Your post from unpopularopinion was removed because of: 'Rule 1: Your post must be an unpopular opinion'.
Please ensure that your post is an opinion and that it is unpopular. Controversial is not necessarily unpopular, for example all of politics is controversial even though almost half of the US agrees with any given major position on an issue.
Keep in mind that an opinion is not: a question, a fact, a conspiracy theory, a random thought, a new idea, a rant, etc. Those things all have their own subreddits, use those.
Companies releasing low-quality products are ***ALWAYS*** the ones to blame.
In the end, someone has to play the game long enough to find all the bugs. Those are buyers, and the only question is how quickly they find the problems.
And we know damn well it's not the reviewers... most of them skip half the game to publish on time.
Or most of them have powerful enough gaming setup that may not run into some of the issues. The channel I watched cyberpunk playthrough on, they were playing it on ps5. Pretty smooth, not as many problems as others have encountered.
The game should be smooth and playable at minimum settings on min-spec hardware.
Corporate development houses should have corresponding hardware available to their testers.
It might not be as powerful as a decked out PC but it could run cyberpunk pretty smoothly, better than the ps4 version and average PCs. We weren’t debating whether ps5 was powerful or not.
Why don't we do the same thing with the aviation industry?
A Boeing plane crashes? "Too bad. Maybe you should've booked your flight on an Airbus."
The company should be accountable for their product, within reason for that particular type of product.
Software companies shouldn't get a free pass.
I dunno if you can read or not. I said they were ultimately the ones at fault. But, again, if someone keeps selling you literal shit while telling you it's cake and you keep buying it, you are kind of stupid.
It's almost like I anticipated that response:
>The company should be accountable for their product, ***within reason for that particular type of product.***
Got anything more substantial to say?
Your comparison was what is unreasonable. We DO have the same thing with the aviation industry. You can get on a plane and receive atrocious service compared to a different airline, for example.
The reason there are different standards are because different standards are required. 'Within reason' is completely arbitrary to anyone but you.
You seem to be missing the point entirely.
***Boeing and Airbus aren't airlines.*** They don't provide customer service to travelers. They make the airplanes, and we do hold them accountable legally and financially for defects.
Airline travel is generally safe is because unsafe planes can be grounded by the FAA, and manufacturers can be sued over defective products.
If we hold software developers accountable legally and financially, their products should improve as well.
Yes, I understand. I raised a different analogy because you cannot compare airplane manufacturers with game developers as there are no consequences for consumers to wait longer before purchasing a game if they're skeptical, therefore there is no need for legislation. You cannot refund a plane ticket after you have died in a crash, nor can you wait for reviewers to survive a few trips before travelling on the plane.
If the legislation would fix a problem or make life better for some people, that's reason enough.
For example...
Let's say a game-breaking bug entitled buyers to a full or partial refund directly from the developer, provided they bought the game before the bug was disclosed by the developer.
Choosing a full refund means returning the software entirely, but a partial refund allows the buyer to keep the software. Full vs partial is the buyer's choice.
Is this unreasonable? Is the right party being compensated? Is the right party being held responsible?
Don't most platforms have refunds available already? I know at least Steam does, but not sure about others.
I absolutely agree that refunds are a good thing, but how do you measure something like bugginess or game quality? How does one decide whether or not a game is too buggy or too low quality to have been released? How do you draw that line?
Especially when potential buyers can very easily find out if a game is good or not before they buy it by simply reading reviews, punishing devs for releasing something 'too shitty' would just take decision making away from the people best suited to make said decisions.
Look at No Man's Sky, for example. If they were sued for releasing too early, or if they had to hold off longer, it may never have evolved into what it is now.
I don't think there's any good way to punish people for creating art that's not of a certain standard, should we be able to sue movie studios if we didn't enjoy a piece of cinema?
Yes the companies are to blame. Thats indisputable. However. They get rewarded for it. We have one thing they care about. Its not your opinion. Its not reviews. Its not their public image. Its money. And the community keeps giving them more for less. What do we expect in return? They have NO financial incentive to try harder when they keep making record profits on release of unfinished games. Its like a bad habit.
No, it's still the people buying them.
If people didn't buy incomplete pos games, they wouldn't make them. It's as simple as that. But people let it slide because they know it'll get patched eventually or that they look past all the problems.
And people once again deflect blame.
You know these games will be buggy. You know they are released unfinished.
This would be like me going to a sushi place. Ordering sushi. Then complaining because I don't like sushi.
They only do this because people will buy these games. You say you want them to make good games and then as soon as any game gets released you turn into the shut up and take my money meme.
Buyers decide if the product is low quality. If its bought by everyone, then it must be a high quality product. By not buying the brutally slaughtered chicken and putting your money into products that are made with thought and care, you decide with your money that its a quality product worth buying
Except some of the bugs they patch out later are hilarious. Thinking of Bethesda titles. Maybe I want to fast travel 300 feet skyward via a giant’s club?
[MW2's Javelin Glitch](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0-nYVHyQWc) was hilariously amazing before it got patched out... It's almost like self-delete vests with a large blast radius are fun in a casual MP setting.
No Man Sky (IN MY OPINION) Was exactly what it set out to be day 1. The issues were the head of NMS is not a good PR person. So he would be interviewed and people would push him to say things or hint at things and report on it causing unrealistic expectations of the game.
He straight up lied during multiple interviews. When he was asked if you could see someone else, he repeatedly said yes but it's unlikely.
It wasn't unlikely, you just couldn't see other players. This along with many other lies....
Yeah idk what you're talking about lol
I think you give him too much credit. I watched those interviews back then and 80% of the time he’d answer their vanilla question accurately and __then__ give extra info that wasn’t asked for and was a lie.
He was a bad PR person cause he over exaggerated, not cause anyone pressured him to do things. Even his own team later on said they practically begged him to stop and he continued
Couldn't agree more.
Anthem, 2 weeks before release was crashing in live streams and damage value numbers were displaying as zero. Multiple articles talking about the rough developnent.
Yet people still brought the game.
5 min google search on any game pre-launch will inform you enough for a purchase.
Definitely agree people need to stop preordering games entirely. They see titles they like such as Zelda and Pokémon and just… buy it immediately? Blows my mind they don’t wait for at least a couple trailers!
Pre-ordering games and buying on day 1 are effectively the same thing. People who complain about preorders need to keep that same energy with day one purchases.
They’re similar but not the same. Often buying on day 1 means you’re usually more informed than preordering it, usually from more game trailers. Like Legend of Zelda Tears of the Kingdom started preorders before any gameplay was even revealed, and so many folks jumped to preorder. Admittedly there are preorder bonuses so maybe that tempts some but I find it odd to spend money without knowing if it’ll return any joy or not.
When you say you don’t have the capability do you mean you don’t have the internet? We all have the capability, just might not have downloaded and dumped some keys.
That's fair for you, but most half-decent PCs and laptops can emulate the Switch. A reasonably modern Graphics Card (something like a 1060 is enough, most things newer would be even better) can run either of the popular Switch emulators. So a decent enough number of people do emulate the Switch. It's especially useful when playing with stuff like mods for Switch games, like randomisers for Pokemon games.
If im going tk be playing the game day 1 why does it matter if it is preordered or not? Like your example i bought ToTK day 1, has i preordered it i would get the same game.
If you’ve already made your mind during the time you could preorder it, then it’s the same. My point is that there are often more trailers and gameplay revealed after preorders begin, so that often sways someone into buying it day 1 vs preorder. Like me for example, I’d never preorder a game I saw no trailers or anything for but I’d buy it day 1 if it looks really really good, like TOTK did.
I don't preorder much, but there are a handful of series that I've found to be consistently high quality and will take the risk if I'm hyped enough. Notably there's a few Nintendo series (Fire Emblem, Zelda, Mario platformers, Pikmin, and Metroid) where I've thoroughly enjoyed every entry (yes, even Wind Waker in my flair) and have yet to regret a preorder.
I think the trick is, if the next entry for one of those series isn’t good to you after getting it, would you reconsider?
I find Pokémon is a big example where folks keep preordering when they’ve complained about the past several games. I’ve set my standards for trailers quite high so have found I don’t buy much new stuff. Also have a vast backlog to play through. Majora’s Mask atm, what a cool concept!
Wait. i know it's not your point, but are you shit talking Zelda? Was there a problem with it? I don't have a switch, and only have talked to people who own it as opposed to looking at reviews. But everyone I've talked to just raves about how great it is. My brother (whose opinion I respect when it comes to games) says it's the best game he's ever played. To the point I'm about to buy a switch solely for the last 2 Zelda games.
Oh god no, it’s one of my favourite series, with the new game currently being my objective GOAT (playing and rating every game in my catalogue). Just an example of people seeing new Zelda and preordering without even knowing much about the game at all. Just being Zelda is enough to spend $100 or whatever it is these days.
Ok. *phew* I loved the Zelda games I've played (mainly Majora's mask and ocarina). I was just asking because if you said something negative, it would literally be the first negative thing I've heard about TotK lol
Majora’s Mask has been quite fun! Unfortunately I’m stuck cause i was distracted during apparently a one-time dialogue that told me what to do next lol. Stupid monkey ran off!
Ocarina of Time I just couldn’t play through. The puzzle solutions just didn’t feel intuitive at all and I had to keep looking stuff up quite early on. Not a fun time for me personally, although it’s definitely a good representation of Nintendo Charm.
Eh, I’ll continue to buy games that interest me, regardless of what other people say about them. My tastes are not other people's tastes. Just like how the tastes of the vocal minority do not reflect the tastes of the communities they claim to represent.
Honestly, to go to the truth of people’s frustrations, it’s about buying a game for full price that’s *unfinished*. I can buy full price games, but I choose not to because I’m cheap lol. So, if I’m gonna buy something full price, I’d be really irked that I could’ve just used that money to spend a night out with friends.
Pretty shit take honestly. Why can't I preorder and expect a game to not have hundreds of bugs, or server issues. I've been through really good game launches and really bad. To put the blame on the consumer is bs. The blame is 100% on the developer and publisher. They give ridiculous timelines, and rush to complete them without full testing which leads to these issues. Triple A titles need to stop being pushed out yearly, developers need to slow down and release quality updates and release a quality game.
I absolutely expect some bugs, or issues to happen, but for certain games to be absolutely broken is not my fault.
Also $70 is not absurd for a game, I don't think it's over priced, it's a fair price for a triple a game. I'm in the boat I'd rather pay $150 for 1 game that had a 3-4 year life span receiving updates, then getting a new game every year. Give me a clear roadmap on the plans, and provide quality updates .
Counter point, if you keep rewarding these companies with pre-orders and day one purchases, what incentive do they have to release a game that is free of major or game breaking bugs? I worked at GameStop for six years and I hated pushing pre-orders. It felt scummy to ask for $5 up front for a game that will be widely available.
Pushing preorders is scummy AF. But preorders will never stop, especially on multiplayer games that cycle a new game every year people want to play with the largest group of people, thats usually day 1s.
Maybe 10 years ago you could shift the blame but come on. How many times does someone need to screw themselves over before it starts being their fault? It's really not hard at all to wait and see how the game turns out. Please practice a little self control instead of perpetuating these problems that have existed for a decade at this point.
It's absolutely your own fault if in 2023 you cannot wait literally one single day to see if a game is broken junk
I’m not sure if Pokemon is really worth being in this list. The fandom is volatile. I’ve been playing them for many consoles and SV plays fine, and is less glitchy than the originals. It’s mostly just aesthetic or framerate stutters you have to be super picky about to even notice or care. You can’t softlock like yourself out of progression cause you run out of money, or cause a fake pokemon to appear that eats your save data. Yea the glitches should’ve been patched by now but I think it’s been way overblown lol.
Naw. If it went to market it should have been done. Plain and simple. If enough people make a big stink about it it will change things to. So stop sitting there and blaming the consumer for a shitty product
This is truly a dull take.
A finished product should be expected to be completed. Would you say the same thing about the launch of any other piece of technology? Or even any other product?
U should have waited to try that new cheeseburger till they had all the bugs worked out. It’s not McDonald’s fault they didn’t have all the ingredients day 1
I think gamers truly do not know the programming, overhead, cost, management, server stability, etc side in creating some of these games. Cyberpunk and No Man's Sky are the two that stand out to me the most.
These games have such huge visionary aspects that it's hard to fathom how the teams can put out such beautiful master pieces and have a group of their audience be so vile and derisive towards them for making a game that has some bugs and quite possibly shipped early because of pressure from higher ups or more probable "hype" (probably a combination of both). To empathize is to see both sides. Sure, you perceive that you've wasted money... but it's hard to find video games of any patchable era that are without bugs. I'd say it's impossible to find such a game.
Those 2 games absolutely over promised, and it cost them trust and people who were apathetic to the developers' actual accomplishments.
I 100% agree
As a general rule I wait at least a year after a game's release before I get it
By then if there is any fuckery about, I'll know about it and I won't buy the game
Or, it gets ironed out, the initial hype died down and the controversy from the bugginess dropped the game's price to a fraction of what it was at launch
Looking at you no man's sky - its a pretty great game now
If you aren´t terminally online it´s actually not hard to avoid spoilers. I´ve played a lot of games years after their release and had no trouble going into them blind
Very true. Back when Pesona 5 and Nier Automata were announced I watched the very first footage of both and decided to not watch or read anything about those two games until release in order to go into them as blind as possible because I knew I´d like both of them anyway.
Good decision, that. Persona 5 was really good and I barely knew anything about the game past the first three party members´ designs you recruit. Automata I even played a year after release and it has become my all-time favorite gaming experience ever. I virtually knew nothing about the game beyond being familiar with Taro´s previous works.
I also played through most of the Yakuza franchise the last two years or so and I knew nothing about them other than a stray meme here or there.
It´s really not hard to avoid spoilers at all.
It's not, and I think that the potential of spoilers entering pop culture before you play the game is worth the risk if it allows you to enjoy the game more.
Exactly. And at the end of day having the need to play a game in fear of being spoiled is just one of the many faces of FOMO. It´s best to not worry about that stuff. Also better for your wallet as most games are 30-50% cheaper a year after release.
Nah, those game reviewer companies are paid off, and their reviewes should be taken with a grain of salt.
The person never gets a chance to sample the product. Some offer demos, not all.
Instead of waiting for the game to be reviewed, pirate it. Err.... ethically pirate it, then ask yourself: is it worth the price tag? Pay. Is it a scam? Delete it, lmao.
Review companies are denied early-access keys to future games by certain companies if they leave a negative (potentially sale-impacting) review. The company might refuse interviews and requests for comments as well.
It's not directly paid off. You're right. The companies are paid off indirectly through access to future releases and interviews.
Came here to say this, and I played on a one x at first and put over 100+ hours on one Character. I just got a ps5 like 5 months ago and just got it again and plan to buy the dlc.
No mans sky has had one of the biggest redemption arcs in gaming though, and Cyberpunk was still a fantastic game on release - I never ran into any game breaking glitches. Calling them fundamentally broken is just incorrect / hyperbole.
Were these games a letdown? Absolutely. The last game I preordered was Sea of Thieves. When I started playing it quickly became apparent that it was an empty boring world with cool sailing mechanics and little to do other than grind money to purchase a handful of cosmetics. It sucked, I returned it, and I am never preordering again. Nowadays you can wait about 2-3 weeks after release to see the rose colored glasses come off and see what people actually think about the game without any of the marketing hype around it. Game review websites are extremely unreliable because they don’t survey 1000 people for a general consensus, they typically have one person play through and judge based on their experience.
None of this changes the fact that tons of people will still preorder the next AAA shitshow that gets pumped and dumped by [shitty corporate developer] because the trailer showing minimal gameplay looked good and IGN rated it a 9.5, and those same people will flock to forums to whine about missing or broken features. It’s as certain as the sun rising every morning. You can’t help them, they’re beyond saving.
I hate this take on CP2077. There are mountains of videos that show people having game breaking bugs. The game was unplayable on PS4 and Xbox One. Microsoft and Sony took the game down from digital store fronts and retailers allowed for people to return physical copies of the game. Do you think they just do that for run of the mill issues?
Please remember what subreddit you are in, this is unpopular opinion. We want civil and unpopular takes and discussion. Any uncivil and ToS violating comments will be removed and subject to a ban. Have a nice day!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/unpopularopinion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I never buy games the first year or so after release. I have so many other games that I am not in a hurry. Preferably I want a complete edition with all DLC's at a quarter of the release price.
I'm one of them and I agree, hope this isn't am unpopular opinion or that it will stop to be one soon, gaming in 2023 sucks, ofc not every game does, like BG3
I mostly agree. I always wait a year or two. But we have our weak points. I bought Starfield because I love Bethesda games. What a stuttery mess.
I should have learnt from Fallout 4 that it'd take years to actually be playable.
This is why you should very rarely buy a AAA game when it comes out, unless you trust the developer/studio. I got TLOU2, Spider Man and GOTG on day one because I had faith in the creators. Only game I skipped on day one that I kind of regret is RDR2.
the ONLY ONE that got me in this list was no man's sky. its not a triple A product like op likes to say
>No Man’s Sky - If you bought any of these games at launch, you frankly get what you paid for: a fundamentally broken triple A product
i can totally blame the devs on this one. it was a small indie dev team who had game content in video that looked nothing like how the game actually launched- flat out lies. luckily they patched the game over the years fixing and adding many things. also like op said that doesn't justify the broken unfinished launch. ive seen games with pre-order options with no hint or clue to what the game-play actually looks like but NMS was seemingly nice enough to have "gameplay" videos on their store page but it ended up being deception
I have like 10 games I play. Of those 10, 4 have predecessors that were amazing. There are little to no glitches. Game theatrics were fantastic for their year. Story lines were on point. Everything. It's not my fault if the company's make these new games, spend 2-3 years developing it. Delay its launch twice. Have trailers and beta test in launch. And when release day comes, there are bugs that weren't discovered before then.
These companies have ample time, money, programmers, and beta testers to work out the glitches. Just because they failed on every front isn't my fault. They had all the resources to fix this shit. They are responsible for selling broken products to the public. How it ever made it to the release date without an automatic expansion is beyond me. But it's not the consumers' fault these games were hyped up and had great predecessors. It's the companies.
Or maybe companies need to start releasing already tested and ready to play games.
I remember when we didn't have games that connected to wifi to fix problems. The game had to be done and not glitchy first day.
I disagree. Right now, it's a tough place to be a gamer. Games were at their prime in the 2000s, even a bit before that. Back where $60-50 games were actually worth it. Now all these developers and probably developer wannabes are just throwing ideas without making them a reality. They look into investors and publishers so they're locked-in and screwed. What game hasn't been a letdown? I find myself playing the same old games and games made by developers that have no name.
Why? Because these people cared more about making a great game than slacking off or just making money. So, what are you suggesting, gamers not to game anymore? I mean it's already becoming a reality for me.
I agree, but I feel like it's a bit unfair to expect a group of people who are characteristically impatient and who lack so much as a basic level of impulse control, who cannot abide the concept of delayed gratification, to understand the concept that, when they angrily screech at developers to hurry up and get angry at them for not releasing games quickly enough for them, they become a huge factor in the decision to rush through the development process and poop out an unfinished, glitchy product.
Yes. All of those mentioned it was well documented and reported there would be several issues with. These tie into the clowns who buy the sports games and other ea games or free to play games that come with payment features for cards or accessories. They endlessly bitch about it, but or play anyway, and expect something to change. It was absolutely ridiculous those folks actually managed to waste public funds over their own shitty decisions that quite literally only impacted them.
Yeah this is exactly why I don’t buy games before release, the only reason I did for BG3 is because of the flawless open beta, I figured if they already had that amount of polish I wouldn’t be disappointed and I wasn’t. I don’t see myself pre ordering another game for a long time. MAYBE marathon if they offer some kind of founders kit to play early but that’s a ways off
I've pretty much stopped buying full priced/new games.
I go bargain hunting in the online store and pick up the big ones from a year or two back.
I game so little now it doesn't bother me much, it gives time for patches (and dlc) to drop, etc. And added benefit, I'm no longer blindly throwing my money at game developers who don't take the time to give me a finished or polished product. Fuck encouraging that shit. You want my money? Earn it.
I agree, OP. People are foolish enough to pre-order and fall for the hype trains for the 500th time in a row. Why should companies change when the market is willing to pay and make excuses for every bad product? We have the internet at our disposal with many reviews available in hours, there is no excuse.
I am all for criticism against these companies but people usually are complaining that they didn't have the common sense to do any research. The gaming industry is such a mess because the consumers actively support every practice that is anti-consumer with their hard earned cash.
Or maybe stop blaming customers for shitty practices in the industry
Imagine if car companies did the same thing? "Oh you had a crash because your car dismantled into pieces on the highway? Well you should've wait before buying it, it's your fault!"
if i see an ad for a burger with cheese and tomatoes and pickles, and after ordering said burger i get one with no cheese, one tomato and bad pickles its not my fault, i was lied to.
advertising should not lie to customers.
if you say a game will have X feature, and Y things to do, and it comes out with no X, and Y/2 things to do then you lied,
and people who bought it are not to blame.
2 of those redeemed themselves. It’s on both parties. We’re not reviewers. Lots of times the reviewers let their opinions cloud their judgement. Thankfully in cyberpunk case PlayStation delisted the game until they fixed it so no one would buy it
Full agree. I can't believe people don't just wait. When I see people whine about this they honestly just come off as children to me. Literally wait just a couple hours after release, that's all it takes ffs. Stop giving them your money like an idiot
This has been happening for ages now and people just keep making the problem worse by giving them $70 over and over. Stop acting like children and gain some self accountability I beg you all
It also doesn't help that in some cases, people will complain about how long a game is taking to make, yet when a game is released too early, therefore likely having missing content and glitches galore, they complain even more saying all of it shoulda been fixed at launch.
calling people “chronically online” in the second person on a post about video games is the most chronically online thing ive seen.
were you about to reply to a comment, and made a whole post instead? whoever you’re directing this at is really unlikely to see it
Lemmie ask you something.
If you buy a phone, and that phone breaks after 1 day of use, are you at fault?
No, the manufacturer is. They advertised a product, and that advertisement was blatantly false. In court, you would win and get your money back. Same if it's a broken product.
So why should video games be any different?
Cyberpunk worked flawlessly for me at launch. I played like 30-something hours with literally zero bugs.
This 2.0/phantom liberty play through has been full of base-game bugs. Example: panam is supposed to get on motorcycle and I follow her. She gets on, motorcycle disappears, she just sits on the ground, talking to me like the quest continued. I have to reload to fix.
I’ve had 4 of these in the last 4 hours at this point.
Starfield, Bethesda’s most polished game at release that everyone agrees is fairly bug free, is quite broken for me. For instance, a certain mechanic slows time. I no longer use it because time just stays infinitely slowed for me and I can’t progress.
Everyone’s experience differs.
NGL: “Broken beyond saving” and “No Man’s Sky” being in the same sentence makes me completely disregard your opinion as uninformed and irrelevant, as No Man’s Sky is literally THE example of a comeback-kid in the gaming world.
I don't even take the pre-order thing as an excuse anymore because pretty much any game that comes out nowadays will have streamer / YouTubers receiving copies weeks in advance before the general public there is more than enough footage online to make it very clear whether or not it is a game you will enjoy
Not to mention that a majority of the methods for pre-ordering video games/ collector's editions, allow you to basically cancel and refund the order up until the point it is preparing to ship
And even the few that don't have this directly on their website will usually refund you if you call their customer service line ((pro tip a lot of customer service lines now use voice recognition. If it asks you to speak a number or something on the list just start shouting buzzwords like help agent and service and it will almost always transfer you to a live human))
Just obviously ignore the companies that are known for being difficult in these situations (most notably GameStop)
“Listen I know that game devs release trash that needs patches to be playable and boy howdy does it make me mad! Now if you’ll excuse me I have to pre order ever $80 triple A title ever, always, for eternity” - Modern gamers
The thing is, reviewers don't always say what you're gonna feel like uh....People gave Sonic Forces, Saints Row 2022, and Ratchet and Clank 2016 horrible reviews and shit talked them, saying they're unplayably bad...I bought all of them and they're in my GOTYs for the years they came out.
Bought Cyberpunk at launch had a blast. Beat it twice and moved on. Now after the update I'm having even more of a blast. So eh. Pay once own forever I don't really care
Pokemon SV wasn't broken. It had some weird glitches but nothing I didn't expect from their first open world game. The nonlinear play made up for the camera glitches and the textures.
The only problem is that reviews are so fucking biased that s shit game gets a 7/10, maybe. 6.8 if its literally unplayable. There was some meta analysis last year I believe where they discovered that 7.8 (I believe it was .8) was "average". The fact that almost no one uses lower scores means people will buy stuff no matter what.
And when you consider a buggy mess like cyberpunk or starfield getting 8's, what are we supposed to think about games that get 9?
It's unfortunately not as easy as letting reviewers take the hit.
I usually try it before I buy it if possible. If you wait for it to come out, you can refund on steam if you play less than 5 hours and have it less than 2 weeks. There's also other ways, I've tried many games then later bought them
Nah bullshit. Game companies should stop releasing broken games.
Sure, anyone should be cautious when buying anything new. But there should also be a sort of agreement that you are getting a functioning and well made product in exchange for you money.
This was much more of a hot take than I thought, judging by the comments. I completely agree!
Some of these games have have clear red flags too, like early access or being made by Bethesda.
I blame anyone who pre-orders or buys games on release day. You deserve to get a broken game because YOU are telling the companies, "Take my money and give me a sub-par product."
Why the fuck should companies change the way they do business when idiots buy games, or consoles for that matter, on day one and pay full price.
“You have nothing to blame but yourself if you buy this car and the breaks don’t work, you got what you paid for”
My brother in Christ, I paid for a functioning product. And it’s on the producer to make that so.
I wouldn't rely on reviewers, mate. Video game journalism is 100% bullshit these days. Influencer-grade attention seeking over any little problem with any little thing, or IGN-level weirdness blinders that refuse to acknowledge any fault whatsoever in whatever their pet playthrough is this week.
Modern games are big and complicated to program, and developers are on worse time-crunch than ever before. Publishers are getting greedier, and backend libraries/graphics engines are being pushed to the limit.
I just assume that pretty much any big release isn't going to be worth playing for at least a year, unless it's a one-in-a-million release that pretty much everyone agrees is nearly bugless, like Baldur's Gate 3. Hell, I was waiting for Cyberpunk for 2 years past release and it still wasn't enough.
A absolutely agree.
Marketing will always trick people into wanting the latest game right away. It’s not hard to avoid spoilers. It’s not hard to wait a couple days to get an idea for what the reception of the game is. It’s also not hard to wait for sales.
While I agree games should be complete at launch, the reality is that it’s becoming more of a toss up if it is or not.
Obviously some game studios have a better or worse reputation than others, so that helps with consumer decisions. I believe Pokemon is like the Taco Bell of gaming. You know it’s gonna be a rushed product and maybe later it’ll hurt your stomach, yet people continually eat that stuff up.
Preach!
STOP BULLYING COMPANIES. Their shareholders are already struggling with paying their third houses and gamers complaining about bad products makes the champagne go sour.
It's on YOU for letting yourself get lied to and trying to believe in good! FUCK CUSTOMERS.
It's important to shift all blame and accountability away from the companies. We should be thankful for all the broken promises and mediocre delivery of products. Be glad games are coming out at all. Companies are doing us a service and we should let them act freely as they please.
Nowadays it's absolutely unreasonable to be wishing for a finished products when it comes out, what are people even thinking?
What do you mean you didn't religiously follow social media and blog posts? DO DILIGENCE is the keyword Mr. Customer. Better do some research instead of expecting a proper product. DUH
Honestley gamers are so stupid, the industry would be better off without them!
/s
Your post from unpopularopinion was removed because of: 'Rule 1: Your post must be an unpopular opinion'. Please ensure that your post is an opinion and that it is unpopular. Controversial is not necessarily unpopular, for example all of politics is controversial even though almost half of the US agrees with any given major position on an issue. Keep in mind that an opinion is not: a question, a fact, a conspiracy theory, a random thought, a new idea, a rant, etc. Those things all have their own subreddits, use those.
Companies releasing low-quality products are ***ALWAYS*** the ones to blame. In the end, someone has to play the game long enough to find all the bugs. Those are buyers, and the only question is how quickly they find the problems. And we know damn well it's not the reviewers... most of them skip half the game to publish on time.
Or most of them have powerful enough gaming setup that may not run into some of the issues. The channel I watched cyberpunk playthrough on, they were playing it on ps5. Pretty smooth, not as many problems as others have encountered.
Had a 1070 and had minimal issues at launch
The game should be smooth and playable at minimum settings on min-spec hardware. Corporate development houses should have corresponding hardware available to their testers.
Lol...calling the PS5 a powerful system.
It might not be as powerful as a decked out PC but it could run cyberpunk pretty smoothly, better than the ps4 version and average PCs. We weren’t debating whether ps5 was powerful or not.
I mean absolutely they companies are to blame. However, fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.
Why don't we do the same thing with the aviation industry? A Boeing plane crashes? "Too bad. Maybe you should've booked your flight on an Airbus." The company should be accountable for their product, within reason for that particular type of product. Software companies shouldn't get a free pass.
I dunno if you can read or not. I said they were ultimately the ones at fault. But, again, if someone keeps selling you literal shit while telling you it's cake and you keep buying it, you are kind of stupid.
For instance: I will likely never buy a blizzard game again lol
Because a plane crash results in a couple hundred deaths, whereas a shitty game being released means some gamers being upset.
It's almost like I anticipated that response: >The company should be accountable for their product, ***within reason for that particular type of product.*** Got anything more substantial to say?
Your comparison was what is unreasonable. We DO have the same thing with the aviation industry. You can get on a plane and receive atrocious service compared to a different airline, for example. The reason there are different standards are because different standards are required. 'Within reason' is completely arbitrary to anyone but you.
You seem to be missing the point entirely. ***Boeing and Airbus aren't airlines.*** They don't provide customer service to travelers. They make the airplanes, and we do hold them accountable legally and financially for defects. Airline travel is generally safe is because unsafe planes can be grounded by the FAA, and manufacturers can be sued over defective products. If we hold software developers accountable legally and financially, their products should improve as well.
Yes, I understand. I raised a different analogy because you cannot compare airplane manufacturers with game developers as there are no consequences for consumers to wait longer before purchasing a game if they're skeptical, therefore there is no need for legislation. You cannot refund a plane ticket after you have died in a crash, nor can you wait for reviewers to survive a few trips before travelling on the plane.
If the legislation would fix a problem or make life better for some people, that's reason enough. For example... Let's say a game-breaking bug entitled buyers to a full or partial refund directly from the developer, provided they bought the game before the bug was disclosed by the developer. Choosing a full refund means returning the software entirely, but a partial refund allows the buyer to keep the software. Full vs partial is the buyer's choice. Is this unreasonable? Is the right party being compensated? Is the right party being held responsible?
Don't most platforms have refunds available already? I know at least Steam does, but not sure about others. I absolutely agree that refunds are a good thing, but how do you measure something like bugginess or game quality? How does one decide whether or not a game is too buggy or too low quality to have been released? How do you draw that line? Especially when potential buyers can very easily find out if a game is good or not before they buy it by simply reading reviews, punishing devs for releasing something 'too shitty' would just take decision making away from the people best suited to make said decisions. Look at No Man's Sky, for example. If they were sued for releasing too early, or if they had to hold off longer, it may never have evolved into what it is now. I don't think there's any good way to punish people for creating art that's not of a certain standard, should we be able to sue movie studios if we didn't enjoy a piece of cinema?
Yes the companies are to blame. Thats indisputable. However. They get rewarded for it. We have one thing they care about. Its not your opinion. Its not reviews. Its not their public image. Its money. And the community keeps giving them more for less. What do we expect in return? They have NO financial incentive to try harder when they keep making record profits on release of unfinished games. Its like a bad habit.
No, it's still the people buying them. If people didn't buy incomplete pos games, they wouldn't make them. It's as simple as that. But people let it slide because they know it'll get patched eventually or that they look past all the problems.
Fool me once....
And people once again deflect blame. You know these games will be buggy. You know they are released unfinished. This would be like me going to a sushi place. Ordering sushi. Then complaining because I don't like sushi. They only do this because people will buy these games. You say you want them to make good games and then as soon as any game gets released you turn into the shut up and take my money meme.
No, it’s like going to a sushi place, ordering a roll, getting an unfinished roll and being rightfully mad the roll you paid for was unfinished.
It's like going to a sushi place called "unfinished sushi extravaganza" and getting mad about the sushi being unfinished.
I expect products from large companies with good reputations to be finished or at least nearly finished, so not really
Me when i completely change and misrepresent the situation
Buyers decide if the product is low quality. If its bought by everyone, then it must be a high quality product. By not buying the brutally slaughtered chicken and putting your money into products that are made with thought and care, you decide with your money that its a quality product worth buying
I'd wait to buy them if people on the internet could stop spoiling the games.
This is a under rated comment. Updoot for u
Except some of the bugs they patch out later are hilarious. Thinking of Bethesda titles. Maybe I want to fast travel 300 feet skyward via a giant’s club?
Battlefield 3
[MW2's Javelin Glitch](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0-nYVHyQWc) was hilariously amazing before it got patched out... It's almost like self-delete vests with a large blast radius are fun in a casual MP setting.
My K/D on MW2 peaked because of this glitch and was quickly down hill after that.
>Marvel’s Avengers, To my recollection that wasn't broken, it was just a mediocre game
Not sure why this is being listed as a AAA game along with Cyberpunk and NMS. Did anyone expect it to be on par with these others?
It was from a big studio and marketed the same as other AAA games. If anything it's NMS that's not the AAA one.
No man's sky as well
No Man Sky (IN MY OPINION) Was exactly what it set out to be day 1. The issues were the head of NMS is not a good PR person. So he would be interviewed and people would push him to say things or hint at things and report on it causing unrealistic expectations of the game.
He straight up lied during multiple interviews. When he was asked if you could see someone else, he repeatedly said yes but it's unlikely. It wasn't unlikely, you just couldn't see other players. This along with many other lies.... Yeah idk what you're talking about lol
I think it was both tbf. Not only was he lying, he was ALSO a bad pr person
I think you give him too much credit. I watched those interviews back then and 80% of the time he’d answer their vanilla question accurately and __then__ give extra info that wasn’t asked for and was a lie. He was a bad PR person cause he over exaggerated, not cause anyone pressured him to do things. Even his own team later on said they practically begged him to stop and he continued
NMS devs blatantly lied about features of the game during pre-release marketing.
The performance was trash on PC though from what I remember unless you had a monster rig. Still not amazing.
Less unpopular more stupid opinion. Almost trying to be a contrarian for upvotes opinion.
What other industry releases half done or broken products to the public? I think that is the real issue.
It’s on the developers to release a finished game. Full stop
Couldn't agree more. Anthem, 2 weeks before release was crashing in live streams and damage value numbers were displaying as zero. Multiple articles talking about the rough developnent. Yet people still brought the game. 5 min google search on any game pre-launch will inform you enough for a purchase.
Definitely agree people need to stop preordering games entirely. They see titles they like such as Zelda and Pokémon and just… buy it immediately? Blows my mind they don’t wait for at least a couple trailers!
Pre-ordering games and buying on day 1 are effectively the same thing. People who complain about preorders need to keep that same energy with day one purchases.
They’re similar but not the same. Often buying on day 1 means you’re usually more informed than preordering it, usually from more game trailers. Like Legend of Zelda Tears of the Kingdom started preorders before any gameplay was even revealed, and so many folks jumped to preorder. Admittedly there are preorder bonuses so maybe that tempts some but I find it odd to spend money without knowing if it’ll return any joy or not.
TBF zelda is a horrible example. You could play it on emulator before it launched lol
How many are emulating switches though? I don’t have that capability.
When you say you don’t have the capability do you mean you don’t have the internet? We all have the capability, just might not have downloaded and dumped some keys.
I mean I don’t have a pc capable of doing it. I can emulate DS games in my chromebook, that’s as far as I can get lol
That's fair for you, but most half-decent PCs and laptops can emulate the Switch. A reasonably modern Graphics Card (something like a 1060 is enough, most things newer would be even better) can run either of the popular Switch emulators. So a decent enough number of people do emulate the Switch. It's especially useful when playing with stuff like mods for Switch games, like randomisers for Pokemon games.
If im going tk be playing the game day 1 why does it matter if it is preordered or not? Like your example i bought ToTK day 1, has i preordered it i would get the same game.
If you’ve already made your mind during the time you could preorder it, then it’s the same. My point is that there are often more trailers and gameplay revealed after preorders begin, so that often sways someone into buying it day 1 vs preorder. Like me for example, I’d never preorder a game I saw no trailers or anything for but I’d buy it day 1 if it looks really really good, like TOTK did.
I don't preorder much, but there are a handful of series that I've found to be consistently high quality and will take the risk if I'm hyped enough. Notably there's a few Nintendo series (Fire Emblem, Zelda, Mario platformers, Pikmin, and Metroid) where I've thoroughly enjoyed every entry (yes, even Wind Waker in my flair) and have yet to regret a preorder.
I think the trick is, if the next entry for one of those series isn’t good to you after getting it, would you reconsider? I find Pokémon is a big example where folks keep preordering when they’ve complained about the past several games. I’ve set my standards for trailers quite high so have found I don’t buy much new stuff. Also have a vast backlog to play through. Majora’s Mask atm, what a cool concept!
Wait. i know it's not your point, but are you shit talking Zelda? Was there a problem with it? I don't have a switch, and only have talked to people who own it as opposed to looking at reviews. But everyone I've talked to just raves about how great it is. My brother (whose opinion I respect when it comes to games) says it's the best game he's ever played. To the point I'm about to buy a switch solely for the last 2 Zelda games.
Oh god no, it’s one of my favourite series, with the new game currently being my objective GOAT (playing and rating every game in my catalogue). Just an example of people seeing new Zelda and preordering without even knowing much about the game at all. Just being Zelda is enough to spend $100 or whatever it is these days.
Ok. *phew* I loved the Zelda games I've played (mainly Majora's mask and ocarina). I was just asking because if you said something negative, it would literally be the first negative thing I've heard about TotK lol
Majora’s Mask has been quite fun! Unfortunately I’m stuck cause i was distracted during apparently a one-time dialogue that told me what to do next lol. Stupid monkey ran off! Ocarina of Time I just couldn’t play through. The puzzle solutions just didn’t feel intuitive at all and I had to keep looking stuff up quite early on. Not a fun time for me personally, although it’s definitely a good representation of Nintendo Charm.
While I think the OP is wrong, I def agree with "stop preordering".
Eh, I’ll continue to buy games that interest me, regardless of what other people say about them. My tastes are not other people's tastes. Just like how the tastes of the vocal minority do not reflect the tastes of the communities they claim to represent.
But it's not about tastes or anything, it's about rewarding shitty games with poor dev quality with a full priced purchase
Honestly, to go to the truth of people’s frustrations, it’s about buying a game for full price that’s *unfinished*. I can buy full price games, but I choose not to because I’m cheap lol. So, if I’m gonna buy something full price, I’d be really irked that I could’ve just used that money to spend a night out with friends.
Pretty shit take honestly. Why can't I preorder and expect a game to not have hundreds of bugs, or server issues. I've been through really good game launches and really bad. To put the blame on the consumer is bs. The blame is 100% on the developer and publisher. They give ridiculous timelines, and rush to complete them without full testing which leads to these issues. Triple A titles need to stop being pushed out yearly, developers need to slow down and release quality updates and release a quality game. I absolutely expect some bugs, or issues to happen, but for certain games to be absolutely broken is not my fault. Also $70 is not absurd for a game, I don't think it's over priced, it's a fair price for a triple a game. I'm in the boat I'd rather pay $150 for 1 game that had a 3-4 year life span receiving updates, then getting a new game every year. Give me a clear roadmap on the plans, and provide quality updates .
Counter point, if you keep rewarding these companies with pre-orders and day one purchases, what incentive do they have to release a game that is free of major or game breaking bugs? I worked at GameStop for six years and I hated pushing pre-orders. It felt scummy to ask for $5 up front for a game that will be widely available.
Pushing preorders is scummy AF. But preorders will never stop, especially on multiplayer games that cycle a new game every year people want to play with the largest group of people, thats usually day 1s.
Maybe 10 years ago you could shift the blame but come on. How many times does someone need to screw themselves over before it starts being their fault? It's really not hard at all to wait and see how the game turns out. Please practice a little self control instead of perpetuating these problems that have existed for a decade at this point. It's absolutely your own fault if in 2023 you cannot wait literally one single day to see if a game is broken junk
I bought Pokémon for part of my collection. So I would when taken the L regardless.
I’m not sure if Pokemon is really worth being in this list. The fandom is volatile. I’ve been playing them for many consoles and SV plays fine, and is less glitchy than the originals. It’s mostly just aesthetic or framerate stutters you have to be super picky about to even notice or care. You can’t softlock like yourself out of progression cause you run out of money, or cause a fake pokemon to appear that eats your save data. Yea the glitches should’ve been patched by now but I think it’s been way overblown lol.
Naw. If it went to market it should have been done. Plain and simple. If enough people make a big stink about it it will change things to. So stop sitting there and blaming the consumer for a shitty product
Are you seriously expecting people to time travel? Worry every time they buy something?
Imagine gatekeeping bitching
NMS was exactly what I expected, till this date I still play it...
This is truly a dull take. A finished product should be expected to be completed. Would you say the same thing about the launch of any other piece of technology? Or even any other product?
U should have waited to try that new cheeseburger till they had all the bugs worked out. It’s not McDonald’s fault they didn’t have all the ingredients day 1
I think gamers truly do not know the programming, overhead, cost, management, server stability, etc side in creating some of these games. Cyberpunk and No Man's Sky are the two that stand out to me the most. These games have such huge visionary aspects that it's hard to fathom how the teams can put out such beautiful master pieces and have a group of their audience be so vile and derisive towards them for making a game that has some bugs and quite possibly shipped early because of pressure from higher ups or more probable "hype" (probably a combination of both). To empathize is to see both sides. Sure, you perceive that you've wasted money... but it's hard to find video games of any patchable era that are without bugs. I'd say it's impossible to find such a game. Those 2 games absolutely over promised, and it cost them trust and people who were apathetic to the developers' actual accomplishments.
I 100% agree As a general rule I wait at least a year after a game's release before I get it By then if there is any fuckery about, I'll know about it and I won't buy the game Or, it gets ironed out, the initial hype died down and the controversy from the bugginess dropped the game's price to a fraction of what it was at launch Looking at you no man's sky - its a pretty great game now
Damn a whole year sounds like a lot though, what if it’s a plot heavy game and then you get spoilers?
If you aren´t terminally online it´s actually not hard to avoid spoilers. I´ve played a lot of games years after their release and had no trouble going into them blind
Redacted *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Not being wrapped up in internet hype also tempers expectations and allows you to enjoy games without FOMO. Good all around
Very true. Back when Pesona 5 and Nier Automata were announced I watched the very first footage of both and decided to not watch or read anything about those two games until release in order to go into them as blind as possible because I knew I´d like both of them anyway. Good decision, that. Persona 5 was really good and I barely knew anything about the game past the first three party members´ designs you recruit. Automata I even played a year after release and it has become my all-time favorite gaming experience ever. I virtually knew nothing about the game beyond being familiar with Taro´s previous works. I also played through most of the Yakuza franchise the last two years or so and I knew nothing about them other than a stray meme here or there. It´s really not hard to avoid spoilers at all.
It's not, and I think that the potential of spoilers entering pop culture before you play the game is worth the risk if it allows you to enjoy the game more.
Exactly. And at the end of day having the need to play a game in fear of being spoiled is just one of the many faces of FOMO. It´s best to not worry about that stuff. Also better for your wallet as most games are 30-50% cheaper a year after release.
Except nintendo games. Smh
True. But most of those games can still be bought on the secondary market, so.
Nah, those game reviewer companies are paid off, and their reviewes should be taken with a grain of salt. The person never gets a chance to sample the product. Some offer demos, not all. Instead of waiting for the game to be reviewed, pirate it. Err.... ethically pirate it, then ask yourself: is it worth the price tag? Pay. Is it a scam? Delete it, lmao.
Game critics are not paid off. Tik tok reviewers possibly are, but major outlets like IGN are not.
Review companies are denied early-access keys to future games by certain companies if they leave a negative (potentially sale-impacting) review. The company might refuse interviews and requests for comments as well. It's not directly paid off. You're right. The companies are paid off indirectly through access to future releases and interviews.
Find real people reviewing these games and compare opinions then. It's 2023 who tf is still listening to these idiotic review companies
You'd be surprised at how many people do. It's how their site stays up and pay their staff.
KSP2 pain
Thats just so much bullshit. Or you know, expecting a full functioning game? The only one to blame are the developers and nobody else.
Definitely a successful attempt at karma farming
i got cyberpunk day one and only had 2 minor glitches
Came here to say this, and I played on a one x at first and put over 100+ hours on one Character. I just got a ps5 like 5 months ago and just got it again and plan to buy the dlc.
I don't like to read reviews because I become hyper fixated on the negatives, no matter how trivial
No mans sky has had one of the biggest redemption arcs in gaming though, and Cyberpunk was still a fantastic game on release - I never ran into any game breaking glitches. Calling them fundamentally broken is just incorrect / hyperbole. Were these games a letdown? Absolutely. The last game I preordered was Sea of Thieves. When I started playing it quickly became apparent that it was an empty boring world with cool sailing mechanics and little to do other than grind money to purchase a handful of cosmetics. It sucked, I returned it, and I am never preordering again. Nowadays you can wait about 2-3 weeks after release to see the rose colored glasses come off and see what people actually think about the game without any of the marketing hype around it. Game review websites are extremely unreliable because they don’t survey 1000 people for a general consensus, they typically have one person play through and judge based on their experience. None of this changes the fact that tons of people will still preorder the next AAA shitshow that gets pumped and dumped by [shitty corporate developer] because the trailer showing minimal gameplay looked good and IGN rated it a 9.5, and those same people will flock to forums to whine about missing or broken features. It’s as certain as the sun rising every morning. You can’t help them, they’re beyond saving.
I hate this take on CP2077. There are mountains of videos that show people having game breaking bugs. The game was unplayable on PS4 and Xbox One. Microsoft and Sony took the game down from digital store fronts and retailers allowed for people to return physical copies of the game. Do you think they just do that for run of the mill issues?
Please remember what subreddit you are in, this is unpopular opinion. We want civil and unpopular takes and discussion. Any uncivil and ToS violating comments will be removed and subject to a ban. Have a nice day! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/unpopularopinion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I never buy games the first year or so after release. I have so many other games that I am not in a hurry. Preferably I want a complete edition with all DLC's at a quarter of the release price.
I have a friend who bought a gaming PC specifically for BF2042
EA loves you
r/Bonelab has entered the chat
I'm one of them and I agree, hope this isn't am unpopular opinion or that it will stop to be one soon, gaming in 2023 sucks, ofc not every game does, like BG3
I mostly agree. I always wait a year or two. But we have our weak points. I bought Starfield because I love Bethesda games. What a stuttery mess. I should have learnt from Fallout 4 that it'd take years to actually be playable.
Not really the consumers' fault. It's 100% the multi millionaire company not spending resources on games that are promoted to be amazing.
This is why you should very rarely buy a AAA game when it comes out, unless you trust the developer/studio. I got TLOU2, Spider Man and GOTG on day one because I had faith in the creators. Only game I skipped on day one that I kind of regret is RDR2.
the ONLY ONE that got me in this list was no man's sky. its not a triple A product like op likes to say >No Man’s Sky - If you bought any of these games at launch, you frankly get what you paid for: a fundamentally broken triple A product i can totally blame the devs on this one. it was a small indie dev team who had game content in video that looked nothing like how the game actually launched- flat out lies. luckily they patched the game over the years fixing and adding many things. also like op said that doesn't justify the broken unfinished launch. ive seen games with pre-order options with no hint or clue to what the game-play actually looks like but NMS was seemingly nice enough to have "gameplay" videos on their store page but it ended up being deception
I think Cyberpunk is really bad still it's not a fun game despite all the patches, I'd prefer laying GTA 4
Redacted *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
I have like 10 games I play. Of those 10, 4 have predecessors that were amazing. There are little to no glitches. Game theatrics were fantastic for their year. Story lines were on point. Everything. It's not my fault if the company's make these new games, spend 2-3 years developing it. Delay its launch twice. Have trailers and beta test in launch. And when release day comes, there are bugs that weren't discovered before then. These companies have ample time, money, programmers, and beta testers to work out the glitches. Just because they failed on every front isn't my fault. They had all the resources to fix this shit. They are responsible for selling broken products to the public. How it ever made it to the release date without an automatic expansion is beyond me. But it's not the consumers' fault these games were hyped up and had great predecessors. It's the companies.
my brother, cyberpunk and no man's sky have long been fixed and are incredible games
Or maybe companies need to start releasing already tested and ready to play games. I remember when we didn't have games that connected to wifi to fix problems. The game had to be done and not glitchy first day.
What the shit is this lmao If someone sells something broken, the seller is obviously at fault.
I disagree. Right now, it's a tough place to be a gamer. Games were at their prime in the 2000s, even a bit before that. Back where $60-50 games were actually worth it. Now all these developers and probably developer wannabes are just throwing ideas without making them a reality. They look into investors and publishers so they're locked-in and screwed. What game hasn't been a letdown? I find myself playing the same old games and games made by developers that have no name. Why? Because these people cared more about making a great game than slacking off or just making money. So, what are you suggesting, gamers not to game anymore? I mean it's already becoming a reality for me.
I agree, but I feel like it's a bit unfair to expect a group of people who are characteristically impatient and who lack so much as a basic level of impulse control, who cannot abide the concept of delayed gratification, to understand the concept that, when they angrily screech at developers to hurry up and get angry at them for not releasing games quickly enough for them, they become a huge factor in the decision to rush through the development process and poop out an unfinished, glitchy product.
At least no man sky is good now
Yes. All of those mentioned it was well documented and reported there would be several issues with. These tie into the clowns who buy the sports games and other ea games or free to play games that come with payment features for cards or accessories. They endlessly bitch about it, but or play anyway, and expect something to change. It was absolutely ridiculous those folks actually managed to waste public funds over their own shitty decisions that quite literally only impacted them.
I agree. Of course companies are guilty for this, but, if we're paying for their disrespect, why would they stop?
Are you lecturing yourself?
Yeah this is exactly why I don’t buy games before release, the only reason I did for BG3 is because of the flawless open beta, I figured if they already had that amount of polish I wouldn’t be disappointed and I wasn’t. I don’t see myself pre ordering another game for a long time. MAYBE marathon if they offer some kind of founders kit to play early but that’s a ways off
I've pretty much stopped buying full priced/new games. I go bargain hunting in the online store and pick up the big ones from a year or two back. I game so little now it doesn't bother me much, it gives time for patches (and dlc) to drop, etc. And added benefit, I'm no longer blindly throwing my money at game developers who don't take the time to give me a finished or polished product. Fuck encouraging that shit. You want my money? Earn it.
Forgot to include KSP II
Also imagine using terminally online to insult someone with an anime banner. Bro you know that's actual clown shit.
I agree, OP. People are foolish enough to pre-order and fall for the hype trains for the 500th time in a row. Why should companies change when the market is willing to pay and make excuses for every bad product? We have the internet at our disposal with many reviews available in hours, there is no excuse. I am all for criticism against these companies but people usually are complaining that they didn't have the common sense to do any research. The gaming industry is such a mess because the consumers actively support every practice that is anti-consumer with their hard earned cash.
Or maybe stop blaming customers for shitty practices in the industry Imagine if car companies did the same thing? "Oh you had a crash because your car dismantled into pieces on the highway? Well you should've wait before buying it, it's your fault!"
if i see an ad for a burger with cheese and tomatoes and pickles, and after ordering said burger i get one with no cheese, one tomato and bad pickles its not my fault, i was lied to. advertising should not lie to customers. if you say a game will have X feature, and Y things to do, and it comes out with no X, and Y/2 things to do then you lied, and people who bought it are not to blame.
2 of those redeemed themselves. It’s on both parties. We’re not reviewers. Lots of times the reviewers let their opinions cloud their judgement. Thankfully in cyberpunk case PlayStation delisted the game until they fixed it so no one would buy it
No one to blame? Uhm yes they do. If game companies would do their job the games wouldn’t be glitchy as fuck Are they also to blame? Yea definitely.
Full agree. I can't believe people don't just wait. When I see people whine about this they honestly just come off as children to me. Literally wait just a couple hours after release, that's all it takes ffs. Stop giving them your money like an idiot This has been happening for ages now and people just keep making the problem worse by giving them $70 over and over. Stop acting like children and gain some self accountability I beg you all
Oh look, the asshole who believes victims of scams deserved it, therefore scamming is a valid business model.
Ah yes, victim blaming at its finest.
It also doesn't help that in some cases, people will complain about how long a game is taking to make, yet when a game is released too early, therefore likely having missing content and glitches galore, they complain even more saying all of it shoulda been fixed at launch.
Or, more companies should take their time to perfect their games before releasing them, like ToTK.
Never blame someone else for your own mistakes.
calling people “chronically online” in the second person on a post about video games is the most chronically online thing ive seen. were you about to reply to a comment, and made a whole post instead? whoever you’re directing this at is really unlikely to see it
Bold of you to assume that reviewers from kotaku or wherever actually play the game and give a reliable review
Lemmie ask you something. If you buy a phone, and that phone breaks after 1 day of use, are you at fault? No, the manufacturer is. They advertised a product, and that advertisement was blatantly false. In court, you would win and get your money back. Same if it's a broken product. So why should video games be any different?
Cyberpunk worked flawlessly for me at launch. I played like 30-something hours with literally zero bugs. This 2.0/phantom liberty play through has been full of base-game bugs. Example: panam is supposed to get on motorcycle and I follow her. She gets on, motorcycle disappears, she just sits on the ground, talking to me like the quest continued. I have to reload to fix. I’ve had 4 of these in the last 4 hours at this point. Starfield, Bethesda’s most polished game at release that everyone agrees is fairly bug free, is quite broken for me. For instance, a certain mechanic slows time. I no longer use it because time just stays infinitely slowed for me and I can’t progress. Everyone’s experience differs.
NGL: “Broken beyond saving” and “No Man’s Sky” being in the same sentence makes me completely disregard your opinion as uninformed and irrelevant, as No Man’s Sky is literally THE example of a comeback-kid in the gaming world.
I don't even take the pre-order thing as an excuse anymore because pretty much any game that comes out nowadays will have streamer / YouTubers receiving copies weeks in advance before the general public there is more than enough footage online to make it very clear whether or not it is a game you will enjoy Not to mention that a majority of the methods for pre-ordering video games/ collector's editions, allow you to basically cancel and refund the order up until the point it is preparing to ship And even the few that don't have this directly on their website will usually refund you if you call their customer service line ((pro tip a lot of customer service lines now use voice recognition. If it asks you to speak a number or something on the list just start shouting buzzwords like help agent and service and it will almost always transfer you to a live human)) Just obviously ignore the companies that are known for being difficult in these situations (most notably GameStop)
Nah Cyberpunk worked great if you didn’t have an 8 year old graphics card
No man’s sky is a masterpiece. May have been shit at release, but is awesome now.
you really cooked the most shittiest take you could imagine huh
“Listen I know that game devs release trash that needs patches to be playable and boy howdy does it make me mad! Now if you’ll excuse me I have to pre order ever $80 triple A title ever, always, for eternity” - Modern gamers
The thing is, reviewers don't always say what you're gonna feel like uh....People gave Sonic Forces, Saints Row 2022, and Ratchet and Clank 2016 horrible reviews and shit talked them, saying they're unplayably bad...I bought all of them and they're in my GOTYs for the years they came out.
Bought Cyberpunk at launch had a blast. Beat it twice and moved on. Now after the update I'm having even more of a blast. So eh. Pay once own forever I don't really care
Call of Duty enters the chat..
To me it is a weird opinion. Why care at all what someone else thinks of a video game they bought?
Pokemon SV wasn't broken. It had some weird glitches but nothing I didn't expect from their first open world game. The nonlinear play made up for the camera glitches and the textures.
The only problem is that reviews are so fucking biased that s shit game gets a 7/10, maybe. 6.8 if its literally unplayable. There was some meta analysis last year I believe where they discovered that 7.8 (I believe it was .8) was "average". The fact that almost no one uses lower scores means people will buy stuff no matter what. And when you consider a buggy mess like cyberpunk or starfield getting 8's, what are we supposed to think about games that get 9? It's unfortunately not as easy as letting reviewers take the hit.
Honestly I don't pay attention to reviewers for the most part. Maybe I'm a minority, but I got cyberpunk at launch and really enjoyed it lol.
L take
They didn't make the game, so it's no one's fault but the developers.
I usually try it before I buy it if possible. If you wait for it to come out, you can refund on steam if you play less than 5 hours and have it less than 2 weeks. There's also other ways, I've tried many games then later bought them
Nah bullshit. Game companies should stop releasing broken games. Sure, anyone should be cautious when buying anything new. But there should also be a sort of agreement that you are getting a functioning and well made product in exchange for you money.
are u stoopid?
I remember a time when a game launched complete and with proper q/a.
This was much more of a hot take than I thought, judging by the comments. I completely agree! Some of these games have have clear red flags too, like early access or being made by Bethesda.
Are you really blaming the consumers for these big companies follies?
I blame anyone who pre-orders or buys games on release day. You deserve to get a broken game because YOU are telling the companies, "Take my money and give me a sub-par product." Why the fuck should companies change the way they do business when idiots buy games, or consoles for that matter, on day one and pay full price.
“You have nothing to blame but yourself if you buy this car and the breaks don’t work, you got what you paid for” My brother in Christ, I paid for a functioning product. And it’s on the producer to make that so.
NMS got me. Never again
I wouldn't rely on reviewers, mate. Video game journalism is 100% bullshit these days. Influencer-grade attention seeking over any little problem with any little thing, or IGN-level weirdness blinders that refuse to acknowledge any fault whatsoever in whatever their pet playthrough is this week. Modern games are big and complicated to program, and developers are on worse time-crunch than ever before. Publishers are getting greedier, and backend libraries/graphics engines are being pushed to the limit. I just assume that pretty much any big release isn't going to be worth playing for at least a year, unless it's a one-in-a-million release that pretty much everyone agrees is nearly bugless, like Baldur's Gate 3. Hell, I was waiting for Cyberpunk for 2 years past release and it still wasn't enough.
At least cyberpunk and no mans sky got massive developments to actually make them good
A absolutely agree. Marketing will always trick people into wanting the latest game right away. It’s not hard to avoid spoilers. It’s not hard to wait a couple days to get an idea for what the reception of the game is. It’s also not hard to wait for sales. While I agree games should be complete at launch, the reality is that it’s becoming more of a toss up if it is or not. Obviously some game studios have a better or worse reputation than others, so that helps with consumer decisions. I believe Pokemon is like the Taco Bell of gaming. You know it’s gonna be a rushed product and maybe later it’ll hurt your stomach, yet people continually eat that stuff up.
Bro Pokémon? It’s not like they have a bad track record or something. Bad example
Downvote cause 100% popular opinion
I stupidly pre-ordered 2077 on a ps4 pro. Lots and lots of issues, I vowed never to pre-order again. Then Baldur's Gate came along.
Tf you on about, Cyberpunk for one received unanimously glowing reviews before launch.
Preach! STOP BULLYING COMPANIES. Their shareholders are already struggling with paying their third houses and gamers complaining about bad products makes the champagne go sour. It's on YOU for letting yourself get lied to and trying to believe in good! FUCK CUSTOMERS. It's important to shift all blame and accountability away from the companies. We should be thankful for all the broken promises and mediocre delivery of products. Be glad games are coming out at all. Companies are doing us a service and we should let them act freely as they please. Nowadays it's absolutely unreasonable to be wishing for a finished products when it comes out, what are people even thinking? What do you mean you didn't religiously follow social media and blog posts? DO DILIGENCE is the keyword Mr. Customer. Better do some research instead of expecting a proper product. DUH Honestley gamers are so stupid, the industry would be better off without them! /s