The Division - Reception Flop

Another whiny gamer that's following other people opinions about the game instead of forming their own LOL. You'll are so quick to jump in a forum and bash a game you haven't even played. How is a game a flop when it's not even 2 days old LOL. I haven't had any issues with the game, the game is fun, great co-op game, graphics are great and the gameplay is smooth. Story is the weakest part of the game to me but a lot of games have weak stories so what else is new but you'll just be online just hoping and wishing to see a game so called "flop" just so you'll can come in here and be the first to tell everything the game is a flop LOL.

Meh, I wanted to wait but a local store had a one day discount on 10 games including The Division so I got it for 39,99 for the PS4. I know that I will get my enjoyment out of it by playing with 2 buddies but I also know that it's not a game I will be playing for months.

Sorry, but the combat looks too generic for me. Why should I buy this game, just to form an "opinion" on my own, I dont want to support a trashy developer like ubisoft. I have learned my lesson with their previous games.

@mjorh said:

This is the kind of shit I'm talking about. People are saying that they would take these reviews over professional reviewers because the professional reviewers are paid off (which they aren't). Yet these reviews are loaded with idiots who made up their minds about a game based on the publisher/developer alone. That's not how you should approach any product.

These people blatantly hate Ubisoft and had made up their mind well before they bought the game. Why they bought the game is a mystery.

This is why Steam reviews and most user reviews are trash. People can't review the game for what it is and always make external factors like publishers and PR content a priority. Who gives a shit if Ubisoft developed it and who cares what the game looked like two years ago? If you were disappointed in the changes you shouldn't have bought the game. Rather you bought the game just to review it poorly? Is your life so empty and void that you have to go out of your way to criticize others?

User reviews suck. End of story.

You don't want to buy the game for whatever reason then good for you, but when people go out with the, "this game is a flop" when the game is literally 2 days old, that's when you start to sound whiny. Everyone has their own taste but when you basing your opinion around what others think, you look more like a follower than anything else. Saying you don't want to buy the game cause of things you seeing is different from saying I don't want the game cause others say it's bad.

The Combat isn't that bad, nor is the over all gameplay. Sure, it's not revolutionary but it responds well and the environmental interactivity is second to none (Massive have done a tremendous job on this). The guns feel different to each other and gun mods do make a difference. The cover mechanics work well and it's very easy to move around the battlefield without getting snagged up, I really hate games where it's difficult or awkward to break the characters lock to cover.

@Wasdie: Its the overall user score that matters, not the individual user review. And again I rather put my trust on actual gamers than "professional"/paid reviewers like ign and gamespot who are doing a bunch of promotional reviews. Why do you think ign keeps giving call of dogshit every year such a high score?

All online only games are forgettable trash. Been voting with my wallet since always.

Picked the game (Xbox 1) up from Redbox yesterday, and was unable to play when I got home from work because the Activation Laptop didn't work. turned it off for about 30 minutes, played some Zoo Tycoon, then came back. Fun game, enjoyed what I played, just as I did in the beta. I plan to play some more tonight, then take it back. I'll pick it up when it is cheap.

PC fanbase is full of whiners, thus you will see negative feedback just on Uplay alone

I have seen enough footage showing how trashy the game is, I am not going to buy the division just to officially confirm my assumption

When will Ubi's checks clear so they can finally review this trash?

the combat is just a poor rehash of the combat system from previous games like Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon Phantoms for instance

Not an assessment I would agree with at all but each to his own.

I don't particularly care if you like the game or not and I'm not looking to argue with you. I'm just giving an honest assessment of what I've found in the relatively short amount of time I've spent playing it.

Out of interest, have you played it?

So that means we shouldnt get it and stick to BroForce???

You should stick to broforce, its a much better game than this ubiscrap

wasn't even the 1st day TBH. it was like the first 2 hours. I started playing at 9pm PST and by 11pm PST everything was going fine. even played last night with no issues.

If it's anything like the beta I can see how people can feel lukewarm about it. My crew and I grew bored of the repetitive missions and enemies after only a few hours of playtime. I can't imagine the full release being much different.

I've reached a point where I trust no one. :P

... I mean, not really, that would just be silly. But I do tend to favor community experiences over one specific person (or publication).

Those reviews aren't right, Ubisoft make astounding games and deserve the abundance of press coverage ensuring ad revenue.

It looks like dirty garbage.

Wait, why are we attaching the word "flop" to a game with no critical reviews. User reviews, whether it's a consumer product, music, movies or games are always hyperbolic bullshit. Yet when it comes to a game that the community wants to hate because of Ubisoft and "always online" we take user reviews as gospel? Come on folks!

Isn't there a review embargo? If no known critics reviewed the game, most likely the date for the reviews hasn't came yet.

Well, you don't know where to look my friend, IGN or Gamespot are not the only websites out there , i suggest you check out websites like Giantbomb, Eurogamer, Gameinformer, etc. Sure as hell that reviewers like Jeff Gertsman ain't paid and some of them have been in the industry for over 20 years , you can easily trust them.

Dunno why when it comes to reviews, everyone looks at IGN .....there are tons of legit websites out there.

The overall score doesn't matter either when a lot of people are purposely giving it negative reviews just because they don't like the company. Metacritic has the same issue. People brigading game scores based on publishers/developers they don't like, exclusive games on platforms they don't own (an extension of System Wars), or when silly things like the marketing hype isn't met 100%.

"Actual gamers" on Steam are some of the worst fanboys that succumb to mob mentality extremely easily. Steam becomes an echo chamber of entitlement, cynicism, and rage that seems to be the defining characteristics of modern PC gamers. You need to take these things in stride. People on the internet go into products and experience with the mentality of "impress me" rather than understanding the product they are buy and/or being open minded. Rather they expect the game to conform to their personal set of gameplay tastes and quality standards. They feel entitled to every game they purchase to cater just to them. This entitlement breeds cynicism as very few games ever meet the every increase demand for perfection by these people. This cynicism simply breed the notion of elitism. The idea that "I'm better than you because I hate on the mainstream games that you so sheepishly fall in line to play." People bashing games they had no intention of ever playing or enjoying just to sound like they are some sort of an expert on what a good game is.

Professional reviewers are not promotional reviews nor are they paid off. There are also dozens of professional reviewers from all sorts of sources. Their aggregate can give you a good idea of what to expect.

User reviews should be taken into account but must be taken in the context of the entitled, cynical and elitest gamer mob mentality. Understanding that many of these people will never be happy as they find criticism is their only way to garner any sort of attention from their peers.

And users are swayed by one problem and overreact, if not fanboyism. Only reliable source is experience. Game was a lot of fun to play with Army buds last night. Its a TPS version of Destiny. That got blasted initially but has maintained and built up. I believe this will as well.

Not surprised. Saw this coming from a mile away. Another great dev destroyed by one of the big 3.

Couldn't care what other people think of the game. For the way I like to play games, and the type of people I play games with online, The Division is one of the best games I've played in a very long time.

Doesn't look like it'd be my sort of game.

It seems the word "entitled" is the only one in the vocabulary of people who criticize consumers.

I actually find aggregated user scores much closer to what I would give a game when I look at Metacritic. "Professional" reviewers score for AAA games tend to be way too high. Aside from big names like COD or exclusives, you can mostly trust user scores when they are complied. The common angry users will get buried by the more reasonable ones most of the time. The Steam reviews also have a lot of legitimate complaints regarding the content of the game.

Cheat Code Central reviewed this game with 92%

Oh the website i have never been on since Secondary school. Didn't even know they still existed.

I also clearly said cynical, elitist, and rage. :P

When I say entitled I mean people are not entitled to a game meeting all of their specific demands. That's not how products of any type work. There's got to be some give and take. This is where professional reviews come in. While user views are usually "did I like this game yes or no?" a professional review is usually more of an overview of the whole thing and looking at the game in the context of the genre and the platform/time period it was released.

What I find is people demanding a game being something it's not supposed to be and getting upset when it doesn't meet their specific demands. They never should have bought it in the first place. I also see a lot of people, primarily PC gamers, who get upset over the DD service or the lack of mods. Instead of just not buying the product, they buy it and then give it poor reviews, or simply just brigade review websites with false reviews criticizing these things. Those, and it's a small group of gamers, who demand mods for all games are some of pretty damn entitled as they are basically demanding free content. Those who demand outright free content (free maps, free updates, free whatever) are the most entitled. Just because that's how it used to be back neatly twenty years ago, doesn't mean that's how it's always going to be and you can't bitch when developers start wanting money for their hard work.

There's nothing wrong with people demanding a quality product though. A game should work how advertised. There is, of course, a little leeway that must be given to a developer. If a game has some problems an hour after launch and you go and uninstall it and give it as low of ratings as you can, you're being rash. It's disappointing and criticisms should be raised, but don't let that ruin the entire game for you and mislead people to thinking the game is terrible. In a day or two nobody who plays the game will even have those issues and it will become irrelevant.

Though there is one thing about demanding a quality product. People demand a "fun" game, but fun is subjective. What I find fun is not what you find fun. Some people have a very narrow band of gameplay they find fun. Usually it's stuff they are comfortable with (where the whole nostalgia thing comes into play). It's one thing to give a game a lower review because you personally find it unfun, but it's another thing to obliterate the game for not being fun because you didn't do your homework ahead of time. That's what happened with Destiny and is happening to The Division. A lot of people are going in and expecting a more traditional shooting experience with linear progression through a well paced campaign and are coming out very disappointed.

Do your homework before dropping $60.

Great post and agreed.

Just one thing though, looking at the Metacritic user score, The Division currently sits at 7.0 which is quite good for user reviews which typically are lower than publications' reviews. Steam is really just positive or negative and I believe about 53% gave it a positive review. Many have had performance issues(reports of stuttering and poor multi-gpu scaling along with several glitches) would bring the total score down from 70%. Then you have the slew of idiots who hate on the game just to hate on it and 53% doesn't seem TOO far from what PC gamers think in general. It should be also taken into account PC gamers are more shall I say "demanding" about games which is why even games that run amazingly on PC still have slightly lower scores than on consoles.

The main issue with those "professional" reviewers is that they keep giving mainstream games like division or call of duty way too high scores. The highest scores should be reserved for games that are actually somewhat innovative and consist of above average gameplay.

The overall user score on steam, which is currently at 60%, seems quite fair in my opinion, its shows that the game is neither good nor bad, it's simply average. The game is meant to be played by the average gamer, who doesnt care about innovation or developed gameplay.

Game looks dope as ****. Love how dense the city is.

also, this is hilarious.

I just think it is shady as shit that there are NO professional reviews out yet (No CheatCC doesn't count). I honestly don't think I have seen such a situation before and for a Triple A game that has some serious concerns about it, seeing reviews delayed like this just scream "shady" to me...

I enjoyed the time I spent with the beta....so I will play this again regardless of the reviews.

This game has more content than Destiny but look how poorly its received on pc. Now imagine if Destiny was released on pc lol. Bungie knew that pc folks would've crucified them hah

That's bullshit. Games are scored based on how fun they are and their build quality. Innovation doesn't guarantee a better game. Most of the time sticking with a variety of the formula that people know and love while making a very high quality product is going to produce a better game overall. Until an idea or style of gameplay becomes boring, stale, or there are simply other games doing the same thing better, it's not a problem for a new game.

The misconception with Call of Duty is that the game series is stagnant. From an outsider who wrote off that kind of gameplay years ago it may be, but to those who actually enjoy those games, there are a lot of meaningful changes and expanded breadth of gameplay in each iteration. The "worst" CoD in recent memory was Ghosts because it was too much of the same. Advanced Warfare and Black Ops 3 introduced unique mechanics as well as had competent storytelling, fantastic presentation, and a wide variety of gameplay options and game modes. They deserved their scores and success. Ghosts was a well made game with strong core fundamentals which was still fun to the majority of the fanbase, but the scores are noticeably lower than Advanced Warfare and Black Ops 3 because people were getting bored of that formula. Other CoD developers took note and made appropriate changes while Activision expanded the development cycle to three years to give devs more breathing room to make a better game.

Innovation can take an old game formula and make it fresh again, set apart a game of a particular genre from others, or create entire new experiences and forge new genres, but it's not a ticket to making a better game. Good games are made by developers who understand what makes a game great. Not just cobble together new gameplay mechanics for the sake of it. Innovation is driven by a necessity to innovate. If an idea is still fun and enjoyable, there is no reason to innovate. Games should not be punished because they stick with a formula that people enjoy. Only when it's no longer enjoyable is it a problem.

Basicly they should just release the same game with updated graphics every year and still recieve the highest score according to your logic.

I rent it its good game

In your opinion

as opposed to what?

@Wasdie: I don't like Ubisoft. A spade is a spade.

If they make a game that's great: Rayman Legends. I call it great.

If they make a game that is recycled from previous games, Far Cry, Watch Dogs, Assassins Creed, follows the same formula and is extremely repetitive.

Obviously some people are not able to give credit for a developer they dislike.

At the same time other people use the fact that people dislike a developer to avoid criticising a game.

Won't even think about buying this till people have a good grasp of what you'll be doing in the day-to-day grind. I imagine people are having decent fun in the division right now but the main concern is what is the game like when you reach endgame.

I havent even activated the key yet. Got it with a video card I bought. Glad I waited now.

What's with the approval rating? Is it just a bad game? Or are people just upset by not advancing out any review copies? Or are they just shitting on Ubisoft because it's a fashion trend and "Ubisoft is the new EA"?