"It's a budget title" does not excuse quality of fun

[jamail77]

snip

Okay (on another work break), forget editing a response in to your original post. That sarcastic attitude doesn't merit a thoughtful response.

For your information, I am 21 and I have known for a long time that games do this. Just because I single out a game for doing this doesn't mean I don't know games don't do this in general. It's not like there aren't games that don't live up to their marketing; there are.

You also say that tie in games always do this, but a lot of fans of the show quite enjoyed this game. I am the exception, not the rule.

Due to my lack of conciseness and inability to be clear, I have already been misinterpreted multiple times as if I'm saying fun and quality aren't objective when I know they're subjective. The point of this thread was how you excuse budget games for flaws that have little to do with budget with some small exceptions that don't affect as much as some might think. On top of all that, I don't need a sarcastic attitude that cherry picks one statement I made and tries to act as if I said it because I am so shocked a game did something games have been doing forever. Even if you meant this in a teasing way, I am not in the best of moods right now, so I can't take it any nicer than that so sorry in advance if that is the case.

 

[Shadow-Phoenix]

Good read and I completely agree, while the game has it;s flaw I've found it to be a great budgeted game that I've played in a long time, even for a TV license based game where most movie based ones fail.

Also I couldn't help but roll my eyes when I was watching TB's take on Korra as he knew nothing about it or the show with him only choosing it because he read Platinum made it, that would be like me watching anything JK made based on her name but not reading into anything.

Also he further likes to throw Korra in when talking about his Ryse Son of Rome review which I thought was uncalled for seeing as how Ryse was a big budget AAA game made by Crytek vs a cell shaded game made by Japanese devs with a very limited time frame and budget, I swear he's a complete graphics whore sometimes.

 

[Tanis]

Way too much text for me so...I'm going to try and keep it simple.

1) My expectations depend wildly on who's behind it, time taken, and budget.

2) This is true for music, movies, games, books, TV shows, etc.

3) When I hear of a movie/TV/etc tie-in, my expectations are INCREDIBILITY LOW.

4) When I hear the game is being made by a favorite developers my expectations are MUCH higher than if it's being made by someone I don't know or don't care for.

5) All these factors make ME, as a gamer, go into any game with expectations ranging from 'never gonna get those 10 min back' to 'Giggity Giggity Goo'.
.
.
.
.
So, with regards to Korra specifically?

I went in with LOWER expectations because it was being sold as a budget ('A' at best) title, while being based on a cartoon series, but also being made by Platinum (Giggity) Games.

For me, Korra has hit every point I wanted it to.
>It's long enough to justify the price.
>It's short enough not to feel patted.
>Because of its length, the replay valve (New-Game-Plus FTW!), is pretty close to being 'just right'.

>The graphics are solid in that 'highest-end PS2 to mid-end Wii'.
>The music, works.
>The story/voice action is solid, though it IS a reminder of how much the CARTOON has improved since then.
&
>I'm glad I bought it, because I've gotten more than enough 'bang for my buck'.<

 

[BarkBarker]

Imagination costed nothing, even something like crafting your own paths with earth bending or bending the ocean as a massive weapon would cost nothing, it is using already created assets in a new and creative manner. If they couldn't populate the towns, don't have the game play in the fucking towns you IDIOTS, it will always feel wrong and we are running on a made for game plot, don't gotta do it. Small focused design is just as costly as broad thoughtless design, I wasn't looking for the next amazing action game but it really lacked any deeper thought then "eh".

 

[jamail77]

snip

I am glad you enjoyed reading and appreciate the courteous response and lack of crass assumptions (Though that may be because I edited my posts after the fact to make it clear I wasn't dismissing any one's opinions, perspective, or experience. I don't deny I am an unclear person who could use a a lesson in conciseness like a building schedule for demolition could use a wrecking ball to its side). I definitely can appreciate that you enjoyed the budget game for maximizing its resources versus enjoying it because you excused flaws that any game regardless of budget can address, the latter of which I am obviously complaining about.

I haven't seen TB's review of Korra, but, while I can see why people like him (I like him myself occasionally, occasionally being the key word), he does have a tendency to get kind of snobby and miss the point of certain things. So, what you're saying doesn't surprise me. When he compares it to Ryse does he specifically criticize the visuals or does he compare them in terms of gameplay. Because if he does the latter, while also excusing gameplay complexity that is taxing on a processor and the scope a budget game can' compare to, then I'd argue it's reasonable. Even so, he may have said it in a snobby way and that's not really excusable.

It'd be nice to hear what you think of the main point of my thread, how you judge a budget game versus a AAA game without going too easy on things that a game can do regardless of budget.

snip

I'd like to thank you as well for the courteous response and you certainly don't seem to fall under the type of person I cited in my OP. You believe you got bang for you buck without excusing silly things that have nothing to do with budget. Perfectly reasonable.

Also, yeah, I don't blame you for not being able to read all of what I said. I wish I could write concisely. A friend gave me the idea to take a technical writing class. Personally, if I don't have time to read something I do a quick skim to get the gist.

Small focused design is just as costly as broad thoughtless design, I wasn't looking for the next amazing action game but it really lacked any deeper thought then "eh".

While I don't need vindication, it's nice to see others came out underwhelmed. As I said, I haven't played it yet. I have only watched a full walkthrough and read reviews, but it's nice to find there are a few people who took the game more negatively than the overwhelmingly positive reviews would suggest. It lets me know, as someone who approaches games with a critical eye, that my skepticism isn't necessarily unfounded, not that there is anything wrong with those who love the game, of course.