Since the removal of the DLC, and the fact it's not already in the base game, all assets related to it now appear as grey boxes. Thanks again for that, as it was doubtlessly absolutely necessary to remove the DLC now and not when it's integrated...
The angry customers and the state of the game are problems.
it’s hard to feel sorry for people who pre-ordered because they got exactly what they paid for - a game of unknown quality and quantity of content
it’s hard to feel sorry for people who bought post-release because they also got exactly what they paid for - a game where reviews detailed poor quality and quantity of content
customers being disappointed and/or wanting a refund is perfectly reasonable
people wanting the game to be better is also reasonable
people abusing the devs is not reasonable
I’m not going to defend the poor quality of the game because it’s obviously bad (from what I gather, anyway - I’ve not played it myself) and should be improved. But I do think gamers could learn to be a little more responsible with their purchases and inform themselves before buying a game.
I’m pretty over the whole cycle of games coming out and not meeting expectations, people buying them anyway (through pre-orders or day-one purchases), people being unnecessarily rude/hostile/sending death threats to developers as if they were forced to buy the game as gunpoint. Yes, developers should try to do better, yes publishers should often give developers more time to polish up games rather than announcing the release date two years in advance and refusing to delay, but also consumers could really take some responsibility for what they decide to give money to.
The last time I believed trailers was dead island.
The only reason why I played cs1 so much was because of the mods. I like to play the vanilla game before modding. I bought the game knowing that I would like it for a month or two, then I would wait for mods to come out and I’d hop back into it. I knew what I was getting and I didn’t have a problem with the game. I don’t need a city builder to be high frames. I didn’t have a lot of bugs. I’m totally fine with the game, as long as the modding scene stays with the game.
My worry is that all the negativity around the game will make less modders appear for cs2.
Looking back at other city builders releases cs2 release is fine. I don’t understand the extent of negativity. Just ask for a refund. If the game gets better with age then buy it when it is cheaper. I’m sure these people have other games to play. CS1 seems to be popular still. Nothing happened to that game.
these people SHOULD be putting this negative pressure on them. It’s deserved
Was it not implied I agree with that when I said:
The angry customers and the state of the game are problems.
and;
customers being disappointed and/or wanting a refund is perfectly reasonable
people wanting the game to be better is also reasonable
I’m not going to defend the poor quality of the game because it’s obviously bad (from what I gather, anyway - I’ve not played it myself) and should be improved.
?
I don’t see why that would make my opinion stupid. Yes, the studio/publisher should be held to account for the crappy release. But a big part of holding them to account should be not giving them money for it in the first place; not just handing over money and then complaining afterwards. Complaining afterwards is reasonable for the people who did hand over money, but they should also hold themselves accountable for financially rewarding a company that puts out a crappy product - they’re part of the problem.
I think it’s important to look for the nuance in situations and not treat everything as zero-sum. Both sides can have good points and be open to criticism at the same time (this isn’t an “enlightened centrist” take, I promise!). I think a lot of discussion online does tend to strip away nuance and take the position that if you show any empathy with one side then it means you must hate the other - I do my best to avoid that!
The angry customers and the state of the game are problems.
I’m not going to defend the poor quality of the game because it’s obviously bad (from what I gather, anyway - I’ve not played it myself) and should be improved. But I do think gamers could learn to be a little more responsible with their purchases and inform themselves before buying a game.
I’m pretty over the whole cycle of games coming out and not meeting expectations, people buying them anyway (through pre-orders or day-one purchases), people being unnecessarily rude/hostile/sending death threats to developers as if they were forced to buy the game as gunpoint. Yes, developers should try to do better, yes publishers should often give developers more time to polish up games rather than announcing the release date two years in advance and refusing to delay, but also consumers could really take some responsibility for what they decide to give money to.
The last time I believed trailers was dead island.
The only reason why I played cs1 so much was because of the mods. I like to play the vanilla game before modding. I bought the game knowing that I would like it for a month or two, then I would wait for mods to come out and I’d hop back into it. I knew what I was getting and I didn’t have a problem with the game. I don’t need a city builder to be high frames. I didn’t have a lot of bugs. I’m totally fine with the game, as long as the modding scene stays with the game.
My worry is that all the negativity around the game will make less modders appear for cs2.
Looking back at other city builders releases cs2 release is fine. I don’t understand the extent of negativity. Just ask for a refund. If the game gets better with age then buy it when it is cheaper. I’m sure these people have other games to play. CS1 seems to be popular still. Nothing happened to that game.
Your opinion is stupid, because these people SHOULD be putting this negative pressure on them. It’s deserved and the louder they are the better.
Was it not implied I agree with that when I said:
and;
?
I don’t see why that would make my opinion stupid. Yes, the studio/publisher should be held to account for the crappy release. But a big part of holding them to account should be not giving them money for it in the first place; not just handing over money and then complaining afterwards. Complaining afterwards is reasonable for the people who did hand over money, but they should also hold themselves accountable for financially rewarding a company that puts out a crappy product - they’re part of the problem.
Yeah I knee jerk reacted, sorry.
It’s okay; I appreciate the apology! :)
I think it’s important to look for the nuance in situations and not treat everything as zero-sum. Both sides can have good points and be open to criticism at the same time (this isn’t an “enlightened centrist” take, I promise!). I think a lot of discussion online does tend to strip away nuance and take the position that if you show any empathy with one side then it means you must hate the other - I do my best to avoid that!
You are absolutely right, and clearly a person of wisdom. Have a great day. :)