Is it fair to slam a game like that mere hours after release?
Maybe gamedevs should stop thinking they have a free pass to release unfinished buggy garbage. I don't get my car half fixed, I don't get an uncooked steak, I don't get beer on a broken glass.
Comment has been collapsed.
That would require poeple to stop preordering shit.... and as we know by now there is always going to be that special kind of moron...
Comment has been collapsed.
So if I pre-order my pizza, when I go to pick it up I should expect raw dough? Pre-order doesn't mean that it's OK for a developer to release a broken or unfinished product and then charge full price. That's what Early Access is for. The quality of the game has nothing to do with those that choose to purchase it before release and doesn't make them a moron for doing so.
Comment has been collapsed.
To stick woth your analogy:
If you order a pizza you pay once it's done right. if its burnt or raw you dont pay for your pizza because its faulty.
But preorderding games the way it works now its like paying after making the call going to pick it up and seeing its faulty.
And yes preordering hasnt got to anything with the quality itself, but everytime a lot of people preorder games that end up being completely broken/unfinished it sends the mssg: yeah we pay for any crap you throw at us no matter how burnt or raw it is and publishers ander devs think it's OK to release that crap for full Price, of which one result will be that its going to be the same shit-show next time around.
Comment has been collapsed.
Steam reviews are about as reliable as our politicians (doesnt matter where youre from this is true) so you cant count on them worth shit.
Comment has been collapsed.
Honestly though I take steam reviews more seriously than the critics that get paid to brown nose the games.
Comment has been collapsed.
Not really, I value my fellow consumers opinion more any day than the likes of IGN and their ilk. Having said that I didnt say Steam reviews are great either. The guy below pretty much sums it up.
Comment has been collapsed.
Considering the steam community is a cesspool of cancer I dont think their thoughts should influence anyone. Watch gameplay before you buy.
Comment has been collapsed.
If you look at score - they yeah. Because it can be biased (for example people giving negative reviews because they don't like te dev because dev just said somethign stupid), but if you look at content of reviews, especially if same thing is being repeat over and over I call it pretty reliable. content of a sinlge review or of few reviews can be biased. Review score can be biased by non-game related things. But if thousands of people, unrelated to each other, all report performance issues or game not running at all, if tens of independent from each others streamers and reviewers all report performance issues. If you can see multiple perfonmance issues across multiple streams and videos - it means that the information about game issues is pretty reliable. If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck - it is a duck most probably.
Comment has been collapsed.
Is it just me or is the Discussions page for the game on Steam slightly devoid of posts?
Comment has been collapsed.
Not sure is anyone has already said it, but wasn't the game's release date pushed back a few months from the original release date? (not the more recent one of pushing it back from Aug 9th release in US to just a full Aug 12th world-wide) Gimme a sec to find that...
Yup, here:
info pulled from Wikipedia, the article they cited HERE
The game's scheduled release during the week of 21 June 2016 was announced in March 2016, along with the onset of pre-orders for both PlayStation 4 and Windows versions. Hello Games also announced that the PlayStation 4 version would also be available in both a standard and "Limited Edition" retail release, published by Sony, alongside the digital version. About a month before this planned release, Sony and Hello Games announced that the game would be delayed until August 2016, with Murray opting to use the few extra weeks as "some key moments needed extra polish to bring them up to our standards".
They delayed release to "polish" the game. So it should not be as buggy a mess it is, if they'd done their job. If you delay a game to "polish" it, that means you know there are issues. And if THAT many people are having performance issues and can't even get past the initial load screens (from what I saw glancing at some the comments here on the first page of this thread), then they definitely didn't do their job or made the game worse with their "polishing". The announcement of the release date, then the announcement of the release delay all came within a surprisingly short period (within a couple months of each other). That should like they had at least an inkling shit was not working as good as it could have and a delay of what... an extra 6 wks? Does not seem like enough to fix something as big as performance issues.
Fair is fair. Release a buggy game that your customers can't play, they're gonna complain because that's the fastest way to put pressure on so that the issues are fixed ASAP. Look at the little indie game Slain. It was released and I was going to get it for my fiance until I saw the reviews were saying it sucked and performance issues and buggy and stuff. So I didn't get it. Developer then went, overhauled it and re-released it four and half months later; now the reviews are reflecting this and how it plays so much better now. It went from mostly negative to overall mixed, but all the recent reviews are mostly positive. Which means I'll be more inclined to by it for my fiance now, when I can spare the cash.
Comment has been collapsed.
Aaaah..The oldtimy' back-lashing effect of premature over-hype ...It never changes.
Is it fair to give a review of a game having played it for one hour..YES . Is it moronic going full rampant fanboy, over those very same reviews...YES
Comment has been collapsed.
not the case of overhype per se. People are not dissapointed with game content (at least it's not their biggest issue) but with game performance or the game not launching at all for many of them. So even if game met all the hyped expectations it wouldn't change anything - because the main problem is that it doesn't work properly or work at all for many people. And no matter how good content inside is - you don't care because you cannot play this content.
Comment has been collapsed.
My eyes go instantly foggy whenever they try to read long rebuttals of stupid things i type online. I had no idea there were even a game called No mans sky until recently my youtube contentfeed practically force-fed me the name. Kind of like with Pokemon GO..Which is another ultra-hyped shitty game. But when i looked at it, all i see is a shittier minecraft, just with better graphics with elements from Spore.
The trick to not getting disappointed, is to not to expect too much
Comment has been collapsed.
It's a $60 game with about as much performance as a console game. They deserve the hate and more.
If they wanted to charge people for the full retail price of a standard Triple A game, they will receive the same reaction that a company like Ubisoft would. That's not unfair, that's perfectly justified.
That being said, I think the game itself is good. Not $60 good, but I will definitely buy it on sale (probably no more than $30, honestly) if they fix the issues and allow for more powerful computers to take advantage of their power for better FPS and graphics.
Comment has been collapsed.
Looks like I made the right decision not to play until week after the release. Hopefully it will be better by then lol.
Comment has been collapsed.
Almost the same happened to dark souls 3.... lots of people crashing and leaving negative reviews. Give it more time....
Comment has been collapsed.
TotalBiscuit released a video about the performance issue: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LRkHPsZak08
TL;DR:
- Frame drops, stuttering, and unusual GPU usage.
- People make up imaginary facts in their minds before release.
- The talk about just because the game works for one person, does not mean the game works for everyone.
- Calling the game totally broken is not correct either.
Comment has been collapsed.
To me it feels like a bunch of whiny crybabies overreacting over the fact that the game has issues on launch and will automatically go for the negative review instead of reporting problems so they can be fixed. People are expecting a small developer to have tested every thousand of combinations of hardware out there for compatibility and performance issues when large publishers like Ubisoft can't even do that properly.
It is a massive game developed by a small indie team, so of course there will be issues. What's important is how are these issues addressed. They've already released a patch with the missing VC++ Redist so it's not like they're not trying to figure out what's wrong and fixing things. I think those multiple negative reviews are premature and shows a lot of entitlement.
Does it suck that the game doesn't work or has serious performance issues on some hardware combinations? Of course it does. (Especially if you're the one being affected.) And if the developers don't do anything to fix them within a few days from release then I'd say that the negative reviews will be warranted. But how many people are going to post a negative review, ask for a refund and never come back to edit their review once the initial issues have been fixed?
If you can't deal with day-1 issues in a game, then don't pre-order or purchase on day one. Just wait a few weeks for the major bugs to be fixed.
Comment has been collapsed.
+1 for that.
Writing reviews when a game launches with problems is pure emotional outrage. I know the review section is just "do you recommend?" and not suppose to be professional reviews that try to dissect the game from different aspects - but I don't agree with this perception and think people should treat reviews seriously (they can be funny while still provide actual useful information). But Valve doesn't push in any way towards higher quality reviews so this is what you get: a steamy pile of emotional shit pretending to be reviews.
There might be a better system of reviews. If you get a refund after minuscule playing time - get your review removed for example. If there's a giant patch that fixes a lot of issues, maybe the next time you run it you get a small window reminding you of your review and ask if your views have changed. I'm just spitballing here. At least they've added "recent" reviews, that's a step in the right direction.
Comment has been collapsed.
There was a time when games didn't need day-1 patches...
How I long for those days gone by.
It's sad that issues and patches have become the norm nowadays. You could even say that they are expected.
Games are getting bigger and bigger and more complex each year. I'd love to see the gaming industry 20 years from now :)
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't understand the mentality of those who aren't bothered by this either. If I buy a car that was advertised as having certain features and those features were missing and things were broken to the point that it causes me to crash I would have one heck of a reason to complain about it. This very reason is why Tesla is under fire right now due to a couple of crashes when using the self-driving feature. Why is it different for games? Why is it OK for a developer to make a P.O.S. game and expect us to wait for patches before getting the game as advertised? This shouldn't be the standard expectation when we purchase a game.
Comment has been collapsed.
Release games in haste. Repent [and get relentlessly panned on Metacritic and Steam] at leisure.
At $89.95, I would have hoped for a more rigorous approach to quality control.
Comment has been collapsed.
Over hyped game being a Flop and not working on launch .... ofc its fair to slam it to the ground ...
Make sure you kick it couple times to , just to be sure its not moving ...
Comment has been collapsed.
Since when is it not fair to expect a fully working game on release?
Do you remember the days when a game broken on release was broken for life because patching was not the norm (and not possible on ...certain systems).
Now we are supposed to accept Beta quality as long as we can reasonably expect something as stable as a release build of yesteryear 3 months down the line?
Fudge that!
Small team? I couldn't care less because they're charging big team prices and have made promises even grander than truly huge teams. AND have delayed numerous times to presumably fix such nonsense.
Comment has been collapsed.
Lovely how the positive reviews appeared.
A lot of them goes like " It runs for me. Recommended"
So now if a game STARTS that is enough reason to recommend it. What a time to be alive.
Comment has been collapsed.
If people that won't get it to run or it runs badly for leave negative reviews, shouldent the people that it works for be able to leave positive reviews?
Comment has been collapsed.
Actually, no. The negative review is based on the fact that the game doesn't run. Which is a valid concern. Saying in your positive review that your game does run is like going to a restaurant and saying that at least you didn't die from food poisoning. I don't think it's something positive.
Comment has been collapsed.
I must have missed the last line in the post i replied too.
I dont mean that people that get it to run with bad fps and crashes should leave positive reviews just for being able to start it up, that is clearly not a positive scenario. But if the game works well and they enjoy the gameplay, then I would say it's totally fine to leave a positive review.
Comment has been collapsed.
It's not running badly for everyone, that's the thing. There's even more positive than negative reviews now that people had the time to log in 10-15 hours in game and come back to write about it. Remember, people having issues will always be more vocal than those who don't. And a lot of these bad reviews are knee-jerk reactions to early issues without even giving a bit of time to the devs to resolve them.
Comment has been collapsed.
60$ game + dunkey's review, seems like buying it would be a waste of money.
Comment has been collapsed.
Its fair.
Regardless of the price tag or the team size, if they release an unplayable product, they are at fault. Regardless of where the pressure came from.. Sony or someone else.. if they do it, they are responsible. They were aware of the perils of working with publishers, and accepted them when they went into partnership with them for the game.
Comment has been collapsed.
Should be fair for everyone dev hurry fixed to bring back faithfully gamer while gamer can revise review when probl is gone. But some user only review once for a game.
Comment has been collapsed.
I guess I wasn't really that hyped for this game and you could save 55 dollars and just buy the humble bundle for space engineers to get your space fix.
Comment has been collapsed.
Bashing a newly released, overhyped game, priced $60 like a AAA, that's still full of bugs, even after being delayed for half a year?
I don't see why we shouldn't. If else, the amount of negative reviews it got is quite tame, it's still 53% positive.
Game content doesn't matter, if the game runs like crap on even the most powerful machines.
I'd like to add to the hate, but to leave a review, I'd need to own the game... that's not gonna happen anytime soon.
Comment has been collapsed.
Fanboyism means complaining about people who complain they bought a product which doesn't work as intended
Comment has been collapsed.
This is what you get for not giving preview copies to reviewers.
Also world isn't fair, and we are on consumers side. And this is better for us mostly. This game truly doesn't have huge longevity. Only very niche group would be entertained by this for long. The port was pretty bad too. Should have fleshed things out better if they wanted better reviews.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah, mostly the review in Steam is basically has two spesific charateristic that will be get negative reviews. Performance and gameplay.
Except on Bad Rats.
But who still read reviews in Steam anyway?
Comment has been collapsed.
well i saw few people complaining that multiplayer wasnt implemented from the get go, they had said it was possible to meet up with friends (assuming the two freinds are close enough to do so) but wasnt/isnt, i saw a review on steam where someone said two streamers met up in the same spot but couldnt find eachother, and also said that for one it was night and other was day.
and another was annoyed/pissed that all the worlds where basically the same, that they were just recolored and what not, and that there are no gas planets and all that jaz (but they did say theres gunna be no gas planets in a interview....i think they said anyway lol )
but i know they did put alot of work into the game and went through alotta crap, but regardless who/what company makes a game, if they PROMISE something then they need to deliver on their promise. but when a company/group releases a game they are basically saying rate/review my game. so i think its fair, but some people are definitely over doing the rage there hahaha, friend told me that gta 5 didnt have multiplayer from the get go, and i also know took rockstar awhile to implement the bank heists
Comment has been collapsed.
Edit: Holy crap, over 16,000 negative reviews now.
store link
The game got 2,000+ negative reviews mostly dealing with crashes and performance problems.
I don't remember seeing so much hate since Batman and Just Cause 3.
But for some reason for no man's sky I feel bad because its a small team and seems like they've been through alot of legal hell and general other development roadbumps before release.
It makes me a little sad seeing so much hate for performance issues, those can (hopefully) be fixed rather quickly.
Like, come on angry mob, give the little space guy a chance D:
Do you think its fair slamming a game into the ground not even an hour after release for performance issues rather than game content?
Comment has been collapsed.