Games losing their wow-factor because of reading too many previews

[dolgion]

So I picked up Fez with the new Humble Indie Bundle and lo and behold, it's a magnificent game! Then I got thinking about how awesome it would have been had I not known anything at all about the game beforehand. If I had been unaware that this was actually a 3D game until the reveal with the cube and the hat.

It got me thinking and I realized that so many games in recent times have lost a lot of the punch and wow factor that they could have potentially had had I not known anything about them before clicking the shortcut on my desktop.

When I was a kid, I picked up Final Fantasy 7 because the cover looked classy and the back of the box said it was an amazing adventure. That was all I knew before embarking upon one of my most cherished gaming experiences.

Another game was WarCraft 3. I liked Blizzard games from playing Diablo 2 and figured that WarCraft 3 must be good because it's from Blizzard and my friends loved WarCraft 2. I wasn't prepared for the epic tale of Arthas and the Nightelves, and the fresh gameplay that kept me playing it in multiplayer for years to come.

With age and the growth of the internet and gaming content, I've made it a habit of keeping up to date with new games, looking for anything that might interest me, then soaking up any information I can get my hands on if I already think that I'd get it. I'd get hyped, then pumped, only to then merely enjoy a game and then ending up lamenting the times when I could really feel awe playing a game.

I'm a backer for Wasteland 2, Broken Age and Torment: Tides of Numenera. I've made it a point of not reading anything about them, to keep myself fresh for those games.

Have you also experienced this? What do you do to prevent that?

 

[Zhukov]

I can see your point, but I'd rather have information beforehand than keep my self in the dark and end up wasting my money and time on crap.

Besides, a truly brilliant game should be able to shine through a few previews or spoilers.

 

[Savagezion]

I am with you personally. The risk of buying a let down has a reward of something that blows you away. Because of this, I only read up on and look up info on games I am lukewarm about. If I am already excited about a title, I will avoid looking up on it because it raises the stakes. Either I will love it and be amazed, or I will be disappointed. Taking the good with the bad is part of life and heading into the unknown is always exciting and offers more rewards.

 

[KarmaTheAlligator]

I try to stay away from information about any game I might be interested in. The only thing I'll look up is the release date. After said release, I'll either wait a bit and see what others think of it (as in, how well the game is received, no details or anything), or just buy it and see for myself, but I won't read reviews.

 

[Thr33X]

If I'm interested about a game, I usually do my own research on the game through the publisher's own media sources to find out about features, and through independent reviewers, such as channels on YouTube who do such reviews (and no I don't consider Angry Joe or ModernWarNegro as independent). I want to know from the perspective of someone who's playing the game genuinely to see in their opinion if it's worth the investment...not those who try to force their own pre-conceived opinions or biases, like say someone doing a preview of a racing game who obviously has never played one seriously before.

 

[veloper]

Most sources I use have the decency to avoid printing any real spoilers, so no, it's reviews and previews for me so I can avoid buying more crap.

 

[Adultism]

Ah! I played Hotline Miami a couple of months ago without knowing a damn thing about it before hand except that it was violent, quick, and hard. Fun fun fun.

Blew me God damned mind I had so much fun and the story gripped me to my chair.

 

[MrBaskerville]

I keep myself in the dark from time to time (i know nothing about Killer is dead and i knew next to nothing about Shadows of the damned when i bought it), but i don't really think it means that much when you get past the first 5 minutes and the feeling of wonder starts to fade. If it's a good game it will remain a good game, even if you know a lot about it.

But then again, i'm also one of those guys who doesn't care about spoilers because they don't affect my enjoyment of things.

 

[Piorn]

The best case for me was propably Metro 2033. I got it in some steam sale in some bundle for 3? or something, and figured "eh? some kind of Call of Duty trying to be post-apocalyptic?" and I was positively surprised.

But usually, you get exactly what you think you get, nowadays, which is a bit unfortunate really.
I like it when games do a bit more than the bare minimum of it's initial design. It would have been really easy to make Portal without a story, or replace Psychonauts whacky level design with a hacking minigame that you have to repeat 10 times like many modern games do, but they didn't.
Of course, these things have to enhance the core experience, not distract or change it.

 

[beez]

Well, in all fairness, devs have to sell their stuff to people somehow. I agree tho. If it is a franchise I'm interested in, I don't ever watch trailers and gameplay demos, I don't ever read news about them, unless it's something important like a delay or something. I usually check out review scores from review people I trust then read the reviews after I've played the game. If it's a new IP, I check out the first few bits and pieces of info and then if I'm interested, I'll go the route I described before.

 

[Teoes]

I don't actively avoid information and am often hunting down as much as I can find for games I'm very interested in. It has yet to lead me to be noticeably less impressed with something than I think I would otherwise have been and has saved me from some stinkers.

i normally avoid alot of spoiler info but im actively ignoring that personal rule for project eternity as im finding it fascinating seeing the development process

I've found this too with the Kickstarters I've backed. Being privy to the development process is really interesting, I find, so that I'll be able to appreciate not just the game itself but also what went into building it. It's similar to having behind the scenes knowledge of a film so that I can appreciate a particularly clever special effect or shot for knowing how it was accomplished, as well as just enjoying what's on-screen in front of me.

 

[Trek1701a]

I mainly try to find out the basics. Mostly the type of game (which nowadays can be a lot harder than you think), combat style (turn-based or real-time), how story related the game is and if the basic story is interesting, whether the game is really geared for solo play, multiplayer or co-op. Once I know these things it gets put on my radar otherwise not. The only time(s) I try things that are not on my radar is when they appear on PS+.

 

[Trek1701a]

I mainly try to find out the basics. Mostly the type of game (which nowadays can be a lot harder than you think), combat style (turn-based or real-time), how story related the game is and if the basic story is interesting, whether the game is really geared for solo play, multiplayer or co-op. Once I know these things it gets put on my radar otherwise not. The only time(s) I try things that are not on my radar is when they appear on PS+.

 

[Griffolion]

That's good, the wow-factor of a game can be easily synthesised through marketing. People end up getting hyped for a game that ends up being shite, or at least not half as good as the company would have you think. Read: any triple A title recently.

The true wow-factor of a game needs to come from the quality of its gameplay, story, aesthetic, etc. That sort of wow-factor is unaffected by any leak, preview, or whatever. It comes from true quality.

 

[somonels]

Streaming killed the videogame (p)reviews, piracy and purchasing interest of some people, and raised them for others.

But usually, you get exactly what you think you get, nowadays, which is a bit unfortunate really.

Only if you have been a gamer for a while and learnt from being misled by many marketing lies. Streaming ended that for me, no subjectiveness, just seeing what the game actually is. Of course it still carries the lie of proficiency, watching dota 2 streams and playing it is a vastly different experience.

 

[CardinalPiggles]

I can definitely see where you're coming from, I went into Bioshock Infinite with very little information other than it was an FPS, had a generic protagonist and an amazing support character. Turned out I loved that game a great deal.

But then when you find an absolute stinker and you paid £40/$60 for it (FF13 I'm looking at you) once your old enough to understand the value of money then you tend to be a lot more cautious. Kids however don't fully understand the implications of chucking £40 down the drain so when they get a shit game they just toss it aside and forget about it.

 

[Something Amyss]

I can see your point, but I'd rather have information beforehand than keep my self in the dark and end up wasting my money and time on crap.

Besides, a truly brilliant game should be able to shine through a few previews or spoilers.

Indeed.

The only thing I really miss is things that used to be like, unlockables being advertised. I miss the days of hidden characters actually being hidden. Half the games I play advertise them in-game.

But for the game as a whole? I'd rather know things.

 

[kaioshade]

Ubisoft is terrible about this. They show so many trailers and gameplay elements of assassins creed and other games, i feel like i have played the entire game by the time it is released.