Bioware’s Anthem is an action-RPG shooter looking a fair bit like Destiny

BioWare’s Anthem [official site], the mysterious new game they announced last night but forgot to say anything about, is a Destiny-lookin’ action-RPG. It’s a “shared-world” shooter with cooperative multiplayer, questing, levelling, looting, and all that. That’s the news out of Microsoft’s E3 press conference tonight, where BioWare showed the game off in a seven-minute gameplay trailer. Observe:

Electronic Arts note that the trailer shows pre-alpha footage, so the game could change for better and worse by the time it launches. And obviously E3 demos are all sorts of staged.

But I like that lush world and I like the big monsters and I do like jetpacks and I guess I like my friends just fine.

Electronic Arts explain Anthem with this blurb:

“In this shared-world action-RPG, you and your friends are Freelancers–the bold few with the courage to leave civilziation behind, explore a landscape of primeval beauty, and confort the dangers you find.

“Up to four players band together to take on whatever perils you discover as a heroic team. as your friends support you in your journey, so do your victories and rewards benefit your friends.

“Wield an aresenal of Javelin exosuits, each equipped with unique weapons and abilities. Customize them with gear you earn and craft, then use them to fly, leap, and climb through a contiguous open world.

“Experience massive, world-altering occurences like Shaper Storms. Fight savage beasts and ruthless marauders. Delve forgotten ruins as you seek to defeat the forces plotting to conquer humanity.

“Your power grows with every step into the unknown. Whether plunder, revenge, or glory lures you onward, your choices will irrevocably change you—and the world around you.”

In short, you shoot things to make your numbers go up.

Anthem is due to launch in autumn 2018.

Destiny 2, the sequel to the game which seems to have been a big influence on Anthem, is due on September 8th this year – though its PC version may (or may not) be late. I won’t go rhetorically asking which will win, as if one game must triumph and one must be beaten to a cyberpulp and ritually humiliated. No, I want to know: can Destiny’s dad beat up Anthem’s dad?

75 Comments

  1. LearningToSmile says:

    Well there goes any chance I’ll ever play this. Looks nice on a technical level, I guess. Not like I ever was a big fan of Bioware… but still, a shame.

    Also, does anyone actually think this horrible scripted player dialogue was good idea? It made the whole video painful to watch.

    • DevilishEggs says:

      See you on the other side

    • Turkey says:

      We’ll never know if Kim got the xp he needed :(

    • fish99 says:

      You neglected to say why you wouldn’t play it.

      • LearningToSmile says:

        As most people assumed this would be another single-player RPG, I thought it was self-explanatory after it turned out it wasn’t.

        I have very little interest in co-op multiplayer shooters to begin with, and nothing in the gameplay reveal served to rekindle it – much the opposite. Even Destiny looked more interesting for a brief period of time before the gameplay details started coming out.

        • PseudoKnight says:

          Maybe you shouldn’t assume people made assumptions. (I didn’t) Heh.

        • LexW1 says:

          Multiple devs have claimed the game is playable “alone or with friends”. That’s distinct from Destiny, in which only the campaign is soloable. Further, they claim it has a strong story, with decisions for you to make.

          So I think you may be writing it off prematurely.

          • Maxheadroom says:

            Obviously its too early to pass final judgement but I definitely wasn’t feeling like I was watching the “Bob Dylan of video games”.

            Or maybe I was, the painful scripted banter between the ‘players’ was too distracting

            Someone with more time and skill than me please mock up a reveal video to ‘Times they are a Changin” with 2 listeners stiltedly discussing it with all the sincerity of a wet fish

      • Klaxon Overdrive says:

        You shoot things to make your numbers go up. Yes.

        Once you realise you’re making widgets the fun drops out of it.

        And maybe I’m old and crotchety, but the story seems like nonsense. Backfilled over repetitive mechanics as you grind endlessly through level after level.

        Watching that I kept wondering: who are those people? Why do they live on that planet, where everything’s trying to kill them? Hiding behind a massive wall but can whip up magic suits of armour indefinitely, and throw them endlessly into fighting whatever’s trying to get through? Why don’t they just pick up and leave?

        And what the hell’s a “Shaper Storm?”

        It feels like a video game. And not in a good way. Is there still a market for these slick high-tech slot machine pull a lever win a quarter style games?

        I thought Destiny killed them.

        But they’re making Destiny 2. So I guess it’s just me.

        Fine.

        Get off my lawn.

        • poliovaccine says:

          Ugh, after watching that video I’m more inclined to ask if you’ve got a second folding chair…

        • LexW1 says:

          I think it’s pretty sad that you blithely and smugly assume there are no answers to those questions.

          • Klaxon Overdrive says:

            No, what’s sad is I spent the time complaining about it.

        • Turkey says:

          A shaper storm is a storm made by the shaper, duh.

          O, Lord Shaper. Bless my loot this day.
          May thyne RNG smile upon me, and thyne server not droppeth upon mine very connection.
          Please don’t unleash one of your furious storms in the middle of a quest.
          Kim needs the XP.

          Amen.

  2. Wulfram says:

    Dispiriting to see Bioware reduced to this sort of genericness. Mass Effect Andromeda could be 10 times jankier and still more interesting.

    • Chalky says:

      These days “Bioware” is just a badge that EA sticks on games it makes. Pretty much none of the people who made the games Bioware are famous for are still around, EA brings in new people and release it under the same name.

      • Wulfram says:

        Eh, MEA and DAI were both games that I could only imagine Bioware making. (Well, Obsidian might make a grim dark pastiche in a few years, since that’s their thing)

        Whereas this looks like AAA games: The Game

    • BooleanBob says:

      It’s sad, but if you’re writing for a game based around a conflict that’s designed to just roll on forever, it actively hurts to have a story in which permanent events take place and there are consequences and people change. You can do it, sort of, but it’s an extremely fine line to walk.

      Look for example at Warhammer 40k. It’s an interesting enough setting, and a lot of narrative material has been generated out of it, but because the bottom line is that all the armies must remain up for sale all the major factions are decked out in plot armour, which is kind of anathema to the idea of storytelling.

      Much easier to just scatter around a bunch of proper nouns as placeholders and have people shout at each other about why they don’t have time to explain why they don’t have time to explain.

    • LexW1 says:

      Oh look, it’s the same comment that was made when:

      A) Bioware started working on Mass Effect – “What is this generic sci-fi shit”.

      B) Bioware started working on Dragon Age – “What is this generic fantasy shit”.

      Then followed by declarations that Bioware was “dead”.

      • Tanesis says:

        Actually there was a huge amount of buzz around both ME and DA prior to release. Remember this was BW pre-EA when BW was a highley regarded studio…

  3. Stevostin says:

    I don’t understand that it’s not common knowledge that there is no such thing as a good 3rd person view shooter. It’s like a 1st person view shooter but with the massive issuer of an off aim, your own butt hiding what you’re looking at, no weapon feel and no immersion whatsoever (the game scream at you at all time “your not there, you’re just looking someone there”).

    Now of course the 3rd person view as advantages like: you see how cool you look (as if this doesn’t gets old fast) and people who get sick with FPV can tank it better. And if it’s tactical, it kinds of help too. And… and that’s all. All side things compared to the massive loss in feel, responsiveness and immersion.

    In that case even more as it’s not tactical and it’s a detailed fictional world that’s a big part of the hook, so immersion is badly needed. I was genuinely impressed and excited at the video until “bang, 3rd person view gameplay”. This immediately drive the game from “I want it” to “out of my radar”.

    • Frank says:

      The fact that these games get made suggests the “how cool you look” factor outweighs shitty immersion for enough monied gamers.

      Fwiw, I can imagine them having the option to switch perspectives, like Bethesda does. Also, you know, VR is the hot new thing, and it demands first-person. (I haven’t played any Bioware games from this century apart from DA:O, so my optimism may be misguided.)

      • Tigris says:

        VR does not need 1st person. There are several 3rd person games out there allready, and it may even be the case, that in 3rd person the motion sickness might be less of a problem.

        About 3rd Person: if done well (good camera and aiming cross) it has quite some advantage over 3rd person, since you see, what is behind you or below.

        It is less about looking cool, but more about having better vision. This is also a reason why most “3D Jump and run” games are 3rd person, since it is a lot easier to jump precisely.

        • Frank says:

          Re third-person VR, oh, I had no idea. Thanks for the info and good points

    • April March says:

      There are good third person shooters. Winback 64 was excellent. And that was for the Nintendo 64! I also rather like some of the James Bond games EA did when they had their teeth in the licence. The thing is that it needs to be a thing quite different from an FPS, more tactical and necessitating the extra awareness players have. If you just make an FPS you make a crap FPS, and you you don’t have that tactical complexity you just make a GTA where you can’t drive cars.

    • Zenicetus says:

      I think there is an argument to be made for 3rd person view when there is flying involved. It helps to have more situational awareness for steering and landing.

      Still looks like a crap game though.

      • BooleanBob says:

        Jumping, too. First person jumping puzzles.. I do not enjoy them.

        There’s trade-offs between third person and first person but you’d really have to over-value the benefits of one to want to shove the other into the bin entirely.

        Splatoon and Half-Life are two of my favourite games of all time. Splatoon wouldn’t work in first person, and Half-Life wouldn’t work in third. Is it invalid that I like both these games? Please.

        • Kreeth says:

          Interesting you mention how good Half-Life is at the same time as talking about jumping puzzles in first person. I very nearly stopped playing Half-Life at several points because of the f£&*£$&£”ing jumping puzzles.

          • BooleanBob says:

            It’s definitely a favourite in spite of the Xen jumping. But! I like the other bits of Xen quite a lot. I feel like it gives the events of Black Mesa a real sense of context to go and see for yourself what’s on the other side of the portals all these aliens are popping out of.

            edit: Now I think about it, there’s non-Xen jumping puzzles too, isn’t there? They don’t work well either. Still an aces game though sez me.

    • Random says:

      It’s not common knowledge, because it can not be considered an objective fact. It’s not a game that possesses the property of being immersive or not, it’s you who’s immersed in it or not and there is a significant number of people (seemingly a minority, although I don’t have any numbers to throw around) who play third person games for the very purpose of better immersion. I am one of them.

      I think this is worth recognizing as a subjective issue, so that the debate can move from the pointless “what’s more immersive” and “why doesn’t everyone know that X is” to the much more interesting “what makes first/third person much more immersive to some people and much less so to others and what does each group have in common”, a better understanding of which, I believe, would help developers make better games.

      I understand that the idea that 3rd person can be more immersive can seem absurd to many people and yet it is a subjective fact to me and many others, so I will do my best to explain.

      Let’s loosely define immersion as a combination of feeling like being in the world, being engaged with what’s happening there and experiencing it as if it were happening to oneself.

      First person games make me feel like a weightless incorporeal camera floating through the world with blinders on. The movement doesn’t feel human at all, I have no physical sense of being there and when characters are talking to me, I always and without exception feel like they’re talking into a camera and not to me (I can very well imagine that VR is a whole different thing, especially if/when we get to the point where one’s own body can be rendered in-game 1:1, but I haven’t had a chance to experience it yet).

      Some first person games do a better job of this with the right amount of head bobbing, climbing-over-stuff animations and rendering a visible character body, but to me it’s not enough (this includes Mirror’s Edge, which does a lot of things very very right in this respect). Generally speaking first person completely shatters my immersion and I find myself incapable of any suspension of disbelief that I’m actually there. Guns feel better to me in third person as well (when done well).

      I enjoy some more abstract first person games with great mechanics, which don’t even try to pretend that I’m a human being moving in a human way (e.g. Quake, Portal and likely the new Doom and Titanfall 2, which I haven’t had a chance to play yet), but other than that I consciously avoid first person games.

      The two most immersive games I have ever played (and probably my all-time favourites) are Mass Effect 3 and Metal Gear Solid V and that definitely wouldn’t be the case if they had a forced first person perspective.

      Showing me how the character I’m playing is moving through the world and how they are affected by it makes it much easier for me to imagine that I’m actually there. The quality of the animations makes all the difference here, if they’re not done well they have the opposite effect and I’d rather play the game in first person.

      Here’s some more perspectives on this:

      link to gamestudies.org
      link to reddit.com
      link to reddit.com
      link to kotaku.com.au

      My personal theory (and I don’t have anything to back it up, so it certainly borders on speculation) is that it’s a combination of three factors that determines one’s preference, immersion-wise:

      – The importance of movement/physicality and how active one is in real life – I would suspect that for example amateur/professional athletes, dancers and martial artists are more likely to require a better presentation of movement in a game to suspend disbelief than people with a more sedentary lifestyle.

      – The sense of identity – having a stronger one, that is a clear idea/definition of who one is might make it harder to put oneself in a character’s shoes when watching them from the side.

      – Having fired a gun in real life. No matter how great the guns feel (the new Wolfenstein games for example), it’s just a very very different thing to real life (first person shooting often makes me feel as if I’m holding a rifle right in front of my face, rather than on the side) and can make the suspension of disbelief harder.

  4. racccoon says:

    I thought the game was unbelievably brilliant in all its structures, the dialog was slightly on the lines on the division introduction into its game, which to the player, can become, where you are saying please stop let me play. I also think it will be a great game to play.
    I find it all too crazy that lord british had this idea years ago with that Tabula Rasa game, not many actually believed in it or saw what it could of advanced into with today’s technology in gaming structures & brilliance, which I may say, is now all being taken for granted.
    I on the other hand see these things and will always know the hard the work that is done in big shop gaming.
    This game in question by the video is a very brilliantly modeled game & looks very adventurous to play. Top marks

  5. Freud says:

    If it was a single player game, I might look into it but I’m not a fan of games that more or less force co-op to experience it fully.

    Looks heavily influenced by The Division and Destiny so I guess co-op loot ’em ups are a genre now.

    • Klayz0r says:

      To be fair, I sank around 300 hours into The Division and around 150 into Destiny and I played 99% of both solo. It’s perfectly viable to get to the highest gearscore in The Division solo and very nearly so in Destiny (unless you raid). So if Anthem sticks to that formula, it’ll be just fine for the resolute solo gamers among us, too.

      • poliovaccine says:

        I mean, you can play Payday 2 with bots but that doesnt really give you a story to play through. I kinda feel like as the global average attention span dwindles into nothingness, the immediacy of a looter-shooter will trump the appeal of a long, involved, even-slightly-brain-requisite story into oblivion.

        Ugh, I even hate using the word “trump” now. Hearing him say, “I beat people – I win,” really makes me wonder about “what’s in a name,” but moreso, in the world of SEO, I somehow feel like every time I type it I’m in some vague, occult way lending him more power…

    • BooleanBob says:

      I was trying to round up some people to play Siltbreaker (Valve’s new multiplayer Dota 2 co-op campaign) the other day. I was talking to a guy on Steam, and because he plays a lot of ARPGs and MMOs, I tried to tempt him in with the angle that it played like a sort of hybrid of Alien Swarm and Diablo.

      His response was ‘does it have loot? :3’.

      So I guess loot mechanics really do trump game mechanics for some people now. And not just in terms of what keeps them playing, but even what attracts them to a game in the first place.

    • LexW1 says:

      The devs are pretty clear that it’s single or multi player, not one or the other.

      YMMV, of course. I’ve played games described that way which were great at both (a lot of ARPGs) and games which were terrible at one of the other (Borderlands being incredibly dull solo).

    • NihlusGreen says:

      It’s disheartening to see Ubinfluence in BioWare titles. This looks like The Division; complete with unrealistic voice overs link to youtube.com

      MEA felt like an open world ubi game with busy work and icons everywhere.

      I’d prefer a smaller game space with meaningful script any day.

      • Tanesis says:

        Totally agree. Which is bizarre as Ubi are currently a total joke. DA:I onwards you can feel the slide towards Ubi game design.

        It’s a shame becuase I love BW and have ever since BG. I have never been bummed out by an E3 before , which is a singularly unpleasant feeling, but Anthem just looks like pretty garbage.

        Derivative shooter looter drivel

  6. jeremyalexander says:

    There’s homage and there is flat out ripping off other peoples work. If at the end of this trailer the title Destiny 2, Attack on Titan Generation 2, Titanfall 2, or Horizon Zero Dawn 2 appeared on the screen I wouldn’t have blinked an eye. This is the most derivative slop I’ve seen in years no matter how pretty it looks. Get out the fork, Bioware is done.

    • LexW1 says:

      You have to be joking, Jeremy.

      This is less generic, and less of a “rip-off” than, for example, Dragon Age: Origins, which was a painfully bad LotR rip-off visually, and looked like ultra-generic fantasy drivel of the worst kind.

      Mass Effect received a similar reaction from some people when it was announced.

      • Premium User Badge

        Ninja Dodo says:

        I don’t know about Dragon Age, but it’s true Mass Effect seems at first glance far less distinctive a setting than it turns out to be when you actually play the series.

    • Sian says:

      If it’s derivative of four games that are quite different from one another, doesn’t that make it different enough from each of them to be its own game?

      I mean, Destiny is a relatively generic multiplayer looter-shooter, Attack on Titan is more hack’n’slash with (or so I hear) a pretty good and unique movement system, Titanfall has its mechs and parkour and is an arena-style pvp game, and Horizon is an open-world game in which you hunt mechanical dinosaurs using traps and stealth as well as outright violence.

      A game that takes pages out of books that diverse could, if done correctly, stand on its own two feet quite well.

      Personally, I think I’d enjoy the power fantasy that the mortar and multi-rocket launcher look to provide as well as the fluid movement system. And even if it turns out just to be like Destiny, I’d be happy to play that, because I didn’t have a chance to play Destiny itself.

      But I’m not fooled by a trailer this early; no hype from me, but I’ll be keeping an eye on this one.

      Edit: Waitaminute – didn’t Titanfall 2 come out already? It’d be Titanfall 3 by now, wouldn’t it?

  7. RickyButler says:

    Haven’t played DA:I or ME:A, but the fan reception to both of those often teetered on “RIP BioWare” for heading into single-player MMO territory. The look of this definitely draws out my own RIP for BioWare.

    This kind of game looks pretty, but it isn’t what I want or expect out of BioWare, and it’s not the type of game I have interest in playing.

    I want to see them continue to hone narrative and choice, to create characters you come to care about while telling fun stories. I’m not interested in MMO-like time-killers where the story’s barebones, the quests variations on the lamest fetch, and the game actively wants you to just turn your brain off.

    • brucethemoose says:

      Bioware already made a single player MMO: SWTOR.

      • RickyButler says:

        As far as I know, that was a completely different team across North America with no overlap in devs, with the BioWare name slapped on by EA basically to help sell the game. Fine and dandy imo, as it doesn’t impact what the other folks worked on.

        • Wulfram says:

          Eh, there was quite a lot of overlap. It was (I think still is) headed up by James Ohlen who was lead designer on Baldur’s Gate and KotOR. It had Drew Karpyshyn, lead writer for ME1 and ME2 writing for it, along with a bunch of other Bioware writers.

        • LexW1 says:

          As Wulfram says, there’s a huge amount of overlap on the teams. You being ignorant about that doesn’t magically make it not the case. It just makes it very strange that you actively suggest that there is none.

          • RickyButler says:

            Worded poorly on my part, but Jesus Christ does the Internet ever bring hostility over nothing.

            I meant overlap as in something that would affect independence: One branch’s project directly affecting what comes from another branch by drawing resources/developers. E.g., Austin working on TOR didn’t put Mass Effect games on hold. Considering my first comment, this makes a lot more sense than caring about whether Ohlen moved to Austin or stayed with the BG team.

    • LexW1 says:

      “I want to see them continue to hone narrative and choice, to create characters you come to care about while telling fun stories. I’m not interested in MMO-like time-killers where the story’s barebones, the quests variations on the lamest fetch, and the game actively wants you to just turn your brain off.”

      They claim they’re still doing this. They may well be wrong or lying, but I think it’ll be obvious. Certainly they’ve said that there will be big storyline choices for you to make and decisions you may regret and so on.

  8. Premium User Badge

    picniclightning says:

    The jetpacks remind me of Just Cause 3’s expansion pack, which was a pretty solid addition. Wonder if the rest of the game will be as compelling as the flying.

  9. yogibbear says:

    I hate to say this but my favourite thing was probably Assassin’s Creed from this 2 hrs conference. Haven’t played one since AC4, but this actually looked OK.

  10. Gordon Shock says:

    I now lost complete interest in it since it is clear that Anthem is simply a commission on Bioware to give their EA overlords a Destiny/The Division clone.

    The name Bioware seems to lose its significance as the years goes on. It might be a good thing for EA to consider folding Bioware altogether and just assign the its employees to internal teams before the name lose relevance completely.

  11. keefybabe says:

    Yeah, this is pretty much my “bioware are now undeniably just an owned badge” moment.

    At least other “bioware” games were remotely “bioware-y”

    • Hoot says:

      EA’s only policy is “slash-and-burn” when it comes to buying studios.

      Westwood. Bullfrog. Maxis. Mythic.

      And now…Bioware.

      I won’t be buying this polished dog turd even if it is the second coming of everything an ARPG should be. There are other studios far more worthy of my cash and more importantly, my time.

      • LexW1 says:

        “even if it is the second coming of everything an ARPG should be.”

        What’s the logic there?

        I understand not buying it if it’s actually a “polished dog turd”, sure, but you just contradicted that. If it’s “everything an ARPG should be”, why would you not buy it?

        And what are these “other studios more worthy of your time”? Not CDPR, I hope, because you may want to sit down, if so.

        CDPR have been hiring multiplayer devs, and not a few of them. Rumours have been pretty consistent that their next game, CP2077, features drop-in, drop-out co-op, albeit more like the Watch_Dogs_2 implementation that this, necessarily.

        • Hedgeclipper says:

          Because EA will use the profits to murder other beloved studios so they can wear their rotting corpses for a while.

  12. KillahMate says:

    Back in the 90s, when I was young, only played single-player games, and the only Internet connection I had was a 56k modem, I used to dream of a game that would be a whole online world, that I could connect to and fight with and against hundreds of other people from all over the world, at any time, with action happening in real-time like Doom but the world staying persistent. I would be able to play together with people the way I never could in my real life.

    Then I grew up, broadband came, and games were created that had everything I dreamed about and more, millions of people played them – and at some point along the way I realized that it was never about the games. It was me. I didn’t like playing with other people. The fact that these other people were on the Internet instead of my couch would change nothing.

    But single player games don’t really make the monies these days, so I guess the world is slowly but surely leaving my kind behind.

    • poliovaccine says:

      Clearly we’re still out here, quietly-existing up a storm. Only difference between you and I is that I never once wanted a massive, online world. I just wanted AIs to be good enough I didnt need one. I always knew I preferred this as a solo hobby.

      I know a few gamers who like couch co-op more than anything else, and “twitch gameplay,” and games with “dailies” and so forth. I know there’s some overlap, but at the extreme like that they seem like a completely different breed of gamer. They’re the ones who, when they go to a movie, they pick a Seth Rogan romcom so they can make out with their date at the given intervals. Whereas I’m more the type to tell a girl “Sorry I’ve gotta take a rain check” cus they’re showing all the David Lean films in a marathon on TCM, and sure, she’d probably still be down to come watch with me, but dammit I just really dont want anyone talking or getting up for snacks during Lawrence of Mother Fucking Arabia.

      • LexW1 says:

        There’s huge overlap, frankly. There are not two kinds of gamer.

        A lot of it is age. When you’re younger, you’re less prone to insularity and less annoyed by idiots online (or annoyed in a way which makes you engage with them). As you get older, that often no longer seems worth it.

        But if you still have friends who game, then you may well want to play co-op stuff with them. That’s my main draw here. I’ve often wished that friends could play drop-in/drop-out co-op in games like Skyrim, and this looks like that is the sort of thing they’re going for. We shall see.

  13. poliovaccine says:

    Yknow, this really IS the “Bob Dylan of games,” in the sense that these ideas have aged badly, that they’ve rested on their laurels so hard they fell right through the floor, and that now only the most loyal, loving fans still give a damn and fork over the megabucks to see him nod out on stage/dope.

    I feel like I can say that cus I’m one of those fans (of Bob Dylan, not Bioware), but still…

  14. Premium User Badge

    Masked Dave says:

    So, Bioware does Borderlands?

    That’s something I can get behind.

    My hope is that there would be a full story that you are playing through and could complete single player if you wish, but equally you have friends can jump into your world and play alongside you.

    Although I never completed Borderlands 2 because while I found the story really fun the long bits in between got boring if you weren’t with friends, but if you were then you kind of raced through/spoke over the story beats as it was unlikely to first time hearing them for everyone.

    So Bioware would need to solve that.

    • LexW1 says:

      That’s the key thing they need to solve, for sure. If the game is Borderlands-dull when it’s single-player, it would be very hard to recommend to people.

  15. McCovican says:

    Bioware is dead, long live Bioware.

  16. Premium User Badge

    Ninja Dodo says:

    In the context of that Kotaku article, this presentation does lend credence to the rumour that more resources went to this game than did to ME Andromeda. It certainly looks spectacular. I wonder if they’re going to have a bit more going on in the world and story though because if it’s just a loot-grinding MMO with pretty environments I don’t think this is for me.

    It does seem a bit generic as a setting. Mech-suits and monsters in a jungle. If you told me this was set in any number of other game universes I would believe you.

    • LexW1 says:

      I actually think “mech suits and monsters in a jungle” is marginally less generic game description than “elves, dwarves, dragons and monsters in a Western fantasy setting” (dragon age) or “space opera about a heroic human defeating a bossy space bastard” (mass effect).

      Historically, Bioware have taken conceptually generic, or just really, actually generic settings (the Forgotten Realm with BG, for example) and made them interesting and engaging.

      I mean, we don’t know they’ve succeeded here, but I wouldn’t take “The setting is conceptually generic!” as a bad sign.

      Bioware CLAIM there will be tons of story, lots of decisions which make differences and so on. We will see of course. I really doubt the lore/background will be anything but excellent, though.

      • Premium User Badge

        Ninja Dodo says:

        I don’t disagree. I was initially very skeptical of Mass Effect. It took a second attempt before I was convinced to play beyond its opening hours. Now it’s one of my favourite series. I still haven’t played any Dragon Age game because I just can’t get over my total lack of interest in the setting. The first game seems painfully generic.

        While there are some games I can’t help but roll my eyes at, I’m not a fan of the blanket cynicism of some at the announcement of new games. I think I will settle on cautiously optimistic.

  17. LimaBravo says:

    Oh look they remade Firefall. I mean plot & all ripped from the game.

    • Rizlar says:

      Firefall was kind of great, alas, what could have been.

    • ilikain says:

      I was starting to get weirded out that no one else was drawing any similarities between Anthem and Firefall… Everyone keeps talking about Destiny…

      But, huge open world, exo suits, jet packs, giant storms, “classes” based on the suit you are wearing… these are all more Firefall adjacent than Destiny adjacent…

      I hope this ends up with the feel of Firefall without all the, you know… fail.

  18. Laurentius says:

    It looks pretty but that’s just that. The rest looks so generic.I know that mmo thrid person shooters are a thing now but for me it looks incredibly bland and boring.

  19. mercyRPG says:

    NOT interested in this crap. Whoo.. see what blockybuster intro we did, you have to buy it now, right? NO..

  20. Premium User Badge

    Nauallis says:

    More and more, it seems like somebody styling themselves as a PC gamer is identifying themselves as “never satisfied” because seriously, the grumping in all of these comments is hilariously pathetic, and it’s the same “nothing’s good enough, remember the good old days, derivative slop, original comment, blah blah blah.” Get a grip, folks. Everything will be okay. There will be other games that you like.

    • mavrik says:

      Well excuse me if we don’t like to eat any generic money grabbing copy-paste shit.

    • MultiVaC says:

      Uh, yeah, obviously there are other games, I mean didn’t everyone fall madly in love with Prey just a little while ago? People here are perfectly capable of not being cynical from time to time, but when a once-legendary developer whose recent output has been pretty disappointing says they are creating the “Bob Dylan of video games” and then shows, well… this, I think there’s some merit to skepticism.

  21. shadow9d9 says:

    Bioware does not exist. There is only EA. I wished publications and news would stop repeating the sham marketing by companies that buy out other companies. EA can name their infant and their dog as a new “Bioware” studio. Just call them EA.