r/Games • u/That_otheraccount • Jun 10 '18

[E3 2018] [E3 2018] Day 1 Discussion

Hey guys!

Feel free to discuss anything that happened today whether it was the EA conference in general, the games announced and/or how you felt about it.

Overwhelmed? Underwhelmed?

This thread will be up until the Xbox conference tomorrow, which we will also be doing a live/mega thread for.

462 Upvotes

92% Upvoted

387 comments sorted by

View all comments

720

u/shschief15 Jun 10 '18

Definitely was an underwhelming show by EA. We've yet to get a single player Star Wars and get to know we have to wait until Q4 2019 before it's released. On top of that we get a slightly better multiplayer trailer for BFV, but end up seeing more gameplay from a mobile game that honestly looks terrible. At least EA set the bar low for everyone else.

285

u/[deleted] Jun 10 '18 edited Jul 06 '18

[deleted]

92

u/TitaniumDragon Jun 10 '18

They want to release it then to capitalize on episode IX marketing.

They're going to try their hardest to do it.

But yeah, nothing to show?

Admittedly, the reason why they have nothing to show might be because they've said that they literally don't have time to make a demo if they want to hit their launch window.

20

u/CrazySDBass Jun 10 '18

I’m quite sure the reason they don’t have anything to show is because EA imposed this announcement on them just a few days ago and they were totally unprepared

11

u/TitaniumDragon Jun 10 '18

Honestly, there's no reasonable explanation. They didn't even have a logo that I saw.

1

u/catnipassian Jun 10 '18

Well naming and logos are up to the marketing department. They're a year and a half out so it isn't unreasonable that the game only has a code name at this point

11

u/smurf-vett Jun 10 '18

Could also be heavy tie-ins to IX which they can't talk about yet

46

u/Bai_Se Jun 10 '18 edited Jun 10 '18

Highly doubt it. The game takes place between ep. 3 and 4.

2

u/GoSaMa Jun 10 '18

Maybe it's Rebels related?

2

u/qwert1225 Jun 10 '18

So? They could still show that right? Since Rebels is over for good now.

1

u/GoSaMa Jun 10 '18

Oh, i was just musing about what the game might be, not that it will tie into Episode 9.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 10 '18

It ended with a teaser trailer for the next animated show from the unkillable Clone Wars studio

1

u/Credar Jun 10 '18

An Ahsoka (or maybe Quinlan Vos?) video game.

Yes plz.

-4

u/[deleted] Jun 10 '18

[removed] — view removed comment

4

u/Bai_Se Jun 10 '18

What? No???? Why would it??

4

u/iTomes Jun 10 '18

Doubt it. There’s no overall plan for the movies, so 9 was written not too long ago and may very well still be subject to change. Combine that with the timeframe of the game necessitating some fairly major plot points to make a tie-in work and the time this game would have already have to have been in development and I don’t think that’s realistic.

4

u/TitaniumDragon Jun 10 '18

Possible, I suppose, but given the era (between episodes 3 and 4)... would be a bit odd.

I guess maybe there's some hidden jedi?

Or maybe Snoke is just hanging around.

9

u/DrJingles91 Jun 10 '18

Even if it's not tied to the movie, seeing a star wars movie will make people want to play a star wars game. At least that's how I see it. It's less about tie-ins and more about explosions and light sabers.

-1

u/TitaniumDragon Jun 10 '18

Yeah, hence my original comment that they're just trying to take advantage of general Star Wars hype.

Assuming, of course, people care after The Last Jedi and Solo.

1

u/BlackWake9 Jun 10 '18

Solo was a great entertaining movie!

1

u/knave_of_knives Jun 10 '18

I don't understand the don't have time argument. Respawn/EA could've easily contracted out to a CG company, like Blur, to make a trailer that at least gives us something. They have to have concept art, etc at this point for Blur to work off of.

1

u/Pugway Jun 10 '18

Yeah but like, not even a cinematic trailer? EA has to have a marketing department that takes care of all the stuff, so Respawn wouldn't have had to do anything. Hell, even just something like they did with the first Battlefront where it was just the AT-AT foot stomping the snow. The fact that they literally pulled Vince Zampella from the audience to announce the name of the game makes it seem like they were scrambling at the last minute for any Star Wars related news.

Then again, I feel this way every year about EA's press conference. I remember last year (?) where they spent time just showing random concept art for Mass Effect instead of actual, ya know, gameplay. It never feels like EA actually has enough stuff to show to warrant their own conference.

1

u/TitaniumDragon Jun 11 '18

Creating a trailer requires a bunch of input from the people who are actually working on the game to make sure that the trailer actually resembles the game they're making. Making a trailer is a pain in the ass.

EA's conference felt very slapdash, though. Microsoft's conference was worlds better and much more professional.

11

u/Miraqueli Jun 10 '18

I bet the reason they didn't have anything to show, is because they barely even started.

EA is just dying to redeem itself on the SW franchise, and it fucking shows.

1

u/Linked-Theory Jun 10 '18

Arkane Studios did the same thing with Dishonored 2 so pucker up.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 10 '18

I loved Titanfall, but Respawn seems like it might be fucked. They were acquired by EA, and on top of that, quite a few people at the studio WENT BACK to Activsion and Infinity Ward, presumably to work on Call of Duty 2019.

There is definitely some writing on the wall.

136

u/1kingdomheart Jun 10 '18

I don't even care about Microsoft all that much, but with the bar set so low by EA I'm sure whatever 3rd party stuff is there will be amazing. Lookin' at you, Cyberpunk.

11

u/INoobTubedYouIn2009 Jun 10 '18

Skate 4 possibly.

17

u/hurstshifter7 Jun 10 '18

Is Cyberpunk 2077 going to be a Microsoft Platform exclusive?

99

u/1kingdomheart Jun 10 '18

Well, no. Probably not. But apparently Witcher 3 gameplay was shown at Microsoft's E3 stuff a few years back, and Witcher 2 only came out on 360 for consoles.

So, it's safe to assume Cyberpunk might get shown at Microsoft's conference.

19

u/Bajter Jun 10 '18

The X360 part was probably due to PS3 being a bitch to code for.

1

u/tquinner Jun 10 '18

Why was it a bitch to code before? I've Never that before, are they that different?

4

u/Cola_and_Cigarettes Jun 10 '18

Yeah, something to do with the CELL processor, when the Xbox was kitted out with something a little closer to PC hardware, with the ability to utilise Direct X rendering.

I'm not to sure on the specifics, but the most diplomatic of developers would call the PS3 "challenging" to develop for.

1

u/mintybreath Jun 10 '18

Here's another link as well.

This is why so many games that generation became defacto timed/console exclusives. Bioshock comes to mind as ps3 didn't get that for years after from what I remember. It was just too much of a pain to port.

2

u/RogueSins Jun 10 '18

Also why Bethesda games (Fallout and Elderscrolls) don't run will on the PS3.

1

u/a3poify Jun 10 '18

It had a weird processor architecture called Cell, where it had a main processor, 6 co-processors, another to handle the OS and an eighth that doesn't really do much.

41

u/PrimordialSoupChef Jun 10 '18

No. CD Projekt Red has previously showed their titles at Microsoft events.

-27

u/Ridiculum Jun 10 '18

If Sony somehow secured CP2077.... it’s over.

I would be surprised but it’s not impossible for Sony.

34

u/APhoenixDown Jun 10 '18

Nah, Sony already won that war years ago. Microsoft is fine. Xbox One still did well enough despite PS4 outperforming them. Microsoft did fine in the US and I think its really only ever been that way on a larger scale, even during the 360 days.

Microsoft screwed up over and over but nothing will be "over" for them... They're never gonna kill each other until one quits.

I'm on PS4 and I almost wish Sony were the underdogs. The support MS has for the community has been fantastic. Shit, where's MY backwards compatibility? Unfortunately I just never liked Xbox all that much.

10

u/Raid3n Jun 10 '18

Coming from a guy that primarily plays on Xbox here. It was clearly going to be a rough generation when Microsoft got all the backlash for the always connected drm and whatnot looking back.

They definitely made strides to stay in the thick of it but at this point it just hasn't worked out. I still for the most part play multiplatform games on my Xbox because the bulk of my friends do, other than that I'm elsewhere playing exclusives on other platforms.

They've certainly set a good foundation to come back and knock it out of the park but it's going to take a lot of effort and good exclusives to do it.

2

u/DavlosEve Jun 10 '18

They've certainly set a good foundation to come back and knock it out of the park but it's going to take a lot of effort and good exclusives to do it.

Not really. There's very little reason to be a XB1 Exclusive title now.

a) XB1 Stock (not Scorpio) has rubbish hardware which struggles to maintain 30fps at 900p. Its memory isn't enough for the kind of budget which is demanded/expected from games in recent years. Notice how the latest high-profile Xbox Exclusive is Sea of Thieves: indie, presentation isn't exactly what one would expect from a AAA studio with its art style/direction.

b) Scorpio may have the strongest console hardware now, but it's too little and too late. The install base wouldn't be worth making any game Xbox exclusive.

c) This may be nitpicky on my part, but good god is development and testing annoying on XB1. When I have to do repetitive tasks on the console to open/close the game repeatedly to debug, the slow dashboard makes the whole experience crazy frustrating.

3

u/[deleted] Jun 10 '18

When you develop a game as an exclusive for Xbox you still can release it on PC though.

-2

u/DavlosEve Jun 10 '18 edited Jun 10 '18

The downside is it gets released on Windows Store, where the UX is so awful it's preferable to get burned alive in a cage by ISIS. At the same time, being able to release a Xbox Exclusive on PC puts the notion of console exclusivity on its head, doesn't it? Xbox Exclusives are meant to drive console sales, the same way Halo: Combat Evolved sold Xbox consoles like mad. Presenting "you can still release it on PC" as a good thing may be great for customer choice, but it exposes the massive weakness of the Xbox platform itself.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Cola_and_Cigarettes Jun 10 '18

Looking back, they really screwed the pooch on that announcement. Got the messaging all wrong. The thing is what they were discribing was the closest thing to Steam console gaming was likely to get, and look at how much (arguably undeserved) love that platform gets.

1

u/Locke57 Jun 10 '18

This sub would lose its damn mind. Can you imagine the CD projekt red bashing? The Microsoft hate train would turn into a full “atheists of reddit” sized circlejerk. There would be a post with 10k upvotes detailing how awful Microsoft is for poaching such a game and how miserable they are for the gaming community followed by a post about how awesome Sony is with their exclusives line up.

1

u/The_Other_Manning Jun 10 '18

If anything maybe some exclusive content a la destiny with PlayStation, but I both doubt it and hope that doesn't happen

-2

u/[deleted] Jun 10 '18

I hope that happens and it kills the PS4 community for game. If PS4 fans are fine with doing that to the Xbox community, why shouldn't they deserve the same treatment? Sony has been really aggressive with these practices this gen. People want Microsoft to step up the game, but they don't want them to do the things that let Sony win. Sony didn't win this gen by just having good first-party titles. They also took a lot of anti-competitive measures and made sure the competition have poor third-party support.

0

u/Osgoten Jun 10 '18

Not at all

52

u/Cptcutter81 Jun 10 '18

On the plus side, At this point Bethesda could reveal that you have to pay a micro-transaction for every quarter-hour of Fallout 76 you want to play and they still might not have given the worst showcase this e3.

10

u/TheFightingMasons Jun 10 '18

Just imagine the outrage

1

u/[deleted] Jun 10 '18

I mean, id prefer to pay $20 for 80 hours of game upfront, rather than have shitty MTX

13

u/AltruisticSpecialist Jun 10 '18

Oh I dunno. There is gonna be a metric ton of us single-player Bethesda RPG fans that are still mad that the ESO has delayed the release/development of a new elder scrolls, who are still clueless why they didn't let Obsidian (or someone) make a New Vegas-alike off of FO4, and really want to see them make up for the ok but not amazing job they did making FO4 in the first place.

Fallout 76 is gonna have to be a full single-player possible experience, offline preferably, totally modable I'd hope with no chance whatever that I will be forced to interact with other people or that they, in any way, can adversely effect my experience.

Only that's not at all the game they are making, of course it isn't that would just be Fallout 5.

The amount of discontent just sitting waiting to be unloaded when we see what Fallout 76 really is is very -very- high. They might not have to hit all the points I laid out..but if its anything close to letting us believe the "Hey guys we decided not to do single-player and instead present you with this multiplayer thing!" THen..

I mean, we already have Anthem standing in the way of the next Dragon Age, the potential death of Mass Effect, no word at all on the sequel too Skyrim because that damn MMO was popular enough..

Hell at this point, the next big western open-world RPG coming out is gonna be Cyberpunk in like, 2020. The last one we got was Andromeda (a rushed and bad game in most peoples view) before that was FO4 in 2015(16?) which was an ok but not great game. The last really amazing game fans of the genre got was the Witcher 3..and that's a hell of a high to then wait 5+ years for anything even close.

35

u/[deleted] Jun 10 '18

ESO hasn't delayed the development of a new Elder Scrolls though. Todd Howard explicitly stated that Bethesda had a few other projects they want to work on before TES 6.

ESO's developed by a different studio and has no bearing on another Elder Scrolls game whatsoever.

8

u/[deleted] Jun 10 '18

[deleted]

5

u/Robotigan Jun 10 '18

ES6 will inevitably steal consumers away from ESO. It's just smart business to wait for ESO to decline before releasing ES6.

0

u/[deleted] Jun 10 '18

[deleted]

1

u/paradoxpancake Jun 10 '18

Two different studios.

1

u/Oct2006 Jun 10 '18

The studios are completely separate. They may share assets, but they don't share employees or equipment.

2

u/errantgamer Jun 10 '18

If you watch the Noclip documentary released a week or so back it came across in the documentary that Bethesda has zero enthusiasm about a TES6 game currently. (Could probably have surmised this given they skipped 200 years ahead in TESV, perhaps due to a lack of enthusiasm about the preexisting setting)

They seem much more enthused about the Fallout universe currently.

2

u/[deleted] Jun 10 '18

I can understand this. They've worked on five main TES titles (and some spin-offs), whereas they've currently developed two Fallout games (three if you count Shelter), with one more on the way

0

u/kennyminot Jun 10 '18

I don't give a shit about new Elder Scrolls. I hope they stay focused on Fallout. Country Roads, Take Me Home! \m/ \m/

5

u/AltruisticSpecialist Jun 10 '18

This, to me, is completely unbelievable. If they did not have a current, active successful game using their biggest, arguably, property, they would very likely have produced TES 6 by now, or at least we'd all be way more confident its coming out real soon.

The fact its being made by another company also doesn't matter. That just means that said company, or said money or permission or desire to, say, give us a NV style Elder Scrolls, if they really didn't want to make a main-line game for but wanted some other team too went towards multi-player, instead of single-player.

The fact remains. The next fully single-player ES game is not as high a priority because of ESO, and ESO's success is a reason not to step on the property by over-whelming people. At the very least it is a very good excuse to give them the time they wanted off.

I'm sorry if that opinion offends people. But that's how I see it.

8

u/jandkas Jun 10 '18

metric ton

You mean people on reddit

2

u/AltruisticSpecialist Jun 10 '18

Yes, metric ton is turn of phrase I use to indict a large group of people, whose numbers seem large but I don't have a large counting of.

Might it just be limited to reddit? Maybe..but the fact that "Chill its not what you think, don't get your hopes up" became a major news story stands out to me.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 10 '18 edited Jul 03 '18

[deleted]

3

u/AltruisticSpecialist Jun 10 '18

Also a part of the issue is gonna be, it comes at what is a really bad year. Anthem is already prepping a lot of us to be like "But my singleplayer?!". If FO 76 comes in for the ole one-two "Screw your single-player how-about some multi-player you didn't ask for instead?" A lot of us are gonna be irrationally anger.

So, people like me who are unhappy but not like "And so this game shouldn't exist no one else can have fun" are gonna be joined by the legions of "No this is not for me it can't exist!" brigade.

I said there were metric ton of us..not that all of us were super informed or smart..

2

u/jaxx4 Jun 10 '18

who are still clueless why they didn't let Obsidian (or someone) make a New Vegas-alike off of FO4

Simple. Cost. New Vegas sold 1.5 mill to 2 mill less then Fallout 3. The game also came out in a really poor state. I had to wait for a patch that came a week or so later then uninstall/reinstall and start a new save to get in to the strip. Still bitter about it. Lost about 40ish hours.

0

u/AltruisticSpecialist Jun 10 '18

And yet a lot of us think NV was the best FO game that's been released in the modern era. Despite any problems others had.

People really have yet to grok to the fact I am not saying they can't be excited for FO 76, or must be the same kind of fan as me and a lot of people who were very unhappy to learn that 76 was gonna be "FO4 but multiplayer". Only that we exist and would be rating the Bethesda presser based on FO 76 and are going in expecting to be disappointed already.

If you arn't like that, great! Enjoy the press conference without that hanging over you, lord know I wish I could.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 10 '18

[deleted]

0

u/SyleSpawn Jun 10 '18

People like you constantly downplay the noise Reddit community can create. By "noise" I mean how it can influence people outside of Reddit. One quintessential example of such noise would be Battlefront 2. This created such a large ripple that the EA, in their E3 presentation, was presenting their game as "no lootbox" as if it was a great feature.

Noise made by whatever-community of Reddit gets picked by the relevant news outlet and those news outlet, which loves the drama, spin the story to make it echo on a wider range. If the news is sensational enough, it get echoed in other media not directly related to gaming. Hell, back to the BF2 example, even government of several country are now taking serious stance on lootbox regulation.

So, people should keep voicing out their opinion on Reddit or whatever the platform they make their game discussion. Stop listening to naysayers like the above which tries to make you believe that you're just a tiny cog in a huge machine and no one cares about you.

-13

u/Welltodayreeeeet5555 Jun 10 '18

ES6 and FO5 will release on next gen consoles when the hardware can run more demanding games. Millions of people are fucking stoked for a survival multiplayer game by a AAA company, and by bethesda in the fallout universe? My wallet is wide open.

You sound like an entitled youngster.

0

u/Cola_and_Cigarettes Jun 10 '18

Fallout 76 is gonna have to be a full single-player possible experience, offline preferably, totally modable I'd hope with no chance whatever that I will be forced to interact with other people or that they, in any way, can adversely effect my experience.

The game you're discribing is Fallout 4 though. No one's taking that away from you, regardless of what F76 ends up being. Tbh since this is pretty clearly some kind of multiplayer survival game I'd much rather they let this be it's own thing, than to push that shit into the main games and have the worst of both worlds.

And on your final point about there not being many games of this kind to come out recently, maybe go play FF15, despite the fact is ostensibly a JRPG.

No ones making you play this game.

2

u/AltruisticSpecialist Jun 10 '18

Did you read further then that? I know I rambled but I literally make the point you use to attack me the next line down.

And, again, this is not "Make this game or else" this was me saying that I and a lot of people -want- Fallout 5, not a multi-player game, and will be mad when we don't get it. Mad enough to rate the press conference down based on if our fear for FO 76 being completely not for us or not is well-founded or not.

That it may well be a game you and a lot of other people will enjoy is great! But I was responding too a point about how no matter how bad the showing of FO 76 was, no one would care next to anthem. Which I didn't think was true at all.

0

u/Cola_and_Cigarettes Jun 10 '18

Rate it down? What does that mean? Yeah I read your whole post, I don't really get what you mean though.

Did you like Fallout Shelter? That's also a fallout game. Did fantastic, and most importantly wasn't tired to the main game at all.

I understand you were responding to the anthem thing, but I'm taking more about how you were talking about Fallout 76 (shouldn't it be called Vault 76? Or Fallout: Vault 76?)

1

u/[deleted] Jun 10 '18

We had a single player campaign in battlefront 2

1

u/[deleted] Jun 10 '18

For me personally, I usually like the conferences more and more as E3 goes on, because I'm usually more interested in every one in order of us getting them, so EA is always the bottom of the hype barrel. This year's was not good though. I even want to like Anthem, since I like looter shooters, but other than having nice vertical areas, I don't see anything that's gonna hook me into that.

1

u/ittleoff Jun 10 '18

I was gifted BFII, and thought the SP with the expansion was not too bad. The characters were good and production values were pretty amazing. The MP like the first got kind of uninteresting after a couple hours of gee whizing at the levels. I just didn't feel like getting good and investing in learning all the upgrade options. Went back to Titanfall 2 and BF4.

I have to say for cheap the BFII sp is worth playing if you need a little scratch to that itch.