65
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 07 Sep 2024
65 points (93.3% liked)
Games
16380 readers
1090 users here now
Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)
Posts.
- News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
- Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
- No humor/memes etc..
- No affiliate links
- No advertising.
- No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
- No self promotion.
- No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
- No politics.
Comments.
- No personal attacks.
- Obey instance rules.
- No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
- Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.
My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.
Other communities:
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
I'm not convinced this game's development cycle wasn't all just a giant money laundering operation. There's no way they could spend that much time and that much money only to put out something so universally panned, and not be intentional. All those millions of dollars, and they never hired a single consultant that looked at the project and said "Literally nobody wants this"? I don't believe it.
I don't think anybody actually hated the game, it just was very mid, and for the space it was competing in it wasn't compelling. But it wasn't obviously bad
So if you're a consultant looking at one aspect of the game, it's hard to make the prediction the entire market would reject it.
It's really down to the game directors, and the leadership, and the executives. They didn't have a product that was sufficiently unique to make a name for itself, and they should have known that