IGN : I’ve been tremendously excited for CrossfireX as the trailers we’ve seen have been flashy, bombastic, and visually impressive. Sadly, none of that was present during the few chapters we had the opportunity to experience early as part of this preview. Enemies look and sound generic, and they aren’t particularly smart either, walking right into your bullets if you’ll let them. The levels we did play had little of the visual flair in the marketing material, and the missions are filled with tired tropes like waiting for a guy to open a door, forced walking so you can be delivered narrative over coms, and of course a dash of campy military ops dialogue sprinkled in.
Wait, weren't these sort of games supposed to be the future?
Good. Love it.
Personally I think because they are mostly the same sh&t and there is only room for a limited number of them thriving at the same time.
Isn't it kind of obvious? The market can only support so many. Everyone wants a piece of the pie, so they try and grab a slice, but many fail because they're chasing a trend someone else was already successful at instead of bringing something new.
Exactly, people only have so much time and money, and there are so many of these games now, gamers can't support them all, thus they all flock to the most popular games.
I also feel like alot of these developers don't have enough of a road map to keep the content/updates flowing to keep the game fresh for players. I also feel that alot of dvelopers try really hard to nickle and dime players at every opportunity when a live-service game can demand alot of the player's time and money.
Because they're focused on making money, appealing to addictive traits, than actually being fun.
It's been a tough week to be a live-service game. CrossfireX might just have it worse than any other recent shutdown.
No... it doesn't. Other online focused titles seem to still be thriving like fortnite, sea of thieves, apex legends... WoW. The main issue with this game was it just wasnt good. There can be good online focused games but they have to be something people will want to play and tell their friends about.
THIS... was not one of them.
Not only it wasn't good. But it was a sequel to a mid-2000s PC shooter, that was somewhat popular in Asia and South America, but somehow got stuck on a console. So the public that could care about it, just wasn't there.
I guess Smilegate (the publisher) was betting on the Remedy Entertainment single-player for this release strategy to make any sense, but unfortunately, Remedy dropped the ball really hard on that front as well. So the final result was a mediocre multiplayer shooter without a fanbase, paired with a mediocre singleplayer that failed to bring in players.
I agree to bad denuvo gets a free pass on its always online requirement.
Harry potter game is overhyped needs 24/7 internet do too drm but no one cares.
Redfall needs internet all the time? riot burn everything spam everyone.
Harry Potter needs an offline mode ong I agree also denuvo nah I agree needs to gogo.
@outsider
yes it does and if you have a 12/13th intel cpu it will crash fail to run or be horraible fps. I own 12th gen cpu ecores fight denuvo all the time.
@XI
I agree its single player those with steam decks and or wifi setups are going to get booted alot.
The industry needs to wake up and start making real games again. Start making full engaging single player games. The gaas models is starting die because they're all either, competing for your tome or too, too much alike, or simply not compelling enough. The market is flooded with these games. Cross Fire is next up at the chopping block.
I can't say I'm too upset. Again, the industry needs to make real games again and stop chasing trends.
chasing trends is what they all do though and they wont stop. It happens in music and movies and tv... if one company catches lightning in a bottle, every other company will try the same thing but put their own spin on it to try and get more. Look at PUBG and Fortnite. Fortnite wasnt anything like it is now until PUBG made them rethink their approach to the game. And then it blew up in popularity.
Sadly things like this NEED to happen to get companies to think outside the box instead of just making another box the same as the rest.
'Remedy had been working on the single-player portion since 2016.'.
More development hell.
But I was told that live service games are more of a guaranteed money maker than one and done single player games
...fun games, that feel different each time you play, will keep em coming back for more.
This one... not so much.
So you were told that all live service games are more of a gauranteed success than one and done single player games...who said that?
Where did I say "all"? And I'm sure you've said something similar in the past, but my point is that in the end, what matters the most is if your game is good. Sure live services games has huge earning potential, but chasing after that revenue stream for sake of money won't work if you don't have good core game to begin with.
You said it, you just made a general statement encompassing all live service games.
And yes, I have said that, but I was also specific as you were in your reply that the game has to at least be good.
But we can apply that to any game, single or multiplayer.
YES!!! LET LIVE SERVICES BURN DOWN!!!
But seriously though, just make complete games and stop chasing fortnites success.
An important update regarding the future of CrossfireX
Less than a year ago Remedy made a FPS game funded by Tencent that im sure they're embarrassed about but nobody bought it cause its comically bad and had 0 advertising
I remember MS parading this off at E3 and hyping it up. Just smoke and mirrors like Halo infinite.
Lol, there was no parading or hype for this game. It barely had a trailer
I played the campaign & the only way I knew about it was through gaming media sites & YouTube trailers so it was promoted in some fashion.
@Butt
Yes it was, is that the equivalent of parading and hyping it up? Or is that every game featured for Game Pass at a video game show.
@Z501
Introducing a game to Xbox?
...that's definitely parades and hyping it up...
They asked MS to publish. MS declined. That should tell yiu there were no parades.
I dunno about that one. Maybe there was initial hype when they announced it but after constant delays the writing was on the wall. Allot of gaas titles getting shut down this quarter.
They helped announce it and said it was coming to GP day one. That's not "parading". Tons of games get shown off at E3 and plenty of them end up being garbage. It was a similar situation with Sony and Gearbox announcing Godfall. Both games ended up being shit but that has nothing to do with Sony or MS.
Can ask much from this game. I think is being done by a very small team isnt?
Wow talk about slating a game just on a preview. I found that a bit unfair,but each to their own. Still looks promising imo
Never really expected much from a military style fps.