Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Fuzzy Avatars Solved! Please re-upload your avatar if it was fuzzy!

Over the Years, NEW MMOs been overhyped pre-release. Are Critics now justified for their actions or

MMOExposedMMOExposed lalal land, DCPosts: 6,257Member Uncommon

Over the Years, NEW MMOs been overhyped pre-release. We see major levels of hype from the developers and the industry.
We seen some promotions and marketing from them, that just is just that. Marketing, and the final product is almost never like that.

Some would call this method of marketing, "misleading", or "False Marketing".

But in just about every hyped up release, always has a small set of Critics. And it always seem as if these critics were right, when we get to all experience the game for ourselves after release.

Its as if the critics have sight beyond the blindness of hype.

Now I am not trying to blame anybody here. I am just saying, that maybe if we stop demonizing the critics in our community,

just maybe, these New MMOs would be more productive products, and better developed.

We as a community would actually for once, hold developers to their word.

In the process, we would actually get better MMO products.

Isnt that the number 1 complain around here, is the quality of MMOs now days?

 

So are Critics now justified for their actions or remain silent?

image

«1

Comments

  • CazNeergCazNeerg Puyallup, WAPosts: 2,198Member
    The small group of "critics" as you call them are rarely "right," because they usually say the games are going to be failures, and very few AAA MMOs have actually failed.

    Peace is a lie, there is only passion.
    Through passion, I gain strength.
    Through strength, I gain power.
    Through power, I gain victory.
    Through victory, my chains are broken.
    The Force shall free me.

  • thecapitainethecapitaine West Chester, PAPosts: 401Member Uncommon

    Critics do have it fairly easy.  With no agreed upon criteria for what makes a game good or successful, it's possible to naysay everything and end up being "right".  Especially around these parts where every game gets flamed by some significant portion of the forum users.

     

    There's always room for critics and their critiques.  I just wish the dialogue was more concrete, inviting debate and discussion instead of the usual round of "F2P in  a year" or "greedy publishers" or "another WoW clone".  True critics find ways of getting their points across with the need to fall back on rhetoric, buzzwords, and hyperbole.  I'd argue we get very little true criticism here and a ton of complaining and the usual litany of personal preferences passed off as genre-defining facts.

  • GestankfaustGestankfaust Behind you, ORPosts: 1,522Member Uncommon

    From the day the first MMO was made until now, the number of MMOs has skyrocketed. So has the number of "critics". They are like paparazzi...

     

    Used to be we could read and trust reviews from true critics....now? Yeah, about that.

    image
    "This may hurt a little, but it's something you'll get used to. Relax....."

  • reeereeereeereee Posts: 1,204Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by CazNeerg
    The small group of "critics" as you call them are rarely "right," because they usually say the games are going to be failures, and very few AAA MMOs have actually failed.

    By fail they mean go f2p, and yes that's almost always the case.   But I think you've confused critics with critical, as Angry Joe fawning over gw2 was a critic being anything but critical.

  • MMOExposedMMOExposed lalal land, DCPosts: 6,257Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by CazNeerg
    The small group of "critics" as you call them are rarely "right," because they usually say the games are going to be failures, and very few AAA MMOs have actually failed.

    Example that you are wrong.

    GW2 pre-release.

    Developers gave off the impression that the bosses would not respawn repeatedly like other games do. And that the Dynamic Events were to have permanent effects. Also some critics pointed out why the trinityless system wouldnt turnout like many envisioned it would. Also remember Developers stating that the game would not have any grinds, which was another misleading statement as we can see today. There are many more. Go check out the manifesto tread on the main forum, if you want to see how the post release community feels about being mislead by other aspects of the GW2 manifesto.

     

    Again lots of stuff pointed out by logical critics, who were demonized for it. Yet on the " Review & Impression" forum here, we can see many former blind fans, who were doing the demonization of the critics, yet now changed their tune and agree with many of them. Its as if, all the hassle could have been avoided if the fans never demonized the critics, who were looking out for them in the first place, since the same fan now agrees with them.

    image

  • GestankfaustGestankfaust Behind you, ORPosts: 1,522Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by MMOExposed
    Originally posted by CazNeerg
    The small group of "critics" as you call them are rarely "right," because they usually say the games are going to be failures, and very few AAA MMOs have actually failed.

    Example that you are wrong.

    GW2 pre-release.

    Developers gave off the impression that the bosses would not respawn repeatedly like other games do. And that the Dynamic Events were to have permanent effects. Also some critics pointed out why the trinityless system wouldnt turnout like many envisioned it would. Also remember Developers stating that the game would not have any grinds, which was another misleading statement as we can see today. There are many more. Go check out the manifesto tread on the main forum, if you want to see how the post release community feels about being mislead by other aspects of the GW2 manifesto.

     

    Again lots of stuff pointed out by logical critics, who were demonized for it. Yet on the " Review & Impression" forum here, we can see many former blind fans, who were doing the demonization of the critics, yet now changed their tune and agree with many of them. Its as if, all the hassle could have been avoided if the fans never demonized the critics, who were looking out for them in the first place, since the same fan now agrees with them.

    I have rarely seen a critic (I count these as working for some gaming site or at least have a good following on Youtube...NOT just posts made around here...that's ridiculous), that I would trust now days at all. You can all you want, but must come off as they have never played said game in the first place. Or for a very short time.

     

    Comments coming from this site...depends on if the person makes sense and not just either dogging or pledging their life to said game.

    image
    "This may hurt a little, but it's something you'll get used to. Relax....."

  • iridescenceiridescence Elliot Lake, ONPosts: 1,486Member

    As with many polls on this site this takes an all or nothing approach and so both options seem incorrect to me. Critics are often guilty of overhyping games and I wish they'd actually play games for like at least 20 or 30 hours before commenting on them at all.

     

    But I can't say critics should "remain silent". Obviously a silent critic isn't of much use.:)

     

  • jusomdudejusomdude Somewhere, KSPosts: 2,401Member
    Maybe not all critics are justified but definitely some of them are. I think some of the critics try to put things in perspective for the blind fanboys but it's often a lost cause since they think their new beloved unreleased MMO can do no harm whatsoever.
  • GestankfaustGestankfaust Behind you, ORPosts: 1,522Member Uncommon
    I voted they should remain silent. Because until they can once again prove to me that can competently review a game, they shouldn't try. Maybe it's time to replace the lackeys in the field with people that play MMOs....it's a start

    image
    "This may hurt a little, but it's something you'll get used to. Relax....."

  • g0m0rrahg0m0rrah indianapolis, INPosts: 269Member
    Originally posted by CazNeerg
    The small group of "critics" as you call them are rarely "right," because they usually say the games are going to be failures, and very few AAA MMOs have actually failed.

     

       The problem with this statement is that we have to agree on what failed means.  I for one would say SWtoR failed due it being a AAA MMO with an enormous budget that didnt get a AAA audience.  I would also say that if in the first 6 months you go from a subscription model to a F2P model, you have failed considering the fact that you wanted your game to succeed as a sub game.

       Fanboys will be happy to say that if a game eeks by making money and having any player base, that the game didnt fail and that failing can only be measured based solely upon game closure.  I simply do not agree with this definition of failure.  I believe that if you create a product with certain key targets in mind "a huge budget, a large population, a sub based model" and you deviate from that target, this is a failure of some type.  There can be varying degrees of failure.  I am sure that there are silver medal winners in the Olympics looks at that medal as a type of failure.  Just as there are different levels of failure there are also different levels of success.  It might not be the level of success that they wanted, but its still success.  It all depends on how you want to look at it.

      As far as the topic is concerned, there are a lot of fanboys on these forums just as there are a lot of haters.  Its to the point that critiquing any element of a game either goes over board and becomes a hater fest.  We get bombarded by constant logical fallacies and people will misconstrue opinions with fact.

      For example in one thread I was reading about how the OP did not like the painted on textures of the armor in ESO.  I agree with the OP, i dont care for painted on textures. Some said that this exists to eliminate lag in PvP, which is a reason and I am fine with that type of argument.  Next the OP was bombarded with how he is blind, how the armor is the best of any MMO ever, and endless nonsense.  Even with a valid complain fanboys will emerge and turn the discussion into a flame fest....

  • GestankfaustGestankfaust Behind you, ORPosts: 1,522Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by g0m0rrah
    Originally posted by CazNeerg
    The small group of "critics" as you call them are rarely "right," because they usually say the games are going to be failures, and very few AAA MMOs have actually failed.

     

     

      As far as the topic is concerned, there are a lot of fanboys on these forums just as there are a lot of haters.  Its to the point that critiquing any element of a game either goes over board and becomes a hater fest.  We get bombarded by constant logical fallacies and people will misconstrue opinions with fact.

      For example in one thread I was reading about how the OP did not like the painted on textures of the armor in ESO.  I agree with the OP, i dont care for painted on textures. Some said that this exists to eliminate lag in PvP, which is a reason and I am fine with that type of argument.  Next the OP was bombarded with how he is blind, how the armor is the best of any MMO ever, and endless nonsense.  Even with a valid complain fanboys will emerge and turn the discussion into a flame fest....

    Times 500 for haters. You could type til your fingers fall off...as in the thread you mentioned...and the trolls and haters wont listen

    image
    "This may hurt a little, but it's something you'll get used to. Relax....."

  • aesperusaesperus Hamshire, NVPosts: 5,128Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by MMOExposed

    Over the Years, NEW MMOs been overhyped pre-release. We see major levels of hype from the developers and the industry.
    We seen some promotions and marketing from them, that just is just that. Marketing, and the final product is almost never like that.

    Some would call this method of marketing, "misleading", or "False Marketing".

    But in just about every hyped up release, always has a small set of Critics. And it always seem as if these critics were right, when we get to all experience the game for ourselves after release.

    Its as if the critics have sight beyond the blindness of hype.

    Now I am not trying to blame anybody here. I am just saying, that maybe if we stop demonizing the critics in our community,

    just maybe, these New MMOs would be more productive products, and better developed.

    We as a community would actually for once, hold developers to their word.

    In the process, we would actually get better MMO products.

    Isnt that the number 1 complain around here, is the quality of MMOs now days?

     

    So are Critics now justified for their actions or remain silent?

    If you're looking to start a witch hunt in regards to hype, look in the mirror. No one has consistantly bashed new games more than you have. It doesn't even seem to matter what the game is, you will let us all know how much it sucks, and how it will be a failure.

    And yet, inspite of all this doom & gloom, very few of these games have actually failed.

    Furthermore, it is we the players who end up generating most of the hype for these games. It's convenient to blame others for our own lack of research, reading comprehension, and expectations not ground in reality. However, at some point people need to grow up.

  • GestankfaustGestankfaust Behind you, ORPosts: 1,522Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by aesperus
    Originally posted by MMOExposed

    Over the Years, NEW MMOs been overhyped pre-release. We see major levels of hype from the developers and the industry.
    We seen some promotions and marketing from them, that just is just that. Marketing, and the final product is almost never like that.

    Some would call this method of marketing, "misleading", or "False Marketing".

    But in just about every hyped up release, always has a small set of Critics. And it always seem as if these critics were right, when we get to all experience the game for ourselves after release.

    Its as if the critics have sight beyond the blindness of hype.

    Now I am not trying to blame anybody here. I am just saying, that maybe if we stop demonizing the critics in our community,

    just maybe, these New MMOs would be more productive products, and better developed.

    We as a community would actually for once, hold developers to their word.

    In the process, we would actually get better MMO products.

    Isnt that the number 1 complain around here, is the quality of MMOs now days?

     

    So are Critics now justified for their actions or remain silent?

    If you're looking to start a witch hunt in regards to hype, look in the mirror. No one has consistantly bashed new games more than you have. It doesn't even seem to matter what the game is, you will let us all know how much it sucks, and how it will be a failure.

    And yet, inspite of all this doom & gloom, very few of these games have actually failed.

    Furthermore, it is we the players who end up generating most of the hype for these games. It's convenient to blame others for our own lack of research, reading comprehension, and expectations not ground in reality. However, at some point people need to grow up.

    I reeeely didn't want to go there...but glad some one else noticed  :P

    image
    "This may hurt a little, but it's something you'll get used to. Relax....."

  • CazNeergCazNeerg Puyallup, WAPosts: 2,198Member

    Originally posted by reeereee

    Originally posted by CazNeerg
    The small group of "critics" as you call them are rarely "right," because they usually say the games are going to be failures, and very few AAA MMOs have actually failed.

    By fail they mean go f2p, and yes that's almost always the case.   But I think you've confused critics with critical, as Angry Joe fawning over gw2 was a critic being anything but critical.

    I was using critic in the same sense the OP appeared to be using it; to refer to the doom and gloomers whose primary hobby appears to be hating any game that looks like it has a chance of being popular, occasionally while singing the praises of games that were shutdown because not enough people played them to justify keeping the servers open.

    Originally posted by g0m0rrah

       The problem with this statement is that we have to agree on what failed means.  I for one would say SWtoR failed due it being a AAA MMO with an enormous budget that didnt get a AAA audience.  I would also say that if in the first 6 months you go from a subscription model to a F2P model, you have failed considering the fact that you wanted your game to succeed as a sub game.

       Fanboys will be happy to say that if a game eeks by making money and having any player base, that the game didnt fail and that failing can only be measured based solely upon game closure.  I simply do not agree with this definition of failure.  I believe that if you create a product with certain key targets in mind "a huge budget, a large population, a sub based model" and you deviate from that target, this is a failure of some type.  There can be varying degrees of failure.  I am sure that there are silver medal winners in the Olympics looks at that medal as a type of failure.  Just as there are different levels of failure there are also different levels of success.  It might not be the level of success that they wanted, but its still success.  It all depends on how you want to look at it.

      As far as the topic is concerned, there are a lot of fanboys on these forums just as there are a lot of haters.  Its to the point that critiquing any element of a game either goes over board and becomes a hater fest.  We get bombarded by constant logical fallacies and people will misconstrue opinions with fact.

      For example in one thread I was reading about how the OP did not like the painted on textures of the armor in ESO.  I agree with the OP, i dont care for painted on textures. Some said that this exists to eliminate lag in PvP, which is a reason and I am fine with that type of argument.  Next the OP was bombarded with how he is blind, how the armor is the best of any MMO ever, and endless nonsense.  Even with a valid complain fanboys will emerge and turn the discussion into a flame fest....

    TOR didn't get a AAA audience?  So what you are saying is that the only MMO with a AAA audience is WoW?  Because even if you only include subscribers, TOR still has the second or third largest player population in the west.

    And the definition of failure that you are disagreeing with here isn't the "fanboy" definition, it is the definition of anyone who understands that the game industry is, first and foremost, an industry.  If a game is still open, it's because it's turning a profit, and if it's turning a profit, it's a success, no matter how "bad" it is or how many people hate it.  Any other definition is just an attempt to legitimize personal opinions by trying to reframe them with objective language.

    A "fanboy" definition of success would be someone trying to argue that some game that has been shutdown was actually successful, and was only shutdown because the "suits" were greedy and stupid, not because it actually failed. (For example, many SWG fans.) The only difference between a fanboy and a hater is whether they like or dislike a given game, both are uncritical thinkers.

    As for your example of the armor thread, nobody on either side should have been flaming, since it was all about personal preferences, on both sides.  But uncritical fanboys claiming something is "the best ever" is no worse than unthinking haters who feel the need to declare any product they don't like a "failure," and spout convoluted nonsense to justify idiosyncratic definitions of failure to support their primarily emotion based "arguments."

     

    Peace is a lie, there is only passion.
    Through passion, I gain strength.
    Through strength, I gain power.
    Through power, I gain victory.
    Through victory, my chains are broken.
    The Force shall free me.

  • StarIStarI Mount EverestPosts: 926Member Uncommon

    Just want to make one thing clear.

    Games don't get overhyped, people do.

    And no, it's not companies' fault that they do.

  • GestankfaustGestankfaust Behind you, ORPosts: 1,522Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by StarI

    Just want to make one thing clear.

    Games don't get overhyped, people do.

    And no, it's not companies' fault that they do.

    ^This...cept that it's also gaming sites the help get the false hype. Like here...or false hate

     

    :P

    image
    "This may hurt a little, but it's something you'll get used to. Relax....."

  • rounnerrounner CanberraPosts: 603Member Uncommon

    We don't have to agree on extreme definitions like failed at all. That's a bunch of straw man bull. No game is perfect and there are plenty of legitimate criticism's for them all. To pick current soon to be released examples:

    ESO's phasing plus underwater swimming, robbing houses and all the other ESO trade mark things

    AA's immersion breaking features (subway in village etc)

    EQNL what to do besides make stuff

    Black Desert everyone looks the same

    Got a problem with my opinions, come at me bro. I'm sick of people parroting 'this is beta' crap and by the time anyone can say I told you so its too late.

  • VengeSunsoarVengeSunsoar Posts: 5,316Member Uncommon
    I think by far the majority of the hype has come from the community and not from the devs.  We are doing all the work for them. 

    Quit worrying about other players in a game and just play.

  • firefly2003firefly2003 Los Angeles, CAPosts: 2,555Member

    Valid criticism is always welcomed in my book, what I dont like is paid forum shills , and alt account posters trying to shout down any negativity about any game period on these boards. Also what rubs me the wrong way it certain posters on these boards that will go out of their way to claim and push people into thinking we shouldn't be playing MMORPGs but MOBA's , or non-MMORPG's cause these charts say so, so everyone drop your genre and play this !!!!. 

    Thing is with overhyped MMORPG's these days , the critics have been always right , going to F2P , mediocore, some people see games for what they really are and are not distracted by the new shiny distraction most of these players get wrapped up in.

    F2P being all the craze right now about making more money than sub based games, these games rely on whales who pay for a sub and buy crap from the cash shops, if it wasnt for those players most of these sub-turned F2P MMORPGs would have folded by now , cause the game and its design was sub-par or mediocore to begin with, the game wasnt good enough to warrant people paying for it.

     

    image

  • firefly2003firefly2003 Los Angeles, CAPosts: 2,555Member
    Originally posted by g0m0rrah
    Originally posted by CazNeerg
    The small group of "critics" as you call them are rarely "right," because they usually say the games are going to be failures, and very few AAA MMOs have actually failed.

     

       The problem with this statement is that we have to agree on what failed means.  I for one would say SWtoR failed due it being a AAA MMO with an enormous budget that didnt get a AAA audience.  I would also say that if in the first 6 months you go from a subscription model to a F2P model, you have failed considering the fact that you wanted your game to succeed as a sub game.

       Fanboys will be happy to say that if a game eeks by making money and having any player base, that the game didnt fail and that failing can only be measured based solely upon game closure.  I simply do not agree with this definition of failure.  I believe that if you create a product with certain key targets in mind "a huge budget, a large population, a sub based model" and you deviate from that target, this is a failure of some type.  There can be varying degrees of failure.  I am sure that there are silver medal winners in the Olympics looks at that medal as a type of failure.  Just as there are different levels of failure there are also different levels of success.  It might not be the level of success that they wanted, but its still success.  It all depends on how you want to look at it.

      As far as the topic is concerned, there are a lot of fanboys on these forums just as there are a lot of haters.  Its to the point that critiquing any element of a game either goes over board and becomes a hater fest.  We get bombarded by constant logical fallacies and people will misconstrue opinions with fact.

      For example in one thread I was reading about how the OP did not like the painted on textures of the armor in ESO.  I agree with the OP, i dont care for painted on textures. Some said that this exists to eliminate lag in PvP, which is a reason and I am fine with that type of argument.  Next the OP was bombarded with how he is blind, how the armor is the best of any MMO ever, and endless nonsense.  Even with a valid complain fanboys will emerge and turn the discussion into a flame fest....

    And its those same fanbois that will be here 6-8 months later waiting on the next big MMORPG..while they criticize the game they worshiped months prior to release, hyping it to no end like ESO is being right now on the pedestal.

    image

  • SephirosoSephiroso Marietta, GAPosts: 1,160Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by CazNeerg
    snip

    you're wrong. The definition of when an mmorpg "fails" is typically if it loses a large sum of its playerbase very quickly to varying degrees depending on the game type.

    If game was P2P, it fails when they lose so many subs, the game is forced to go f2p if it wants to stay alive, otherwise it would have to shut down its servers. A game that goes f2p no longer has to chug out content as often, or as polished as a p2p game does. So development costs are alot lower, as well as believe it or not, customer service costs. (Huge difference between customer service in a p2p game and a f2p game).

     

    If game was B2P, it fails when it again loses the majority of its stable playerbase and doesn't really gain them back...however as a B2P, it too doesn't really get credited with the term "fail" to much because it isn't under the same pressure to pump out actual content often.

     

    If game was F2P, it fails the moment it was conceived.(I'm kidding....)

    image
    Be the Ultimate Ninja! Play Billy Vs. SNAKEMAN today!

  • mistmakermistmaker viennaPosts: 232Member Uncommon

    SWG

    AoC

    SWToR

     

    those games were hyped and called a failure but i still had years of fun in them.

     

    so its just a point of view...

  • FinalFikusFinalFikus Chicago, ILPosts: 906Member
    MMORPG.com 92.9 accuracy rating and rising.

    "If the Damned gave you a roadmap, then you'd know just where to go"

  • FinalFikusFinalFikus Chicago, ILPosts: 906Member
    Originally posted by CazNeerg

    Originally posted by reeereee

    Originally posted by CazNeerg
    The small group of "critics" as you call them are rarely "right," because they usually say the games are going to be failures, and very few AAA MMOs have actually failed.

    By fail they mean go f2p, and yes that's almost always the case.   But I think you've confused critics with critical, as Angry Joe fawning over gw2 was a critic being anything but critical.

    I was using critic in the same sense the OP appeared to be using it; to refer to the doom and gloomers whose primary hobby appears to be hating any game that looks like it has a chance of being popular, occasionally while singing the praises of games that were shutdown because not enough people played them to justify keeping the servers open.

    Originally posted by g0m0rrah

       The problem with this statement is that we have to agree on what failed means.  I for one would say SWtoR failed due it being a AAA MMO with an enormous budget that didnt get a AAA audience.  I would also say that if in the first 6 months you go from a subscription model to a F2P model, you have failed considering the fact that you wanted your game to succeed as a sub game.

       Fanboys will be happy to say that if a game eeks by making money and having any player base, that the game didnt fail and that failing can only be measured based solely upon game closure.  I simply do not agree with this definition of failure.  I believe that if you create a product with certain key targets in mind "a huge budget, a large population, a sub based model" and you deviate from that target, this is a failure of some type.  There can be varying degrees of failure.  I am sure that there are silver medal winners in the Olympics looks at that medal as a type of failure.  Just as there are different levels of failure there are also different levels of success.  It might not be the level of success that they wanted, but its still success.  It all depends on how you want to look at it.

      As far as the topic is concerned, there are a lot of fanboys on these forums just as there are a lot of haters.  Its to the point that critiquing any element of a game either goes over board and becomes a hater fest.  We get bombarded by constant logical fallacies and people will misconstrue opinions with fact.

      For example in one thread I was reading about how the OP did not like the painted on textures of the armor in ESO.  I agree with the OP, i dont care for painted on textures. Some said that this exists to eliminate lag in PvP, which is a reason and I am fine with that type of argument.  Next the OP was bombarded with how he is blind, how the armor is the best of any MMO ever, and endless nonsense.  Even with a valid complain fanboys will emerge and turn the discussion into a flame fest....

    TOR didn't get a AAA audience?  So what you are saying is that the only MMO with a AAA audience is WoW?  Because even if you only include subscribers, TOR still has the second or third largest player population in the west.

    And the definition of failure that you are disagreeing with here isn't the "fanboy" definition, it is the definition of anyone who understands that the game industry is, first and foremost, an industry.  If a game is still open, it's because it's turning a profit, and if it's turning a profit, it's a success, no matter how "bad" it is or how many people hate it.  Any other definition is just an attempt to legitimize personal opinions by trying to reframe them with objective language.

    A "fanboy" definition of success would be someone trying to argue that some game that has been shutdown was actually successful, and was only shutdown because the "suits" were greedy and stupid, not because it actually failed. (For example, many SWG fans.) The only difference between a fanboy and a hater is whether they like or dislike a given game, both are uncritical thinkers.

    As for your example of the armor thread, nobody on either side should have been flaming, since it was all about personal preferences, on both sides.  But uncritical fanboys claiming something is "the best ever" is no worse than unthinking haters who feel the need to declare any product they don't like a "failure," and spout convoluted nonsense to justify idiosyncratic definitions of failure to support their primarily emotion based "arguments."

     

    The pass/fail criteria for TOR was known long before it was conceived. See SWG. (Profitable from day one to close. Winner of awards and fat bonuses for it's success. Around 70 devs at the NGE.)

    "If the Damned gave you a roadmap, then you'd know just where to go"

  • GeezerGamerGeezerGamer ChairPosts: 5,596Member Uncommon

    Why do people talk about fanboys and haters as opposing factions....like good vs. evil? Go look at some of the most notable fans in certain game forums. Then go see them engaging in the exact same behavior in other game's forums they fought so hard against in their forum of choice. Irrational people are irrational. IT's the same people. The fanboys ARE the haters.

«1
Sign In or Register to comment.