Gaming

30557 readers

296 users here now

From video gaming to card games and stuff in between, if it's gaming you can probably discuss it here!

Please Note: Gaming memes are permitted to be posted on Meme Mondays, but will otherwise be removed in an effort to allow other discussions to take place.

See also Gaming's sister community Tabletop Gaming.

This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

alyaza@beehaw.org

TheRtRevKaiser@beehaw.org

gyrfalcon@beehaw.org

Whom@beehaw.org

The_Hunted_One@beehaw.org

chloyster@beehaw.org

remington@beehaw.org

What are some good games that have a bad reputation due to unreasonable expectations? (midwest.social)

submitted 10 months ago by Catastrophic235@midwest.social to c/gaming@beehaw.org

51 comments fedilink hide all child comments

For consistency sake, let's say that any game that's >or=7/10 at what it's trying to do while having a popular perception of being a <5/10 game in general would count. Want to specify that this is more about the perception of the game compared to, say, a game just being really niche.

My personal Go-to for this would probably be the Callisto Protocol, because while it certainly did have some troubles at launch they were massively overblown. IMO most of the hate for it comes down to people expecting it to be Dead Space 4 with a new name, ignoring the devs the multitude of times they said that it's something else before release, and then getting mad when it released and wasn't dead space 4 under a new name.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Stillhart@lemm.ee 34 points 10 months ago (14 children)

Cyberpunk 2077 is the poster child for this. That game was easily 7/10 even when it came out as a buggy mess. Now that it's had a few years of polish, it's much better than 7/10.

But the public perception was bad mostly because of unmet expectations. I don't know if I'd call them "unreasonable" a they were set by the devs themselves, but either way, the game was and is much better than a lot of people think.

[–] SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone 35 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (6 children)

It was announced way way way too early.
Announced "It will be finished when it's finished" on that way too early reveal.
Years later, it's not finished, but tough shit, the studio is out of money and the shareholders are pushing for release.
It was released unfinished. Oops.
Years later, it is now closer to the original expectations.
Still no wall-running, so a lot of things they hyped and were expected are still unmet.
The Flathead was supposed to be a thing you kept throughout the game, but they never got the AI pathing right with it, so they dropped it.

[–] Stillhart@lemm.ee 10 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

The salt is real. (And the edits.)

[–] SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone 22 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

Well you're mostly right in your original post, game was a solid 7/10 on release, but the studio just did so much disservice to themselves by hyping it up for nearly a decade before release, and especially hyping a bunch of stuff that never made it into the final product, and on top of all that breaking their own promise to not release until it's finished.

The whole reason people liked The Witcher 3 was people were convinced the multiple delays to release "made it a better game." It was at that moment that CDPR built the image that they won't release a game "until it's done." They now had their own studio history working against them when they made the promise of "It's finished when it's finished" and people were expecting that. People loved that CDPR was so dedicated to the gamers that they wouldn't let pesky things like money-men push a game out too early when it's half-baked. Oops, they did exactly that with their next game, which absolutely shot all that goodwill from the players right through the heart, especially after already waiting nearly a decade for it.

In the end, are the expectations really unreasonable if the studio themselves were the people who built the hype those expectations were based on?

[–] Stillhart@lemm.ee 8 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I get it. I said I didn't think the expectations were unreasonable.

I think you're pretty much proving my point, though, that the game is unfairly maligned due to unmet expectations. The game they released, while buggy, was fun. You're pissed off about a lot of things that aren't how fun the game is to play.

[–] SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone 12 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (2 children)

I'm not really pissed off, I'm just listing off things that were unmet based on the studios own desires and their own promotional materials leading up to release.

There's still videos out there from when they were hyping wall-running and the Ghostrunner class. *shrugs

I really don't think it's unfairly maligned when those expectations were set by the studios themselves.

[–] barsoap@lemm.ee 2 points 10 months ago

Ghostrunner class

I mean... sandy, optic camo/cool, blades? For some odd reason it took Edgerunners for people to give the sandy an honest spin, possibly due to "aw shucks doesn't work with guns and I can't hack".

[–] Stillhart@lemm.ee 2 points 10 months ago

Fair enough, we can agree to disagree on the OP's intent for this post. Thanks for the civil discussion regardless.

load more comments (4 replies)

load more comments (11 replies)