390°

The 10 Worst First-Party Published Games of 2015

COG writes - Most first-party games are excellent, sadly we had to say most. Here's a look at some of the worst first-party published games of 2015.

Read Full Story >>
cogconnected.com
GrapesOfRaf3484d ago

Oh The Order... you had so much potential.

Digital_Anomaly3484d ago

I know I'm in the minority but I loved it. Full stop.

OhMyGandhi3484d ago (Edited 3484d ago )

Okay. I rented it on redbox the day it came out, in the morning, and beat it in the afternoon. I payed only 3 bucks for this experience, and thought it wasn't a wholly despicable game. Just average in every regard.

The Order had a ton of potential. You have beautiful graphics, a pretty cool steampunk and werewolves concept and setting, and some decent weapons.
The story held promise, but Ready At Dawn did nothing with it.

The characters, while nearing photorealism, were absolutely lifeless, and without any real...character.

The game held your hand the entire way, was way too linear, and beyond it's jaw droppingly gorgeous graphics, did so little with what it was given, that it became instantaneously forgettable the second I finished it.

The worst part, is that even though the game had a short runtime, there is absolutely nothing there for the gamer once he/she finished the game. No replay value at all. I don't want to insinuate that a single player experience needs to be 400 hours long or include some half-heartened bolted-on multiplayer for "value"...I'm talking about making the core experience so compelling that your demands of the game are satiated, and you are left feeling satisfied.

I've payed a decent amount of money for games with even shorter campaigns, and loved every second it.
Among The Sleep, Limbo, Layers of Fear, Braid, The Swapper, The Neverhood, Cryostatis: Sleep of Reason, Dear Esther, Another World, Ori and the Blind Forest, Kentucky Route Zero and so many others.

I wish publishers/developers understood this more clearly. adding more "stuff" doesn't improve the game's perceived value in the eyes of the gamer. If that core gameplay loop is fun enough, and the story holds their interest, and has an ending that is both agreeable and satisfactory, people will pay just about anything for that.

TripleCs3484d ago

@RustedMan

You think you had it bad? At least you got it for $3. I'm ashamed to admit this but I bought The Order on day one for $60.... Imagine how I must of felt :(

freshslicepizza3484d ago

mario tennis seems to be a quick game to get out there to fill the lack of wii u titles. no real ambition at all there.

djplonker3484d ago

I just bought the order last week and although I am only half way through I am really enjoying it.

I might have had a different opinion if I paid full price though.

ThunderPulse3484d ago

Bought it for $10 and enjoyed it to hell.

guyman3484d ago

"oh The Order... you had so much potential"

O the order... is not a first party title.

Digital_Anomaly3484d ago

First party PUBLISHED.... that's exactly what it is.

guyman3484d ago

Despite the fact that the article refers to first party GAMES

Digital_Anomaly3484d ago

Preeeetty sure the title clearly says first party published. Not sure what you're looking at.

divinealpha3484d ago (Edited 3484d ago )

The title says first party published lol , which the order is .

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 3484d ago
Yui_Suzumiya3484d ago

GOTY material in my book. One of my top five favorites of 2015 for sure.

shaw983483d ago

I see people defending the order and it is ok if you like it. But from a story and gameplay standpoint, it was still bad. Red letter media (people who review films) went over the game as a storytelling experience and found how many holes the story had, and how bad the pacing was for the game.

People try to defend it saying it is a story experience and that their is supposed to be a lack of gameplay (even if the gameplay is generic), but the story in itself is actually really bad from a story telling standpoint. :p

assdan3483d ago

Here's what I have to say after buying the order for $10 during the psn flash sale. It was definitely worth $10, but I honestly would have been disapointed if I had spent a cent more. I paid $15 for the left behind DLC, and while that experience was about half the run time, it was a far better game. The order had a lot of things going for it, it had arguably the best graphics I've ever seen in a console game, it had an amazing atmosphere, and the set up for an amazing plot.
On the other hand, I beat it in 6 hours, and feel no need to ever touch the game again. The campaign was incredibly predictable, and none of the characters seemed very strong. The story was incredibly predictable. I liked it while it lasted, but I'm very glad I cancelled my original preorder for this game after I saw reviews for it. This was Ready at dawn's test to see if they could be promoted to a full AAA dev, and they unfortunately failed. And the saddest thing is that this awesome concept will probably never see the light of day again.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 3483d ago
Metallox3484d ago

Rainbow Curse isn't bad, it's just acceptable as it is.

rjason123484d ago

I agree, but it shoulda been made for the 3ds, it and triple deluxe should have been switched lol.

MzDino3484d ago

My heart aches when i see Animal Crossing games on a "worst" list...especially when there's 2 of them. But i do admit, Amiibo Festival is pretty lackluster. HHD on the other hand i thought was pretty good. Just waiting for a full-fledged Animal Crossing game!

rjason123484d ago

They both aren't my cup of tea personally. They weren't what people expected, but these should have been expected since animal crossing has never had spin-offs before and were due one eventually. I'd say an animal crossing spin-off seems like a hard concept to come up with, and like I've said in a previous statement the Wii U one was made for multiple reasons
1. To get animal crossing amiibo out ASAP, (which the developer stated in an interview being the main reason he wanted this game made)
2. To start getting one (of hopefully few, rather than many) fully amiibo functioning games where you need to use amiibo to play it (like sky landers and infinity games)
3. It's made to be like a literal interactive game board, with the amiibo functioning as the game pieces

NotanotherReboot3484d ago

I still wanna try the Order someday. I heard some people enjoyed it.

Digital_Anomaly3484d ago

I understand how people crapped on it but now when you're only looking at dropping a 20 spot on it, I say have at it man. It's not that bad!

GryestOfBluSkies3484d ago

its not bad, just has sone slow sections.

Rimeskeem3484d ago

If you get it for 10$ it is a fantastic game.

ScaReCrow903484d ago

A game is either good or it isn't. Cost does not equal quality. This line of thinking is what is making games worse. Whole content and quality vs cost. It's so stupid.

Rookie_Monster3484d ago (Edited 3484d ago )

The worst first party published game of this year IMO belongs to:

Beyond 2 Souls HD. $30 for a 2 year old single player interactive game is not a great deal for customers. Heavy Rain should be added as a collection with it.

Tied with The Orders 1886. The mediocre reviews, user reviews pretty much made this the worst exclusive of the year. Some aay Devil's Third is worst but giving the hype level factor between the two, The Order is the more disappointing of the two. Had so much potential like Ryse before it.

ziggurcat3484d ago

i doubt you even played the order, so your "opinion" of it is invalid. that, and there's this:

http://www.metacritic.com/g...

out of the critic reviews - 30 positive, 53 mixed, 11 negative. out of the user reviews - 488 positive, 168 mixed, and 157 negative. so with 488 positive vs. 157 negative user reviews, and 30 vs. 11 critic reviews, how did those review make it the worst exclusive?

the handful of negative reviews posted here are not indicative of the quality of the game (especially when it was painfully obvious that they were all copy/pasted from each other). it's a good game, not GOTY or anything (personally, it's a 7-8/10 and not the ridiculous 2-4/10 scores some site gave the game), but it definitely deserved more than what it got - which is really only because there were unfair expectations despite the fact that R@D were advertising what the game was about the *entire* time.

ScaReCrow903484d ago

A game is either good or it isn't. No one cares what the developers said it was gonna be like. It's not like they said the game was gonna be bad did they?
Problem wasn't the game was different then expected. The problem was the game was bad as what it is.

ziggurcat3484d ago

@scarecrow:

that's not the point. people were expecting the game to be something (i.e. gears of war, for some silly reason) it was never advertised as being. and if it was a bad game, you'd have a point, but it was a much better game than the 2-4/10 reviews were implying.

Exoil3483d ago

@scarecrow: Aren't you the same troll who said Uncharted 3 was a very bad game?

Of course you think the game is bad, you haven't even played it bud.

guyman3484d ago (Edited 3484d ago )

Halo 5 was an incredible disappointment (you see what i did there).

BTW: The order 1886 AND beyond 2 souls are not first party titles, which reinforces your ridiculous agenda against anything ps4 related. Your opinion is nothing.

ScaReCrow903484d ago

Well they're still only PlayStation games. I would say that's PlayStation related.

divinealpha3484d ago

But did you read the title it's first party published, the order is a first party published game

Rookie_Monster3484d ago (Edited 3484d ago )

Guyman, if Then orders and beyond 2 Souls Are not first party game, then what do you called Bloodborne in which I constant praised as one of the best games I'd played this year? That would leave Sony with nothing first party this year if you are going to play that first party definition game. Anyways, this piece is about first party published game and Sony published those games just like Nintendo is publishing Devil's third and MS is the publisher of Ryse. LoL

ziggurcat3484d ago

"... Anyways, this piece is about first party published game and Sony published those games..."

that doesn't make them 1st party. 1st party refers to a game that is developed by a studio owned by MS/Nintendo/Sony.

so that makes you horribly off-topic (be honest, here - you've not played the order or beyond 2 souls, you just listed them to down talk playstation...), and the article incorrect for listing the order as a 1st party title.

Rookie_Monster3484d ago (Edited 3484d ago )

"so that makes you horribly off-topic (be honest, here - you've not played the order or beyond 2 souls, you just listed them to down talk playstation...)"

LoL, Ziggercat, did you even read the article? Both The Order 1886 and Devil's third are on there. I think I am perfectly on-topic. FACE palm!

And how do you explain my constant praise for Sony Published games like Bloodborne and Uncharted 4 if what you are saying is true about me always downplaying PS? I think I had praised Sony 10x more than you ever did regarding XBox. I am taking bets.

ziggurcat3484d ago

"did you even read the article? Both The Order 1886 and Devil's third are on there. I think I am perfectly on-topic. FACE palm!"

yes, did. again, the article is *wrong* for listing the order as 1st party just like you're wrong for citing beyond, and the order as being 1st party. and you couldn't even bring yourself to mention a *single* xbox title... how very objective of you.

"And how do you explain my constant praise for Sony Published games like Bloodborne and Uncharted 4 if what you are saying is true about me always downplaying PS?"

when bubbles "mattered", you admitted that you praised sony just to get your bubbles up (saying something to the effect that your sony "praise" is "finally paying off"), which has since rendered all of your "positive" comments disingenuous. since they switched to the no bubble system, practically all you have been doing is spreading FUD (all of your alleged information you claim to be passing along is either ill-informed or just downright ignorant/devoid of any fact).

"... I think I had praised Sony 10x more than you ever did regarding XBox. I am taking bets."

yeah... no. that's a bet you'd have no chance at winning.

Christopher3484d ago (Edited 3484d ago )

Wait, you are putting The Order: 1886 as worse than God of War 3 Remaster? I mean, they only took the time to remaster one game, and it was the final chapter in the overall trilogy arch. But, having just paid $10 for it and still not having played it, The Order: 1886 was not up to par but it definitely wasn't broken like other games (Driveclub and Halo MCC at release, for example). Are we rating based on the games on their own or just on 'most pointless' or something?

Based on the topic of first-party games -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wi...

I'd go with Driveclub being the worst. Delayed twice, still released with tons of issues, not truly notable other than the otherwise lack of racing games on the platform.

I'd put a 2nd place on Killzone Shadow Fall. They had no clue what they were doing with the PS gameplay, IMHO. They should have stuck with the original formula or something instead of giving us some sort of semblance of 'you decide how to do stuff' with an extremely forgettable storyline.

Rookie_Monster3484d ago (Edited 3484d ago )

Christopher, the title of the arricle was talking about first party published games of 2015. Both Driveclub and Halo MCC were published in 2014 and Killzone SF was 2 years ago.

Also, I agreed the the GOW3 HD is bare bone but in terms of gameplay and as a game itself, it is much better than either The Order or Beyond 2 Souls. But is definitely in my top 5 or worst 1st party published games of 2015 along with Deveil's Third on Wii U and Screamride on XB1.

ScaReCrow903484d ago

Halo mcc multiplayer was broken. The rest of the 4 games worked perfectly so thats ignorant of you. Or completely biased.

Christopher3484d ago

***Halo mcc multiplayer was broken. The rest of the 4 games worked perfectly so thats ignorant of you. Or completely biased.***

Uhh... it was broken at release just as much as Driveclub. Did you ignore that I mention that game as well? Both had major online issues at launch.

How about you get your head out of the clouds and come back down to earth?

Christopher3483d ago

Gah, you're right about the 'time' though Rookie.

Not much this year for poor first-party. I would say that Uncharted Collection was much worse than The Order, though. We knew what we were getting with that, but Uncharted Collection released without much fanfare and they cut MP from two of the games (or didn't include MP at all in any way, shape, or form).

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 3483d ago
+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 3483d ago
Show all comments (62)
210°

The Order: 1886 Sequel Would Have Featured Larger-Scale Battles & Multiplayer

A sequel to Sony and Ready At Dawn's action-adventure game, The Order: 1886, would have featured larger-scale battles as well as multiplayer.

Read Full Story >>
twistedvoxel.com
pwnmaster300024d ago

I missed it when games use to have a multiplayer to them.
Hope Sony revives the game at one point

KyRo24d ago

Killzone, Resistance, Uncharted, TLOU, Motorstorm. Great times. Its a shame how far they've fallen this generation

Muigi24d ago

Oh they still do…its just the whole game now 😂.

-Foxtrot24d ago

Why add multiplayer when the single player (despite enjoying it for what it was) had flaws?

You'd work out the issues with how you craft the single player then once you’ve perfected it do multiplayer after.

RaidenBlack24d ago

https://www.videogameschron...
"Two sequels were planned for the franchise, The Order 1891 and The Order 1899. While the third game was never in development, Weerasuriya says he had planned where the story of the franchise was planned to go, if he had been able to develop the full trilogy."
...
Alas, we'll also might never get the PC version of 1886, which is currently residing in some dev's hard drive, nearly ready for a release if required.

Charal24d ago

It’s a shame we didn’t gave its chance to this franchise.
Game world was very interesting, and gameplay could have evolved to a major hit with sequels.
Not even speaking about graphics that were way ahead of their time.

Reaper22_24d ago (Edited 24d ago )

If "we" is sony, i agree. I liked the game but it was metacritic that contributed to it's death. It's a shame.

AshleeEmerson24d ago

No, we are "us," the gamers who rated it so low on Metacritic, hurting... Killing its sales. I agree it is a shame. I loved this game.

Charal24d ago

No it is not, it is us has a community which crucified this game, which is happening much too often.

CrimsonWing6924d ago (Edited 24d ago )

I think MP being co-op would’ve been awesome. Essentially, I always viewed this as Sony’s take on the Gears series.

However, it really failed to measure up to what I expected. I definitely saw the potential but there were some things that really bogged it down for me like the forced slow walking segments (which I know was to hide loading), the repetitive warehouse werewolf fights, not enough variety in enemies, oddly we fought more humans than Darkstalkers, and the stealth sections were infuriating.

One thing there’s no denying though, this damn game was a looker. Such a shame at the wasted potential.

Show all comments (16)
120°

The Order: 1886, a Ten Year Reunion

WTMG's Leo Faria: "After finally playing the now decade-old The Order: 1886, what do I think about it? Is it really worthy of all the hate it has received over the past decade? Or is it some kind of hidden gem? I honestly think it falls somewhere in the middle. I loved the setting, the story is initially fine, the combat isn’t half-bad, and the potential for some awesome world building was there. It was all bogged down by too much ambition against a tight deadline, as well as poor marketing. As a result, it’s short, full of plotholes, infested with QTEs, and not exactly memorable as a whole. As a game you can grab for less than ten bucks today, I absolutely think it’s worth checking out. It’s one hell of a wasted potential, but for such a discount, I had some fun with it, and I’m sure you will too."

Read Full Story >>
waytoomany.games
SimpleSlave121d ago (Edited 121d ago )

Great setting, great graphics, even decent gun play, but what a trash of a game. The fuck were these people thinking? We could've had something like an Alan Wake 2 meets Mass Effect 2 style game. With investigations, creepy locations to uncover and explore, people to talk to and even recruit, clues to uncover and connect, monsters to slay, side quests to get lost in, and a more expansive lore to go with it.

Instead we got a shitty AAAAAAAAA Third Person Pew Pew snoozfest. Awesome.

_SilverHawk_121d ago

The order 1886 was one of the best games I played on ps4. Within a top 5 best ps4 games I'd put the last of us 2, the order 1886, days gone, horizon zero dawn and God of war.

SimpleSlave120d ago

"The order 1886 was one of the best games I played on ps4. Within a top 5 best ps4 games..."

Jesus H. Christ, bud. You just sound like a Sony apologist. What the fuck? Anyways. Good luck with that or whatever.

coolbeans121d ago

God. The "what could've been" you're describing would've been way better than just being the most empty cinematic shooter slop of that generation.

SimpleSlave120d ago

Right? I mean, I can understand people enjoying this thing ironically. Knowing that it sucks but still enjoying it for what it is. I get that. That's fine. We all have our guilty pleasure no doubt. But to come here and actually pretend that this is a top 5 PS4 game? Wow!

To pretend that this barely there game is anything more than an "empty cinematic shooter slop of that generation," as you said, is beyond ridiculous. But I guess Self-Awareness is some expensive ass DLC still.

Espangerish120d ago

I really enjoyed this game and also think it was one of the best PS4 games. It’s weird to me that this makes you so angry. I’m not a Sony fan at all by the way, very much pc player.

SimpleSlave120d ago

"and also think it was one of the best PS4 games"
"I’m not a Sony fan at all by the way, very much pc player."

Yeah, OK. You want to lie to yourself? You do you, bud. But like I said to the other Sony apologist, "good luck with that or whatever."

-Foxtrot120d ago

Jesus, it had some flaws but you're acting like it was unplayable.

It built a foundation, a rocky one but a sequel is where they could have refined things.

Personally my only issue is I feel like the "Gears of War" like over the shoulder gameplay, especially getting into cover and the like didn't really fit the game as much. In Gears you understand that kind of gameplay because they are wearing super heavy amour and guns but in the Order these guys are super human, they should feel more of a breeze to control, easily jumping over things and being allowed to climb whatever similar to Uncharted.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 120d ago
Inverno121d ago

Im back again to simp for The Order, if ya like games well grounded in their reality with consistency in everything it does then I recommend it if ya haven't played it. Play it thru emulation or on your PS it don't matter just play it.

1nsomniac121d ago (Edited 121d ago )

A great game run down by the media for it's price vs length - Which was understandable, but it shouldn't of been the be all and end all.

At the right price this was a great game & deserved a sequel!

thorstein121d ago

Exactly. What a weird metric that suddenly was important and then, within a few months, no longer mattered.

andy85121d ago

I enjoyed this. I think the complaints were the length if I remember. Nothing wrong with a short good game, at least to physical copy owners 😅

Rebel_Scum121d ago

Put the thing on PS plus already!

Show all comments (16)
310°

The Order: 1886 Dev Pitched a Sequel to Sony, But Was Denied

Co-founder thinks bad reviews were to blame.
Ready at Dawn co-founder has revealed the now-shuttered studio pitched a sequel to PS4 exclusive The Order: 1886 to Sony, but was denied the chance to make it.

Read Full Story >>
pushsquare.com
_SilverHawk_131d ago

I can't believe sony turned down a sequel to the order 1886 which ended basically on a cliffhanger. The game is amazing and I would love a ps5 pro enhanced version just like I'd like a driveclub ps5 pro enhanced version.

DodoDojo130d ago

About 2 million sales and not the greatest of reviews, I can believe it.

Tbh there's a lot of dormant Sony exclusives that are more deserving of a sequel.

ravens52130d ago

Have you played it? Just curious.

ABizzel1130d ago (Edited 130d ago )

2 million probably wasn’t enough to make a strong profit on, and the mid reviews didn’t help, even though it was a solid game just short, and could have expanded way more on the creature mythos.

Days Gone: +7 million / mid reviews (no sequel)
Infamous SS: 6 million / mid reviews (no sequel)
Killzone SF: +2 million (4 mo.) / mid reviews (no sequel)
Driveclub: +2 million (2015 / leaks say 5m) / mid reviews (no sequel)

Basically it looks like for the PS4 generation budgets were getting out of control and Sony made the decision

sales + reviews - budget = sequel or no sequel

goken130d ago

Whatever the number, can’t be worst than concord

SimpleDad130d ago

Glad that Alloy Lego is doing great.

Toecutter00130d ago

Two million in sales for a new IP is pretty impressive. The world-building was in a class on its own. Any moron could see this IP had mad potential and the fact that Sony balked on it makes one question their competence and leadership.

Cacabunga129d ago

Nothing to do with sales. It’s all about the broken vision that Sony is having lately.
Days Gone sold great but they still don’t want a sequel to it.
Sony wants Easy money and they saw it in gaas and lazy games like lego horizon and countless remasters..

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 129d ago
pwnmaster3000130d ago (Edited 130d ago )

Idky you can’t believe it.
This game was shitted on by everyone besides some PS fans.

Don’t blame Sony on this one. Blame everyone who wanted to see this burn. Sony does a lot of stupid shit with their IP and waste a lot of them like bloodborne and days gone, but don’t be surprised with this one.

Outside_ofthe_Box130d ago

Exactly. I came to post exactly this. The game was torn apart upon release. It's not shocking that a sequel was denied.

S2Killinit130d ago

Not “upon” release. There was a whole campaign “prior” to release.

In my opinion they should have made it a bit less linear and it would have been great. I did enjoy it. But the reception it got makes sense that Sony wouldnt want to risk a sequel if it was going to open up a can of worms with people who wanted the first one to fail.

130d ago
Christopher130d ago

I played the game. I 100% believe Sony turned down a sequel.

blackblades130d ago

Well pretty obvious when it was left on a cliffhanger. Many sequels get turned from companies as someone else said above blame the SOB's that always whining.

Sabbath1313130d ago

i 100% agree with you, both of those games were amazing

Bathyj130d ago

What's so hard to believe? Don't you remember this game was crucified by the media.. it was DOA. It's a shame because it was a really fresh new IP it was gorgeous and a play really well . it had some issues but it wasn't the only game with qte repeated bosses and a playtime under 10 hours.

TheEroica130d ago ShowReplies(2)
mkis007130d ago (Edited 130d ago )

It was panned because of the graphics hype. Kind of similar to Ryse and hellblade 2...although the story was pretty interesting in all 3.

As a matter of fact I think Indy's success is partially due to the fact the graphics were not hyped up pre launch.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 129d ago
-Foxtrot131d ago

It’s strange though Sony would be so proud about their work and overall quality but wouldn’t give them an extra year to, give them that quality.

Anyway he talks about if it was in the 70s they’d have had their sequel but Days Gone is at 71 on Metacritic and we don’t have a sequel.

Both games should have one, I think they deserve a second chance at refining and building onto that foundation already laid out.

neutralgamer1992130d ago (Edited 130d ago )

Definitely days gone 2 should happen. Who knows maybe now Sony will let them make it since bend had to cancel its live service game. Days gone 2 for PS6 sounds amazing

As far as order 1886 sequel it would be have been interesting. I think if this game was a RPG with 15 hour story it would have done so much better. Don't get me wrong game is great but you can tell the potential is there if they were allowed to make some drastic changes

Sadly this new Sony is not the PlayStation they are suits and spreadsheet guys. Playstation has lost its touch with gamers. I miss Shawn jack Andrew house etc

At the launch of PS4 Playstation was at its full strength with gamers running the company but not anymore. No we have a guy who loves horizon above every thing else and is willing to fund projects based on that IP

Redemption-64130d ago

So an IP that actually sell? Sony moved away from the type of games you saw during the launch of the PS4 because many gamer didn't support them. I hear people crying more about say Japan Studio closing than actually supporting their games when they were open. Wasn't it shawn layden who said many of these games fail and you hope a few like horizon to make up for the failed games. Maybe if gamers actually supported these games there would be more of them. Shocking right?

Redemption-64130d ago

There is no sequel for Days Gone because it didn't sell. The director himself said "If you love a game, buy it at f****** full price. I can't tell you how many times I've seen gamers say 'yeah, I got that on sale, I got it through PS Plus, whatever'.”

Majority of the sales from days gone came from when it was heavily discounted, and I have seen many gamers say they will not pay full price or the game isn't worth full price, but they will buy it when it's discounted. Yet they get triggered when the studio decides to move away from a game they refused to support at full price

jwillj2k4130d ago (Edited 130d ago )

What this is showing is that the majority of people don’t like the price. It doesn’t mean they don’t like the game. Two different dimensions.

Example: The company Take Two took advantage by selling NBA 2K at $20, completely undercutting NBA live to become the most popular basketball game. High priced games isn’t the only way they can make money.

-Foxtrot130d ago

Well. If we are going to go off that director apparently Days Gone hit 8 million sales around the same time frame that Ghost of Tsushima later did.

https://x.com/JakeRocket/st...

One was considered a failure, the other a massive success so I don't think it just boils down to sales.

Redemption-64130d ago

@Foxtrot

Hey, maybe you clearly know more than the director/writer. If memory serves me right, Days Gone went on sale faster than Ghost. Also, please know budget is a major factor. There is a huge difference between Ghost with a budget of $60M selling 8M, vs Days Gone, with a budget of $250M selling 8M after major price cut. One can be considered a success, because it had a much lower budget.

Don't Complain If a Game Doesn’t Get a Sequel” If You Didn’t Buy It “At F-cking Full Price, clearly shows the game didn't make the money it needed to make within the time frame it needed

Redemption-64130d ago

@jwillj2k4

What is shows is majority of gamers didn't think Days Gone was worth the $60 price tag and clearly Sony agrees with them. You can like a game, but if you don't think it is worth the price tag, why do you complain when the company decides to not invest in a game you don't think is worth what they are charging? They should release the game, lose money, cut the price and then you will support it?

jwillj2k4128d ago

Reading is fundamental. I said start with a reduced price not cut the price after you’ve already released it. It was an example to show how there are other ways they couldn’t make money. The idea is that number of buyers is much greater at $20 than $60. I didn’t think I had the point that out to you.

Redemption-64128d ago (Edited 128d ago )

@jwillj2k4

The number of buyers being greater at $20 than $60 does not equate to more money. You literally have to sell 2-3 times more to makeup the difference. Starting with a reduced price for an AAA that costs say $250M is pure stupidity and again would have to sell 2-4 times more depending on the reduced price break even. Or include micro transactions. They can make it into a free live service game with mtx. Yeah, you are right, maybe they should follow the route 2K NBA took

Clearly many don't think the game is worth $60. Who knows maybe the remaster can give it hope. But it would be funny if they get a sequel and people refuse to buy it at full price. Highly doubt those who think the game isn't worth 60, will be lining up for 70.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 128d ago
S2Killinit130d ago

Days Gone deserved so much better than 71. I’ve noticed that some PlayStation games get attacked and it feels generated. Like money is behind the hate campaign.

-Foxtrot130d ago

Days Gone was that one game which wasn't really attacked by gamers but by journalists.

As soon as it was revealed they really didn't like it for some reason, it was made out to be because it came across as a generic looking open world game or another generic "zombie" game but at the time we had plenty of open world games and a fair few "zombie/infected" games that these journalists didn't bad an eyelid towards.

When the game released broken before the Day One patch it just gave these journalists a massive excuse to slaughter the game in their reviews.

On one hand, a game shouldn't have released in that broken state or at least they shouldn't have given journalists a copy without the Day One patch HOWEVER these are the same journalists who usually gloss over that kind of stuff with so many other games, take Star Wars Outlaws for example, the game was a buggy, broken mess at launch with plenty of issues, bad AI, some clear performance issues and a lot of quality of life improvements needed but it still did a lot better than Days Gone at launch.

Personally I think they knew they could get away with it more because Sony Bend weren’t that high up and respectable, they knew calling their game out as much as they did wouldn't hit them with any major consequences unlike if they hypothetically were like this towards NaughtyDog, Sony Santa Monica or Insomniac.

RaidenBlack130d ago

Yea and there was/is a PC version of 1886 too in 2016 ... but now maybe collecting dust in some dev's hardrive.

Relientk77130d ago

That's lame. It's not perfect, definitely a flawed game, but deserves a sequel. You already have the first game as a starting point just need to improve upon it. This could have been a much better sequel like the jump from Assassin's Creed to Assassin's Creed 2. The IP has potential.

S2Killinit130d ago

But Assassins Creed sold a lot.

Show all comments (57)