For me, there's an important distinction between "budget-friendly" and "a budget game." The former may be a little sanded down or rough around the edges, but is an otherwise solid experience that can be had for a low price (or no price at all, in many cases). The latter is an unremarkable or messy game clearly made for pennies that is often written off because, well, you only paid like $15 for it at Walmart. A "budget-friendly" game is one you come to when you don't want to spend too much. A "budget game" is one you come to when you're curious why Samurai Jack wants to beat up Chowder and that $20 is just burning a hole in your pockets.
Based on my time with Dauntless, a four-player co-op action-adventure giant monster hunting game, I feel safe calling it "budget friendly." You can't get much cheaper than free, and as a nice bonus, playing the game ain't half bad either! It was pitched to me as a cross between Monster Hunter and Dark Souls, with a little bit of Destiny thrown right in. Of course the dev team would go right to those comparisons -- all three franchises have strong, devoted fanbases that you'd be a fool to not tap if your game was even a little bit similar in any way.
That comparison might be a little too ambitious. Yeah, you hunt monsters like Monster Hunter, you roll around a whole lot like in Dark Souls, and there's a hub world and loot system that will apparently resemble Destiny. So although the games look similar on paper, my PAX South demo failed to convince me that Dauntless will eclipse or even fully meet its inspirations.
via destructoid http://ift.tt/2ktcaRP