I don't believe it will change anything really either.
But I do think moaning endlessly about a game then throwing cash at it is hypocritical and dumb.
People still make this kind of faulty argument? I thought having to watch
this video is basically a NeoGAF rite of passage ;-)
"Moaning endlessly"
does get things done. Faster and better than any other way, actually. So what's that dumb about it? And for that matter, what's hypocritical? One can "endlessly moan" (which one single person isn't actually doing here, it's just your overall impression that is colouring this perception) about one aspect of a game but still immensely enjoy the rest.
I never said there's no difference, rather that people were acting crazy about it when they hadn't even played the game, which is par for the course on this forum. Since then I've been Twitter bombed and had my integrity and intelligence called into question multiple times. In my mind that just further proves my point.
At 15 hours into DS2, I can only think of one area that doesn't look as good as or better than everything I've seen in the previous games, and on top of that it's an exceptionally good game. If that's not enough for the people who are raging about the preview footage, it's their prerogative not to play it, but they're seriously missing out.
People seemingly acting crazy about it is, I'd say, just how human group psychology works and how one tends to categorise people as parts of a pattern/group instead of as individuals. There is, e.g., actually plenty of reasoned discussion and few if any trolling going on, so it's nothing really out of typical normative behaviour ('crazy')--even for mostly anonymous people. Non-normative writing, such as abuse of any kind, is usually punished quickly. As for the topic itself: False advertising practices will of course spark debate (as they did with
Watch Dogs,
Killzone etc.) and comparisons and whatnot, especially since this is an enthusiast forum.
That a lot of people hadn't or haven't yet played the game before starting the discussion is simply besides the point. Again, debating (even passionately hating) an aspect of a thing does not mean one does not like the thing as a whole or, in fact, needs to have experienced the thing in full to form a well-reasoned argument about it. This is one such topic where the evidence already weighs so heavily on one side that it's not needed. Thus, painting all participants of this topic with your overly broad
crazy brush does a major disservice to the argumentative validity of your statement. I'm not saying you deserve the twitterbombing, though. That's just people on Twitter being people on Twitter--it's not exactly a great place for discussion. But hey, calling people crazy out of the blue and with no qualifier is not exactly a great discussion starter either, right?