Belle Sorciere

They're literally promising the sky. I hope this is truly what they're saying it is.

For a time, AAA publishers pushed the received wisdom that horror games don't sell. Indie horror games proved them wrong on that point. Those indie games did some things well, and there's nothing wrong with other developers adapting those things to their own games. Also, Resident Evil VII is not, as was pointed out, a straight ripoff of Outlast. The inclusion of combat alone, as well as the game's overall focus, counters that point. Also, the way you've framed Resident Evil VII's sales as not meeting expectations is a bit misleading. From wikipedia, with citations: SalesCapcom's pre-release sales projection for the game's launch window, through the end of March 2017, was 4 million copies.[73] The game had shipped over 2.5 million units worldwide days after the release, while the demo exceeded 7.15 million downloads.[74] The modest shipment figure had an effect on Capcom's stock price, which fell more than three percent following the Tokyo Stock Exchange.[75] It was the best-selling video game in the UK during its week of release according to Chart-Track, amounting to the third-best debut in Resident Evil history behind 5 (7.1 mill) and 6 (6.6 mill). 200,000 copies had also been sold through Steam during that time.[75][76][77] It ranked first in the Japanese charts for the week ending January 29; the PS4 sales totalled 187,306 copies,[78] 58.9 percent of its initial shipment.[79] In the month of January in the United States, Resident Evil 7 sold the most out of any video game.[80] On February 1, Capcom communicated to its investors that the game had recouped its budget.[81] It remained at the top of the UK sales chart in its second week.[82] February saw Resident Evil 7 ranked the second best-selling video game in the United States, behind For Honor.[83] By April 2017, Resident Evil 7 had sold 3.5 million copies worldwide, short of Capcom's expectation of 4 million.[84] In May 2017, Capcom gave the game a lifetime sales forecast of 10 million units, citing favorable reviews, marketing and downloadable content as contributing factors.[85] So while sales didn't meet expectations, it sold very well for the time period it was released, and it recouped its budget. The problem here isn't that it sold poorly. The fact that it didn't outsell Resident Evil 5 or 6 isn't a bad thing, and is not indicative of failure. I wouldn't be surprised if Resident Evil 8 were to happen, or if other studios follow in Capcom's footsteps. Also, Alien: Isolation (which I agree is a good game) failed to meet sales expectations as well. It was well-received and sold well, but it couldn't recoup its budget. It's not really a fair argument to pick on RE7's sales but gloss over Alien: Isolation's sales. Compare Resident Evil's 3.5 million sales to Alien's 2.1 million.

Star Trek Online is fun despite the clunkiness, thankfully. I go to it when I want Trek and Starfleet Command isn't going to do it.

I like what I've seen of Resident Evil VII (watched a review, played "the beginning hour" demo). I don't mind games borrowing from Amnesia: The Dark Descent, either. I mean it is a good horror game. Or from Outlast, although I haven't played that yet.

That video was adorable.

The hotel chase scene was terrible and I certainly hope there's nothing like it in this. I own Dark Corners of the Earth on Xbox.

Huh, that's unexpected. What was their problem? There was just a general negativity toward healers. There were threads on the Guild Wars fan forums about how people who played healers were entitled and elitist for reasons that had little to do with reality, and there was a general dislike of the fact that it often took a very long time to find a healer when doing missions, because few people played them, because they were treated like rubbish when they did. The worst abuse I've ever experienced in an online game came from playing a healer in Guild Wars, and I love to play healers. I was never treated that badly in WoW, City of Heroes (not technically a healer but support that provides damage prevention), Star Wars TOR, or The Secret World. Guild Wars 2 might be better about that, but I haven't played it enough to say either way and the character I am playing right now is a necromancer. Meanwhile, in the original EverQuest, healers were treated like royalty, while DPS were at the bottom of the rungs... Now I regret missing out on EverQuest.

But GW1 had mostly competent henchmen? I solo'd almost the whole game with heroes and henchies. What's wrong with people? :D In 2, while Elementalists can be one of the dedicated healer classes, buff stacking is what would be expected of you and elitists demanding you ping your top end berserker gear. This was before Guild Wars had heroes - they were added with Nightfall and more were added with Eye of the North. In Prophecies and Factions, you only had henchmen, and by themselves they weren't that great (I think they were improved at some point). I know there were missions that were very difficult with henchmen. Also, I like playing in groups so I actively looked to play in them. Life was great whenever I played my necromancer. Life was only sometimes great when I played my monk. With my ritualist it depended on what people needed - I could heal or go minion master or a few other things. I don't think I got as much abuse while healing as a ritualist, though. Once heroes became a thing I did play in groups much less frequently, because while I like getting into groups, I hate looking for groups for like an hour just to do a single mission.

Huh, that's unexpected. What was their problem? There was just a general negativity toward healers. There were threads on the Guild Wars fan forums about how people who played healers were entitled and elitist for reasons that had little to do with reality, and there was a general dislike of the fact that it often took a very long time to find a healer when doing missions, because few people played them, because they were treated like rubbish when they did. The worst abuse I've ever experienced in an online game came from playing a healer in Guild Wars, and I love to play healers. I was never treated that badly in WoW, City of Heroes (not technically a healer but support that provides damage prevention), Star Wars TOR, or The Secret World. Guild Wars 2 might be better about that, but I haven't played it enough to say either way and the character I am playing right now is a necromancer.

The worst treatment I ever had as a healer was in the first Guild Wars. People got vicious.

Looks like it's the actual name, what with it being all over the promotional materials.

It's not that when you talk about hardware it's off topic. It's that coming into a thread which has no connection to hardware discussion and filling it with hardware discussion is off topic. In this thread, the discussion started about Xbox One X's hardware, which is topical to E3 as it was announced at E3. This prompted comparisons and discussion of PC hardware. It's not entirely on-topic but the discussion evolved to that point, rather than simply having it imposed.

How was Steam Workshop not ideal? It allows people to play and rate mods and once you add a mod to your list the game automatically gets updated. It works for the most part so I don't know what's bad about it I never found it very convenient. But the internal mod management in Skyrim SE and Fallout 4 is at least as good as that provided by Steam Workshop so I still don't see the problem.

It introduced a new system which is basically not Steam Workshop and it will eventually introduce paid mods which is not good in my opinion. Steam Workshop was never ideal for Skyrim mods, so why would it be great for Fallout 4? Nexus was and still is the better option and is still available. The in-game mod management is awkward, I will admit, but you're not required to use it. As far as paid mods go, they're optional. Not playing them won't harm your game experience. I doubt most mods will have prices attached. I mean I don't like them either, but I don't have to touch them. Here's Bethesda's creation club page.

How did Fallout 4 take the fun away?

Hey I'm into the VR. Looking forward to Doom VFR. XCOM 2: War of the Chosen looks promising.

No open world SF game announced.

If you don't already own those they're on sale on Steam right now. $4.99 each and $7.49 for both for the next day and a half.

Watch_Dogs 2 is definitely on my list.

The studio wasn't downsized, though? People were transferred to other teams.

Regarding sales, this video has some interesting analysis:

Far Cry Blood Dragon is pretty great if your a fan of 80's nostalgia film references like Terminator, Escape From New York, Robocop, etc. I am happy you skipped Primal because that's really the only "bad" one, in my opinion. I liked primal, it was different enough that it breathed some life into what is now a reanimated corpse called Ubisoft. Just the fact that you had to do more stealth than shooting was enough to make it better than FarCry 4. Plus it is thankfully devoid of all SJW propaganda that seems to permeate Ubisoft games lately. SJW propaganda in Ubisoft games? Awesome - I need to play more of them. To be fair, I suspect it's actually propaganda in the same way that killing a spider is murder.

Far Cry Blood Dragon is pretty great if your a fan of 80's nostalgia film references like Terminator, Escape From New York, Robocop, etc. I am happy you skipped Primal because that's really the only "bad" one, in my opinion. I got Blood Dragon for free last year because Ubisoft was giving free games away. It's installed on my system but I haven't tried it yet. Thanks for the recommendation, 'cause I do like those things. And yeah, I've heard very little good about Primal.

Mass Effect 3 was heavily criticized, but it was by any economic measure a success.