Originally Posted by johnny_ultimate
Surely a studio's track record is a more substantive guide for setting / moderating expectations than a trailer and a few pieces of concept art? Given the studio has a record of impressive pre-release demos followed by fairly insipid actual games, I can't help but temper expectations accordingly.
Yup but I will point out the studio has gone under some restructuing as they have hired ex-Bethesda and CD Projekt Red developers, who have worked on Fallout: New Vegas (the lead writer for example) and The Witcher series.
Thats just one of the reasons i'll give them the benefit od the doubt this time round.
Obviously and rightly proper judgement should be reserved til release - studios have indeed gotten 'fresh starts' in the past, perhaps most notably Guerilla's Sony stablemates Naughty Dog. Guerilla making a great game would be surprising but hardly impossible. But yeah I'm with Ciderman here in being unable to commit any significant levels of pre-release excitement given the studio involved here. Not that I'd consider a game whose core appears to consist of blowing up robot dinosaurs a particularly creative or commercially 'risky' proposition anyway
Guerilla have said they came up with 40 pitches for a new IP, and Horizon was the riskiest of the lot, so it was certainly risky for them.
Its never easy for a developer to push into completely different terrority and I have big respect for them being so ambitious in that regard.
I'm strange though as I almost have more respect for someone who tries to do something ambitious and create a different experience than someone who just makes a good game!
It should probably be the other way around but i cant help giving more merit to an effort that tries to break existing conventions, even if its not a great success!