Do Bad Customer Practices Make it Easier to Write off Good Games



  • @Axel said in Do Bad Customer Practices Make it Easier to Write off Good Games:

    @Mbun Yeah that's true, middling games just disappear from the public eye instantly (which is possibly even worse than being discussed negatively).

    I just feel that a lot of games get a label attached to them in most major gaming circles, which sticks to them forever.

    So you get the eternal darlings with seemingly zero flaw, like The Witcher 3, and the bad games you shouldn't touch with a ten foot pole, like Mass Effect Andromeda. And those labels, especially the negative ones, tend to be impossible to shake off. It starts with legitimate criticism but as time goes by, public opinion simply solidifies into "Bad game". At this point, you wouldn't even know why it's bad anymore, it just is. Any redeemable qualities the game has are ignored.

    Again I'm talking about certain gaming circles like Reddit, Neogaf, etc. Maybe I'm exaggerating but I often get this impression.

    It depends on the game, sometimes it's not necessarily the label it received but a single mis-step in it's marketing, or sheer lack of marketing.

    Just look at Lawbreakers, the constant cringeworthy advertising that game got and the way it was presented at events turned people off. And then the beta ran poorly on console (Despite the PS4 version having more players than PC in the end) and then the results are as we currently know them to be.

    No matter how humble that could've made that dev team or any apology from Cliff I don't think it would've changed those first impressions.

    Sure that's not to say we're not partially responsible sometimes like with Battleborn/Overwatch (I actually preferred BB over OW, YEAH I SAID IT!) but the comparisons are hard to ignore, the timing was bad, and gearbox was already developing a bad reputation prior to that game, so it was a perfect storm of disappointment all around.

    But yeah, again to the entire thread for me it depends on the company, some have burned me so many times that I won't touch their games unless someone bought it for me as a gift, I received it as a review copy (This no longer happens), or it was otherwise free from my previous job, or I got it used from gamestop so 9 times out of 10 it's probably being returned for a full refund anyway and the company who made it doesn't see a dime from the sale either way.



  • The vast amount of other good games makes it easy to write off other games. Why would people buy a game that has good gameplay, but lacks many other things and does several things they dont like, when they can buy a game that has good gameplay, has other stuff they like and doesnt do the things they dislike?

    The gameplay in MvC:I is indeed good, but so is the gameplay in Guilty Gear and Tekken 7. Guilty Gear looks much better in my opinion and has characters I like much more, so why would I choose MvC:I over it ever?

    I've been there a half decade ago with Soul Calibur 5, the gameplay was the best the series had been in ages but people really wanted a better story mode and more single player content and they're allowed to want it



  • @Axel said:

    So you get the eternal darlings with seemingly zero flaw, like The Witcher 3

    Maybe you could've thought of a better example, because I heard plenty of complaints about Witcher 3 around launch, even from people who liked it. Stuff like "meh combat", "have to loot EVERYTHING", "Geralt's Hair Physics slow the game down", "too many things to do per area", etc.



  • @Mbun said in Do Bad Customer Practices Make it Easier to Write off Good Games:

    "too many things to do per area"

    Who on earth would complain about something like that, especially when the Witcher has really well balanced levelling, where you can do as much or as little side content as you want.



  • @Hazz3r said in Do Bad Customer Practices Make it Easier to Write off Good Games:

    @Mbun said in Do Bad Customer Practices Make it Easier to Write off Good Games:

    "too many things to do per area"

    Who on earth would complain about something like that, especially when the Witcher has really well balanced levelling, where you can do as much or as little side content as you want.

    It can be daunting and cause a feeling of being overwhelmed, regardless of how much the player intends to do. Too much choice does exist and a game does need to find a balance.



  • @Hazz3r said:

    Who on earth would complain about something like that

    Never heard of Open World Fatigue?



  • @Hazz3r No that's a valid complaint, especially when it's tedious stuff and not marked on the map or something.



  • @Torigasa-Reta that was exactly the case for me with Xenoblade Chronicles, at first all the quest were welcomed, but it quickly became overwhelming and quickly made me lose interest in them.



  • @bard91 Don't remind me grinding for those very rare items for a sidequest, ugh.



  • @Mbun Open World Fatigue is self-inflicted. If you don't want to do something then don't do it, just focus on the main story.

    In a thread talking about Bad Customer Practices this seems like a very valid argument to me.



  • @Hazz3r said in Do Bad Customer Practices Make it Easier to Write off Good Games:

    @Mbun Open World Fatigue is self-inflicted. If you don't want to do something then don't do it, just focus on the main story.

    In a thread talking about Bad Customer Practices this seems like a very valid argument to me.

    Depending on the game that's not always possible, like I'm playing Just Cause 3 right now and it locks off story quests until you take over x number of territories by doing the open world stuff



  • @Hazz3r The Witcher 3's main quest literally sends you on a wild goose chase back and forth across the map. It's very obvious playing that game that the developers know how to make linear RPGs, made a huge map for this one, and streeeeetched the main quest out across it. I mean Skellige didn't even need to be in the plot, they just created an excess of world regions so they threw it in as well.

    It's easy to understand open world fatigue — people don't want to have to walk or load everywhere to play games (most of which are level-based franchises like The Witcher dragged out over a much larger map).



  • I'm tired of playing good games all the time.



  • @Sieghardt Why in god's name would you play Just Cause 3 for the story?



  • @Sieghardt Uhuh, but we're talking specifically about the amount of side content in the Witcher 3. Which doesn't lock any content away from you.



  • @Haru17 said in Do Bad Customer Practices Make it Easier to Write off Good Games:

    The Witcher 3's main quest literally sends you on a wild goose chase back and forth across the map.

    No it doesn't. Your objectives completely change and become way more solid before you ever are forced to revisit a region in the main quest line.

    level-based franchises like The Witcher

    Witcher 1 is Open World.
    Witcher 2 is Open World.
    Witcher 3 is Open World.

    The only difference is scale.

    Like, this is a weird argument for me. My favourite entry in the series is 2, mainly because I love the fact that in this day and age a small scale 30 hour RPG can as good as if not better than a 70+ hour one.

    But I will stand and say that the Witcher 3 is an Open World RPG done right.



  • @El-Shmiablo You have to do the story missions to unlock a bunch of the weapons/vehicles



  • @Sieghardt Wait a second... there were vehicles in Just Cause???