Wow leave the guy alone already. So much drama for a bad game.
mrBgone1155 said:@DuvalMagic I'm a huge @GearboxSoftware fan. Love Borderlands, but DNF was my favorite game u put out. Enjoying Aliens. U guys are awesome.
Randy Pitchford said:@mrBgone1155 And this is why the world is awesome! Varied tastes, varied choices. I would be sad to only make one type of game forever.
Or the proceeds from winning might fund a new Samba de Amigo game.If SEGA sues Gearbox we might not get a new Samba de Amigo game you guys need to think this through
My girlfriend preordered it for me on Steam for Valentines day based off of the false advertising.This. Nobody forced you to buy the game.
This. Nobody forced you to buy the game.
Sega if you sue and win be sure to give us Yakuza 5.
Or the proceeds from winning might fund a new Samba de Amigo game.
Think of the possibilities!
Wow leave the guy alone already. So much drama for a bad game.
Tall Poppy Syndrome - "a social phenomenon in which people of genuine merit are resented, attacked, cut down, or criticised because their talents or achievements elevate them above or distinguish them from their peers."I feel like anyone calling for Sega to sue Gearbox is suffering from some real bad Tall Poppy Syndrome and are looking to feel some sweet sweet schadenfreude. It's a bad game, it had troubled development, it happens, I know litigation is the answer to everything in the US but jeez, lay off.
I feel like anyone calling for Sega to sue Gearbox is suffering from some real bad Tall Poppy Syndrome and are looking to feel some sweet sweet schadenfreude. It's a bad game, it had troubled development, it happens, I know litigation is the answer to everything in the US but jeez, lay off.
The issue isn't that "it's just another bad game", the issue is how Gearbox strung along all the "gaming journalists" and consumers to believe what they saw at E3 and other events (not to mention the screenshots, which are still being used to falsely advertise the Wii U version) would reflect the final game. All the lies they spouted throughout the whole time pre-release.
It shouldn't be something that's swept under the rug just because it's another licensed movie game that's bad. It's the practices that went into feeding information to the journalists and consumers about the game before it released.
If this were an actual popular gaming franchise and much bigger dev studio, you wouldn't be saying what you just said.
man, this A:CM saga just never stops giving
twitter is such an onerous curse on modern discourse. horribly fragmented debates broadcasted from behind a 190 character firewall which basically gives you a license to put out the most abbreviated, vapid statement possible and call it a day; all the while selectively recirculating only the most reassuring of commentary from your pre-verified clique of supporters.
it's a pedestal for cowards.
It wouldn't be the first and won't be the last time game journalists are used to prop up a dead-on-arrival turd.
This. Nobody forced you to buy the game.
Personal update, I've been accused by Mr. Pitchford of attempting to do nothing but vilify and injury for the purposes of grandstanding, and was told I should have sent private questions.
Trouble is, last time I asked questions through official channels, I got told Aliens: Colonial Marines would ship with next-gen lighting in an interview I now cringe at the thought of.
That's a problem inherent in "game journalism," such that it is. You're a "shoddy journalist" for not taking part in the big PR Rube Goldberg machine -- very much like how Eurogamer got called out for announcing Borderlands 2 before Game Informer got its big exclusive reveal -- despite the fact that such a machine is exactly WHY a situation like Colonial Marines is allowed to happen.
Maybe I am indeed showboating a little, but y'know, when we serve an audience, how are we doing right by them in asking the questions privately?
if sega did sue, they could give the money to relic to make an aliens RTS.
Jim Sterling's Twitter said:Jim Sterling ‏@JimSterling
I won't apologize for criticizing Gearbox publicly. I serve an audience. If A:CM did likewise this would never have been a situation.
Jim Sterling ‏@JimSterling
You're a bad journalist if you don't ask questions via official, PR-controlled channels, yet such channels are HOW A:CM got so misleading.
Speaking about the bullshots and questionable videos, its not like this is a new thing. It seems Gearbox and Sega are just the first people to be called out on it. Numerous other companies do the same thing. Ubisoft is probably the worst offender of it. I think targets should be switch from directly at Gearbox and instead at the entire industry as a whole.
Randy Pitchford is obviously the veteran of many flame wars.
/ignore
Keep it up, Jim! I think it's safe to say that a lot of people here appreciate the fact that someone is trying to stand up to this type of behavior. It shouldn't be forgotten so quickly.Personal update, I've been accused by Mr. Pitchford of attempting to do nothing but vilify and injury for the purposes of grandstanding, and was told I should have sent private questions.
Trouble is, last time I asked questions through official channels, I got told Aliens: Colonial Marines would ship with next-gen lighting in an interview I now cringe at the thought of.
That's a problem inherent in "game journalism," such that it is. You're a "shoddy journalist" for not taking part in the big PR Rube Goldberg machine -- very much like how Eurogamer got called out for announcing Borderlands 2 before Game Informer got its big exclusive reveal -- despite the fact that such a machine is exactly WHY a situation like Colonial Marines is allowed to happen.
Maybe I am indeed showboating a little, but y'know, when we serve an audience, how are we doing right by them in asking the questions privately?
But they took it to a new level. They basically provided a demo room for journalists with a carefully crafted demo experience running on a far flashier engine with better AI. They let these journalists play the demo so they would lavish praise, knowing that the demo was nothing like the game they were making. The missions and events in the demo weren't even present in the final game, other than some familiar level assets. They also listed out all these features that would be in the game, while not putting those features in. I don't recall any company going this far to misrepresent their game.
if sega did sue, they could give the money to relic to make an aliens RTS.
Keep it up, Jim! I think it's safe to say that a lot of people here appreciate the fact that someone is trying to stand up to this type of behavior. It shouldn't be forgotten so quickly.
I noticed Stephen over at Kotaku joined Jim's crusade on questioning the idea of previews. I kinda hope that becomes a trend.
We are talking about a company that published Sonic 2006, they know about the quality of the game, they just run out of time and ecided to throw the title trying to recover some of the money they invested.LOL nobody is getting sued.
If SEGA were that unhappy about the quality of the work they wouldn't have published it
Are we there yet?Can't wait for Randy Pitchford to start insulting reviewers.
im actually wondering if Sega is little other choice but to stick with Gearbox. Are other studios even available?
Personal update, I've been accused by Mr. Pitchford of attempting to do nothing but vilify and injury for the purposes of grandstanding, and was told I should have sent private questions.
Trouble is, last time I asked questions through official channels, I got told Aliens: Colonial Marines would ship with next-gen lighting in an interview I now cringe at the thought of.
That's a problem inherent in "game journalism," such that it is. You're a "shoddy journalist" for not taking part in the big PR Rube Goldberg machine -- very much like how Eurogamer got called out for announcing Borderlands 2 before Game Informer got its big exclusive reveal -- despite the fact that such a machine is exactly WHY a situation like Colonial Marines is allowed to happen.
Maybe I am indeed showboating a little, but y'know, when we serve an audience, how are we doing right by them in asking the questions privately?