Stop relying on controversy...try making a good game instead. And stop letting a 12 year old write your story for you, that faux-angsty garbage in Hatred was embarrassing.
Exactly. Gamers are becoming more savvy due to various high profile complaints regarding content-light games, season passes, excessive DLC, micro-transactions etc.
You can get so much value if you're a little patient, and unfortunately, this does mean that people will become more picky about what they spend their money on. Something like The Witness may suffer...but that's just the way that things are when the industry as a whole is doing what it's doing.
You seem to only want positivity, yet talk about objectivity....it's a little weird.
Sometimes people just don't like a game....that doesn't make their opinion invalid. What would you have that person do? It's not "punishing" a game to rate it low, that's such a bizarre way to look at things.
Looking at your second paragraph, I have no idea what reviews you're reading. Your perspective is so baffling...what are you talking about wh...
There are no bogus reviews....just people with different perspectives.
Some people are happy with nice graphics, some people need more than that. Neither are wrong, they just have different opinions. Screaming about someone not rating a game you like high enough is just idiotic.
Read the info given in reviews, and use it to inform your purchase decision...that's it. It's not rocket science, yet many seem to take a low score for a game they like WAY too pers...
So you DO trust reviewers? You obviously do, or you wouldn't read those ones that you feel speak to you. That's the thing....reviews aren't the be all end all, and no-one is claiming they are. It's all just people giving their opinions on games....some well informed and written, others not so much.
The ones you don't trust are not reason enough to dismiss the concept of critics.
People get mad either way...if you think it doesn't go both ways, go read the comments under Jim Sterling's review of Mad Max.
The problem is, too many people still don't get what reviews are. They have always been opinions. The good reviewers provide informed reasons for them. The bad ones read like marketing puff pieces. It's up to the reader/viewer to take in the info, and use it as they see fit. Do the positive things they mention sound like something...
This is just sad. Only a 12 year old could actually fall this nonsense, and even 12 year olds nowadays know how to turn a safe search off...this dreck isn't needed. Just pitiful.
We do pay for good work....when we buy the game at the price you set it at.
Charging people to skip grinding has nothing to do with good work, it's cashing in on people's impatience. Even worse when you make a game more grindy in order to encourage the purchase...that's not good work, it's making your game worse.
Charging for options that used to be free? That's got little to do with good work, again, that's making your game a lesser value proposition...
Should've stayed multi-platform....taking the deal upfront isn't always the best for a game. Once it hits PC and PS4, it'll do just fine...will probably do well on Xbox One as well once people get done with Fallout 4 and the like.
I think releasing it the same day as that game was a bad idea too. Never mind, the game looks good, and will probably get it when it hits PS4 or PC.
Unless you're a first party studio, or so tight on money that you have no other cho...
I agree. But I think the timed exclusive thing pretty much forced them to also bring out a 360 version in an effort to make up for some of the lost sales from a PS4 version. The 2013 game sold the most on Sony platforms, so it's a bit of a blow to lose those sales in the short term.
Hopefully it doesn't compromise the game design too much.
The game might be fun...but it in no way pays the "upmost respect" to the property. It turns The Thing into an X-Files rip off, and cheapens the story and the ending of the original.
Better than the Prequel movie isn't exactly a glowing recommendation. Dental surgery with not quite enough anaesthesia is better than the Prequel movie.
They're two very different games, with different ways of delivering their story, and different gameplay design. You can't really compare the two directly...it's apples and oranges.
FIFA is better than Tetris, because the football physics in FIFA are WAY better. Yeah, doesn't really work.
There hasn't been a better time to be an indie developer since the bedroom coding days of the Commodore 64, Spectrum and Amstrad.
There are so many options, so many places to buy from, many DRM free. Even the ones that are their own DRM offer refund policies if you buy something rubbish.
There's a lot to dislike in the AAA space, but there's FAR more to gaming than that. Including something like the Retro VGS possibly being viable. Although there's still qua...
Couldn't agree more. Any consumer arguing against this after the likes of Assassin's Creed Unity, Diablo 3 etc. is a fool.
Sorry devs....but get better. If you make a game good enough, people will not want a refund. It's that simple.
If your game has flaws that make people not want it for more than two hours, then you've messed up. Period.
If you're selling a game, you should be held to similar standards as any other developer. Creating exceptions for indie devs is a bad idea, standards will never raise that way. In fact, considering a lot of the dreck that we've seen...
Yeah, what a terrible agenda those publishers have, wanting to be paid for the work they bankrolled. Capitalist scum, the lot of them. They should do it just for the art man....stop selling out guys.
Awful idea. Cartridges are prohibitively expensive for the indie devs they want to attract, so the cost is going to get passed to the consumer. $60+ to make it worthwhile for collectors....maybe $40 if it's got minimal extras. Shovel Knight for $15 DRM free, or 3 to 4 times that much just for a cartridge.
Ouya failed with a less niche architecture and OS, and less restrictions and costs. This will be a fraction of even THAT audience, and Ouya could barely attract devs to actual...
Who cares? No really...who cares if some people are being negative about a game? There is always a chance for those negative opinions to be changed as more info is released and demos become available. If people see something in released footage or see something mentioned in interviews with the devs that they don't like as fans of a series, then it's perfectly valid to express those negative feelings.
I'm glad that more people are willing to question what they see releas...
You should, because it will inevitably spread to a game that you actually like, and an option that you used to use.
They are charging for what should be a basic option, charging for simple convenience. That wouldn't even be so bad if they weren't already charging full price for the game. Freemium games charging for stuff like this is one thing, though still annoying in how excessively they do it, but this is another level of greed.
If they want extra money, why not c...
Why do you think that this is something that should be charged for, instead of just something you could toggle in the options menu?
The example I'll use is the WWE games. There, you need to perform moves, taunt and have some variety in your offence in order to build up for a finishing move. In that game, you can go into the options menu and toggle just how fast or slow you want that guage to fill up. Find things too hard, you can set it to fill up fast and get to the powerful f...