In fairness, probably a number of people sent them something pretty similar to this (though my guess would be more people did the "a few dense planets instead of a ton of lifeless ones" idea).
The sad thing is this is going to be another "devs and publishers learn the wrong lesson" moment. What they should learn is that they should offer a physical version and release on Steam. What they probably will take away instead is that the interest for this type of game isn't really there and that they should focus more on multiplayer live service games.
And how much of that group would buy the PC version if it didn't require installing another launcher.
Yep there are plenty of games that succeed on Steam without ever getting a physical release. It's the fact that they didn't put out a physical version AND it isn't on steam. There's probably a not insignificant group of people who only/primarily buy physical games on console but also buy games on Steam.
It can be an unfortunate trend in our industry to lump games people were looking forward to that didn't end up meeting their expectations and were just okay (Forspoken) with games that are broken (Gollum) or little more than asset flips (The Day Before). If expectations (and price) had been set appropriately, Forspoken wouldn't even be that bad.
Whew this isn't good. I wonder how much of this stems from COD not being the console mover it usually is. Yes, of course it is still selling and charting well, but even the weaker COD games do that, so that alone doesn't mean it isn't having an off year. The sentiment about it is generally negative so it may not be pushing new console sales in the way it normally would.
PS5 as well is pretty surprising. This was supposed to be the year it jumped because everyone...
You are exactly right. Anytime a dev says something dumb, releases a broken game, or gets caught in a lie, at this point their PR people probably start scouring the Internet for something that can be characterized as a threat so that they change the narrative to be about the overreaction, rather than about whatever thing they did.
But of course you'll have no issue with downloading the essential patches so that your disc-based games actually run on your day 1 model.
Sorry Spiderman 2 is selling well. I know you had low hopes for it.
@shinoff2183
Agreed. And while I'll readily admit that I also played some bad games as a kid, it's easier to forget the bad and remember the good when you actually played a variety of games. If you just play one or two games during your entire formative years, I don't know if that's possible.
Then again, I have heard people a bit younger than me who play a variety of games now look back fondly to the time as kids where they really only pla...
Now I hear people I work with talking about buying Vbucks for their kids/grandkids for birthdays and Christmas. I know everyone always thinks that "kids these days" are stupid and have bad taste, but I can honestly look at the games I played when I was their age and many of them stand the test of time. Are the kids now who keep playing games as adults really going to look back fondly on their favorite Cardi B Fortnite skin from season 6 wave 3? I don't know.
I'll believe people hate COD's SBMM when they quit playing the game.
Yep. So many people were deluded by Xbox 360's admittedly excellent performance in the US into believing that Xbox was a strong brand worldwide. Even then PS3 routinely outsold 360 in Europe, but back then places like IGN only talked about NPD numbers and rarely mentioned that they didn't represent the entire world.
"there's no need to cite scientific studies.
People have gender identity. Most people identify as the gender that matches their biological sex. Some people don't."
I mean, when you are trying to disprove someone's position-and I might add, specifically criticizing the person you are arguing against for relying on "common sense" arguments-yes, there absolutely is a need to cite sources. You have done the same thing you accus...
@RaiderNation
Yeah it's a fair argument against that game too.
Yeah it's wild to see how all the people who "would have been fine with [insert name of remaster/remake] if there had been a reasonably priced upgrade" are still angry.
The "they should have made a new game instead" crowd is pretty silly too. Do people on here really think it takes that same resources to touch up a PS4 game for release on PS5 that it does to make a new game from scratch, and that a studio can only do one of these things at a time?
Why don't you explain the difference and give some citations to scientific studies establishing that difference so that this person doesn't make the same mistake again?
Yeah that's the thing that's suspect. I can get behind the argument that it is derivative in many respects and that it wouldn't have been so big if not for the IP. But those are great reasons it shouldn't WIN Game of the Year. The fact that it wasn't nominated for anything is what is questionable.
Seriously, now watch everyone who said they would have been fine with other remakes/remasters if there had been a reasonably priced upgrade path move the goalposts again just so they can complain.
Orchard?