@projectpat72988 @jeremy- You are tripping over your words with point (2).
If you wanted to know how long the game was, you could have done any of the following. 1) Googled it, 2) Played the beta and read any news post about length on the beta 3) Watched twitch tv, 4) Try the slightest inclination of not being lazy.
I doubt even you believe what you wrote when were saying that. It boils down to this, your only complaint after several back and forths has been length. And you have basically agreed with me that you were lazy (or have never used the internets before), and thats the only reason you didnt know how long it is.
1) You had the beta to test it for FREE. you knew 100% what you were getting
2) There were plenty of twitch livestreams where they indicated 12-16 hours... also, they stated that the beta was about 15% of the game content size.
3) Some people like quality over quantity. I dont have time to waste on indies and vast stretching bad games.....
4) Risen was basically life support for people who are desperate for RPG"s at the end of the year like DA:I and TW2, lets be honest here, its not good. Risen is about half as good of an RPG as Destiny is a shooter. The combat stinks and there are only a few interesting salvagable things like the novel way skills level up and how much content there is in the game like spells, abilities and crafting. But thats basically it... theres a tonne of stuff to do, but its all half broken and messy. Its quantity over quality.
Destiny, on the contrary, has a limited amount of stuff to do and awesome. In reality... all these people running on a budget that felt they didnt get their moneys worth for $60 dollars should have just taken the time to google how long the game would be. You CANNOT complain with post purchase cognitive dissonance when you were too lazy to fact check.
If you had been responsible and checked, you would have known 100% of what you were getting, and you wouldnt be leaving BS reviews for an awesome game. Thats my 2 cents.
@projectpat72988 @jeremy- I would prefer to play 1 hour of this game for every 5 of risen, and I didnt think Risen was terrible, I just think some people who dont have a great deal of time would prefer a AAA experience even if its only 8 hours long, let alone the 12-16 hours this game boats.
I met a bunch of people when i did my first strike and joined a clan and we've got a small group of strangers in a clan that are all hanging out and enjoying destiny, 20 hours in.
You can split off for some PVP or try the raids, there is a steady progression albeit not greatly varied pve (vanguard stuff).
As far as comparing against any shooter. I think it beats any shooter hands down. Borderlands is the only game in the same genre and it has no PVP options, seems like it was made 10 years earlier (because BL1/2 are basically a 10 year old theme). THe shooting mechanics handle better, better group and MP elements. Need I go on.
If you wanted a game to play forever, I'm not saying you are going to be able to do that. But as far as comparing 12 hours of this game to anything else... I think you are kidding yourself or have memory issues if you think you have found something better.
Of course with a game hyped this much, in the COD genre, you are going to get toxic comments. And rather than a legitimate review, I think GS just gave it metacritics score. Its a difficult position to be in, because if they gave it what it deserved there would be at least 1000 "unsubscribed", if not 10 times that.
However, I think there is a serious lack of integrity if you are giving it this score. The review basically agrees that its a great game but short. So do we score quantity over quality now? Risen is like 40 hours long but its completely unpolished and as an RPG, its really not so great.
Destiny is much shorter, but a much higher quality, as a shooter, its at least twice as good as risen is an RPG, yet the scores are the same.
Again, the ONLY conclusion we can draw here is pandering to people's obvious disappointment with a game that would be hyped this much. The only good thing to come out of this is that the studio is so big and initial sales so much that GS cant really hurt them with their lack of integrity.
Who did they fire and hire to make so many mistakes on Simcity and Sims 4.
I can almost look past the blatent money grabbing, but the loading screens and plot size restrictions on both games. Cant they just optimize performance for the low-end PC users by downgrading the aesthetics? Why do they have to GIMP 90% of the PC market with loading screens for the 10% of PC's that would have trouble with the game.
It seems like a bunch fresh college graduate would make better (re)design decisions than this team. Wow, just wow.
The thing I appreciate about the Gamespot's review over IGN's is they actually finished the game (and it takes like 50 hours or something). In the IGN interview it seemed clear from the video only showing the first area, and lack of comments on complexity and difficulty for newcomers that they didnt even get to the second area. In this video i see clips going right until the end of the game which is what you would expect from somebody reviewing the game.
@alexspencer9 You are letting your nut cupping of Yogscast get in the way of being a fair and reasonable business owner. As a fair and reasonable business owner you need to give people the product they paid for.
If you went into a walmart and paid for something, then they came out with something else saying "we tried to go into the backroom and get it, but it was too hard, have this instead"... no refunds, no returns, this will have to do. Its a vague comparison but the point stands.
What Yogscast did was wrong. However, in my opinion, the actual failure of the game development was only a small portion of being wrong. What was REALLY wrong was their original endorsement filled with lies for Yogscast's own financial gain. How were they endorsing these guys as expert game developers. Clearly that was not the case and they should be apologizing for THAT. (However, you wont ever see them publicly apologize for that because it would open them up to serious litigation).
In my opinion Danny hit the mark with the 'licensing' part. Because as a successful media production company, if they were more involved in the development process they wouldnt have waited until the 500k was gone to say anything.
Surely this amatuer game development studio just approached them and offered them like a 25% cut of kickstarter to license their title.
So the question for me, is because in 90% of companies caveat emptor is not a valid excuse, "Goods must be fit for their purpose", "Goods must be of merchantable quality"... and further, that they actually outright lied about the credibility of the developers "financial advantage by deception", "wrongful financial gain"... are they REALLY not liable?
The specific legal argument I would make is the lines Danny skillfully highlighted about being a "DREAM TEAM"... and "experience working on highest levels of production".
The project lead held another full time job while managing a 500k project, and poorly project managed this one. That doesnt speak to me of having any level of production management, let alone the 'highest level'. I hope somebody launches a class action against these dupers.
People should still support Kickstarters, but make sure they ascertain the credibility of the people doing them. If you get a lot of ex game developers that are able to actually name the titles they have worked on, and you know and have enjoyed them, (EG, Divinity : Original Sin), this is a lot different than a youtuber taking a 100,000 cut (speculation), for putting their name a potential new game.
Shh, dont say it too loudly. The game will be banned in Australia not because he bangs 300 women, but because he drinks magical potions before battle that are like drugs.
@LordCrash88 Who says people on a game website want in depth analysis of the characters when they appear in a trailer.
I wouldnt mind reading the book, but i certainly wouldnt want somebody spoiling or even explaining how the characters work before i read said book... thats just a spoiler.
In doing a 'breakdown' of a trailer you just want some light information on the characters. And especially, in the context of a game website, you want information that has appeared or is relevant to the game world.
If Kevin had given spoilers or more information about the characters I would have felt cheated from learning about them myself when i eventually play the game, (that is, anything not already mentioned in W1/W2).
You are coming off pretty pretentious and ridiculous IMO, nobody cares that you apparently understand the witcher books better than Kevin does. I'm sure the books are great but where do you get off telling Kevin to spoil a game for gamers.
jeremy-'s comments