Listening to Austin describe Dragon's Dogma
"It's open world in the way of Bethesda games and combat is equipment driven like Dark Souls"
But then
"But if you go into this expecting Skyrim or Dark Souls, you'll be disappointed as it doesn't have that same open world interactability."
So... basically ANY western open world RPG that isn't a Bethesda game would have been a better comparison for the interactivity in DD.
Okay Austin.
Honestly I get what he's trying to articulate, but it sounds like he just couldn't think of anything but the two most "mainstream" names when there are a multitude of reasonably well known RPGs recent and old that probably would have served as a more accurate comparison for his point.
Also regarding Jeff Bakalar's glacial rant about generation jump in visuals between last gen and now.
I feel like the most severe examples of bad visuals he is noticing are actually games that were made for cross gen. They are generally looking strangely worse on older consoles than games that were made specifically for those last gen consoles.
For example, MGSV looks like utter dogshit on PS3, but MGS4 not only looks better than PS3 MGSV but actually looks pretty fantastic even now, because they made that game strictly for the PS3 and pulled out every wizardry trick they could, which is part of why it was never ported to any other console, it was made to be too reliant specifically on PS3's architecture for it to be be a practical port for anything else.
(Also Jeff talks like he has had a few drinks before the podcast, he wasn't slurring, but he has that slow drawn out speech I've never really noticed until now and certain tones of voice and responses that you can associate with someone who is beyond tipsy and quickly on their way to being drunk.)
