Horizon Forbidden West - Review @ GamingBolt

[HiddenX]

GamingBolt reviewed Horizon Forbidden West:

Horizon Forbidden West PC Review - A NEW BENCHMARK For PC Ports

When it first came out on the PS5, Horizon Forbidden West was praised for being an excellent follow-up to Horizon Zero Dawn, already an incredibly fun open world adventure game. Burning Shores on the PS5 continued this trend, while making further use of more modern hardware with gorgeous vistas and engaging gameplay. The PC release, however, has set a new benchmark for just how well a port can be developed.

The PC version of Horizon Forbidden West includes just about every feature you can imagine, including more niche ones like support for ultrawide monitors. For the larger majority of PC gamers, however, the game also features incredible optimization across a wide range of hardware. This means that, as long as your PC has parts made in the last few years, it'll probably run Horizon Forbidden West incredibly well.

More information.

 

[Redglyph]

He's really hammering on the DualSense controller being much preferable to K+M, but I'm pretty sure playing with K+M is as good as it is for HZD (or any other controller, for that matter).

As for 32 GB RAM / 3060 Ti being mid-range... I doubt everyone can afford the 40 series right now.

I think it's reassuring overall, anyway.

 

[JDR13]

He's really hammering on the DualSense controller being much preferable to K+M, but I'm pretty sure playing with K+M is as good as it is for HZD (or any other controller, for that matter).

I played HZD with K+M, and I'm playing this the same way. I prefer a gamepad for melee-heavy third-person games, but not for something like this.

The only thing I miss is not having the haptic feedback I'd get with my DualShock 4.

 

[ikbenrichard]

had a lot of fun with dawn, looking forward to play this one soon !
if you cannot afford a good setup now, just buy some crypto and cash out before xmas ;-)

 

[arthureloi]

The first Horizon game was one of the most bland gaming experiences I had in many years, totally generic, foreseeable, inoffensive, boring really.

I wonder if there's anything innovative in this new version.

 

[JDR13]

The first Horizon game was one of the most bland gaming experiences I had in many years, totally generic, foreseeable, inoffensive, boring really.

I wonder if there's anything innovative in this new version.

You're a vampire with shit taste. You probably like garlic.

 

[NFLed]

I had a completely opposite experience. I almost didn't buy Horizon Zero Dawn when it was released on PC because bow-shooting didn't seem interesting to me but that ended up being pretty good and the rest of the game is very good, including the very intriguing setting and story. Pretty much the opposite of bland for me.

 

[Redglyph]

I don't think it's generic. On the contrary, it's a fresh take on post-apocalyptic, and the mechanics are relatively original. I like the story, too.

If I had one reproach, it'd be the Ubisoft-like approach with big pointers, map icons, and filler content. But I'm fine with that; it's easy to ignore the less interesting quests (the game even has quest categories), and it's not overdone.

 

[danutz_plusplus]

Currently playing through HZD it and enjoying it, but the limited inventory is killing me. And the itemization (the crafting and enhancing especially) with is also fairly generic and light. There's also so many resource types.
Also, while the open world is decently pretty, it feels very cramped and kind of small. Compared to other recent open world games. But I'm not sure it's the actual square mileage. But more the feeling of it. It feels very cramped and not expansive.
Also the intro area, until you enter the big open world, is so hard to learn for some reason. I played through this area twice in the last 1-2 years, and I still find myself in places that takes me a bit of moving around to realize where I am.

 

[arthureloi]

I don't think it's generic. On the contrary, it's a fresh take on post-apocalyptic, and the mechanics are relatively original. I like the story, too.

If I had one reproach, it'd be the Ubisoft-like approach with big pointers, map icons, and filler content. But I'm fine with that; it's easy to ignore the less interesting quests (the game even has quest categories), and it's not overdone.

What exactly is original about this game? I haven't found a single aspect that's already been done before, and better, too. It just felt like an Assassin's Creed clone to me. I had about the same feelings toward Assassin's Creed: Odissey, and I consider that one a bad game.

Just for gauging, I consider the latest two Zeldas on Switch and Witcher 3 to be the pinnacle of open world games, in which I would categorize Horizon (I haven't played Red Dead 2 and Cyberpunk yet, which look like top dogs too). Now those are innovative and original, in my opinion.

 

[Redglyph]

What exactly is original about this game? I haven't found a single aspect that's already been done before, and better, too. It just felt like an Assassin's Creed clone to me. I had about the same feelings toward Assassin's Creed: Odissey, and I consider that one a bad game.

It does feel a little like AC (for the reasons I've said above), but AC was original, at first. After that, it became a little repetitive. I didn't play Odyssey or Valhalla; I stopped at Syndicate, without even finishing it.

What I find original, in comparison to other post-apocalyptic games, is the machines taking the role of animals and providing crafting material when they're disassembled. It's also uncommon to see people coming back to a sort of tribal state, without even trying to use all the technological stuff that lies around. In most post-apo games, people live in the same old refurbished buildings and use pre-apocalypse items, trying to preserve anything they can.

Maybe it's been done, but it's hardly generic.

Just for gauging, I consider the latest two Zeldas on Switch and Witcher 3 to be the pinnacle of open world games, in which I would categorize Horizon (I haven't played Red Dead 2 and Cyberpunk yet, which look like top dogs too). Now those are innovative and original, in my opinion.

I prefer TW3 to HZD, though it repeats what the 2 first games did, so I don't consider it fully original, nor innovative. But who cares, when it's so well done? If I wanted to be fussy, I'd say TW3 is based on books, while HZD has an original story. That doesn't make it a better game, though.

HZD's open world feels less crafted to me than TW3's, but it's hard to compare objectively. It's just a feeling from the part I've already seen. For example, I was more impressed by cities like Novigrad or Beauclair than anything I've seen yet in HZD. I prefer the fantasy settings, too. And yeah, CP2077 is a fine piece of art, and RD2 has gorgeous landscapes and very convincing cities and towns. Those games are really at the top of open-world maps, and they have an atmosphere that we don't often feel elsewhere. But I think that 'bland' isn't doing HZD any justice.

Never played Zelda (no console).

 

[JDR13]

Also, while the open world is decently pretty, it feels very cramped and kind of small. Compared to other recent open world games. But I'm not sure it's the actual square mileage. But more the feeling of it. It feels very cramped and not expansive.

I never had that feeling. In fact, if the world were any bigger, I think it would have been too much. There's a lot to explore, and you have multiple biomes. I felt more than satisfied by the time I reached the end.

 

[bkrueger]

What exactly is original about this game? I haven't found a single aspect that's already been done before, and better, too. It just felt like an Assassin's Creed clone to me. I had about the same feelings toward Assassin's Creed: Odissey, and I consider that one a bad game.

Just for gauging, I consider the latest two Zeldas on Switch and Witcher 3 to be the pinnacle of open world games, in which I would categorize Horizon (I haven't played Red Dead 2 and Cyberpunk yet, which look like top dogs too). Now those are innovative and original, in my opinion.

The story of HZD is really good and better than that of most similar games. Also I found the stealth mechanic very much fun since I love stealth games. For this reason it belongs into a different category than Whitcher 3, for example. I love both games, but wouldn't try to compare them, because they are too different. In addition HZD (and also HFB) give me the feeling, that I am really in a living world, much more than the other games mentioned.

 

[bkrueger]

By the way: I strongly recommend that everybody interested in Horizon Forbidden West plays HZD first. While it is not technically necessary to do so, there are so many references to the first game in the second, that you miss much of the context without knowing the first one. They managed to create the feeling of an interconnected world between the two parts, so it greatly improves the experience to play them in order.

 

[arthureloi]

By the way: I strongly recommend that everybody interested in Horizon Forbidden West plays HZD first. While it is not technically necessary to do so, there are so many references to the first game in the second, that you miss much of the context without knowing the first one. They managed to create the feeling of an interconnected world between the two parts, so it greatly improves the experience to play them in order.

Is it really necessary, though?

I found the story totally forgettable. I played through the whole game and the expansion and I can't remember the name of a single character, the protagonist included.

I remember the physical appearance of the main character, the beginning, when you're learning, which I found pretty cool. Then, there's the predictable twist that sets the story in motion.

Then I remember killing mechanical dinossaurs with a bow and other weird weapons I did not care to explore too deeply. There was a thorough stealth mechanism.

Oh, I remember the expansion taking place in a really cold place and it was trying to explain the origin or the corruption of the dino bots.

I remember combat being extremely broken (enemies are bullet sponges, even when hitting the weak points), and you could exploit the AI by attacking them from the imaginary boundaries they can't cross.

Lastly, there was a super cool giant dinossaur about midway through the campaing. That's literally all I remember about it. I think none of it would help with the new game.

 

[arthureloi]

It does feel a little like AC (for the reasons I've said above), but AC was original, at first. After that, it became a little repetitive. I didn't play Odyssey or Valhalla; I stopped at Syndicate, without even finishing it.

What I find original, in comparison to other post-apocalyptic games, is the machines taking the role of animals and providing crafting material when they're disassembled. It's also uncommon to see people coming back to a sort of tribal state, without even trying to use all the technological stuff that lies around. In most post-apo games, people live in the same old refurbished buildings and use pre-apocalypse items, trying to preserve anything they can.

Maybe it's been done, but it's hardly generic.


I prefer TW3 to HZD, though it repeats what the 2 first games did, so I don't consider it fully original, nor innovative. But who cares, when it's so well done? If I wanted to be fussy, I'd say TW3 is based on books, while HZD has an original story. That doesn't make it a better game, though.

HZD's open world feels less crafted to me than TW3's, but it's hard to compare objectively. It's just a feeling from the part I've already seen. For example, I was more impressed by cities like Novigrad or Beauclair than anything I've seen yet in HZD. I prefer the fantasy settings, too. And yeah, CP2077 is a fine piece of art, and RD2 has gorgeous landscapes and very convincing cities and towns. Those games are really at the top of open-world maps, and they have an atmosphere that we don't often feel elsewhere. But I think that 'bland' isn't doing HZD any justice.

Never played Zelda (no console).

I unserstand the appeal but it just didn't grab me. What do you think of the new game? Is it an improvement?

 

[bkrueger]

Is it really necessary, though?

I found the story totally forgettable. I played through the whole game and the expansion and I can't remember the name of a single character, the protagonist included.

I remember the physical appearance of the main character, the beginning, when you're learning, which I found pretty cool. Then, there's the predictable twist that sets the story in motion.

Then I remember killing mechanical dinossaurs with a bow and other weird weapons I did not care to explore too deeply. There was a thorough stealth mechanism.

Oh, I remember the expansion taking place in a really cold place and it was trying to explain the origin or the corruption of the dino bots.

I remember combat being extremely broken (enemies are bullet sponges, even when hitting the weak points), and you could exploit the AI by attacking them from the imaginary boundaries they can't cross.

Lastly, there was a super cool giant dinossaur about midway through the campaing. That's literally all I remember about it. I think none of it would help with the new game.

You remember fighting mechanical dinosaurs but forgot the story? So you don't even remember, that these dinosaurs were not your real enemies? Hm. The game might not be the right one for people with loss of memory.

Edit: You state that the game is completely bland and boring but played through the whole game and its expansion? I believe that you are simply trolling here.

 

[Redglyph]

I unserstand the appeal but it just didn't grab me. What do you think of the new game? Is it an improvement?

You'll have to ask someone else because I'm still playing the first one.

 

[arthureloi]

You remember fighting mechanical dinosaurs but forgot the story? So you don't even remember, that these dinosaurs were not your real enemies? Hm. The game might not be the right one for people with loss of memory.

Edit: You state that the game is completely bland and boring but played through the whole game and its expansion? I believe that you are simply trolling here.

Not trolling. I liked the visuals. Technically speaking (sound, graphics etc) the game is pretty good, and that was enough to make me keep going.

I don't have memory issues, not sure why you said that. To tell you the truth, all I remember was dinos as enemies and evil tribesmen from another clan or something. I also remember a city modeled after arabian architecture after the huge dino. And another super boring city after that with a coliseum structure. I don't recall at all how the end game was, but I swear I finished it.

I do have selective memory though, I can memorise complete scores of piano sheet music, but I found the story here so mediocre, I think my brain just erased it right after the final credits rolled.

 

[JDR13]

I thought the story was pretty good, and I'm one of those people that usually doesn't give a rat's ass about story.

My only real complaint is the dialogue. It's incredibly unrealistic how they talk like modern-day people given the environment they've lived in.