Armored Core VI: Fires of Rubicon is rated 'Mighty' after being reviewed by 59 critics, with an overall average score of 85. It's ranked in the top 5% of games and recommended by 91% of critics.
Yeah as much as I'd like to take credit, donate a few bucks to Open Critic if you enjoy this. They offer a readymade format for this, and they're a fantastic service in comparison to Metacritic anyways.
holy shit i know how you feel mate. Fucking went from having nothing to be excited about personally to all of a sudden getting like 5 games dropped on me in less than 2 months. My wallet and free time aint ready for this.
Because at this point it is their stylistic choice, same as Ace Combat or like asking Kojima not to make a convoluted vomit of a narrative. You kind of know what you are getting into. And with how much long cutscenes and exposition takes you out if the game (I’m looking at you FFXVI) I like this approach to pure action games.
Because that's not the focus of their game. That's why. Witcher 3 chose to focus on the story and the combat is bland and boring. Dragon's Dogma has great combat and a lacking story. Your point makes no sense.
From games have tried to branch out into a different genre and didn't quite pull it off. If a racing car game dev made an RPG and it was just a game where you raced cars would you also say it doesn't matter? Makes no sense.
It shows they're not quite as versatile as their fanboys make them out to be.
What do you mean by branch out? They set out to do an action game like they did 10 years ago where the story is entirely secondary to the gameplay and mechanics. If anything having a super cutscene heavy character development drama would be branching out from what the series is all about.
Elden Ring is their best attempt at story telling imo. I could follow most of the NPC storylines without much effort in the first playthrough. It wasn't really obtuse like their previous titles. There is a bit of hope they can improve.
@TheChancePants they don't compare at all to the souls games. Armored Core existed alongside King's Field and they were nothing alike. You could relate that to the comparison of the latest Armored Core and Elden Ring. They are by the same developer but completely separate. --edit typo
They are mission based and very fast paced. AC games are generally pretty challenging and designed to be replayed a lot for mastery and for trying out different mech loadouts as you unlock parts and weapons over time.
Difficulty and weirdness in the story wise? Very similar.
How the game actually feels to play? Totally different. AC is more of a hardcore arcade action game. One part MechWarrior, one part bullet hell shooter. I'm surprised to see it hasn't really changed much from AC2, the last AC I ever played.
Some of the levels are fucking epic as hell. One of the missions I've done so far, you have to take down this massive building sized tank on legs, and it's like the size of a level in and of itself. You're already in a giant mech that dwarfs a human, and this structure made me feel like just a regular dude fighting a skyscraper.
When it comes to Armored Core 8/10 is actually 1-2 points higher than the series usually gets.
The game is no Dark souls or Elder ring but not bad for previously rather niche franchaise.