I believe Zero Dawn is the “total package”. I think that while Forbidden West is an excellent game, it had some really fucking stupid and ass-backwards gameplay and design decisions that really hold the game back. Forbidden West’s crafting feels too unnecessarily tedious and grindy and costs too many resources, and the game feels more difficult than it should have been.
Very Hard difficulty in Forbidden West felt way harder than Ultra Hard difficulty in Zero Dawn. The gigantic machines are way more easily able to stun-lock or knock down Aloy, and even with the best weapons, armor, food boosts and carefully planned battle tactics and overall strategy, the enemies are too damage spongy.
The thrill and tension and danger of the machine fights in Forbidden West is amazingly more adrenaline-inducing, but it feels a little too “MMO-ey”, rather than a test of skill like I felt the first game was, in Forbidden West it feels more about attrition and throwing everything until you win.
In Zero Dawn, the combat had a “dance” or rhythm to it that was more about skill and I felt better rewarded tactics, where as in Forbidden West feels more cheap and steep in regards to elemental effects, and as a result it feels less like the “play your way” idea the developers claimed to want and more like solving a puzzle or matching the right weapon or ability to “out” the challenge rather than an organic ebb and flow, and weapons and gear feel less individualistic and lose their identity and feel more like different colored sticks.
I also felt that the emotional draw and the world-building of Zero Dawn was way better, and the story was concise and did everything it needed to do.
And even though Forbidden West’s side quests were generally better than Zero Dawn’s, the sheer sprinkling of everything in my opinion veered too much towards “Ubisoftification”, where as in Zero Dawn the side content seemed more necessary to exist rather than filling check boxes.
I also feel slightly disappointed in regards to the “big bad” of Forbidden West being Nemesis. I like the idea of Nemesis and it makes sense in story, but I was hoping that Vast Silver would end up being the main villain and I feel like Vast Silver would make more sense and fit better, but those are just my thoughts on a trilogy that isn’t finished yet.
I gotta say, I really like Aloy’s “sister.”
And the character death in Forbidden West I felt could have been handled way better.
I played Zero Dawn for over 1,000 hours across 10 playthroughs, nearly 100 percenting it every time, and almost always playing on Very Hard or Ultra Hard difficulty and I platinumed it and still played for 200 of my total 1,000 hours.
I played Forbidden West for around 160 hours and despite platinuming the game and completing 91 percent of it, I feel way less inclined to return to it until substantial updates, DLC or New Game Plus helps refresh the game.
Horizon: Forbidden West kicks serious ass. I platinumed it like 3-ish weeks ago, roughly speaking. I still prefer Zero Dawn though.
Why do you prefer Zero Dawn?
I believe Zero Dawn is the “total package”. I think that while Forbidden West is an excellent game, it had some really fucking stupid and ass-backwards gameplay and design decisions that really hold the game back. Forbidden West’s crafting feels too unnecessarily tedious and grindy and costs too many resources, and the game feels more difficult than it should have been.
Very Hard difficulty in Forbidden West felt way harder than Ultra Hard difficulty in Zero Dawn. The gigantic machines are way more easily able to stun-lock or knock down Aloy, and even with the best weapons, armor, food boosts and carefully planned battle tactics and overall strategy, the enemies are too damage spongy.
The thrill and tension and danger of the machine fights in Forbidden West is amazingly more adrenaline-inducing, but it feels a little too “MMO-ey”, rather than a test of skill like I felt the first game was, in Forbidden West it feels more about attrition and throwing everything until you win.
In Zero Dawn, the combat had a “dance” or rhythm to it that was more about skill and I felt better rewarded tactics, where as in Forbidden West feels more cheap and steep in regards to elemental effects, and as a result it feels less like the “play your way” idea the developers claimed to want and more like solving a puzzle or matching the right weapon or ability to “out” the challenge rather than an organic ebb and flow, and weapons and gear feel less individualistic and lose their identity and feel more like different colored sticks.
I also felt that the emotional draw and the world-building of Zero Dawn was way better, and the story was concise and did everything it needed to do.
And even though Forbidden West’s side quests were generally better than Zero Dawn’s, the sheer sprinkling of everything in my opinion veered too much towards “Ubisoftification”, where as in Zero Dawn the side content seemed more necessary to exist rather than filling check boxes.
I also feel slightly disappointed in regards to the “big bad” of Forbidden West being Nemesis. I like the idea of Nemesis and it makes sense in story, but I was hoping that Vast Silver would end up being the main villain and I feel like Vast Silver would make more sense and fit better, but those are just my thoughts on a trilogy that isn’t finished yet.
I gotta say, I really like Aloy’s “sister.”
And the character death in Forbidden West I felt could have been handled way better.
I played Zero Dawn for over 1,000 hours across 10 playthroughs, nearly 100 percenting it every time, and almost always playing on Very Hard or Ultra Hard difficulty and I platinumed it and still played for 200 of my total 1,000 hours.
I played Forbidden West for around 160 hours and despite platinuming the game and completing 91 percent of it, I feel way less inclined to return to it until substantial updates, DLC or New Game Plus helps refresh the game.
Really should play that one.