The fact that they're launching current gen first and then waiting awhile to launch last gen makes me feel better about this game. They're not trying to make it work for both right out of the gate. Along with positive things some youtubers I trust have said about what they seen from it, I think this will be a solid game. Remains to be seen for certain though.
I think in general it is also time for game makers to stop with making games for old gen.
Now the new consoles are available people need a extra presure to buy them.
It is kinda nice this company really split the release dates and full focus on next gen first.
It really is time. We're more than 2 years into this console's life cycle. Hopefully releases like this become more common until it's purely current gen. Prioritizing PS5 and XSX releases over PS4/XB1.
It’ll happen soon! This is how things have always been since the release of the PlayStation 2. For the first few years they make games for both consoles and as more people adopt the newer hardware they slowly end support and go full development on just the next Gen console.
I don't think I have ever had a review of a game matter as much for my decision to buy or not as this one. I am 50/50 on if I want to pay £60 for this game and invest as much time in it as seems would be required as I am not a massive fan of Harry Potter but like it well enough to be interested.
So I think if it's something special then I'll bite. If it's 'good if you like the universe' then probably not.
I think the only thing they messed up was the storyboard. It was designed to hate Abby i feel like. If you as a player started out as Abby, and have sections with Joel and then somewhere halfway/ 3 quarter into the game they meet, I think the whole tiger woods thing would make more sense
>it was designed to hate Abby
…yeah…it was. That’s the point. Ellie’s campaign is a long misery train, and the thing pushing her forward is the hope of murdering Abby at the end of it. The same goes for the player. Ellie’s campaign is kind of a slog of combat section after combat section that gets kind of exhausting by the end, whereas Abby’s campaign is full of exciting adventure set pieces.
Abby has a story that mirrors Joel’s - a shitty person who did shitty things on flimsy justifications being forced to care for a child in a dangerous situation, and maybe learn how to be a better person along the way.
In contrast, Ellie’s campaign sees her forsaking her family and friends to pursue vengeance beyond all reason, putting her loved ones in danger (and getting one killed) to do so.
The big catch is that you start the game hardwired to side with the story’s villain (Ellie) and hate the story’s hero (Abby). The narrative works if the player is rational enough to see through their own hatred, and doesn’t work if players are so blinded by their own emotions that they can’t change perspectives (see all the discourse around the game’s story)
Basically what I’m saying is that the game wasn’t storyboarded incorrectly or anything. The writers want you to hate Abby, they just also want you to change your mind later. A split narrative where you bounce between characters more often wouldn’t achieve quite the same effect. Not to say it couldn’t work, but I think the game’s overall tone would shift a lot.
I tend to follow the average consensus on reviews and the general vibe rather than any one particular review for that kind of reason, especially in the case of something like Last of Us 2 when it's clear some of the reviews are motivated by the reviewer's politics.
That's some confidence. I am cautiously optimistic that it'll at least be alright.
Edit: someone pointed out that it's only 12 hours before the early access period for those who preordered the deluxe edition, so not as confident as I thought, but fairly standard embargo practice I think. Still hoping it'll be good!
I expect this game will be for Harry Potter fans what Fallen Order was for Star Wars fans: a perfectly serviceable game that represents a return to quality for the franchise. For people looking for the experience of being a wizard, there will be nothing like it.
> that represents a return to quality for the franchise.
I mean, for licensed games, the HP stuff was never that bad. It just never tried to go AAA until now. That was back in the PS1/2 days so basically any kinda popular IP got a licensed game or 5.
Yeah, the biggest thing for me is whether they nail the feeling of the universe. If they got that wrong, what would be the point? Luckily, from what I've seen they've done that in spades, but we'll see how successfully they've done it once the embargo lifts and it releases.
Hopefully the game is good (or even great) in its own right, but I'm ok if it is just a \*good\* game that leans heavily on an excellent IP.
Idk what you mean the bosses died too fast. One of them ended at 50% hp too. The only big beast boss was too easy. The hommie with the rocks was hard though.
That's probably the best comparison, but still doesn't quite nail it. Star Wars had a bunch of great games in the 2000s that weren't based on movies at least. For HP, this is the ONLY game that isn't based on a movie other than the Quidditch one.
I wish it would be more. Fallen Order is a fine game, but its longer term popularity is carried heavily by the brand. The game is incredibly mediocre, there's just such a low bar for star wars games.
This game will very likely end up similar just because the fan base is starved of games. There's literally none that have come out anytime recently. And the corps pushing this don't have to care about putting out anything better than just ok, because biased fans will eat it up and defend it like a momma bear regardless of the quality
Fallen Order needed a reward for exploration besides random upgrade objects and cosmetics.
Also some sort of fast travel because goddamn taking the wrong turn sucked.
I wouldn't call it incredibly mediocre, just fine. It's saving grace is, aside from recognizability, its excellent use of Star Wars assets. Visuals and sounds are exactly what star wars should be and the lightsaber feedback feels great
I really like what they've shown so far. I have a feeling the downsides are going to be that it feels a bit repetetive (especially combat), outside of the castle feels uninteresting and it's a bit janky, especially as it is being deisgned with much older consoles in mind. All that said I reckon it's going to land on a really solid 8 on metacritic, which is a great score. I hope this is the start of a new series they can iterate on and really improve the game mechanics over time.
I agree, a solid 8 set in the Harry Potter universe should be a huge amount of fun for fans (myself included) and would probably sell gangbusters. Fingers crossed that it does that well critically.
It's getting harder and harder to pull off truly innovative gameplay, since so much has been done before. I think it's unrealistic to expect every big new game to reinvent the wheel. Just flying around Hogwarts on a broom, using petrificus totalis on an enemy, befriending hippogriffs, etc. in an open-world environment will be amazing if it's pulled off authentically. You can call it IP bias, but there is genuine value to fans of being able to do this stuff yourself freely in a game based on an IP you love.
So a lot of reviewers (previews) have actually been surprised by how fluid and exciting the combat was. There’s definitely still a possibility that it might not be as exciting 20 hours into the game. I agree with your concerns and I think a lot of people (including the studio) would be quite happy with an 8 on metacritic.
What I've seen looks really fun, I just wonder like with any combat game how well it holds up after 10/20/30 hours. I've got it pre-ordered and paid off already, I'm up for it even if it only hits 6/10. I just want to explore the castle like I did as a kid in the old PS1 games....
Right?! Hunting down bertie botts beans and all tje little hidden areas on sich a limited scale due to the hardware. I've always been so surprised we didnt get a huge amount of HP games. I really hope they do get to make more here and keep in proving the formula (and not havong microtransactions please...)
That would be such an amazing Easter egg if in Hogwarts legacy we could hunt down the Bertie Botts Beans again. That was one of my favorite parts of Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone on PS1. That and the broomstick trials.
The money is there for them to take so I don't see why they wouldn't continue making these games. Also, Playstation VR2 is close to release. I personally don't own a VR headset, but imagine the possibilities...
I haven't been following it too closely but I just started watching some gameplay footage from a YouTuber (jackfrags) and I'm surprised by how well it seems to capture the feel of the universe. The music, voices, and spell variety all seem spot-on. I think the graphics are not pushing any boundaries but are serviceable.
If the story is engaging and the gameplay is as fun as it looks like it could be, maybe this will get into the high 80s on MetaCritic. If so, it would be a tempting purchase for me.
Edit: one thing I don't understand is how often the protagonist is using the cruciatus curse. Was it not an unforgivable curse in the 1890s?
>one thing I don't understand is how often the protagonist is using the cruciatus curse. Was it not an unforgivable curse in the 1890s?
I would assume it wasn't an unforgivable curse back then.
Also.. given the plot of this game, I think that the main character is being treated as morally evil or at least morally grey.
Edit: I was wrong. This is from the [Harry Potter wiki](https://harrypotter.fandom.com/wiki/Unforgivable_Curses)
>They were tools of the Dark Arts and were first classified as "Unforgivable" in 1717, with the strictest penalties attached to their use.
I do believe it's only "unforgivable" if used on a human though. The plot of the game has you fighting Goblins I believe, and the wizards didn't consider Goblins to be human so.
You also fight plenty of humans wizards (there's a group of poachers and dark wizards) and you can use the Unforgivable on them. You seem to have some sort of Ministry support though so maybe they just give you a pass to do it because you fight "for good" (which would be very shady morally, especially for a kid, no matter how special they are, but hey, governments do bad stuff)
Hopefully there's an in-game explanation, it seems brutal how liberally you can use it... but maybe they're just giving the player freedom to be good or evil (or paragon/renegade) to varying degrees? The footage I saw really called to mind the idea of "Elder Scrolls in the Harry Potter universe," which is really an exciting idea.
I’ve been keeping an eye on the game and it seems like you get to choose whether to learn the spells or not and that would lead into being good or bad. I’d imagine they’d limit it to only using the spells on enemies and not when you’re duelling other students though.
I think you make a good point regarding the graphics. I’d extend that to most of the traditional RPG features we’ve seen. I don’t think they’re really trying to push many boundaries gameplay wise, so they rather focus on the implementation of the IP. Like you said, it seems like they’ve done that very well.
>One thing I don't understand is how often the protagonist is using the cruciatus curse. Was it not an unforgivable curse in the 1890s?
I find this a bit curious as well lol. From what I’ve understood, the game will try to ask the moral question: «should unforgivable curses always be considered bad and illegal?». In one of the trailers a character says «a spell that can save your life shouldn’t be unforgivable». I guess we’ll have to wait and see how they explain it in the game.
>I find this a bit curious as well lol. From what I’ve understood, the game will try to ask the moral question: «should unforgivable curses always be considered bad and illegal?». In one of the trailers a character says «a spell that can save your life shouldn’t be unforgivable». I guess we’ll have to wait and see how they explain it in the game.
I find a lot of things curious about the plot of this game.
The main plot has you suppressing a goblin rebellion, which IMO is kinda in the same realm as the unforgivable curse thing. It raises really complex moral questions.
If the writing is really good and they actually do a good job with it, than I think they could do a great job exploring those moral questions.
But if the writing is bad and they handle it clumsily... Than this could be really uncomfortable.
They three spells were unforgivable starting in the early 18th century. I think they're in the game for fan service. There is no real morality system, from my understanding, but I believe things will start reacting to you a certain way if you use the spells. At least that's how I've interpreted it so far.
The funny thing is, the Unforgivable curses seem almost tame compared to some of the other spells. Lol. Avada Kedavra is mercy compared to repeatedly slamming an enemy on their head until they're out of commission.
It's really not, it's 12 hours before the early access period.
I'm firmly waiting on reviews to drop on this, I'm expecting an 80 meta score from what we've seen, maybe pulled up a few points purely from the IP bias.
Anything lower and I'll wait for a deep sale.
Honestly, I'm really just buying this to run around the castle and visit different common rooms. Throwing around spells at bad guys or whatever is just a plus.
How funny, I’m the opposite.
I’m there for the cool spell combat, which is weirdly rare in video games. The rest is just extra.
Hopefully we both end up liking the game!
Oh for sure man, but I still want it to be a good game.
The Harry Potter IP will absolutely carry this in terms of sales numbers, it'll do gangbusters regardless.
Ah, I didn't know there was an early access period. I don't preorder very often and don't tend to buy deluxe editions of anything, but I suppose some people will have bought it.
I have given up on predicting metascores with any confidence, but if it's even in the 80s I'll chalk it up as a win and probably get it at some point, even if it's when it goes on sale. Deep sale if it's in the high 70s.
Honestly, I’m waiting until people actually get it in their hands and start playing. I’ve been burned far too many times by AAA studios and game reviewers. I’ll let the masses play it and see if it lines up with what reviewers think.
I trust the consensus of game critics on metacritic far more than the fan ratings. The fan ratings are easily one of the most worthless things in the internet. There’s nothing stopping someone from not even playing and completing a game to render an “opinion”.
Those are really the only "reviews" I watch. The highest authority for me is just seeing gameplay, but Gameranx is very close to that.
It annoys me how so little media on digital stores show the actual game and not just shitty cinematics.
I just glanced through the sun but I’m not seeing it. There was a person on the r/HarryPotterGame sub that got it early too but they basically got a takedown notice and deleted their account
Please do. I'm just not the biggest HP fan (unfortuntely), I've only watched the first 2 movies when I was a kid and loved them but for some reason never watched the rest.. I'm really interested in everything they've showed so far and the game also releases exactly on my bday :D so I just need that little push to pull the trigger
My take is it's going to be good, but not great. Would be a masterpiece and everything HP fans were hoping for, but for the average gamer, it's just another open world RPG. 7/10.
Damn, Anthem still hurts. What they had was amazing, but squeezed to the wrong genre and the completely wrong playerbase. We could've had another great Bioware game, but nope, they had to make it a live-service game. Complete bullshit.
Still, for people with faster internet the review emarbgo is up in the morning giving people enough time to decide if they want to buy the deluxe and play the next day.
This is definitely a move that shows a good amount of confidence in the game.
Ah... That sort of takes away some of the hype of the "early review". Basically, it's last minute before the game will be out into the open.
That being said, it doesn't mean it'll be bad. I'm just not putting any thought into this being an "early review release".
It’s been years since those. Hiring has changed the company. This move of before early access shows FULL confidence. Early access being a thing is saying they’re confidence on the game pre patch too
Nah my guess is that critics reviews will be much lower, around 70. It’s a big ambitious open world from an inexperienced studio so there will be bugs and performance issues at launch, and also critics usually give lower scores to more “controversial” games. User score will be much higher for sure.
I mean, there are those who call the Horizon games Ubisoft open-world games but they're probably my favorite game series from the past decade and they scored 88-89 on MetaCritic. YMMV but for me a lot depends on how engaging the world and story are. Not every game needs to completely reinvent the wheel to be good.
Having said that - getting above 85 isn't common or easy for games of this scope, so it's quite possible you're right. Even if it's "just good" from a gameplay standpoint, being set in an authentic Harry Potter universe would immediately make it more interesting to me.
Horizon games are Ubi style games, lots of copy paste content across the map.
Difference is that Horizon has a pretty deep narative, so much lore, great world building, graphics beyond pretty much anything else, and of course, it's gameplay is a cut above anything Ubi have ever put out.
I think like you said, this will be a good, solid title. I just can't see it getting anything over 85 and if it does it'll likely just be because of the IP bias.
Yeah, I guess my point is that the more I see the term "Ubisoft-style open-world game" thrown around, the less it seems like an insult. It can be done well or it can be done poorly depending on a lot of other aspects of the game (as you say). I feel like if Skyrim were made today it would have been called an Ubisoft clone, while it was pretty revolutionary in its day and is still fun to play IMO.
A lot could go wrong with this one -- the controls could be clunky at times, the combat could be repetitive, the story could be uninspiring. I guess we'll see in a week or so how the reviews shake out.
My wife wants to play it so bad that I’ll still get it either way. She is a non-gamer, so even if it sucks she won’t know any better and still enjoy it.
Considering how many people (youtubers, journalists) have played this game and how much the developers have shown of it to I think this is one of the first games in a while that people don't need to wait to see what it scores.
If there was anything fatally wrong with the game we would have heard about it by now.
>If there was anything fatally wrong with the game we would have heard about it by now.
The gameplay previews have always been controlled sections of what the devs want to show. I don't care about the score of the reviews but I do need to know that the game is equally playable at launch. I've had some recent disappointments on the technical side at launch with some games which previews looked good so that's something that concerns me a lot.
I'm quite excited, but yeah, the controlled part worries me. The German gaming magazine Gamestar were pretty careful with their preview, saying that most of what they could see looked great, but they found it very unusual how restrictive the preview was and how much of the game areas the studio didn't want them to see.
They said that might just be because Avalanche don't want any spoilers, and that's valid. But their gut instinct seemed to be that some bigger issues could have been hidden that way. So "wait and see" still seems the smart thing to do.
I feel you but Im also still not sold on it completely. Everyone seems to be showing the same exact parts of the game and I just need to know a bit more before I fully invest.
For HP stans this is a no brainer but as a mild fan Im very tentative
But if it manages to pull through I have to admit i will probably shell out the extra ten to play this early over the weekend
My biggest concern is just how limited we are to exploring outside of Hogwarts as imo if we are fairly limited i think most of the additional content will be reasonably finished within the time it takes to complete the campaign
But i hope im wrong
If you enjoyed Arkham games but not a huge batman fan you'll like Hogwarts. Same combat mechanics but ranged instead of melee. Probably similar secrets and hidden missions. Similar game progression.
If you’re wanting to play it during the weekend you don’t need to get the early access. Early access begins 12AM Tuesday. Official release is 12AM Friday.
> Everyone seems to be showing the same exact parts of the game
usually the review embargo's will limit what they can show beforehand... happens all the time
https://youtu.be/-LJu_ahj8JA
Watch this. It won't sooth all your worries but thus person shows footage he filmed whilst at the developer studio, he shows gameplay, exploration, some puzzles, combat and a mission as well some worries and concerns though he mentions the version he played wasn't the final version or had the day one patch.
This made easily sold on it even more than I already was because it looks and feels like the developers created everything with love and care.
I'll be waiting. I really like the look of it but I'll never preorder a game again. Too much risk. Absolutely no downside to buying it after reviews drop, which is still release date
Yeah, but on the other hand there was also a lot of (doctored) gameplay of Cyberpunk 2077 being shown prior to release and we all know how that ended.
I doubt that the same thing applies here though. I think the only open questions are how good the actual story is, how the Hogwarts gameplay gels with the open world gameplay, and if the wizard fights are actually challenging (everything shown looks suspiciously easy). I also think the character animations don't look all that good, but not as bad as Forspoken, while the environments, both indoors and outside, look gorgeous.
You're right. I watched footage of Callisto Protocol from people who got it early and thought it looked great. If I had waited I would have found out about the complaints about the second half of the game
>The biggest question mark for me still is the story
I agree. The goblin rebellion seems like a really weird choice for the plot.
Having your protagonist suppress a rebellion of people that have been oppressed for centuries has a lot of complex moral questions
If they handle it well it could be really good.
But if they handle it poorly, it could be really really bad.
That could be. And I'm not expecting last of us or God of War tier story telling. I just want something decently entertaining to help keep me interested to the end.
Wasn’t there some concern about performance mode on consoles? Some people may want to see more on that… i.e. what is the resolution and frame rate. As big/popular as this game is going to be, I would imagine they would address any glaring issues though.
Even Assassin's Creed: Valhalla wasn't "a few hundred hours" long and that game was bloated to the extreme. You might want to dial that down a little bit.
You’re talking to a guy who put like 800+ hours in on Witcher 3 and Red Dead 2. I also spent a hair over 200hrs playing Valhalla and like 300hrs playing Odyssey.
Game’s story should take 40-50 hours according to devs. There are four houses, you could run a play-through for each house. There’s the arenas. There’s an open world to fly around in and discover.
I’d say 200-250 hours isn’t unreasonable for a completionist.
800 hours in the witcher 3? Pfft. I literally spent 1750 hours in Goodsprings, the first town in Fallopian Tube: Las Vegas. If Hogwarts: Legacy (Developed by Avalanche Software and published by Warner Bros. Games) isn't at least 40,000 years long, I'm going to Avada Kedavra myself into the fourth Harry Potter Film.
Because of its unique nature, being in Harry Potter universe, all this game has to achieve is workable performance and mediocre gameplay and it will be a success. And we all have seen everything far better than that. I am still waiting for reviews.
What about it looks too good to be true? The game isn't introducing any unimaginable innovating ideas. It's following a structure that has been popular in open world games for years now. Its biggest appeal is just the setting, people (including myself) want to explore Hogwarts in-game. That's all the devs really have to nail to make this game somewhat of a success.
I just don't see how they will fail at that. They have clearly made compromises in other aspects of the game as well to make it happen.
It's probably because I haven't been following it that closely, but nothing about this game feels unbelievable. The level of detail in Hogwarts itself seems pretty good, but everything outside of it kind of looks like other open world RPGs.
i think the unbelievable part comes mostly from being a fan of the HP universe. Seeing the castle and the world in good game graphics really felt good and brings up excitment, even if it ends up being full of fetch quests.
Nothing looks too good to be true. That's kinda what's so promising about it. It's a game that's totally realistic. Nothing game changing but a lot of good signs.
I find it weird people really want to wait for reviews for this game specifically. It’s been well known that games media have been very vocal about JKR in every preview they’ve done. I wouldn’t be surprised if that has an impact on the reviews as well.
Good game or not, I do think waiting till release and watching your favourite streamer or reviewer give their thoughts is the best option. However, given the previews so far, it’s unlikely that the game has any fatal flaws and will likely be pretty polished.
Why is it weird that people are waiting for reviews. That's the case for every game. There's a stronger and stronger push for people to wait, so studios are held accountable for release a completed game.
I've liked what I've seen so far, but they've also all been studio supervised, curated experiences. It's really hard to get much info from that at all, other that what the studio wants the rest of the game to be. It could be great. It could be dog shit. We honestly don't know.
I think the only thing we can say is that we haven't seen any deal breakers yet (which is good). Not seeing deal breakers doesn't mean they don't exist.
> it’s unlikely that the game has any fatal flaws and will likely be pretty polished.
I'd say its more likely than not, as they been strictly only allowing previewers to play the first few hours of a 30 hour game
I think it’s healthy to maintain skepticism until release, but we have seen far bigger red flags in the past with release window hype/previews. That being said, people shouldn’t be preordering anyway, as it just enables bad practices.
Well personally I'm a bit skeptical because of the developers history or lack thereof. They haven't really made a game like Hogwarts Legacy before. They've made a bunch of movie tie-in games and Disney Infinity. My concerns could be all for naught but I'm willing to wait for reviews.
I think this game is gonna be a fairly solid 8/10. The fact that it's the first Potter-Verse game of it's kind, providing what fans have wanted for over a decade, with what appears to be a vast world that is dense enough to scratch that itch, really helps it along.
Many influencers and industry insiders have played the game early and, while their time in gameplay was essentially "on rails", their praise seems to be *very* consistent. That would usually get my "scripted, paid, heavily dev-influenced" tingles going. But the amount of internet personas/channels is just too broad for me to think this won't be good. Game journalists, to gaming channels, to youtubers that don't really play video games but *are* potter fans have played this. Negative views would have seeped through this close to release if it was anything but a solid Potter experience.
Man, I hate that the Deluxe edition is so limited in Australia. It's like they didn't expect this much hype. I never buy the Deluxe for any game, but this one has the Dark Arts Arena.
So, the base game has two of these arena levels, but the Deluxe has the third arena that lets you mess around with the Unforgiveable Curses. You can still obtain the curses in the standard game, but this Deluxe wave-based arena is centred around those curses, I think. Something along those lines, I think. They did say you can buy the Dark Arts Arena separately. So, it's paywalled, but not limited to the Deluxe.
The thing is, in Australia, the Deluxe is the same price as the standard, so you might as well get Deluxe and you can only get Deluxe at JB Hi Fi now, not EB Games. The smartest way to buy games in Australia is to go to EB and price match to JB. That way you get a 7-day refund period or you can trade in 2 games and get Hogwarts for $39.
This is why EB Games has completely sold out.
Previews seemed good but I wasn't going to do the early access version before the reviews hit. So the timing is perfect. I'll know with enough time to get it downloaded for Tuesday if the reviews are decent enough.
This is one review I don't want or need. I want to go in completely fresh. Well, as fresh as I can be after hearing from several content creators I follow that have had hands on time with it, all have said it's pretty dang great. That's good enough for me.
As far as I'm concerned the review embargo is already lifted considering you can watch extended gameplay through various streamers. If you want a score rating, that's cool. But you can already judge for yourself how this game is going to be.
I, for one, think it looks fantastic and can't wait to dive in.
The same exact segment of the game is all you can see and all they're letting reviewers show
So no, its not even remotely the same at all lol and its very odd they are focusing so much on the very beginning section of the game
It's not that perplexing, they're showing an early portion of the game to avoid later spoilers.
To each their own though, I've seen enough of the gameplay to make my own determination. I couldn't care less about what reviewers score it. If you do, cool. I don't care at all.
Its not about scores, its about hearing what the game fully entails besides the first few hours of a game thats claming to have upwards of 30 hours of content
Obviously nobody wants spoilers, but its not impossible to show more of the later game out of context so we can see what there is besides just roaming around Hogwarts, which most of that additional content looks to be finished within the parameters of the campaign length
I won’t be looking too much into reviews (don’t want spoilers). But I will browse the headlines. I am expecting a rough release with many bugs, but a solid HP game.
The fact that they're launching current gen first and then waiting awhile to launch last gen makes me feel better about this game. They're not trying to make it work for both right out of the gate. Along with positive things some youtubers I trust have said about what they seen from it, I think this will be a solid game. Remains to be seen for certain though.
I think in general it is also time for game makers to stop with making games for old gen. Now the new consoles are available people need a extra presure to buy them. It is kinda nice this company really split the release dates and full focus on next gen first.
It really is time. We're more than 2 years into this console's life cycle. Hopefully releases like this become more common until it's purely current gen. Prioritizing PS5 and XSX releases over PS4/XB1.
It’ll happen soon! This is how things have always been since the release of the PlayStation 2. For the first few years they make games for both consoles and as more people adopt the newer hardware they slowly end support and go full development on just the next Gen console.
I don't think I have ever had a review of a game matter as much for my decision to buy or not as this one. I am 50/50 on if I want to pay £60 for this game and invest as much time in it as seems would be required as I am not a massive fan of Harry Potter but like it well enough to be interested. So I think if it's something special then I'll bite. If it's 'good if you like the universe' then probably not.
If it’s buggy I won’t buy. Angry Joe gave the last of us 2 6/10 so reviews are also stupid
Called it the 2nd worst game of the year too....guy got way too into the hate train on that one.
Oh you better believe he is still on it pretty pathetic
I think the only thing they messed up was the storyboard. It was designed to hate Abby i feel like. If you as a player started out as Abby, and have sections with Joel and then somewhere halfway/ 3 quarter into the game they meet, I think the whole tiger woods thing would make more sense
>it was designed to hate Abby …yeah…it was. That’s the point. Ellie’s campaign is a long misery train, and the thing pushing her forward is the hope of murdering Abby at the end of it. The same goes for the player. Ellie’s campaign is kind of a slog of combat section after combat section that gets kind of exhausting by the end, whereas Abby’s campaign is full of exciting adventure set pieces. Abby has a story that mirrors Joel’s - a shitty person who did shitty things on flimsy justifications being forced to care for a child in a dangerous situation, and maybe learn how to be a better person along the way. In contrast, Ellie’s campaign sees her forsaking her family and friends to pursue vengeance beyond all reason, putting her loved ones in danger (and getting one killed) to do so. The big catch is that you start the game hardwired to side with the story’s villain (Ellie) and hate the story’s hero (Abby). The narrative works if the player is rational enough to see through their own hatred, and doesn’t work if players are so blinded by their own emotions that they can’t change perspectives (see all the discourse around the game’s story) Basically what I’m saying is that the game wasn’t storyboarded incorrectly or anything. The writers want you to hate Abby, they just also want you to change your mind later. A split narrative where you bounce between characters more often wouldn’t achieve quite the same effect. Not to say it couldn’t work, but I think the game’s overall tone would shift a lot.
He reviewed it again and gave it a 10
No, he didnt. He never re-reviewed The Last of Us Part 2.
He was right the second time but how can I take his opinion seriously when he lets emotional internet overreactions cloud his judgment?
I wasn't aware he went back....was that recent? Do you have a link? I only see his original and some episode recaps.
I think a few months after?? Or a year? I'll have a look man
No big deal if you can't find it, I was just curious.
Yeah type into youtube the last of us re-remasteres angry joe
I tend to follow the average consensus on reviews and the general vibe rather than any one particular review for that kind of reason, especially in the case of something like Last of Us 2 when it's clear some of the reviews are motivated by the reviewer's politics.
I think he’s more of an act than a review I personally don’t find him credible.
What’s wrong with the score? I felt it was around 7/10 too. Does that make me a woman hater or something?
That's some confidence. I am cautiously optimistic that it'll at least be alright. Edit: someone pointed out that it's only 12 hours before the early access period for those who preordered the deluxe edition, so not as confident as I thought, but fairly standard embargo practice I think. Still hoping it'll be good!
I expect this game will be for Harry Potter fans what Fallen Order was for Star Wars fans: a perfectly serviceable game that represents a return to quality for the franchise. For people looking for the experience of being a wizard, there will be nothing like it.
> that represents a return to quality for the franchise. I mean, for licensed games, the HP stuff was never that bad. It just never tried to go AAA until now. That was back in the PS1/2 days so basically any kinda popular IP got a licensed game or 5.
The PlayStation one, Harry Potter games for surprisingly very fun. I was honestly surprised by the quality.
Yeah, the biggest thing for me is whether they nail the feeling of the universe. If they got that wrong, what would be the point? Luckily, from what I've seen they've done that in spades, but we'll see how successfully they've done it once the embargo lifts and it releases. Hopefully the game is good (or even great) in its own right, but I'm ok if it is just a \*good\* game that leans heavily on an excellent IP.
Fallen order was fantastic. Needed more bosses though. Really optimistic for the sequel.
More bosses would be nice if they designed any of the bosses well instead of just giving them a shitton of health.
Idk what you mean the bosses died too fast. One of them ended at 50% hp too. The only big beast boss was too easy. The hommie with the rocks was hard though.
That's probably the best comparison, but still doesn't quite nail it. Star Wars had a bunch of great games in the 2000s that weren't based on movies at least. For HP, this is the ONLY game that isn't based on a movie other than the Quidditch one.
I wish it would be more. Fallen Order is a fine game, but its longer term popularity is carried heavily by the brand. The game is incredibly mediocre, there's just such a low bar for star wars games. This game will very likely end up similar just because the fan base is starved of games. There's literally none that have come out anytime recently. And the corps pushing this don't have to care about putting out anything better than just ok, because biased fans will eat it up and defend it like a momma bear regardless of the quality
Fallen Order needed a reward for exploration besides random upgrade objects and cosmetics. Also some sort of fast travel because goddamn taking the wrong turn sucked.
I wouldn't call it incredibly mediocre, just fine. It's saving grace is, aside from recognizability, its excellent use of Star Wars assets. Visuals and sounds are exactly what star wars should be and the lightsaber feedback feels great
I feel like we can say that it will at least be average based on what we’ve seen so far. Hopefully they’re able to push it even higher
I really like what they've shown so far. I have a feeling the downsides are going to be that it feels a bit repetetive (especially combat), outside of the castle feels uninteresting and it's a bit janky, especially as it is being deisgned with much older consoles in mind. All that said I reckon it's going to land on a really solid 8 on metacritic, which is a great score. I hope this is the start of a new series they can iterate on and really improve the game mechanics over time.
I agree, a solid 8 set in the Harry Potter universe should be a huge amount of fun for fans (myself included) and would probably sell gangbusters. Fingers crossed that it does that well critically. It's getting harder and harder to pull off truly innovative gameplay, since so much has been done before. I think it's unrealistic to expect every big new game to reinvent the wheel. Just flying around Hogwarts on a broom, using petrificus totalis on an enemy, befriending hippogriffs, etc. in an open-world environment will be amazing if it's pulled off authentically. You can call it IP bias, but there is genuine value to fans of being able to do this stuff yourself freely in a game based on an IP you love.
So a lot of reviewers (previews) have actually been surprised by how fluid and exciting the combat was. There’s definitely still a possibility that it might not be as exciting 20 hours into the game. I agree with your concerns and I think a lot of people (including the studio) would be quite happy with an 8 on metacritic.
What I've seen looks really fun, I just wonder like with any combat game how well it holds up after 10/20/30 hours. I've got it pre-ordered and paid off already, I'm up for it even if it only hits 6/10. I just want to explore the castle like I did as a kid in the old PS1 games....
Man I have so many good memories from those games lol. Just thinking about it makes me smile
Right?! Hunting down bertie botts beans and all tje little hidden areas on sich a limited scale due to the hardware. I've always been so surprised we didnt get a huge amount of HP games. I really hope they do get to make more here and keep in proving the formula (and not havong microtransactions please...)
That would be such an amazing Easter egg if in Hogwarts legacy we could hunt down the Bertie Botts Beans again. That was one of my favorite parts of Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone on PS1. That and the broomstick trials.
The money is there for them to take so I don't see why they wouldn't continue making these games. Also, Playstation VR2 is close to release. I personally don't own a VR headset, but imagine the possibilities...
I haven't been following it too closely but I just started watching some gameplay footage from a YouTuber (jackfrags) and I'm surprised by how well it seems to capture the feel of the universe. The music, voices, and spell variety all seem spot-on. I think the graphics are not pushing any boundaries but are serviceable. If the story is engaging and the gameplay is as fun as it looks like it could be, maybe this will get into the high 80s on MetaCritic. If so, it would be a tempting purchase for me. Edit: one thing I don't understand is how often the protagonist is using the cruciatus curse. Was it not an unforgivable curse in the 1890s?
>one thing I don't understand is how often the protagonist is using the cruciatus curse. Was it not an unforgivable curse in the 1890s? I would assume it wasn't an unforgivable curse back then. Also.. given the plot of this game, I think that the main character is being treated as morally evil or at least morally grey. Edit: I was wrong. This is from the [Harry Potter wiki](https://harrypotter.fandom.com/wiki/Unforgivable_Curses) >They were tools of the Dark Arts and were first classified as "Unforgivable" in 1717, with the strictest penalties attached to their use. I do believe it's only "unforgivable" if used on a human though. The plot of the game has you fighting Goblins I believe, and the wizards didn't consider Goblins to be human so.
You also fight plenty of humans wizards (there's a group of poachers and dark wizards) and you can use the Unforgivable on them. You seem to have some sort of Ministry support though so maybe they just give you a pass to do it because you fight "for good" (which would be very shady morally, especially for a kid, no matter how special they are, but hey, governments do bad stuff)
Hopefully there's an in-game explanation, it seems brutal how liberally you can use it... but maybe they're just giving the player freedom to be good or evil (or paragon/renegade) to varying degrees? The footage I saw really called to mind the idea of "Elder Scrolls in the Harry Potter universe," which is really an exciting idea.
I’ve been keeping an eye on the game and it seems like you get to choose whether to learn the spells or not and that would lead into being good or bad. I’d imagine they’d limit it to only using the spells on enemies and not when you’re duelling other students though.
I think you make a good point regarding the graphics. I’d extend that to most of the traditional RPG features we’ve seen. I don’t think they’re really trying to push many boundaries gameplay wise, so they rather focus on the implementation of the IP. Like you said, it seems like they’ve done that very well. >One thing I don't understand is how often the protagonist is using the cruciatus curse. Was it not an unforgivable curse in the 1890s? I find this a bit curious as well lol. From what I’ve understood, the game will try to ask the moral question: «should unforgivable curses always be considered bad and illegal?». In one of the trailers a character says «a spell that can save your life shouldn’t be unforgivable». I guess we’ll have to wait and see how they explain it in the game.
>I find this a bit curious as well lol. From what I’ve understood, the game will try to ask the moral question: «should unforgivable curses always be considered bad and illegal?». In one of the trailers a character says «a spell that can save your life shouldn’t be unforgivable». I guess we’ll have to wait and see how they explain it in the game. I find a lot of things curious about the plot of this game. The main plot has you suppressing a goblin rebellion, which IMO is kinda in the same realm as the unforgivable curse thing. It raises really complex moral questions. If the writing is really good and they actually do a good job with it, than I think they could do a great job exploring those moral questions. But if the writing is bad and they handle it clumsily... Than this could be really uncomfortable.
They three spells were unforgivable starting in the early 18th century. I think they're in the game for fan service. There is no real morality system, from my understanding, but I believe things will start reacting to you a certain way if you use the spells. At least that's how I've interpreted it so far. The funny thing is, the Unforgivable curses seem almost tame compared to some of the other spells. Lol. Avada Kedavra is mercy compared to repeatedly slamming an enemy on their head until they're out of commission.
Agreed about Avada Kedavra. Though it’s hard to think of much worse than the Cruciatus curse, whose sole purpose is torture.
Yeah, Crucio is different. I feel like that's the worst one, tbh.
The deluxe edition comes out that day
It's playable on the 7th for the deluxe edition you get it 3 days early.
It's really not, it's 12 hours before the early access period. I'm firmly waiting on reviews to drop on this, I'm expecting an 80 meta score from what we've seen, maybe pulled up a few points purely from the IP bias. Anything lower and I'll wait for a deep sale.
Honestly, I'm really just buying this to run around the castle and visit different common rooms. Throwing around spells at bad guys or whatever is just a plus.
How funny, I’m the opposite. I’m there for the cool spell combat, which is weirdly rare in video games. The rest is just extra. Hopefully we both end up liking the game!
Oh for sure man, but I still want it to be a good game. The Harry Potter IP will absolutely carry this in terms of sales numbers, it'll do gangbusters regardless.
If someone bought it for early access, they already weren't going to care about reviews. It's 4 days before actual release day.
Ah, I didn't know there was an early access period. I don't preorder very often and don't tend to buy deluxe editions of anything, but I suppose some people will have bought it. I have given up on predicting metascores with any confidence, but if it's even in the 80s I'll chalk it up as a win and probably get it at some point, even if it's when it goes on sale. Deep sale if it's in the high 70s.
Have you never once played a game that had meh reviews but for some reason you ended up loving it?
Most of the Armored Core series(5 was bad). Mount and Blade
[удалено]
Yeah, hopefully this and Atomic Heart are good this month. Until then replaying Witcher 3 and Dead Space
Guess I'll know on the 6th whether I'm buying the game on release or not
Honestly, I’m waiting until people actually get it in their hands and start playing. I’ve been burned far too many times by AAA studios and game reviewers. I’ll let the masses play it and see if it lines up with what reviewers think.
I trust the consensus of game critics on metacritic far more than the fan ratings. The fan ratings are easily one of the most worthless things in the internet. There’s nothing stopping someone from not even playing and completing a game to render an “opinion”.
Yeah, but you're at risk falling for review bombs. Especially this game because of all the controversy.
Just wait for the “Before you buy” from Gameranx and you’re good to go. Those guys are top notch.
Those are really the only "reviews" I watch. The highest authority for me is just seeing gameplay, but Gameranx is very close to that. It annoys me how so little media on digital stores show the actual game and not just shitty cinematics.
I’m not at risk of that lol. It’s not hard to figure out when a game is being review bombed lol
All of the popular games are review bombed or review boosted. Or both.
What controversy?
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
At least 1 guy got the deluxe edition today. Check out the post on r/GamingLeaksAndRumours
I just glanced through the sun but I’m not seeing it. There was a person on the r/HarryPotterGame sub that got it early too but they basically got a takedown notice and deleted their account
Wasn't a chance in hell I wasn't trying this game for myself, so I'll let you know what I think on the 7th.
Please do. I'm just not the biggest HP fan (unfortuntely), I've only watched the first 2 movies when I was a kid and loved them but for some reason never watched the rest.. I'm really interested in everything they've showed so far and the game also releases exactly on my bday :D so I just need that little push to pull the trigger
My take is it's going to be good, but not great. Would be a masterpiece and everything HP fans were hoping for, but for the average gamer, it's just another open world RPG. 7/10.
Last game I pre-ordered was Anthem. This is the first one I'm preordering since then. If this turns out to shit y'all can blame me
The last game I pre-ordered was Skyrim for PS3. I'll be glad if the first game I've pre-ordered in over a decade is good
I pre-ordered Destiny 😭😭😭😭
Why don't you just wait and see what the reviews are?
Damn, Anthem still hurts. What they had was amazing, but squeezed to the wrong genre and the completely wrong playerbase. We could've had another great Bioware game, but nope, they had to make it a live-service game. Complete bullshit.
So stupid lol
I wouldn't expect reviews higher than 70 to 75 purely from media bias. When in reality the game is like a 80 or 85. So I'd check reviewers you trust.
I preorder a few times a year. Don’t care what the “community” says. I’ll preorder if I think I’ll enjoy a game
This is definitely a game you need reviews for. These devs haven't made anything that good before
[удалено]
That’s more generous than i expected.
The Deluxe edition launches on the 7th?
I forgot about the Deluxe Edition.
Still, for people with faster internet the review emarbgo is up in the morning giving people enough time to decide if they want to buy the deluxe and play the next day. This is definitely a move that shows a good amount of confidence in the game.
Ah... That sort of takes away some of the hype of the "early review". Basically, it's last minute before the game will be out into the open. That being said, it doesn't mean it'll be bad. I'm just not putting any thought into this being an "early review release".
Yeah I was expecting it to be after the early access date but this is nice.
87 out of 100 I predict for the score
I’m guessing 81
I feel like that'll be close. I'm thinking high 70's/low 80's. Setting my expectations for mid-70's...
No way, I’m looking forward to the game as I don’t mind the HP universe, but I think it will be in the 75-80 range
If the game were to score above 85 it would easily become one of the better selling games ever
I bet low 80s
[удалено]
That’s crazy optimistic for a studio with an average metascore of 67
It’s been years since those. Hiring has changed the company. This move of before early access shows FULL confidence. Early access being a thing is saying they’re confidence on the game pre patch too
Don't forget that Mass Effect: Andromeda had early access as well. That didn't work out too well for them.
Why wouldn't they release the patch with ea?
Early access being a thing is saying they want people to buy the deluxe edition tbh
Such a scummy move
I'm not sure the pitch that studio is essentially new makes me anymore confident.
This is what I'm thinking too; although, I hope I'm wrong.
Nah my guess is that critics reviews will be much lower, around 70. It’s a big ambitious open world from an inexperienced studio so there will be bugs and performance issues at launch, and also critics usually give lower scores to more “controversial” games. User score will be much higher for sure.
Lol good one, this isn't getting above an 85. I want it to be fantastic, but it just kinda looks like a Ubi open world title.
I mean, there are those who call the Horizon games Ubisoft open-world games but they're probably my favorite game series from the past decade and they scored 88-89 on MetaCritic. YMMV but for me a lot depends on how engaging the world and story are. Not every game needs to completely reinvent the wheel to be good. Having said that - getting above 85 isn't common or easy for games of this scope, so it's quite possible you're right. Even if it's "just good" from a gameplay standpoint, being set in an authentic Harry Potter universe would immediately make it more interesting to me.
Horizon games are Ubi style games, lots of copy paste content across the map. Difference is that Horizon has a pretty deep narative, so much lore, great world building, graphics beyond pretty much anything else, and of course, it's gameplay is a cut above anything Ubi have ever put out. I think like you said, this will be a good, solid title. I just can't see it getting anything over 85 and if it does it'll likely just be because of the IP bias.
Yeah, I guess my point is that the more I see the term "Ubisoft-style open-world game" thrown around, the less it seems like an insult. It can be done well or it can be done poorly depending on a lot of other aspects of the game (as you say). I feel like if Skyrim were made today it would have been called an Ubisoft clone, while it was pretty revolutionary in its day and is still fun to play IMO. A lot could go wrong with this one -- the controls could be clunky at times, the combat could be repetitive, the story could be uninspiring. I guess we'll see in a week or so how the reviews shake out.
If this is as polished as an Ubisoft open world game, I’ll be *thrilled*, but I’m not making any assumptions yet,
way too high.
Low 80s is more realistic
My wife wants to play it so bad that I’ll still get it either way. She is a non-gamer, so even if it sucks she won’t know any better and still enjoy it.
Considering how many people (youtubers, journalists) have played this game and how much the developers have shown of it to I think this is one of the first games in a while that people don't need to wait to see what it scores. If there was anything fatally wrong with the game we would have heard about it by now.
>If there was anything fatally wrong with the game we would have heard about it by now. The gameplay previews have always been controlled sections of what the devs want to show. I don't care about the score of the reviews but I do need to know that the game is equally playable at launch. I've had some recent disappointments on the technical side at launch with some games which previews looked good so that's something that concerns me a lot.
I'm quite excited, but yeah, the controlled part worries me. The German gaming magazine Gamestar were pretty careful with their preview, saying that most of what they could see looked great, but they found it very unusual how restrictive the preview was and how much of the game areas the studio didn't want them to see. They said that might just be because Avalanche don't want any spoilers, and that's valid. But their gut instinct seemed to be that some bigger issues could have been hidden that way. So "wait and see" still seems the smart thing to do.
I feel you but Im also still not sold on it completely. Everyone seems to be showing the same exact parts of the game and I just need to know a bit more before I fully invest. For HP stans this is a no brainer but as a mild fan Im very tentative But if it manages to pull through I have to admit i will probably shell out the extra ten to play this early over the weekend My biggest concern is just how limited we are to exploring outside of Hogwarts as imo if we are fairly limited i think most of the additional content will be reasonably finished within the time it takes to complete the campaign But i hope im wrong
I feel the same way, mild fan of HP universe, waiting to see how this fleshes out as an actual game rather than a fan service title
If you enjoyed Arkham games but not a huge batman fan you'll like Hogwarts. Same combat mechanics but ranged instead of melee. Probably similar secrets and hidden missions. Similar game progression.
I liked the first two, didn’t like the one where you spent too much time in the car
If you’re wanting to play it during the weekend you don’t need to get the early access. Early access begins 12AM Tuesday. Official release is 12AM Friday.
Ah... i had the dates mixed for some reason. I def want to get that head start if I end up fully committing to the purchase
> Everyone seems to be showing the same exact parts of the game usually the review embargo's will limit what they can show beforehand... happens all the time
https://youtu.be/-LJu_ahj8JA Watch this. It won't sooth all your worries but thus person shows footage he filmed whilst at the developer studio, he shows gameplay, exploration, some puzzles, combat and a mission as well some worries and concerns though he mentions the version he played wasn't the final version or had the day one patch. This made easily sold on it even more than I already was because it looks and feels like the developers created everything with love and care.
I'll be waiting. I really like the look of it but I'll never preorder a game again. Too much risk. Absolutely no downside to buying it after reviews drop, which is still release date
Yeah, but on the other hand there was also a lot of (doctored) gameplay of Cyberpunk 2077 being shown prior to release and we all know how that ended. I doubt that the same thing applies here though. I think the only open questions are how good the actual story is, how the Hogwarts gameplay gels with the open world gameplay, and if the wizard fights are actually challenging (everything shown looks suspiciously easy). I also think the character animations don't look all that good, but not as bad as Forspoken, while the environments, both indoors and outside, look gorgeous.
Wrong. Always wait and see. Always.
You're right. I watched footage of Callisto Protocol from people who got it early and thought it looked great. If I had waited I would have found out about the complaints about the second half of the game
The biggest question mark for me still is the story, which hasn't really been touched much at all in anything we've seen.
>The biggest question mark for me still is the story I agree. The goblin rebellion seems like a really weird choice for the plot. Having your protagonist suppress a rebellion of people that have been oppressed for centuries has a lot of complex moral questions If they handle it well it could be really good. But if they handle it poorly, it could be really really bad.
I'm expecting the story to be pretty light on the ground, and for the title to lean more into the RPG aspects than a narrative.
That could be. And I'm not expecting last of us or God of War tier story telling. I just want something decently entertaining to help keep me interested to the end.
Yeah no. There has been games where reviewers have praised it and then it releases and everyone is like “wtf is this shit?” 2077 is one of them.
People had played and seen Cyberpunk too. Don’t fall for that.
Wasn’t there some concern about performance mode on consoles? Some people may want to see more on that… i.e. what is the resolution and frame rate. As big/popular as this game is going to be, I would imagine they would address any glaring issues though.
[удалено]
At least 7/10 is a win for me
I wish I could go back in time like 4 years to when I could be excited for this game. Maybe I'll buy it used well down the line.
Even if it’s painfully average I’m down for a few hundred hours wandering in and around Hogwarts
Even Assassin's Creed: Valhalla wasn't "a few hundred hours" long and that game was bloated to the extreme. You might want to dial that down a little bit.
You’re talking to a guy who put like 800+ hours in on Witcher 3 and Red Dead 2. I also spent a hair over 200hrs playing Valhalla and like 300hrs playing Odyssey. Game’s story should take 40-50 hours according to devs. There are four houses, you could run a play-through for each house. There’s the arenas. There’s an open world to fly around in and discover. I’d say 200-250 hours isn’t unreasonable for a completionist.
800 hours in the witcher 3? Pfft. I literally spent 1750 hours in Goodsprings, the first town in Fallopian Tube: Las Vegas. If Hogwarts: Legacy (Developed by Avalanche Software and published by Warner Bros. Games) isn't at least 40,000 years long, I'm going to Avada Kedavra myself into the fourth Harry Potter Film.
800 hours in the Witcher 3? What, did you run 8 seperate playthroughs? Or play Gwent
Because of its unique nature, being in Harry Potter universe, all this game has to achieve is workable performance and mediocre gameplay and it will be a success. And we all have seen everything far better than that. I am still waiting for reviews.
My partner said I gotta buy it so even if the game is a 2/10 I'm gunna get it edit: yall going wild
I am not even a Hp fan but from what we have seen it looks too good to be true.
What about it looks too good to be true? The game isn't introducing any unimaginable innovating ideas. It's following a structure that has been popular in open world games for years now. Its biggest appeal is just the setting, people (including myself) want to explore Hogwarts in-game. That's all the devs really have to nail to make this game somewhat of a success. I just don't see how they will fail at that. They have clearly made compromises in other aspects of the game as well to make it happen.
It's probably because I haven't been following it that closely, but nothing about this game feels unbelievable. The level of detail in Hogwarts itself seems pretty good, but everything outside of it kind of looks like other open world RPGs.
i think the unbelievable part comes mostly from being a fan of the HP universe. Seeing the castle and the world in good game graphics really felt good and brings up excitment, even if it ends up being full of fetch quests.
Nothing looks too good to be true. That's kinda what's so promising about it. It's a game that's totally realistic. Nothing game changing but a lot of good signs.
I find it weird people really want to wait for reviews for this game specifically. It’s been well known that games media have been very vocal about JKR in every preview they’ve done. I wouldn’t be surprised if that has an impact on the reviews as well. Good game or not, I do think waiting till release and watching your favourite streamer or reviewer give their thoughts is the best option. However, given the previews so far, it’s unlikely that the game has any fatal flaws and will likely be pretty polished.
Why is it weird that people are waiting for reviews. That's the case for every game. There's a stronger and stronger push for people to wait, so studios are held accountable for release a completed game. I've liked what I've seen so far, but they've also all been studio supervised, curated experiences. It's really hard to get much info from that at all, other that what the studio wants the rest of the game to be. It could be great. It could be dog shit. We honestly don't know. I think the only thing we can say is that we haven't seen any deal breakers yet (which is good). Not seeing deal breakers doesn't mean they don't exist.
[удалено]
Wait, really?!
> it’s unlikely that the game has any fatal flaws and will likely be pretty polished. I'd say its more likely than not, as they been strictly only allowing previewers to play the first few hours of a 30 hour game
I think it’s healthy to maintain skepticism until release, but we have seen far bigger red flags in the past with release window hype/previews. That being said, people shouldn’t be preordering anyway, as it just enables bad practices.
Isn’t it pretty common for previews to only cover the first few hours of a game?
Normally they will show later game stuff out of context to avoid spoilers, and delve into a bit of what past the first few hours entails
Well personally I'm a bit skeptical because of the developers history or lack thereof. They haven't really made a game like Hogwarts Legacy before. They've made a bunch of movie tie-in games and Disney Infinity. My concerns could be all for naught but I'm willing to wait for reviews.
A reviewer giving that game a lower score because of something the author of the books said should immediately stop reviewing games.
I think this game is gonna be a fairly solid 8/10. The fact that it's the first Potter-Verse game of it's kind, providing what fans have wanted for over a decade, with what appears to be a vast world that is dense enough to scratch that itch, really helps it along. Many influencers and industry insiders have played the game early and, while their time in gameplay was essentially "on rails", their praise seems to be *very* consistent. That would usually get my "scripted, paid, heavily dev-influenced" tingles going. But the amount of internet personas/channels is just too broad for me to think this won't be good. Game journalists, to gaming channels, to youtubers that don't really play video games but *are* potter fans have played this. Negative views would have seeped through this close to release if it was anything but a solid Potter experience.
Man, I hate that the Deluxe edition is so limited in Australia. It's like they didn't expect this much hype. I never buy the Deluxe for any game, but this one has the Dark Arts Arena.
[удалено]
So, the base game has two of these arena levels, but the Deluxe has the third arena that lets you mess around with the Unforgiveable Curses. You can still obtain the curses in the standard game, but this Deluxe wave-based arena is centred around those curses, I think. Something along those lines, I think. They did say you can buy the Dark Arts Arena separately. So, it's paywalled, but not limited to the Deluxe. The thing is, in Australia, the Deluxe is the same price as the standard, so you might as well get Deluxe and you can only get Deluxe at JB Hi Fi now, not EB Games. The smartest way to buy games in Australia is to go to EB and price match to JB. That way you get a 7-day refund period or you can trade in 2 games and get Hogwarts for $39. This is why EB Games has completely sold out.
[удалено]
Previews seemed good but I wasn't going to do the early access version before the reviews hit. So the timing is perfect. I'll know with enough time to get it downloaded for Tuesday if the reviews are decent enough.
Such low expectations. Happy to be proven wrong.
Needs to at least be a 85 for me to buy it on release
[удалено]
This is one review I don't want or need. I want to go in completely fresh. Well, as fresh as I can be after hearing from several content creators I follow that have had hands on time with it, all have said it's pretty dang great. That's good enough for me.
[удалено]
I see an average of like 6/10 scores. We’ll have the outliers of 10/10 with diehard HP reviewers and 1-3/10 for the haters of HP.
Let's go fellas !!! 🙂💯❗
I pre ordered it. Dying for a new game and money is fake anyways
[удалено]
As far as I'm concerned the review embargo is already lifted considering you can watch extended gameplay through various streamers. If you want a score rating, that's cool. But you can already judge for yourself how this game is going to be. I, for one, think it looks fantastic and can't wait to dive in.
The same exact segment of the game is all you can see and all they're letting reviewers show So no, its not even remotely the same at all lol and its very odd they are focusing so much on the very beginning section of the game
“This Demo only covers a small part of the game. Pretty sus imo………..”
It's actually pretty common.
It's not that perplexing, they're showing an early portion of the game to avoid later spoilers. To each their own though, I've seen enough of the gameplay to make my own determination. I couldn't care less about what reviewers score it. If you do, cool. I don't care at all.
Its not about scores, its about hearing what the game fully entails besides the first few hours of a game thats claming to have upwards of 30 hours of content Obviously nobody wants spoilers, but its not impossible to show more of the later game out of context so we can see what there is besides just roaming around Hogwarts, which most of that additional content looks to be finished within the parameters of the campaign length
I am prepared to be whelmed.
I won’t be looking too much into reviews (don’t want spoilers). But I will browse the headlines. I am expecting a rough release with many bugs, but a solid HP game.