It's common knowledge that 2015 will be a big year for the console market, with games such as Uncharted 4: A Thief's End and Halo 5: Guardians looming on the horizon. When looking a little closer to the present, however, it's clear that March will be a massive month for Microsoft and Sony, with both the Xbox One and PlayStation 4 playing host to a variety of exclusives. For what it's worth, here is a comparison of just which games will suck your wallet dry over the next 31 days.
The Souls-like genre remains popular, along with FromSoftware's classics there are many contenders. But which are the best Souls-like games?
Hmm... In my opinion, the 7 best are the 6 made by FromSoftware (DeS, DS1, DS2, DS3, BB and ER), then Lies of P. But each to their own.
Still DS1? You don't feel it's been surpassed yet?
Demon's Souls has the remake of course, but DS1 has surely been outdated?
I think that the DS1 remake is better looking than DS2. The interior lighting matched with the low resolution textures in DS2 is very garish, IMO.
Besides graphics, what do you mean by DS1 being "outdated"? I'm someone who played through Elden Ring and just recently played through the DS series, and as far as gameplay went, there were all very similar.
I haven’t played many but Bloodborne and NIOH1 are on top of my list.. had a blast with these 2
For world design and interconnectedness (that's a word, right?) DS1 is yet to be beaten.
Saad from eXputer: "Almost a decade later, it's time to take the nostalgia goggles off and accept that Bloodborne has long been surpassed by its successors."
Yes, yes it does. It’s still a great game. Elden Ring isn’t better just different and a bit easier . I like that you have to be aggressive but smart in Bloodborne
I literally replayed it recently and it's better than I remember. I think it's like going back to a beloved book and noticing things I hadn't before.
Yo! I was getting ready to reply with the exact same four words you started with lol. Yes, I think Bloodborne has withstood the test of time and remains a great game. That’s why all the fans are hoping for a sequel someday. Hoping that we can catch that magic again with a new storyline.
Yes. Just replayed it a few days ago. My first Platinum. And yes. I rage quitted so many times and called it BS too when I started. It's tight. The combat is amazing and the lore is rich.
Elden Ring was easier? I don’t know about that at all. I remember leveling up in Bloodborne and breezing through it. In Elden Ring no matter how powerful I got I was still catching a beat down from every boss.
That's due to scaling enemies. I remember not doing Haligtree untill near the end and having enemies withstand almost a full blast from Azur's Glintstone Staff Comet Azure. My level was quite high.
Melee characters are not fun in that game, especially for the Elden Beast.
The Ori and the Blind Forest studio CEO has asked the fans to purchase the game instead to completely support it.
I've been told that this is an outlier and 99% of devs feel the opposite of what moon studios is saying right here.
"It can be? If you're a smaller dev and get an upfront fee to put your game on gamepass and it blows up, that's great.
I merely pointed out that Moon would make no money at this point from people playing Ori on gamepass - so not the best way to support us!" - Thomas Mahler, Moon Studios
"This is the exact argument people have been saying about GP for years now"
It's not. Moon studios had no say in their game going on GamePass, because it's a 2nd party game and Microsoft own the Ip and games. Moon was paid for developing the games and presumably get a cut of sales, GamePass is hurting their sales but this is a different situation.
They make no money because they were already paid an upfront fee. So they MADE money, but make no additional money.
yeah of course because people renting games and not buying them is so much better for studios.
Microsoft has conditioned people not to pay for their hobby or at least not to pay to own anything
@GamerRN
"They make no money because they were already paid an upfront fee. So they MADE money, but make no additional money."
So it's a good thing that they make no additional money despite their game having continued success well after the initial payment?
@Lightning77
"Because it is. You can name on one hand the studios GP doesn't help."
Just in the past few months we have had statements from Larian, 2k and now Moon Studios (as well another indie studio that released it's game pass but I can't remember who it was) have made similar statements recently about the effect of subscriptions on sales and profitability.
Heck you recently saw in Insomniac's leaked slides that after games were put on subscriptions the sales of the games almost totally dried up, which is something they have publicly been saying for years. And on top of that even though xbox fans constantly deny it, Microsoft leaks as well as their own statements and actions (like putting thier games on rival platforms) clearly show that putting games on subscriptions lowers the potential profit of a game.
It's time to accept the reality that the long term effect of subscriptions has been lowered revenue and profit for game sales almost universally across the board.
Credible research and information keeps showing that people don't buy games that are on subscriptions and more and more people don't buy games they suspect are coming to subscriptions.
Look into Outriders situation, unless you are a very small indie dev, gamepass loses money for everyone involved, including Microsoft.
"oh really. The Microsoft /Game Pass Dream Bubble is bursting, eh?"
I don´t think Sony agrees, because they´ll continue and release yet another brand new MBL game on Gamepass day one for the fourth time in a row!
@Crows90
"Because they have a choice right?"
Yes they do. They could say no. Nobody is forcing Sony to make MLB games to Xbox at gun point, especially day one on Gamepass.
Christopher
"That's not by Sony's choice..."
Of course, it´s their choice. They could just said *no* to MLB and made their own baseball game just like EA did.
Besides, It´s a GaaS title after all and one of the most played on Xbox. So it´s not really hurting Sony in any way, and I´m 100% positive that they relly love those fat checks from MS.
"This is a poor argument."
You can say that, but, the Interesting and undeniable fact is that after four years making MBL games available on Gamepass day one, nobody from San Diego studio got fired in Sony´s recent wave of layoffs.
Just food for the brain.
That's not a business choice that was decided by Sony, that decision was decided by the MLB. Sony will reap the rewards only because Sony's first party developers (Sony San Diego Studios) develops The Show. If it wasn't for the MLB licensing contract of The Show the game would still be exclusive to PS.
"Of course, it´s their choice. They could just said *no* to MLB and made their own baseball game just like EA did."
Well this isn't EA, they lost the license to Fifa, not Fifpro, or the premiere league or champions league or the euros.
MLB I'm guessing (i don't play baseball) is the only licence to it. They have no choice, indeed. American gamers will want authentic teams im sure.
@christopher: “That's not by Sony's choice... This is a poor argument.”
Have you see him have a rich valid argument when it comes to Sony. 🤷🏿
@obscured: “Yes they do. They could say no. Nobody is forcing Sony to make MLB games to Xbox at gun point, especially day one on Gamepass.”
Sure buddy whatever keeps you happy same as no one is forcing Xbox to now and in the future release their games on PlayStation and Nintendo oh btw in the near future Xbox will go fully 3rd party like Sega 💵💰
do you understand the concept of licensed games? good lord the straw arguments or just lack of actual real information is astouding.
*** Of course, it´s their choice. They could just said *no* to MLB and made their own baseball game just like EA did. ***
That's an illusion of choice. It's not a choice. You're acting ignorant to try and serve up a bad argument.
you have to remember that these games are old now, they are given a fee upfront for their titles to be on gamepass, but for new people to play the games naturally you want to drive them to standalone sales as opposed to them playing on a service that they've already been paid for.
I don't understand what you are saying here. This is the exact argument people have been saying about GP for years now. In the short term the upfront cost is good, especially if your game is either trash or was never going to be popular in the first place, but long term and if your game exceeds expectations then it's not as good. Also if your game is AAA and is a sure fire going to sell millions day one, people want those titles day one on GP as well and think it's sustainable for some reason when logically that doesn't make sense.
@Outside - I don't know if MS has any incentives in place where devs get bonuses if games do well. You'd have to talk to someone in the know there.
Same here. its a nice little compilation. Plus I have the XB special editions on disc (still sealed)... and it was all thanks to playing them in Game pass. I dont get why its so hard for people to understand how this service can actually lead to sales, not just blindly accept the few who complain about how sales weren't as good as they expected.
Because not everyone is like you.
Most people wont go out and purchase a game on other consoles or buy special editions of games they already played if they can just try it on their cheap subscription service and move on once theyre done with it.
I bought Ori for Switch because it's on GP and wanted to be able to play it on the go. That being said, at 120fps and 4K on Series X, that is the way to play.
Fingers crossed for a release on PS5, I'd snap them up even though I have them on Switch already.
They didn't have a choice to partner with Microsoft for funding and create the game for them?
I’m with OneLove on this. Don’t go begging to fans when you already took Microsoft’s money.
For smaller companies to even have a CHANCE to make some money on Xbox, they often have to put their games on Game Pass. Don't be dense.
Anyone who wanted Ori has most likely already bought it. The game is not going to sell significantly anymore but GP will offer free exposure so that when Ori 3 comes out people may be willing to buy. If your game is good enough people will support in even if they can get it on a subscription. I still buy plenty of games that are available on GP and I also have played plenty of games that I would not have played thanks to GP. Bottom line is this, make a product people want and they will buy it.
I think what the CEO is implying is that the studio makes more money per copy sold vs a player on GP. But I think we know that as common sense. Even without being privy to Moon/Microsoft's contract, I think we can assume that because of the nature of GP, more money can be made per player at retail than via subscription. And honestly this would also probably apply to Microsoft as well. As in they would make more money too. Thats why the only way to maximize the utility of a subscription is to have a really large subscription base.
Excellent
March is looking good
EDIT
What's the problem pedro? Does my enjoyment of March cause you to feel insecure?
EDIT 2 @ Magicite, Not sure what you consider "notable"? Is a metacritic score of 65 notable?
Isn't MLB 15: The Show coming in March too?
Trying to get them clicks huh?
Kinect fruit ninja 2 wtf!?!?!?!?
You can't compare an indie game to a AAA real exclusive