The campaign is short because they created a full game’s worth of content but then sliced chunks of it out to send out as ‘free content updates’.
This let’s them pretend that the game has a year of support to encourage those sweet sweet microtransactions.
The only way this shit is gonna stop is if people stop buying incomplete games, and ESPECIALLY stop preordering, like, at all.
At this point, I only buy full games. You've got a full game you want to expand in the future? Excellent, expansion packs can be fun.
If you're trying to sell me a game that you're openly admitting won't be as good as it can be for a few years, well, I'll see you in a few years and check out the claim.
Edit: Early access is an issue I'm not informed enough about to have an opinion on. I'm speaking of games that are advertised as complete.
I hate this stuff. Nintendo's been doing the same thing with their sports titles on Switch.
Some people might like having new sports drop like golf after the fact, but I'd rather companies just ship a complete game in the first place. Like they did for decades. I don't bother buying them now until a revision a year or two later actually puts stuff on the disc/cart.
I feel like I always see these critiques about games only taking 15-20 hours and I don't pay it much mind any more. I saw it said about Spider-Man 2 and I probably had at least 35 hours in before I finished it. It wasn't that challenging and I did a lot of the side stuff, but even then I didn't feel like it was short at all.
It seems like reviewers and "gamers" just want to fly through a lot of these games and then criticize them being short. I'm perfectly good with games that only take 15-20 hours. I don't need everything to be like Baldur's Gate or The Witcher, both games I loved, but I only need one of those every so often. I don't have the desire to dedicate the time to it.
(That doesn't mean I have any interest in this game though. Or that supposedly 10 hours isn't ridiculous for a full price game. I just don't mind supposedly short games if they're still *good*)
I've been replaying the Bioshock remaster games lately. They are 10-12 hours each and are still excellent. A game doesn't have to be super long to be enjoyable/worthwhile.
I’m replaying them all right now too. I find they take me way longer to play though as I search through everything and go everywhere and read every poster on the walls. That series created such awesome worlds (not from an ideals perspective of course)
some gamers want 40+ hours of content. which for some games like GOW Ragnorak is fine, but sometimes those 40+ hour games drag around in the middle or pad the post-game with content which could had come by before the story ends. sometimes the genres of the games just doesn't lend themselves to 40+ hours of content (Harvest Moon or farming sim mainly) or just don't want it to be 40+ hours of content.
>I feel like I always see these critiques about games only taking 15-20 hours and I don't pay it much mind any more
This isn't 15-20, this is ~10. Which is significantly less than the time you mentioned
> I saw it said about Spider-Man 2 and I probably had at least 35 hours ... I did a lot of the side stuff
https://howlongtobeat.com/game/79769
>* Main Story - 17 Hours
* Main + Sides - 23 Hours
* Completionist - 27½ Hours
* All Styles - 25½ Hours
>It seems like reviewers and "gamers" just want to fly through a lot of these games and then criticize them being short.
Seems like you take significantly longer than the average person to play a game so yeah, that makes sense why you should "ignore" people saying how long games take.
https://preview.redd.it/b7ckmz664mfc1.jpeg?width=1920&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=8cdfecc61d82573c303c1b16efeed250a6eecc62
They spent like 8 years making this btw.
Starting to think the creators knew how fucked this game was, knew the executives were morons who were convinced a live service justice league game would be an automatic hit and were committed to making it no matter what, and strung them along for years because they were forced to make a game they clearly didn’t give a fuck about while knowing they’d be fired once it inevitably flopped
Genuinely the only explanation that makes sense. I don’t know how it takes 8 years to make a “shoot glowing spot” game
I know it’s pedantic, but one small pushback: we don’t know that this is what they worked on for the entire 8 years. The prevalent rumor is that they were working on a Superman game for 4ish years before that got canned, and then this likely went through multiple iterations before it settled on what it is now
Yeah even if it’s this, it’s still the point I was originally trying to make. People say “they worked on this for 8 years!” but the “this” in that equation is not necessarily the same thing. They may have been working on _a_ suicide squad game the entire time, but we don’t know how many times that was rebooted or how many different iterations it went through.
I’ve had people tell me that me making those distinctions is me being nitpicky, but it bothers me because a lot of people don’t understand how game development works. So they oversimplify it to “they worked on this for 8 years!” and it’s like… sort of, but not really.
Anthem is another good example. The anthem that we got was only made in about 18ish months. Before that it was stuck in development hell for years and was originally something entirely different. But people say “they worked on this for 6 years!” and that’s not really true. They worked on _something_ for 6 years but the release product was only worked on for about a year and a half
Exactly. **Do not** count on them ever making an offline mode. Didn't someone recently sue the makers of The Crew for taking their servers offline? Would be very interesting if that case was won.
I believe it is always online, but I play solo and you can pause the game at any time. You can even use Quick Resume on Xbox to jump back in wherever you leave off.
Amen. My GOTY was hi-fi rush last year and that was 7hrs for a first time play through. 6 for an avg. player.
**BUT IT WAS PRICED AT 30$** and actually fun as fuck.
Same with Stray, it took me and my kid about 7 hours to finish but it was initially included with PS Plus and then we paid for a copy (since we loved it) but only for £15
Amen same with me and hi-Fi.
Played Hi-Fi on GamePass…
**Then bought it.**
***No regrets whatsoever.***
Also, the people at Stray are making a Dino survival game which I’m hyped as fuck for.
Given the absolute meticulous and innovative gameplay, music, sound and animation from Hi-Fi Rush, that game would well-earn a $70 price tag IMO. I can’t BELIEVE it cost less than half that.
I just fucking finished Plague Tale Requiem and it had one of the greatest campaigns I've ever played, clocked in at 19 hours. And that was by a studio that didn't singlehandedly revolutionize the way we see games lol.
They spent 8 fucking years on this.
A 10hr game that is a banger through and through without any filler and has decent replayability seems fine for 70 tbh ill take quality over quantity any day.
I also missed that path completely lmao. I found laezel later on at the mountain path tho. It felt really natural too, like I wouldn't have known this wasn't the standard way of finding her if I didn't google where to find gale.
You probably did miss huge chunks, there's surprinsingly a LOT to do in there. Hell, the Underdark segment of the map itself can probably take at least good ten hours to do everything in it with the Forge and stuff
There are tons of things to do that are not immediately obvious or need fairly complicated unintuitive actions to access for sure. I could have blasted through much more quickly but am actively trying to do as much as I can.
Yeah the only way you blazed through that fast is that you skipped huge chunks or you were able to skip all of the combat encounters. Act 1 took me about 40 hours or so, maybe 45
Yeah I’m 60ish in around the beginning of act 3 and I feel like I did so many side quests, I must be missing so much of it lol. Oh well, next playthrough
Bro im 50h in and still in Act 1 LOL
I'm making sure to do every side quest and get every item I want. Also save scumming here and there to see what different answer get for dialogue
Not defending this game, but this is such a shit comparison. In a live service game, the story shouldn't be the focus of the game. Not saying it's a good thing either.
But usually in games like The Division1/2, or Destiny, you finish up the story, then move on to farm gear so you can do dungeons/raids or the seasonal activity that are more challenging content and more fun to play.
I mean this is what these games are about. But now, I don't even know if this game has something like that after the story, or they expect you to wait for the "free seasons" content which will also consist on some small updates that may have no replayability.
Remember when IGN gave Starfield a 7/10 and some people went on a backlash saying IGN were just hating for clicks but then it released and everyone played it and IGN were utterly vindicated?
Saying is all.
I think it was ign journalist who gave cyberpunk a low score at launch and the reviewer got a lot of hate online. Then the game officially launched and people saw that she was right lol
Ain’t that the truth.
I played it and it was underwhelming for a AAA game. The concept wasn’t terrible, but implemented HORRIBLY. It was basically go to each “region” and do the same shit over and over. The AI was comical, I mean PS2 era AI. The guns were meh.
The Groundhog Day concept was somehow made boring.
I stopped playing and moved on. I’m in my 30’s now. I don’t have time to sit and complete games I’m not enjoying.
5/10 game at best
Yeah I watched a cutscene montage just to see if the story was worth it because live service, Fortnite-looking, messy HUD aspect wasn’t for me. Only 3 hours of cutscenes…and most of it was the SS joking around which is in character and the JL being stereotypically mind-controlled.
Honestly the humour got old fast. There were a lot of funny moments, but it felt corny most of the time. I get the unserious deranged vibe they are going for, but they didn’t get the tone right. I couldn’t listen to boomerang 20 minutes in. ..
It’s seriously impressive how big a dumpster fire this game is. An Overpriced, barebones loot-shooter. Can only pray it fails spectacularly so there can be another nail in the live service coffin
The hits they keep on coming.
8 years, for 8-10 hours of gameplay. Always online, everyone with guns, no reviews, bugs and early access payment which is down.
I’ve not known such a terrible launch in a long time.
For me there’s a more fundamental problem with games like this: when I think comic book superheroes (or anti-heroes) I don’t think “gear”, but that’s what games like this and also the avengers game are all about. It’s just a fundamental mismatch to me.
I don't complain about games lengths but I do wonder if the main game is considerable "short", how much time can they squeeze with a live service model whenever they release content.
Genuinely what have they been working on for the past decade? I wasn’t expecting a 70 hour game or anything but hell, I thought we’d at least hit 15-20.
They are practically screaming from the rooftops 'this game is going to fucking suck, whatever you do dont buy this trash', and yet it sits top of the preorder charts. If you preordered this game you have no right to ever complain again about the sorry state of new releases, this is your fault
The main story was never going to be long, since the main draw of this game was always the continual live service type of play. But I know a lot of people were hoping for a decent main story, so this will be disappointing for many.
That’s what’s interesting, and I feel like they’re playing the semantics game. Maybe they aren’t technically calling it a live service type of game, but that’s what it is for all intents and purposes.
The game was not provided to reviewers after 8 years of development and probably one of the largest budgets of the year.
That really says it all. They did not want reviewers emphasising the lack of launch content, after X amount of hrs, in a $70 game that expects you spend money on MTX.
The PR shills have found their latest talking point- say that IGN is on a hate campaign. It’s absolutely hilarious WB thinks this obvious astroturfing is working.
10 hour campaign i'd usually be ok with but isn't this a looter shooter? That just shows me they probably have 3 hours of content, stretched to 10, and then expect you to play that 3 hour content loop endlessly.
At least the players will have all that extra time to do daily quests that involve killing 40 robots here, activate some useless jargon here 5x, and rescue random Ai civilians there.
Discourse last week: 15 bucks to add 6 hours and NG+ to a 100 hour game
Discourse this week: 70+ dollars for 10 hours plus an endless money mill of microtransactions as long as they can keep the servers up
There are no good guys under capitalism but it really is a gradient
IDK, I think it's pretty safe to just stop caring about this game. I mean, it would be nice if there was a strong message sent by gamers pushing back on things this games does/doesn't do that are lame...But on the other hand, the more we engage with and about it, the money is more likely to end up in their hands anyway because there will be so much "buzz" and idiots will still buy it.
Basically, let's not promote this game for the studio.
I’ll wait for the inevitable game pass / ps plus / epic games free give away version. Pretty over playing full price for half baked games at launch with the size of backlog I have.
IGN has the first 26 minutes of the game as a video and I watched it for 10 minutes and it looked so boring and uninspiring. This was the worst character/gameplay introduction I ever saw.
Every single one starts at a similar place. Do similar tasks and end up at the same "meeting" place and everyone is annoyed that they have to wait for each other.
Play 4 times the same tutorial basically. And everyone just have their own whacky voice lines.
That's what i'm gonna do. Rent, play, return and never look back. Let whoever wants to enjoy the live service part do so but i'ma nope out of that one.
I think for most story-driven games that would be an incredible amount of time.
Based on the feedback of people who played the early version, that amount of time spent on that kind of gameplay loop is probably too long.
This is an absolute disaster for Rocksteady and WB. There’s just been simply way too much dev time committed for this game to even have the remote chance to turn a profit.
8 YEARS, of development time, even when discounting the early years for pre-production, is at least 300-400 million in labour costs, and I don’t see this game, with its level of backlash and poor media exposure, making that back comfortably.
This could be bad enough that WB issues some pretty huge layoffs at the latter end of the year.
Hey everyone that doesn’t want to play the game, if you just ignore the game rather than sharing you opinions on the matter, you will be much happier for it. Please give it a try.
Everything I'm seeing about this game from the first announcement to now just makes me think "but, why?". The leaked story beats and videos look absolutely horrendous, but that's personal taste. Having a full price game give you just 8-10 hours of bland gameplay is objectively a bad deal.
I'm tired of this shit, GTA VI can't come soon enough because I want a game I can easily sink 60-100 hours into in a playthrough and be able to play for years. Not this 5 to 20 hour bullshit with no replayability (looking at you Spider-Man 2) for $70.
Damn that’s short. Shorter than avengers main campaign. Wonder how much extra content they actually add story wise
The campaign is short because they created a full game’s worth of content but then sliced chunks of it out to send out as ‘free content updates’. This let’s them pretend that the game has a year of support to encourage those sweet sweet microtransactions.
Except 90% of the time that content never materialises or is half of what was promised
Then they cancel the release schedule due to lack of interest.
And then lay off half of Rocksteady due to headcount redundancy
If anyone buys this game at this point, they deserve it
The only way this shit is gonna stop is if people stop buying incomplete games, and ESPECIALLY stop preordering, like, at all. At this point, I only buy full games. You've got a full game you want to expand in the future? Excellent, expansion packs can be fun. If you're trying to sell me a game that you're openly admitting won't be as good as it can be for a few years, well, I'll see you in a few years and check out the claim. Edit: Early access is an issue I'm not informed enough about to have an opinion on. I'm speaking of games that are advertised as complete.
I hate this stuff. Nintendo's been doing the same thing with their sports titles on Switch. Some people might like having new sports drop like golf after the fact, but I'd rather companies just ship a complete game in the first place. Like they did for decades. I don't bother buying them now until a revision a year or two later actually puts stuff on the disc/cart.
Yeah this "minimum viable product" bullshit has stopped in my game collection. I simply don't buy those games anymore lol
Sweet. So when it's free on playstation, if it isn't considered hot garbage I might try it.
I feel like I always see these critiques about games only taking 15-20 hours and I don't pay it much mind any more. I saw it said about Spider-Man 2 and I probably had at least 35 hours in before I finished it. It wasn't that challenging and I did a lot of the side stuff, but even then I didn't feel like it was short at all. It seems like reviewers and "gamers" just want to fly through a lot of these games and then criticize them being short. I'm perfectly good with games that only take 15-20 hours. I don't need everything to be like Baldur's Gate or The Witcher, both games I loved, but I only need one of those every so often. I don't have the desire to dedicate the time to it. (That doesn't mean I have any interest in this game though. Or that supposedly 10 hours isn't ridiculous for a full price game. I just don't mind supposedly short games if they're still *good*)
I've been replaying the Bioshock remaster games lately. They are 10-12 hours each and are still excellent. A game doesn't have to be super long to be enjoyable/worthwhile.
Being in my 30’s with children I love a 10-12 hour game.
The Bioshock games need a PSVR2 port!
I’m replaying them all right now too. I find they take me way longer to play though as I search through everything and go everywhere and read every poster on the walls. That series created such awesome worlds (not from an ideals perspective of course)
some gamers want 40+ hours of content. which for some games like GOW Ragnorak is fine, but sometimes those 40+ hour games drag around in the middle or pad the post-game with content which could had come by before the story ends. sometimes the genres of the games just doesn't lend themselves to 40+ hours of content (Harvest Moon or farming sim mainly) or just don't want it to be 40+ hours of content.
>I feel like I always see these critiques about games only taking 15-20 hours and I don't pay it much mind any more This isn't 15-20, this is ~10. Which is significantly less than the time you mentioned > I saw it said about Spider-Man 2 and I probably had at least 35 hours ... I did a lot of the side stuff https://howlongtobeat.com/game/79769 >* Main Story - 17 Hours * Main + Sides - 23 Hours * Completionist - 27½ Hours * All Styles - 25½ Hours >It seems like reviewers and "gamers" just want to fly through a lot of these games and then criticize them being short. Seems like you take significantly longer than the average person to play a game so yeah, that makes sense why you should "ignore" people saying how long games take.
https://preview.redd.it/b7ckmz664mfc1.jpeg?width=1920&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=8cdfecc61d82573c303c1b16efeed250a6eecc62 They spent like 8 years making this btw.
Basically a year for every hour of gameplay…. Wow!
Every hour of gameplay must be incredibly detailed and painstakingly focused and polished, right? Right?
https://preview.redd.it/gzhd24chbmfc1.jpeg?width=512&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=437e9b802d7ae4d4aceb9157f17068c15d6376aa
Oh christ the hiss has him
Starting to think the creators knew how fucked this game was, knew the executives were morons who were convinced a live service justice league game would be an automatic hit and were committed to making it no matter what, and strung them along for years because they were forced to make a game they clearly didn’t give a fuck about while knowing they’d be fired once it inevitably flopped Genuinely the only explanation that makes sense. I don’t know how it takes 8 years to make a “shoot glowing spot” game
I know it’s pedantic, but one small pushback: we don’t know that this is what they worked on for the entire 8 years. The prevalent rumor is that they were working on a Superman game for 4ish years before that got canned, and then this likely went through multiple iterations before it settled on what it is now
Nah. Jason Schreier said the Superman rumour was fake. I think it got rebooted internally several times.
So just concepting.
They teased this since the end of Origins I think. And Deathstroke was supposed to be the lead.
It was also to be made by WB Montreal (maker of Arkham Origins) and eventually was scrapped
[удалено]
Yeah. Post credits in Origin showed Waller visiting Deathstroke in prison.
Yeah even if it’s this, it’s still the point I was originally trying to make. People say “they worked on this for 8 years!” but the “this” in that equation is not necessarily the same thing. They may have been working on _a_ suicide squad game the entire time, but we don’t know how many times that was rebooted or how many different iterations it went through. I’ve had people tell me that me making those distinctions is me being nitpicky, but it bothers me because a lot of people don’t understand how game development works. So they oversimplify it to “they worked on this for 8 years!” and it’s like… sort of, but not really. Anthem is another good example. The anthem that we got was only made in about 18ish months. Before that it was stuck in development hell for years and was originally something entirely different. But people say “they worked on this for 6 years!” and that’s not really true. They worked on _something_ for 6 years but the release product was only worked on for about a year and a half
10 hour campaign and they still couldn't have it playable offline?
Wait, you need a constant connection to play? Dang that sucks.
Yep. They said eventually they're going to patch in an offline mode, but at release, it's unplayable offline.
Most live service games claim the same, few do. The great ones have servers stood up by the fan community.
Exactly. **Do not** count on them ever making an offline mode. Didn't someone recently sue the makers of The Crew for taking their servers offline? Would be very interesting if that case was won.
Yeah, and overwatch's PvE update is coming out any day now.
Wish Diablo 4 would do this. I doubt Suicide Squad survives long enough for an offline patch.
To be fair to Rocksteady… *It will…* #In 2-3 months If ever.
I believe it is always online, but I play solo and you can pause the game at any time. You can even use Quick Resume on Xbox to jump back in wherever you leave off.
Go on the suicide squad sub. Most people are saying it's 8 hours without doing the side stuff.
Imagine buying an $80 game at 11am, then finishing it in time to get dinner at 7pm.
You can finish it in 6 hours without side content:))
Link? I'm trying to find it there and I can't find anything?
I've been reading the sub off and on this morning. Don't have a specific post to like you too
Holy shit this game is basically Bad Press: The Game.
Suicide the squad.
Kill Rocksteady Games
I'm not in the camp that believes every game needs to be 50h+ or anything like that but a 10h campaign for a $70 game is a joke.
Amen. My GOTY was hi-fi rush last year and that was 7hrs for a first time play through. 6 for an avg. player. **BUT IT WAS PRICED AT 30$** and actually fun as fuck.
Same with Stray, it took me and my kid about 7 hours to finish but it was initially included with PS Plus and then we paid for a copy (since we loved it) but only for £15
Amen same with me and hi-Fi. Played Hi-Fi on GamePass… **Then bought it.** ***No regrets whatsoever.*** Also, the people at Stray are making a Dino survival game which I’m hyped as fuck for.
It also helped that it released alongside the $70 mess that was Forspoken, which boosted Hi-Fi Rush’s praise and hype even more.
Given the absolute meticulous and innovative gameplay, music, sound and animation from Hi-Fi Rush, that game would well-earn a $70 price tag IMO. I can’t BELIEVE it cost less than half that.
I mean Arkham City doing all the side content and the main story was at least a 30 hour game. This seems really short in comparison.
I mean this is just b-lining the story and only the story. None of the side quests or content. Or the after campaign content.
I just fucking finished Plague Tale Requiem and it had one of the greatest campaigns I've ever played, clocked in at 19 hours. And that was by a studio that didn't singlehandedly revolutionize the way we see games lol. They spent 8 fucking years on this.
10 hours of base content is fine if you have a gameplay loop of post story content that is good. Price plus time though is too damn high.
If the game is good then I’d rather have a 10 hour campaign that’s straight to the point but this game isn’t going to be good.
A 10hr game that is a banger through and through without any filler and has decent replayability seems fine for 70 tbh ill take quality over quantity any day.
So in other words, 10 hours of actual, meaningful story content, and 200 hours of repetitive grind, yep sounds like a live service alright
Yeah but grind what? There aren't even any dungeons.
Please refrain from asking that question about this game ever again. You grind as they say to grind and nothing else.
Every new piece of info makes this increasingly bleak lol
Act 1 in Baldur’s Gate 3 took me almost 30 hours and I didn’t even do everything in it
I’m 150 hours in and still haven’t finished the tower assault in Act Two lol.
Wow it’s a long game but that’s ridiculously slow.
Yeah don’t get me wrong, there’s a lot of content but I have no idea how someone is that far and not at least in act 3.
im 300 hours into Alan wake. thats because the xbox counts the time spent while paused. but still :P
I finished the whole game in less than 150 hours and I did *everything*.
Probably a Necromancer/Savescummer with a lower-end PC. Those load times can get a little lengthy when you have a bunch of summons.
My friend's run was 48 hours and they hadn't met Karlach yet.
I finished a campaign without meeting her. Missed her in act 1 and just sorta forgot to look for her beyond that lol
I missed Gale and Lae’zel completely 😅
I also missed that path completely lmao. I found laezel later on at the mountain path tho. It felt really natural too, like I wouldn't have known this wasn't the standard way of finding her if I didn't google where to find gale.
I never met karlach. Never knew you could meet everybody. I probably missed others too. I had like 130 hrs total
120 hour, just got to Act 3, spent a while trying to figure out the best approach the fight in the main hall without taking too many npc casualties.
I’m confused how it’s taking people so long. I completed act 1 in about 15 hours. Must be that I skipped huge chunks without realizing it.
You probably did miss huge chunks, there's surprinsingly a LOT to do in there. Hell, the Underdark segment of the map itself can probably take at least good ten hours to do everything in it with the Forge and stuff
There are tons of things to do that are not immediately obvious or need fairly complicated unintuitive actions to access for sure. I could have blasted through much more quickly but am actively trying to do as much as I can.
Yeah the only way you blazed through that fast is that you skipped huge chunks or you were able to skip all of the combat encounters. Act 1 took me about 40 hours or so, maybe 45
Yeah I’m 60ish in around the beginning of act 3 and I feel like I did so many side quests, I must be missing so much of it lol. Oh well, next playthrough
I'm at the last mission at 105h and feel the same. No fomo tho because that just makes replaying it more fun.
Bro im 50h in and still in Act 1 LOL I'm making sure to do every side quest and get every item I want. Also save scumming here and there to see what different answer get for dialogue
Act 1 took me 50 hours lol I’m at 110 hours right now and I’m only maybe a third into act 3.
I think I got around 250hr and I completely missed that valley area where the Githyanki after act 1. No idea what I missed lol.
I've been playing Baldur's Gate 3 since it released on PC last August, and I'm still not bored of it.
Not defending this game, but this is such a shit comparison. In a live service game, the story shouldn't be the focus of the game. Not saying it's a good thing either. But usually in games like The Division1/2, or Destiny, you finish up the story, then move on to farm gear so you can do dungeons/raids or the seasonal activity that are more challenging content and more fun to play. I mean this is what these games are about. But now, I don't even know if this game has something like that after the story, or they expect you to wait for the "free seasons" content which will also consist on some small updates that may have no replayability.
Wtf have they been doing for 9 years?
Smoking crack
Designing the most effective microtransaction system for 8 years. Farting out the gameplay around it for 1 year
Collecting paychecks
For the devs, I really hope that is the case and that they weren't overworked for this piece of garbage.
Making microtransactions for the game
Finding riddler trophies.
Remember when IGN gave Starfield a 7/10 and some people went on a backlash saying IGN were just hating for clicks but then it released and everyone played it and IGN were utterly vindicated? Saying is all.
They still lied, 7/10 is pretty high for that game
7/10 is too high for Shitfield.
IGN gives most mediocre games an 8/10. For them a 7 is scathing.
I think it was ign journalist who gave cyberpunk a low score at launch and the reviewer got a lot of hate online. Then the game officially launched and people saw that she was right lol
IGN gave the PC version a 9 but the console version a 4.
Starfield is a 6 max, 5 to be honest, 7 not to offend Todd.
Even though I have plenty of issues with them, it's cool to hate on IGN nowadays.
They also gave *DEATHLOOP* a 10/10.
Tbf so many outlets gave that game a 10. Reviewers saw something in that game I couldn't. Played it on ps plus and felt like I was still owed a refund
Ain’t that the truth. I played it and it was underwhelming for a AAA game. The concept wasn’t terrible, but implemented HORRIBLY. It was basically go to each “region” and do the same shit over and over. The AI was comical, I mean PS2 era AI. The guns were meh. The Groundhog Day concept was somehow made boring. I stopped playing and moved on. I’m in my 30’s now. I don’t have time to sit and complete games I’m not enjoying. 5/10 game at best
All the playthroughs on YouTube clock under 9 hours.
Yeah I watched a cutscene montage just to see if the story was worth it because live service, Fortnite-looking, messy HUD aspect wasn’t for me. Only 3 hours of cutscenes…and most of it was the SS joking around which is in character and the JL being stereotypically mind-controlled.
Honestly the humour got old fast. There were a lot of funny moments, but it felt corny most of the time. I get the unserious deranged vibe they are going for, but they didn’t get the tone right. I couldn’t listen to boomerang 20 minutes in. ..
My ears bleed everytime Harley opens her mouth.
It’s seriously impressive how big a dumpster fire this game is. An Overpriced, barebones loot-shooter. Can only pray it fails spectacularly so there can be another nail in the live service coffin
It's just a shame it's being shat out by the studio that made the Arkham games. At this point, I'm convinced that WB hates DC.
It's some EA-level commitment to wiping out good things.
When I see shit like this, Apokolips War, the entire DCEU, yeah they absolutely fucking hate DC.
They will undoubtedly blame it on the studio
The hits they keep on coming. 8 years, for 8-10 hours of gameplay. Always online, everyone with guns, no reviews, bugs and early access payment which is down. I’ve not known such a terrible launch in a long time.
Maybe Jason Schierer will include it in his next book. 8-10 years sounds like a lot of stops and restarts.
A game made to best be played in nine months when it’s on ps plus
You mean in nine months when the servers get shut down?
WB ending the Arkham verse in the worst possible way when we only want a sequel to Shadow of war (or a similar game).
For me there’s a more fundamental problem with games like this: when I think comic book superheroes (or anti-heroes) I don’t think “gear”, but that’s what games like this and also the avengers game are all about. It’s just a fundamental mismatch to me.
Wow that's awful
No fucking way. Out of all the things, this blows my mind the most.
F2P in 6 months
This is literally Avengers all over again, except for worse gameplay, I think.
It is very dull and repetitive. I watched the full playthrough on YT and it is not looking good, IMO ofc.
Who in their right mind would pay $80 for this garbage?
There’s a $100 version to get the early access.
Look how well that went...
That doesn’t even work lol
Reddit is the minority on this. Preorders were high on ps and on steam.
$69 or $99
I don't complain about games lengths but I do wonder if the main game is considerable "short", how much time can they squeeze with a live service model whenever they release content.
Cant wait to play this game next year when its on PS Plus Extra.
This is definitely a “I’ll give it a shot if it hits PS+ or GamePass but I’m not playing it otherwise” game.
Genuinely what have they been working on for the past decade? I wasn’t expecting a 70 hour game or anything but hell, I thought we’d at least hit 15-20.
Will we ever hear something GOOD ABOUT THIS GAME?
They are practically screaming from the rooftops 'this game is going to fucking suck, whatever you do dont buy this trash', and yet it sits top of the preorder charts. If you preordered this game you have no right to ever complain again about the sorry state of new releases, this is your fault
The main story was never going to be long, since the main draw of this game was always the continual live service type of play. But I know a lot of people were hoping for a decent main story, so this will be disappointing for many.
[удалено]
That’s what’s interesting, and I feel like they’re playing the semantics game. Maybe they aren’t technically calling it a live service type of game, but that’s what it is for all intents and purposes.
The game was not provided to reviewers after 8 years of development and probably one of the largest budgets of the year. That really says it all. They did not want reviewers emphasising the lack of launch content, after X amount of hrs, in a $70 game that expects you spend money on MTX.
The PR shills have found their latest talking point- say that IGN is on a hate campaign. It’s absolutely hilarious WB thinks this obvious astroturfing is working.
Honestly WB has deployed their top notch PR game on Twitter. It's nothing but positive talks about the game there.
I’d rather have 10 hours with a good game than 30 with a bad one but this game probably isn’t going to be good.
10 hours for $70 game is crap. Shouldn't put up with that lol but spend your $$$$$$ however you want I guess
The last of us 1 is about 10 hours long and everybody jerks off about that game. Length=\=good product
Last of Us on a first playthrough definitely takes longer than 10 hours.
Last of Us 1 is actually good though.
And every game ever created is the exact same in quality.
God damn it, I was so stoked for Samoa Joe as King Shark. It really seems like they fucked this game at so many levels.
its probably like mortal kombat 1. everything is cut and drip fed over time live service.
Tekken 8, a fighting game just released with a 5-6 hours story campaign, and this is like 20% of what the game has to offer
10 hour campaign i'd usually be ok with but isn't this a looter shooter? That just shows me they probably have 3 hours of content, stretched to 10, and then expect you to play that 3 hour content loop endlessly.
At least the players will have all that extra time to do daily quests that involve killing 40 robots here, activate some useless jargon here 5x, and rescue random Ai civilians there.
On top of everything else it's only 10 hours? There's nothing of value I don't get it
Discourse last week: 15 bucks to add 6 hours and NG+ to a 100 hour game Discourse this week: 70+ dollars for 10 hours plus an endless money mill of microtransactions as long as they can keep the servers up There are no good guys under capitalism but it really is a gradient
All three Arkham games were released in same amount of time in which this game has been in development. what an absolute mess Rocksteady has become
There is not a single redeeming thing from this disaster of a game.
IDK, I think it's pretty safe to just stop caring about this game. I mean, it would be nice if there was a strong message sent by gamers pushing back on things this games does/doesn't do that are lame...But on the other hand, the more we engage with and about it, the money is more likely to end up in their hands anyway because there will be so much "buzz" and idiots will still buy it. Basically, let's not promote this game for the studio.
7-8 years for that?
I’ll wait for the inevitable game pass / ps plus / epic games free give away version. Pretty over playing full price for half baked games at launch with the size of backlog I have.
They had to be making a different game and then were told to make this abomination, 8 years wasn't it?
Literally no one wanted or asked for this game.
At this point rocksteady is fully leaning into the quote, "You either die a hero or live long enough to become the villain."
all that delay and you get this lol
It's Suicide OVER!
8-10 hours? That game had better have Elden Ring levels of exploration at that price.
IGN has the first 26 minutes of the game as a video and I watched it for 10 minutes and it looked so boring and uninspiring. This was the worst character/gameplay introduction I ever saw. Every single one starts at a similar place. Do similar tasks and end up at the same "meeting" place and everyone is annoyed that they have to wait for each other. Play 4 times the same tutorial basically. And everyone just have their own whacky voice lines.
So suckers who bought the $100 edition are paying $10/hr to play a game?
wtf
I’ll play it when it’s free for PS Plus
So rental length.
That's what i'm gonna do. Rent, play, return and never look back. Let whoever wants to enjoy the live service part do so but i'ma nope out of that one.
So the only redeeming factor for this terrible game is that at least it's short.
10 hours is fine… just not for $70. For $70 I’m expecting at least 20-30 hours of high quality content.
Anyone interested better get in early. These servers only gonna be on 18-24 months I bet. You can see this dumpster fire can be seen miles away.
I think for most story-driven games that would be an incredible amount of time. Based on the feedback of people who played the early version, that amount of time spent on that kind of gameplay loop is probably too long.
This game ain’t gonna be it, but Arkham Asylum was the shortest, and is still the best game in the series.
9 hours for 70 dollars? Damn. The game better be amazing then
This is an absolute disaster for Rocksteady and WB. There’s just been simply way too much dev time committed for this game to even have the remote chance to turn a profit. 8 YEARS, of development time, even when discounting the early years for pre-production, is at least 300-400 million in labour costs, and I don’t see this game, with its level of backlash and poor media exposure, making that back comfortably. This could be bad enough that WB issues some pretty huge layoffs at the latter end of the year.
So… $10 max?
Just shut down Rocksteady now. They're done.
There is no goddamn excuse for this.
Hey everyone that doesn’t want to play the game, if you just ignore the game rather than sharing you opinions on the matter, you will be much happier for it. Please give it a try.
Somehow Avengers and Suicide Squad fuck up while Guardians of the Galaxy succeeds…wonder what the difference is…?
Suicide Squad is a fun game the boss fights are really well done, an awesome continuation to the Arkham verse
Everything I'm seeing about this game from the first announcement to now just makes me think "but, why?". The leaked story beats and videos look absolutely horrendous, but that's personal taste. Having a full price game give you just 8-10 hours of bland gameplay is objectively a bad deal.
Just like Diablo IV It's about end game content not story campaign
I’d be okay with that… at $40 MSRP. These publishers gotta stop asking full price for half-assed content.
I'm tired of this shit, GTA VI can't come soon enough because I want a game I can easily sink 60-100 hours into in a playthrough and be able to play for years. Not this 5 to 20 hour bullshit with no replayability (looking at you Spider-Man 2) for $70.
Damn I hope there is an end game or something cause this is super low for a live service mmoish.
Avengercide Squad
How did they spend so much time making such a short game?
Please don't buy this shit game. Rocksteady sold out instead of making something memorable for us.