How many people who hate the game because of the terrible marketing and PR are going to comment acting like they've actually played it and don't like it for gameplay reasons? My guess is many.
This isn't a lot, considering there are probably 125 millionish combined PS4/Xones out there (not to mention PC, but no one buys pc games at retail, and these are retail numbers) and Battlefield 1 is considered one of the high points of the series commercially and critically.
You also have to factor in that some casual people never hear of the bad PR issues like "don't buy the game" that everyone here knows about. I had casual friends last year who didn...
Not sure which games you are specifically referring to on PC, but the problem with smaller games like that on steam is that they sound great in concept, but when you get on the server browser there are only a few populated servers, and those often have a ton of weird settings turned on which negate the experience you bought the game to have.
If you have examples where this isn't a problem, I'd genuinely love to hear them, especially ones without crazy system require...
There is a lot of unfair hate, but if you look through the comments on this thread, many people have acknowledged that the game itself is good, and that the PR is the problem.
Never hurts to have as many as possible.
Maybe you are referring to other issues, but this article is about DICE responding to player feedback and making changes. I know EA=bad, but other than that I'm lost as to how being responsive like this is bad.
What would have been awesome is if they'd had RDR 1 on switch come out about 6 months before RDR 2 released. RDR was popular, but a lot of people skipped it, and that would have given them a chance to play it.
So two games (BF1 and COD:WW2) did the World War theme (which is two different eras) "to death," but four Modern BF games-Bad Company, Bad Company 2, BF3, BF4-and countless modern cod games (I haven't bought a COD since four, but several more were modern combat after that one) didn't overdo the modern era? I'd agree that WW2 was overdone in the early 2000s, but recently we've had far more modern combat games.
Yeah it's funny how many people you still see complaining about the face painting, prosthetic arms, and generally terrible steampunk vibe of that first trailer, when none of that is actually in the game (or if it is, it's unnoticeable). The sad thing is that DICE seems to have listened to complaints and made changes, but instead of emphasizing that, they've just critcized their audience. It's one of the strangest cases of a great product being severely handicapped by it'...
Just wondering how one game can make you tired of two different eras 30ish years apart while 4 games set in a single era don't burn you out on that time period. Doesn't make much sense. Unless you are advocating for an alternating cycle between historical and modern, which in that case, fair enough.
Lol BF1 gave you your "fill" of WW battlefield games (two different eras) but BF:BC, BF:BC2, BF3, and BF4 didn't give you your "fill" of a modern setting?
Seriously? "Oh no, I paid $15 for this game 4 years ago, I can't believe it's free now."
I've wondered about this. Obviously in running 100m or throwing a baseball, males have a biological advantage, so sex-segregated sports are logical. In video games, that same rationale doesn't seem to apply. Possibly there is a difference in reaction time that has been shown to be sex-based, but I'm unaware of research on that. My guess is that the idea may be to encourage female engagement with esports, and that that is better done (at least at first) through all-female teams.
I love all the "it's too similar to the Wii U version" hate. Number 1, that doesn't appear to be true, and number 2, no one had a Wii U, so it doesn't matter.
This series has gone downhill since 2, particularly after 3.
Well you are sort of right. People made an illegimate criticism of the game (that there are women in it) and EA properly treated them with scorn. The problem is that, when other people made other, legitimate critcisms of the game, EA tried to paint them with the same brush and just said "no, you're really just sexist."
That said, I'm enjoying it as much as the best entries in the series (I've played each entry some other than 2142 and Hardline), and I...
Lol I love how the Eurogamer article feels the need to say "it's no Mario Kart." When people say things like that, I generally assume they've never owned a console that launched prior to 2005.
There's no world where this game is a 9+, just like it's ridiculous to say it's a 3. It's clearly a mediocre game. And I get that opinions are subjective, but there is a reasonable range in any given case.
The guy I play with pays no attention to games media, etc, and couldn't believe it when I commented that there was so much negative hype about the game.
There's a solid argument for switch, but these games wouldn't sell significantly on XONE. The install base is roughly half of PS4 and much less disposed to Japanese games (even when 360 and PS3 had virtually identical install bases Japanese games would sell a significant majority of their copies on PlayStation). KH3 was announced for both consoles before Square saw how lopsided this gen would be. Plus a true numbered sequel is always going to sell better than a spin-off with a crazy t...