Poll: Has any one comment ever immediately killed your desire to buy a game?
- Thread starter FillerDmon
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Ooohhhh...
Comments that killed my desire to buy a game?
Starforce protected (who remembers this?)
Any comment that compares it to Daikatana or DNF
Streamlined for greater accessibility/Feature removed to ease in new players
No private servers
No mod support
Multiplayer only (in the case the previous game had a single player campaign that was actually awesome)
EDIT: Forgot one:
Made by Derek Smart
Comments that killed my desire to buy a game?
Starforce protected (who remembers this?)
Any comment that compares it to Daikatana or DNF
Streamlined for greater accessibility/Feature removed to ease in new players
No private servers
No mod support
Multiplayer only (in the case the previous game had a single player campaign that was actually awesome)
EDIT: Forgot one:
Made by Derek Smart
"This game requires steam drm to install and run." -> best way to make sure I will never buy your game.
"We removed X important and liked feature(s) because it/they wouldn't work on consoles." -> mostly seen in AAA sequels.
"RPG Maker game". Why do so many games use this shitty engine? And why do so many game developers (for this engine) set up these shitty, poorly-made background tunes that cannot be muted?
"Pixel graphics." Ain't got time for that. Just tells me you were too lazy to put any effort into your graphics, or even get a graphics designer.
"Online-only FPS." For someone who lakes to faff about in local coop/multiplayer, this is a no-go. I used to be a huge fan of the Battlefield series until BF 3 came out. In the same vein, having to use a website as a server browser and not having any way to manually start the game if you want to fiddle with your game settings.
"Real advertisements. They're for immersion, really!" I was really hyped for Battlefield 2142 until it was announced they were going to have billboards ingame that would dynamically display advertisements for real products.
"Console exclusive. (but we totally might release it on pc later." Most recent example being GTA 5. If you're going to delay the PC version for a year for no obvious reason(besides being paid by ms/sony to do so), then... Fuck you. I'm not buying your shitty game.
"Optimised for controllers." But you're selling it as a PC game. Wankers.
"We removed X important and liked feature(s) because it/they wouldn't work on consoles." -> mostly seen in AAA sequels.
"RPG Maker game". Why do so many games use this shitty engine? And why do so many game developers (for this engine) set up these shitty, poorly-made background tunes that cannot be muted?
"Pixel graphics." Ain't got time for that. Just tells me you were too lazy to put any effort into your graphics, or even get a graphics designer.
"Online-only FPS." For someone who lakes to faff about in local coop/multiplayer, this is a no-go. I used to be a huge fan of the Battlefield series until BF 3 came out. In the same vein, having to use a website as a server browser and not having any way to manually start the game if you want to fiddle with your game settings.
"Real advertisements. They're for immersion, really!" I was really hyped for Battlefield 2142 until it was announced they were going to have billboards ingame that would dynamically display advertisements for real products.
"Console exclusive. (but we totally might release it on pc later." Most recent example being GTA 5. If you're going to delay the PC version for a year for no obvious reason(besides being paid by ms/sony to do so), then... Fuck you. I'm not buying your shitty game.
"Optimised for controllers." But you're selling it as a PC game. Wankers.
Never really, there's a lot of things in games that will make me not want to purchase them but I'm for the most part on the side of you have to convince me to buy you instead of the other way around.
Not to say there aren't things in a game that make me not want to buy them but it just has to be reiterated a lot by many people before I'll knock the game off of the "maybe list".
Not to say there aren't things in a game that make me not want to buy them but it just has to be reiterated a lot by many people before I'll knock the game off of the "maybe list".
Why yes, in fact it happened with a certain recently released Star Wars game not too long ago...
"AT-ATs are on rails and no space battles"
"AT-ATs are on rails and no space battles"
The funny thing about Supremme Commander II is that it felt in every way like a game made before SupCom. Worse graphics, less units, less strategy, less diversity, smaller sizes, less interesting campaign... Less, less, less, and I think not a single thing "more".Zontar said:
Which brings me to my personal instant filler in the "fuck-off"-er meter: Sequel chopping. That fun little thing when you remove from the sequel something that was in the original game, for no adequate reason and no satisfying gain. No better example than The Sims, the only series I don't feel bad pirating, because at least half the previous-game's DLC (Or, in Sims 4's case, ALL the DLC plus some base features) are removed, only to be added later and sold back.
The words "Where is X", with X being a beloved feature in the previous game, is enough for me to drop it right there
It did have more of two things: more cartoony graphics and more 3D mapping. Not that anyone was complaining about the more realistic appearance of things in the previous games, or that anyone cared about the fact you can turn your map, but it's something.JamesStone said:
Still a terrible game though. Honestly, was it even made by the same people? Only one character from the previous games shows up, he's suddenly evil for no reason, the plot is about his suddenly being evil and the villain from the previous game who survived and the fact the alien faction still had survivors all over the place who could in fact win the ongoing war even without reinforcements, was all dropped and never mentioned. For god sake the game is what, 20, 30 years later? Even if you want to skip ahead that far in time the war between the remnants of the Seraphim/QAI's forces and the Coalition. The nature of warfare makes another thousand year conflict quite possible even with the Earth liberated and the quantum rift closed. But no, instead we get a character getting "suddenly evil syndrome" and all plot threads from the previous games left forgotten. It's like bad fanfiction.
I blame Square Enix for this. Their Supreme Commander game is the terrible one that killed the franchise while those published under THQ where great RTS games.
God I wish Supreme Commander: Experimentals hadn't fallen through.
Well lets see, the following have completely killed prospective purchases dead for me:
- Online only DRM
- Truncated dialogue wheel
- Timed jumping puzzles
- Multiplayer only
- Game breaking bugs at launch
- "Improved" to appeal to a broader customer base (read: Dumbed down).
- Online only DRM
- Truncated dialogue wheel
- Timed jumping puzzles
- Multiplayer only
- Game breaking bugs at launch
- "Improved" to appeal to a broader customer base (read: Dumbed down).
Funny, because Tumblr mostly hates that game right now, because of the Papyrus/Player Character thing.stormtrooper9091 said:
Anyway, the biggest ones to get me completely disinterested in games is:
"We chose to only make this game for the new console generation, so we can have the best possible player experience." Then I look at the trailer and it looks like something 2007 spat out, with nothing really bigger or better.
Mothership Zeta. Seriously, I used to be a heavy Fallout 1-2 fanboy and seeing a DLC where you are captured by aliens and it turns out they did certain lore things made me want to put my life savings into reopening Black Isle Studios/Interplay and showing them how it was done... and then I remembered that my life savings was little more then a couple Paul McCartney records and a Dreamcast. Still, avoided the new Fallout games like a plague until I finally gave them a try in 2010 when New Vegas came out and was supposedly written by the originals.
"Cinematic Experience" If I wanted to watch a movie I would go watch a movie.
It has been mentioned countless times, but I will join the group of people that hates it when companies sell DLC first and their game second.
Mass Effect 3 was one of the earlier examples I recall where a specific pre-order DLC (or was it retail specific? I can't remember) vital to the lore was being hyped more than the game itself.
Evolve literally selling DLC first before any info on the game proper was revealed made me pass on the game outright.
The most recent example was Deus Ex: Mankind Divided and the horrible pre-order promotion killed the hype I had for the game.
Mass Effect 3 was one of the earlier examples I recall where a specific pre-order DLC (or was it retail specific? I can't remember) vital to the lore was being hyped more than the game itself.
Evolve literally selling DLC first before any info on the game proper was revealed made me pass on the game outright.
The most recent example was Deus Ex: Mankind Divided and the horrible pre-order promotion killed the hype I had for the game.
One has gotten pretty damn close to. The recent announcement that in Total War: Warhammer you may only conqueror and take over the settlements of your nemesis, the rest you have to burn to the ground. So not only is taking over large amounts of territory a lot harder, they're killing the sandbox fun for lore. Actually it seems each announcement kills and also gives me hope for this game. It's tearing me apart!
I think I learnt Star Wars Battlefront had no single player from a comment. So yeah! That, kinda.
I predict I'll also decide on whether to play Bravely Second based on a single comment too. All I wanna know is are the characters better and is there any exploration. If yes to both them I'm done.
I predict I'll also decide on whether to play Bravely Second based on a single comment too. All I wanna know is are the characters better and is there any exploration. If yes to both them I'm done.
I come from a community that tends to jump the gun on the simplification of gameplay mechanics, but it really is something that irks me. I absolutely hate it when games dumb themselves down, especially "competetive" games like league of legends.
"We're making this game instead of torchlight 3 because diablo 3 is an amazing game that's just killing it right now!"
This not only executed a heap of hype I had but was a massive slap to the face.
"We're making the movement system in reflex simpler because people said it'd be fun to play as but not against."
Going fast is like, the entire point of quake likes. There is no point in strafe running or advanced movement if you can't go fast. The game stands no chance against casualized arena shooters like overwatch or dirtybomb and it decides to casualize. Broke my heart, almost quit gaming.
"We're making mirrors edge 2 appeal to a broader audience."
EA manages to impress with even more social retardation in their press releases. They took a meme that meant that the game was going awful and used it their very first press release.
"We're making this game instead of torchlight 3 because diablo 3 is an amazing game that's just killing it right now!"
This not only executed a heap of hype I had but was a massive slap to the face.
"We're making the movement system in reflex simpler because people said it'd be fun to play as but not against."
Going fast is like, the entire point of quake likes. There is no point in strafe running or advanced movement if you can't go fast. The game stands no chance against casualized arena shooters like overwatch or dirtybomb and it decides to casualize. Broke my heart, almost quit gaming.
"We're making mirrors edge 2 appeal to a broader audience."
EA manages to impress with even more social retardation in their press releases. They took a meme that meant that the game was going awful and used it their very first press release.
Usually "Free To Play" is enough for me. I know there are good ones out there, but I seem to have developed some sort of anti-Free to Play bias.