PREY is getting Excellent reviews from everywhere
- Thread starter B-Cell_v1legacy
- Start date
Agreed, the humanoid enemies are utterly frustrating to fight. You just can't dodge their stuff most of the time. The projectiles travel too fast (or straight up just appear at your feet as an explosion) so even if you're already runing for cover you'll get hit. The fire ones with their 'explosion appears at your feet' are the worst. IN one encounter I even set up 2 turrets to help me take one down and the fight ended up with 2 dead turrets and me at 30% life.undeadsuitor said:
The thing literally face tanked 2 machine guns at once and had the time and attacks to kill both f them and nearly kill me.
That is way too much health.
I'll put the following in spoilers because it discusses some enemies that may or may not count as spoilers. But TL;DR: Stun gun is aces, weapon damage upgrades are your friends.
I don't know, maybe it's because I play on Normal but I've found the humanoid enemies to not be trouble. If it's a Burning or normal Phantom, just use the stun gun (against Etheric or Electric, GLOO obvs). Not only does it lock them for a long time, any weapon you use on them since does huge damage. Seriously stunned phantoms take 2-3 shotgun shells to take down (although granted, I've upgraded the shotgun AND I bought the Security skills that ups Pistol/Shotgun damage. Much like Sneak Attack skills, they really do make a huge difference)
Now, the really big guys, like Technopaths and Telepaths and Weavers? Those can be a pain (although Weavers go down fast to the Q-Beam, and Technopaths count as tech so the good ol' Stun Gun absolutely demolishes them. The problem is you have to hit them in a weak spot for it to work properly).
And the Nightmare is just a pain all around, unless you can get it stuck somewhere.
Now, the really big guys, like Technopaths and Telepaths and Weavers? Those can be a pain (although Weavers go down fast to the Q-Beam, and Technopaths count as tech so the good ol' Stun Gun absolutely demolishes them. The problem is you have to hit them in a weak spot for it to work properly).
And the Nightmare is just a pain all around, unless you can get it stuck somewhere.
Worthabuy is a master of posting reviews for a game without actually reviewing the game. I've watched a few of his videos in the past to check for consistency and the man seems to have no sense of how to review a game properly.
Prey is another game in a long list of game's that I'm sure is average at best and will likely find it's way into my GameFly queue at some point.
Prey is another game in a long list of game's that I'm sure is average at best and will likely find it's way into my GameFly queue at some point.
He seems predisposed [https://youtu.be/qwFiCgsUvrw?t=890] to hating third person/console games.Bombiz said:
Prey 2006 was very mediocre and subpar shooter. it was very easy and you cant even die.Headdrivehardscrew said:I'm with you on this one.RaikuFA said:
After what happened with Human Head Studios, Bethesda and Prey 2, I simply found myself unable to put much hope into this all-new "Prey", Arkane Studios or not.
The original Prey has a special place in my heart, as one of the most surprising good games of its time... too bad it's still being forced into extinction and generally being forgotten by the gaming public.
Maybe, just maybe this new "Prey" will eventually, later-on in the story, or in some remote DLC offer some of that sweet walking-on-the-ceiling action or even just more interesting enemy types than "hot black smoke tentacle thing crab-style" and "hot black smoke teleporting tentacle man thing"... not a fan. Sure, it may be much "better" than the legendary Gearbox rape and ongoing exploitation of the Duke Nukem IP, but an average, 08/15 shooty shooty FPS just won't do it for Prey in my books.
Thanks to Arkane for somewhat trying, but Bethesda's spirit animal for this one is clearly the maggot.
new one resemble any 90s immersive sim. excellent level deisng and game is very deep and complex with RPG elements.
And? Plenty of other games have everything the Reboot Prey has (I also think we need to revisit the definition of what an "immersive sim" is cause a moment ago you said this was an FPS rivaling Half-Life? please pick one). It's no wonder why everyone on this thread is yawning at it's "reliable" praises. We'd rather see HumanHeads' Prey because they were actively striving/pushing for new ideas for the genre before being given the boot on a 90% finished sequel.B-Cell said:Prey 2006 was very mediocre and subpar shooter. it was very easy and you cant even die.Headdrivehardscrew said:I'm with you on this one.RaikuFA said:
After what happened with Human Head Studios, Bethesda and Prey 2, I simply found myself unable to put much hope into this all-new "Prey", Arkane Studios or not.
The original Prey has a special place in my heart, as one of the most surprising good games of its time... too bad it's still being forced into extinction and generally being forgotten by the gaming public.
Maybe, just maybe this new "Prey" will eventually, later-on in the story, or in some remote DLC offer some of that sweet walking-on-the-ceiling action or even just more interesting enemy types than "hot black smoke tentacle thing crab-style" and "hot black smoke teleporting tentacle man thing"... not a fan. Sure, it may be much "better" than the legendary Gearbox rape and ongoing exploitation of the Duke Nukem IP, but an average, 08/15 shooty shooty FPS just won't do it for Prey in my books.
Thanks to Arkane for somewhat trying, but Bethesda's spirit animal for this one is clearly the maggot.
new one resemble any 90s immersive sim. excellent level deisng and game is very deep and complex with RPG elements.
Bethesda and Arkane... slapping "Prey" on things haphazardly? suing for using the word? losing sales? Sounds about right.
more like. They slap the name of mediocre game and turn it into masterpiece.JagermanXcell said:And? Plenty of other games have everything the Reboot Prey has (I also think we need to revisit the definition of what an "immersive sim" is cause a moment ago you said this was an FPS rivaling Half-Life? please pick one). It's no wonder why everyone on this thread is yawning at it's "reliable" praises. We'd rather see HumanHeads' Prey because they were actively striving/pushing for new ideas for the genre before being given the boot on a 90% finished sequel.B-Cell said:Prey 2006 was very mediocre and subpar shooter. it was very easy and you cant even die.Headdrivehardscrew said:I'm with you on this one.RaikuFA said:
After what happened with Human Head Studios, Bethesda and Prey 2, I simply found myself unable to put much hope into this all-new "Prey", Arkane Studios or not.
The original Prey has a special place in my heart, as one of the most surprising good games of its time... too bad it's still being forced into extinction and generally being forgotten by the gaming public.
Maybe, just maybe this new "Prey" will eventually, later-on in the story, or in some remote DLC offer some of that sweet walking-on-the-ceiling action or even just more interesting enemy types than "hot black smoke tentacle thing crab-style" and "hot black smoke teleporting tentacle man thing"... not a fan. Sure, it may be much "better" than the legendary Gearbox rape and ongoing exploitation of the Duke Nukem IP, but an average, 08/15 shooty shooty FPS just won't do it for Prey in my books.
Thanks to Arkane for somewhat trying, but Bethesda's spirit animal for this one is clearly the maggot.
new one resemble any 90s immersive sim. excellent level deisng and game is very deep and complex with RPG elements.
Bethesda and Arkane... slapping "Prey" on things haphazardly? suing for using the word? losing sales? Sounds about right.
no one cares about original prey. its gameplay suck. was too linear and scripted, too easy and you cant even die
new Prey is challenging game in the vien of system shock 2.
I rather have System shock 2/Half life successor than Prey 2006 successor.
I didn't hate on PC. I just prefer consoles because their pros are more important to me than the pros of PC gaming. There's quite a few people here that think console gaming has no pros at all.Bombiz said:
What is a 90's interactive sim Linda?! Difficulty is subjective (revive chambers didn't make System Shock 2 a snore?) Linda. You're repeating yourself, comparing the game to others instead of pointing out if it did ANYTHING original at all, and dodging questions again Linda.B-Cell said:
Gotta love hyperboling (I, for one stil would play the actual Prey if it's engine wasn't constricted to a single CPU core), plus, you forget that dying in System Shock is a slap on the wrist at most.B-Cell said:
Also, linearity is not always a bad thing.
I liked that one it was very fun.Headdrivehardscrew said:I'm with you on this one.RaikuFA said:
After what happened with Human Head Studios, Bethesda and Prey 2, I simply found myself unable to put much hope into this all-new "Prey", Arkane Studios or not.
The original Prey has a special place in my heart, as one of the most surprising good games of its time... too bad it's still being forced into extinction and generally being forgotten by the gaming public.
Maybe, just maybe this new "Prey" will eventually, later-on in the story, or in some remote DLC offer some of that sweet walking-on-the-ceiling action or even just more interesting enemy types than "hot black smoke tentacle thing crab-style" and "hot black smoke teleporting tentacle man thing"... not a fan. Sure, it may be much "better" than the legendary Gearbox rape and ongoing exploitation of the Duke Nukem IP, but an average, 08/15 shooty shooty FPS just won't do it for Prey in my books.
Thanks to Arkane for somewhat trying, but Bethesda's spirit animal for this one is clearly the maggot.
FTFYPhoenixmgs said:
Either I know of the juicy B-Cell lore that you crave, or I just give people random first names when they act aloof. I'll leave that to your interpretation.Chimpzy said:
Intriguing. By all means, continue. I look forward to wherever this may lead.JagermanXcell said:
Based off the demo. The shooting is kind of crap, which is kind of expected (if you ever tried shooting in Dishonored as a regular go to). The stealths a little wonky too, feels really tacked on, not like the game was designed for it at all (and shadow tentacle crabs with no discernible faces are a little bizarre to try and decipher their vision angles). Didn't get too much into the System Shock homage RPG system within the span of it.
If Dishonored was Arkane doing their spin at Thief, this one is pretty clearly System Shock a la Arkane. But System Shock itself was more of an ambition and concept then actual execution, and Arkane seems to (in the demo impression) have the same issue when they spread their mechanics out more then they did in Dishonoreds primarily stealth play.
If Dishonored was Arkane doing their spin at Thief, this one is pretty clearly System Shock a la Arkane. But System Shock itself was more of an ambition and concept then actual execution, and Arkane seems to (in the demo impression) have the same issue when they spread their mechanics out more then they did in Dishonoreds primarily stealth play.
I don't call 6/10 [http://metro.co.uk/2017/05/08/prey-review-shock-of-the-new-6623206/] "Excellent", so evidently "everywhere" is objectively untrue... Discuss. Discus! DIS-CUSSS! Ahem...
The trailers made it look boring as fuck, and nothing I've read about it piques my interest. The actual/original Prey was--- kinda fun, in a dumb way that never really capitalised on its potential. A great opening to the game, at least by way of being a little different than usual. This Prey looks the complete opposite of 'a little different'.
The trailers made it look boring as fuck, and nothing I've read about it piques my interest. The actual/original Prey was--- kinda fun, in a dumb way that never really capitalised on its potential. A great opening to the game, at least by way of being a little different than usual. This Prey looks the complete opposite of 'a little different'.
That's great, but does it even matter? Is there anyone who STILL trust reviews?
Don't get me wrong, I think Prey is probably a quite good game. It's just that the reviews don't count. Reviews don't count anymore these days.
Don't get me wrong, I think Prey is probably a quite good game. It's just that the reviews don't count. Reviews don't count anymore these days.
thats only one review.Darth Rosenberg said:
beside i trust worthy youtubers than professional critics. they are used to of playing COD like FPS where you have explosion ever 3 second, scripted, regen health and cover system.