Support NeoGAF

[The Jackdog]

So basically you are saying that Sony priced the game to recoup the marketing they did for this because that just pretty much rest assured that it was on Sean to make sure that the game was actually good. Because that price wouldn't have came after the game was created but definitely before the game was even showed on a stage.


and yes I do

i genuinely do not understand what youre saying here at all.

could you rephrase?

 

[RPGCrazied]

Problem I had with it was it being $60. Sorry, does not look like a full priced game. The features just aren't there.

 

[ClosingADoor]

Last comment and I'm out. The game wasn't broken so the state of the game was perfectly fine. What was promised was what wasn't in the game. That is not Sony's responsibility. If whatever the devs stated was going to be in that game to Sony and went off script to explain that, and there is a contract date that this game needs to be on shelves, Sony is just not at fault for that. Sony should now the condition of the game if it's not working right, but that wasn't the case here. I do think there is a line here and I think we are really going over board as to who has a say in what.

This is the first time that I have heard people argue that the publisher of a game is not responsible for the game itself. That doesn't make sense. They market the game, they put it out there, they are selling it to consumers. How are we absolving them of all responsibility when that product does not meet the consumers expectations and in this case does not have the features that were talked about in the time leading up to release?

As a consumer, I am buying the game from Sony on PlayStation 4, since they are the publisher. If they were just the distributor (like Valve on PC through Steam) it would be a different story, but they were actively involved with the game and are the ones selling it to me. How is the company selling me the game not at least partially responsible.

 

[GinoFelino]

If it doesn't work out, and you know it didn't, but you still charge full price. Then its not just disappointing, its dishonest. And I think people would move on, except that statements like this trying to play it off or downplay the dishonesty brings it all back up again.

True that, its easy enough to avoid being duped by the lies. Though that hardly excuses that they were lies.

Really? Because I'm pretty sure that 99% of all games being sold at full price has scrapped features at one point in development. Or it has oversold its graphics in PR bullshots, or has oversold the importance of a new gameplay gimmick. Do they get the same treatment?

What they were told they were going to get, probably.

Like what? What precisely? What aspect is so clearly missing and so damaging to the game that we still can't get over it as a community?

At what point does ambition and over promising become lies and avoiding taking accountability of what happened?

Jesus Christ some people just want to suck off some devs like they are doing god's work, not realizing that most everyone else on the fucking planet works their asses off too, but for some reason HG is allowed to get away with outright lies or over-promising without having to explain when they don't deliver.

Getting over disappointment is not the same as wanting to suck off a dev. Is nuance really that hard for you?

Your first question is a good one. I'd say intent plays a big part of that. And intent is hard to prove or disprove, but I usually like to give people the benefit of the doubt. That's just a matter of perspective.

Hi Sean. Where've you been?

The very lamest of lame replies. Again; you're an authority on miscommunication, so I really don't think you should be so unforgiving of others.

OK? Then don't sell your game on the back of promises that you know you're not going to keep. If you don't want people to be upset about your product, be respectful of your consumers. It's just as simple as that.

For all the complaining about the complaining that people love to do in NMS threads, the great thing is that all the complaining is actually having an effect. Steam is introducing new advertising standards to help avoid this kind of thing in the future, so apparently consumers are being heard. I'm glad people didn't "get over it" so quickly that some good couldn't come from it.

Complaining is fine if it's legit, and if it leads to improvement: doubly so. Abuse is most definitely not fine. Complaining about everything related to the actual issue is also not fine. Attacking Layden regarding this snippet is complete bullshit.

Regarding your first paragraph: you simply don't know if anyone made promises they knew they weren't going to keep. All you know is some promises didn't come to fruition in the final game.

This is nonsense.

The issue is one of communication. If you know you are not going to deliver what was promised, then kindly update your potential customers on that fact. Passing it off as "everybody overpromises" is pathetic.

A bullet point overview of stuff that didn't make it into the final game but was planned to be in it at some point would have been super helpful, yes. But I'm sure they were proud of the final product and the importance of some omissions have been greatly exaggerated by those disappointed in the final product. Almost none of the omissions would have made for a significantly better game imo. It would still have been disappointing in other ways.

 

[Statue of Limitation]

All this over a vaguely hinted multiplayer and a list of stuff no one actually cares about

 

[Wheatly]

At this point, there's nothing Sony representatives can say which GAF won't complain about, it seems.

Pretty much

 

[Felix Lighter]

Shuhei Yoshida's response was far more interesting. This is meaningless PR fluff.

 

[ClosingADoor]

Really? Because I'm pretty sure that 99% of all games being sold at full price has scrapped features at one point in development. Or it has oversold its graphics in PR bullshots, or has oversold the importance of a new gameplay gimmick. Do they get the same treatment?

The developer refused to tell on release if promised features were in the game or not. That is something on another level then just having features being scrapped during development.

 

[The Jackdog]

At this point, there's nothing Sony representatives can say which GAF won't complain about, it seems.

lol what?

how bout "the developers at hello games have tremendous vision, and perhaps reached a little too high, and we have to be more careful in the future to present games in a state and in a way that when a potential buyer sees it, they can be assured they'll get the same experiences we promise on launch day."

i did that in two seconds

 

[akileese]

Last comment and I'm out. The game wasn't broken so the state of the game was perfectly fine. What was promised was what wasn't in the game. That is not Sony's responsibility. If whatever the devs stated was going to be in that game to Sony and went off script to explain that, and there is a contract date that this game needs to be on shelves, Sony is just not at fault for that. Sony should now the condition of the game if it's not working right, but that wasn't the case here. I do think there is a line here and I think we are really going over board as to who has a say in what.




So basically you are saying that Sony priced the game to recoup the marketing they did for this because that just pretty much rest assured that it was on Sean to make sure that the game was actually good. Because that price wouldn't have came after the game was created but definitely before the game was even showed on a stage.


and yes I do

See this is where you're wrong. Publisher's handle marketing. It's on them to work with the developer to curate a marketing platform that works with what game is. Marketing also includes talking about the game in public. Hello Games is a small studio that did not have a marketing team or a PR person. If you're Sony, and you're pushing these devs on to your main stage at E3, you really need to give them a staffed PR person to go "Hey Sean, maybe you shouldn't go out there and talk about every feature you're working on." Blizzard games had a bad habit of doing this and their community is famously rabid. This led to a lot more ambiguity, silence from them until they were absolutely ready to show something.

As you yourself said, the game wasn't broken, but it was missing stuff that Sean said should have been then. Fair. I cannot argue that and will not argue that because I don't believe in giving someone a free pass for essentially promising things that aren't there or do not work the way you described. If you're going to be transparent, you need to be transparent all the way. Dev diaries, talking the good and the bad, why features work, why they don't. Most studios will not do this for the obvious reasons. He never should have gone out and talked about theoretical features or ideas in the first place.

Where the blame falls on Sony is not reigning in Sean or giving him a PR person to slap him and tell him to shut up. Having a PR question allows for softball questions where you get to talk about strictly what you want to talk about. It's called "messaging". No Man's Sky critical marketing flaw was that it quite literally had no fucking marketing message. The fact that Sony saw this, threw their hands back behind their head and went "Yep. No problem here." was a huge mistake on their part. Give the devs free reign to create their product. Do not give them free reign to publicize it. These are not people who have experience working with the press and in the end, they're just going to say things they shouldn't say and make people furious.

 

[Green Yoshi]

Wasn't Sean Murray himself supposed to go?

He overpromised.

 

[Justified]

I'm pretty sure the 60$ was specifically Hello Game's decision. In fact, Sean was upset when Geoff suggested to him that the price was way too high. Sony had no demand at all for the price.

A Dev is going to think their game is worth a million dollars so of course he would be upset at Geoff. But you are wrong if you think the devs sets the price and not the publisher. Only if the Dev is independent.

Last comment and I'm out. The game wasn't broken so the state of the game was perfectly fine. What was promised was what wasn't in the game. That is not Sony's responsibility. If whatever the devs stated was going to be in that game to Sony and went off script to explain that, and there is a contract date that this game needs to be on shelves, Sony is just not at fault for that. Sony should now the condition of the game if it's not working right, but that wasn't the case here. I do think there is a line here and I think we are really going over board as to who has a say in what.




So basically you are saying that Sony priced the game to recoup the marketing they did for this because that just pretty much rest assured that it was on Sean to make sure that the game was actually good. Because that price wouldn't have came after the game was created but definitely before the game was even showed on a stage.


and yes I do

Yes Marketing is usually the bigger piece of money being spent, and they market No Mans Sky a lot in events, while flying Sean around giving interviews/appearing on Colbert, etc.

So yes the price was probably set early in development. You can also look at early videos (Which are still on Steam) to see the game was suppose to be much more immersive. So early on Sony may have been deceived about the state of the game, like how Tequila Works did them, but was much more invested by that point and had to recoup their money

 

[SOR5]

That was very well worded.

 

[Wheatly]

lol what?

how bout "the developers at hello games have tremendous vision, and perhaps reached a little too high, and we have to be more careful in the future to present games in a state and in a way that when a potential buyer sees it, they can be assured they'll get the same experiences we promise on launch day."

i did that in two seconds

What it Sony's commercials that were deceiving or what Sean Murray promised during his interviews?

 

[The Jackdog]

What it Sony's commercials that were deceiving or what Sean Murray promised during his interviews?

...both?

sean murray promised features in person in interviews, on stage at sony's press conference, and in trailers presented by sony at every trade show they could find

 

[Javin98]

lol what?

how bout "the developers at hello games have tremendous vision, and perhaps reached a little too high, and we have to be more careful in the future to present games in a state and in a way that when a potential buyer sees it, they can be assured they'll get the same experiences we promise on launch day."

i did that in two seconds

Reading through this thread, are you absolutely sure if Shawn Layden issued this statement, no one on GAF would complain? I very much doubt it. Several posters here seem to have something to prove.

 

[The Jackdog]

Reading through this thread, are you absolutely sure if Shawn Layden issued this statement, no one on GAF would complain? I very much doubt it. Several posters here seem to have something to prove.

for SURE people have a bone to pick. youre not gonna get everyone, obviously.

but i think what people want the most is an acknowledgement of the issues, the lies, and more importantly some accountability.

none of that is in existence right now. game launched, shit wasnt there, it wasnt talked about, hello games retreats into hiding.

theres people who are just pissed off cause its fun to dogpile and theres people who have actual reasons for being upset with sony and hello games, have made them clear, and nobody from either company seems to care.

 

[Yukinari]

All this over a vaguely hinted multiplayer and a list of stuff no one actually cares about

Multiplayer was mentioned in various interviews and even advertised on television.

"Vaguely hinted"

 

[GinoFelino]

Multiplayer was mentioned in various interviews and even advertised on television.

"Vaguely hinted"

It was advertised on television? In what form? You mean the live demo?

The developer refused to tell on release if promised features were in the game or not. That is something on another level then just having features being scrapped during development.

You're talking about the two people being at the same place in the universe?

Cool factor aside, and I'm also talking to Yukinari here, that wouldn't have made it a much better game at all, right? It's virtually insignificant for how fun to play (or disappointing) the game is.

 

[orthodoxy1095]

This is the first time that I have heard people argue that the publisher of a game is not responsible for the game itself. That doesn't make sense. They market the game, they put it out there, they are selling it to consumers. How are we absolving them of all responsibility when that product does not meet the consumers expectations and in this case does not have the features that were talked about in the time leading up to release?

As a consumer, I am buying the game from Sony on PlayStation 4, since they are the publisher. If they were just the distributor (like Valve on PC through Steam) it would be a different story, but they were actively involved with the game and are the ones selling it to me. How is the company selling me the game not at least partially responsible.

The publisher of No Man's Sky is Hello Games.

They are indeed responsible for what's in their game.

 

[The Jackdog]

You're talking about the two people being at the same place in the universe?

Cool factor aside, that wouldn't have made it a much better game at all, right? It's virtually insignificant for how fun to play (or disappointing) the game is.

WOW.

"games have features scraped during development all the time"

"Okay but this wasnt 'scrapped' it was advertised, talked about, and promoted"

"okay yeah but like it wouldnt of been that cool so whatever"

i wish i could jump as high as some people do to jump through these hoops, id be an Olympian.

 

[Wheatly]

...both?

sean murray promised features in person in interviews, on stage at sony's press conference, and in trailers presented by sony at every trade show they could find

Sony presented a platform for Sean to talk about his game on their stage. How would they have known that Sean, the lead developer of the game, was over promising? The suits probably know what they know about the game from presentations / meetings from Hello Games - they weren't going to do something like dig through the code.

Show me what Sony trailers had deceiving footage.

 

[AgentChris]

Charging $60 was major mistake on the publishing side.

 

[flkraven]

It was advertised on television? In what form? You mean the live demo?

He said it on Stephen Colbert's late night show. Something along the lines of "the only way you will know how you look is when you bump into someone else and they see you".

You're talking about the two people being at the same place in the universe?

Cool factor aside, that wouldn't have made it a much better game at all, right? It's virtually insignificant for how fun to play (or disappointing) the game is.

Whether or not it's "cool" has no influence over the discussion. He said several times you could see others (Colbert, YouTube, interview), but that it would be nearly impossible to bump into someone. Within 10 hours of release 2 people bumped into each other (lol nearly impossible), but were unable to see each other. Zero explanation. Months later, zero explanation. The only possible conclusion is that he purposely misrepresented what you could do which is, in other words, lying.

 

[Alpende]

Soooo as long as you try it doesn't matter if you lie or fuck up? At least you tried right? What a bullshit answer. It's not a big deal to say you can't do something. Be honest about it.

 

[Yukinari]

It was advertised on television? In what form? You mean the live demo?

You're talking about the two people being at the same place in the universe?

Cool factor aside, and I'm also talking to Yukinari here, that wouldn't have made it a much better game at all, right? It's virtually insignificant for how fun to play (or disappointing) the game is.

Its still a feature that many people looked forward to and one he consistently promoted.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AE0nuW-mQ8A

 

[Elandyll]

Charging $60 was major mistake on the Sony's part.

Sony not being the publisher could only have, at best, suggested the price.
There are plenty of examples of sub $60 games (even retail) on PS4 to suggest they did not "force" HG to go that road.

 

[ClosingADoor]

It was advertised on television? In what form? You mean the live demo?

You're talking about the two people being at the same place in the universe?

Cool factor aside, and I'm also talking to Yukinari here, that wouldn't have made it a much better game at all, right? It's virtually insignificant for how fun to play (or disappointing) the game is.

That is up to the player to decide. And he talked about it on the Late Show with Colbert.

The publisher of No Man's Sky is Hello Games.

They are indeed responsible for what's in their game.

I was under the impressions the PS4 version was published by Sony. I see it is misbranded in my local PlayStation Store then. It says SCEE there as publisher. Apparently the deal was different. Seems they only did the marketing then. That changes the story a bit for me.

 

[AmuroChan]

I'm glad Geoff asked Shawn the question, but honestly what do people expect him to say? No publisher is going to straight up throw a dev under the bus, no matter how bad the screw up is. In the business world you're taught to build relationships and not burn bridges unless absolutely necessary because you never know if that will come back and bite you in the ass in the future.

 

[Mr. F]

I'm glad Geoff asked Shawn the question, but honestly what do people expect him to say? No publisher is going to straight up throw a dev under the bus, no matter how bad the screw up is. In the business world you're taught to build relationships and not burn bridges unless absolutely necessary because you never know if that will come back and bite you in the ass in the future.

Given how Shu was pretty savage I think it could have gone either way

 

[ResoRai]

It was advertised on television? In what form? You mean the live demo?

You're talking about the two people being at the same place in the universe?

Cool factor aside, and I'm also talking to Yukinari here, that wouldn't have made it a much better game at all, right? It's virtually insignificant for how fun to play (or disappointing) the game is.

Man, Jesus dude. This isn't about the game being good or not.

for SURE people have a bone to pick. youre not gonna get everyone, obviously.

but i think what people want the most is an acknowledgement of the issues, the lies, and more importantly some accountability.

none of that is in existence right now. game launched, shit wasnt there, it wasnt talked about, hello games retreats into hiding.

theres people who are just pissed off cause its fun to dogpile and theres people who have actual reasons for being upset with sony and hello games, have made them clear, and nobody from either company seems to care.

Great post. Think you are spot on.

 

[mejin]

Shawn took a Phil Spencer's approach, but he did well.

 

[Oersted]

I'm glad Geoff asked Shawn the question, but honestly what do people expect him to say? No publisher is going to straight up throw a dev under the bus, no matter how bad the screw up is. In the business world you're taught to build relationships and not burn bridges unless absolutely necessary because you never know if that will come back and bite you in the ass in the future.

He is basically saying look at him, not at us. It is not throwing under the bus, its leaving you alone in front of one.

 

[OuterLimits]

Last comment and I'm out. The game wasn't broken so the state of the game was perfectly fine. What was promised was what wasn't in the game. That is not Sony's responsibility. If whatever the devs stated was going to be in that game to Sony and went off script to explain that, and there is a contract date that this game needs to be on shelves, Sony is just not at fault for that. Sony should now the condition of the game if it's not working right, but that wasn't the case here. I do think there is a line here and I think we are really going over board as to who has a say in what.




So basically you are saying that Sony priced the game to recoup the marketing they did for this because that just pretty much rest assured that it was on Sean to make sure that the game was actually good. Because that price wouldn't have came after the game was created but definitely before the game was even showed on a stage.


and yes I do



You're not doing anything but piggybacking on other people comments that aren't anymore right either. At the end of the day it's an opinion and none of these are facts. We don't know the facts because we don't know the details behind their relationship..but Sony's responsibility isn't the same as the developers responsibility. When it's a Sony in house made game, then we can have a real conversation on who's at fault because as far as I'm concerned..Sony takes fault for marketing but Sean is at fault for the entire game that he created. Sony didn't make this so they shouldn't have to answer for him. He needs to answer to himself....because, it's not like Sony didn't give him the entire floor to explain this.

Game was actually kind of broken at release. Tons of crashing and other glitches. Patches have helped, but I still have crashes at times(much less though). At release it was crashing every 30-60 minutes for me anyway.

It wasn't just missing features causing frustration at release for some people, but the constant crashes and other issues.

 

[innervision961]

BUT you should never outright lie or mislead your fans and customers because you couldn't achieve said vision. FTFY Shawn.

 

[MarineMountie]

Its baffling to me that people still think Sony published this game. All they did was get advertising rights. That's it. Same way Sony has COD advertising and Microsoft has Battlefield.

 

[meerak]

I continue to find all the disappoitnment and anger at this game utterly overblown, hilarious and embarassing. Sorry. It's just a mediocre game.

Next time just don't work yourselves up so much - problem solved. You just have to WAIT. For the love of god, just wait. If you are convinved by any preview of any game that is YOUR fault, like believing a magic trick is real.

People need to make themselves responsible for their own purchasing decisions. You're not a child. Well, if you are, fine. But the rest of you...

Blame isn't going to save you from your next stupid purchase, but, admitting responsibility may.

 

[Jito]

No one is saying all forgiven though, are they ?. But atleast its not like alot of people here would like you to believe, an intentional con-job.

Oh so he was just lying with the best intentions? Regardless of the fact he knew plenty of features wouldn't make it into the game, he just continued lying? You're delusional.

Apparently it's ok to lie if you have good intentions.

 

[Man Called Aerodynamics]

The problem is not that they aimed too high or scrapped planned features. That's true of most games. The problem is that they continued to talk about and advertise stuff that wasn't in the game, and was never going to be in the game, and they knew it.

 

[RedlineRonin]

ITT: A whole bunch of people who (still) haven't learned not to pre order and then get upset when games aren't what they were shown to be and want accountability.

No, it's not okay that HG lied. No, it's not okay the Sony (Shu) haven't taken accountability. But that's Shu's role as president of Worldwide Studios, not Shawn's.

It is ultimately not on Sony (or HG or any company) to protect your hard earned dollars. That's on you. All the acknowledgement and accountability it the world doesn't put your $60 back in your pocket.

Wait for previews and reviews, don't get caught up in hype cycles, and make smart buying decisions.

Or don't and own it when you wasted your money.

 

[flkraven]

I continue to find all the disappoitnment and anger at this game utterly overblown, hilarious and embarassing. Sorry. It's just a mediocre game.

Next time just don't work yourselves up so much - problem solved. You just have to WAIT. For the love of god, just wait. If you are convinved by any preview of any game that is YOUR fault, like believing a magic trick is real.

People need to make themselves responsible for their own purchasing decisions. You're not a child. Well, if you are, fine. But the rest of you...

Blame isn't going to save you from your next stupid purchase, but, admitting responsibility may.

This is the shittest of shit posts. Learn why people want accountability from HG before painting everyone with a broad, entirely off base brush.

 

[OuterLimits]

Its baffling to me that people still think Sony published this game. All they did was get advertising rights. That's it. Same way Sony has COD advertising and Microsoft has Battlefield.

Not sure how it's baffling. When you start the game one of the first things you see is "Sony presents"

Plus before release you had Sony claiming they were treating it like a first party game and they were giving it a ton of attention.

 

[RedRum]

Last comment and I'm out. The game wasn't broken so the state of the game was perfectly fine. What was promised was what wasn't in the game. That is not Sony's responsibility. If whatever the devs stated was going to be in that game to Sony and went off script to explain that, and there is a contract date that this game needs to be on shelves, Sony is just not at fault for that. Sony should now the condition of the game if it's not working right, but that wasn't the case here. I do think there is a line here and I think we are really going over board as to who has a say in what.

What world do you think you live in where a publisher funds a developer making a game and when a contract is made to make said game, that there's no oversight whatsoever. I guarantee that Sony knew the state of the game every step of the way and it was Sony that had the power to redlight or greenlight the release. These guys just don't get direction and funding blindly. Sony knew, should have delayed again, but I promise you they were instrumental in giving the go for release. They shoulder the fault too.

 

[MarineMountie]

I continue to find all the disappoitnment and anger at this game utterly overblown, hilarious and embarassing. Sorry. It's just a mediocre game.

Next time just don't work yourselves up so much - problem solved. You just have to WAIT. For the love of god, just wait. If you are convinved by any preview of any game that is YOUR fault, like believing a magic trick is real.

People need to make themselves responsible for their own purchasing decisions. You're not a child. Well, if you are, fine. But the rest of you...

Blame isn't going to save you from your next stupid purchase, but, admitting responsibility may.

While you are right about pre ordering, it doesn't excuse the constant lies from Sean in every interview that he did. He mislead potential customers with promises he knew he couldn't fulfill, and that was enough for the massive number of day 1 sales.

 

[ResoRai]

ITT: A whole bunch of people who (still) haven't learned not to pre order.

No, it's not okay that HG lied. No, it's not okay the Sony (Shu) haven't taken accountability. But that's Shu's role as president of Worldwide Studios, not Shawn's.

It is ultimately not on Sony (or HG or any company) to protect your hard earned dollars. That's on you. All the acknowledgement and accountability it the world doesn't put your $60 back in your pocket.

Wait for previews and reviews, don't get caught up in hype cycles, and make smart buying decisions.

Or don't and own it when you wasted your money.

So you're saying it's the consumer and devs fault?

I continue to find all the disappoitnment and anger at this game utterly overblown, hilarious and embarassing. Sorry. It's just a mediocre game.

Next time just don't work yourselves up so much - problem solved. You just have to WAIT. For the love of god, just wait. If you are convinved by any preview of any game that is YOUR fault, like believing a magic trick is real.

People need to make themselves responsible for their own purchasing decisions. You're not a child. Well, if you are, fine. But the rest of you...

Blame isn't going to save you from your next stupid purchase, but, admitting responsibility may.

Hehe wowza. So you're saying it's everyone else's fault?

 

[GinoFelino]

WOW.

"games have features scraped during development all the time"

"Okay but this wasnt 'scrapped' it was advertised, talked about, and promoted"

"okay yeah but like it wouldnt of been that cool so whatever"

i wish i could jump as high as some people do to jump through these hoops, id be an Olympian.

Conversely, I really can't imagine being as angry as you are about this. It was a miniscule part of the game's appeal for me and 'advertised, talked about, promoted' as being virtually impossible to make happen.

Nuance is a thing that exists. Doesn't mean I'm trying to jump through hoops or something here.

He said it on Stephen Colbert's late night show. Something along the lines of "the only way you will know how you look is when you bump into someone else and they see you".

Whether or not it's "cool" has no influence over the discussion. He said several times you could see others (Colbert, YouTube, interview), but that it would be nearly impossible to bump into someone. Within 10 hours of release 2 people bumped into each other (lol nearly impossible), but were unable to see each other. Zero explanation. Months later, zero explanation. The only possible conclusion is that he purposely misrepresented what you could do which is, in other words, lying.

I know, it has zero influence on the discussion. But it really, really, really should have plenty of influence. Like, how are we still this mad about something described as impossible in the first place..?

Its still a feature that many people looked forward to and one he consistently promoted.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AE0nuW-mQ8A

'Many people' looked forward to something he described as impossible? I really don't want to play devil's advocate any more than I already have, but what if he repeated that point mainly to point out the vastness of the created universe? The fact that all players inhabit a unique part of that universe? I don't know, and I don't really care either. It was described as impossible in the first place. Why be so mad about that for so long?

Man, Jesus dude. This isn't about the game being good or not.

What are you even saying? How is this not about the game being good or not? How is that irrelevant?

If you think the game is still brilliant, does that not excuse some of its shortcomings? If you think the game is terrible, would the omissions really have made it that much better?

 

[Adam_Vania]

before release: "What do you do in this game??? hur hur hur"
after release: "But you said we could do (presents long and detailed list of everything that could be possibly included)???"

some folks have it right here. don't pre-order. you can wait a few hours to see independent gameplay footage. have some self-control.

 

[flkraven]

ITT: A whole bunch of people who (still) haven't learned not to pre order.

No, it's not okay that HG lied. No, it's not okay the Sony (Shu) haven't taken accountability. But that's Shu's role as president of Worldwide Studios, not Shawn's.

It is ultimately not on Sony (or HG or any company) to protect your hard earned dollars. That's on you. All the acknowledgement and accountability it the world doesn't put your $60 back in your pocket.

Wait for previews and reviews, don't get caught up in hype cycles, and make smart buying decisions.

Or don't and own it when you wasted your money.

So maybe climb down from your soap box an explain what exactly are you talking about? You say it's not okay that they lied, but then you hop on your high horse and give a lecture about consumer responsibility and preorder culture? Why the hell is this an appropriate discussion whenever people simply want accountability for lies? No one is saying preordering is a brilliant idea, but these are completely different discussions.

 

[Raptor]

"You can't sell a $30 game for $60 and make it look like a big release!"

"Yes, I can."

"You cant tell that the game has MP in order to charge $60 Sean!"

"Yes I can, watch me!"

 

[RedlineRonin]

So you're saying it's the consumer and devs fault?

Here, let me bold that part for you...

ITT: A whole bunch of people who (still) haven't learned not to pre order.

No, it's not okay that HG lied. No, it's not okay the Sony (Shu) haven't taken accountability. But that's Shu's role as president of Worldwide Studios, not Shawn's.

It is ultimately not on Sony (or HG or any company) to protect your hard earned dollars. That's on you. All the acknowledgement and accountability it the world doesn't put your $60 back in your pocket.

Wait for previews and reviews, don't get caught up in hype cycles, and make smart buying decisions.

Or don't and own it when you wasted your money.

There are plenty of people at fault, but no one else but you is accountable for where your money goes. No one.