Know clue why I'm surprised in any shape or form

Let me start by saying, EVERY LEGEND OF ZELDA GAME! Others games as well. Gears of War 3 was actually better than I anticipated.

 

The thing is, the handheld Zelda games never have any hype. So they always live up to it, since there is none. Skyward Sword would be a better example, I think.

 

Positive: 625 out of 2009
Mixed: 67 out of 2009
Negative: 1,317 out of 2009

Yeah, I would say this is a terrible launch. My guess is the developers got fucked over by someone because of a deadline.

Herein lies the danger of factory farming games.

It is my favorite game in the series (that I have played), and I played both of those beforehand. Beat neither, though.

 

There have been games that have lived up to their hype.

Assassin's Creed Brotherhood did much better than Revelations, and I'm sure III will deliver.

/excited

Oh, and then there was BioShock, which gave so much more, and I'm really looking forward to Infinite.​

 

Thing is, most of those low reviews are just people bitching about the servers, rather than the actual game. Its still a valid complaint to have to connect online just to play single-player, but its not enough to justify giving a game scores like 0/10. Something similar happened to Mass Effect 3: angry gamers gave it low scores on Meta-Critic just because of the shitty ending. The ending is shit, but it doesn't take away from the amazing other 95% of the game. Here's a good article on the issue.

...but they're so easy :|

 

Requiring online access for single player is major flaw that would probably keep me from playing it in the first place. How does that benefit the player?

Laziness. With CoM, someone deleted my file at the Marluxia fight. I was pissed. I have not gotten that far since then.

 

But that fact that they're rating a game just because they couldn't play. It isn't an evaluative judgement of how good the game actually is. I'm not saying its a good thing that you have to connect online just to play single player. Quite the contrary, I think its a stupid, stupid idea, but it wouldn't sway my judgement of the game itself. (I think it was implemented to combat pirates or something...don't see what swashbucklers have to do with a apocalyptic-themed RPG game personally...)

I was about to say that the game was kinda short, but I remember that was only Riku's part that was pretty short. Sora's took me around 16 hours.

 

It's not a single player game. It's a multiplayer game you can play alone. It's an MMO without a monthly subscription.

 

But Revelations came out after Brotherhood, so why does it matter that Brotherhood did better? That just further enforces that Revelations did not live up to the hype. Neither did Brotherhood actually, which did worse thant Assassin's Creed 2 and is less loved.

And Bioshock did not really live up to the hype either, since most people hyped for it were hyped because it's a sort of spiritual sequel to System Shock, which most people agree is better than Bioshock.

 

Which is bullshit. You are treating all of your customers as criminals at that point. It will not deter actual pirates at all because they will create cracks either way.

 

Yeah, I agree with you. I kinda hate (really hate) DRM. Its pretty much pointless trying to implement it, but there are instances where developers/publishers actually do something cool to keep pirates from playing.

 

That didn't stop Diablo II from having a reasonable campaign mode


Unfortunately I'm going to have to pirate the game as I am completely against DRM in all shapes and form....
That is if the game is good.....

 

More pirating will certainly change their ways!

 

Yes, indeed. It will drive them to innovate instead of treating everyone as a criminal.

 

Innovating in terms of DRM, you're right.

 

... Nope. If you boycott, they will be forced to change their tactics. The more rigorous their DRM, the fewer their willing customers.

 

http://www.vgchartz.com/article/250143/usa-preorders-chart-12-may-2012-diablo-iii/ So far there is no sight of a boycott at least, does that mean that this is not bad DRM?

 

It means the people who were buying it did not know or care enough about the DRM. It has not been released yet, for one, and someone who preorders a game is not a skeptic about purchases regardless.

You have shown the number of people buying it, but do you have a counter statistic to show the number not buying it? How can I use such a chart to compare the number boycotting to the number pre-ordering?

 

Why would the developers care about anything but how many sales they actually get? The hard facts are that there's a million people who have pre-ordered the physical version in the US alone. Despite buying them online and downloading them being more popular on the computer and US not even being their biggest market. They are making a ton of money and selling a ton of copies, despite having a DRM. You need to boycott harder, Akaz. Pirate more! Or else they will never learn.