It wasn't, nor is it, blown out of proportion. If someone doesn't like the timers, or other aspects that aren't in the game, then that is their opinion and stance on it. It isn't out of proportion to have been waiting for a game that was going to be built off of the previous release, and it turns a completely different way.
Yeah, I think you're catering to more than just the readers though. I would be surprised if the majority of the community around here even took your reviews serious. You know what they say about someone that forces the issue and ends up putting out content that they don't want to. At any rate, I edited out my last statement. I just disagree with a lot of your views and bickering over the forums with you won't change that. However, you should show a touch more respect for the community around here. They have a much greater impact than you give them credit for.
I agree. It would be interesting to see freemium games work outside of the usual mode of assessment. Not only because they can be picked up for free but because they are not a concrete product. A metacritic score is drawn on a bunch of opinions on a finished product for a set price. There are so many variables for freemium games that a persons enjoyment (or lack of) can be based outside of the usual factors
I have loads of respect for our community, we have lots of great members here. But, there are quite a few bad apples which rear their head during trying times such as free games getting released. The amount of hate that gets spewed around here is disheartening, especially the threats of physical violence, hopes that developers get cancer, and the countless other comments and posts I had to delete because people can't ignore a video game they don't like. I'm not sure what your little winky smily face is all about, but our front page is 100% reader focused.
I'm about to buy my second car as I've saved about R$48K. Should I buy the Nissan Skyline, the Nissan 350Z or the Dodge Challenger SRT8? Tips will be appreciated! Thanks
You don't show much respect at times. You lay out these snappy one liners that have a condescending tone. Like this current one about the vocal minority here blowing something out of proportion. I mean, you played the game in it's soft launch stage. How could you say the people here made a big deal out of nothing? Were you blind to the insane timers as you played the game? What do you honestly think would have happened here if everyone was just fine with those timers? During the podcast you just seemed cornered with gamers of your type and that was it. And hey, that's fine if the game works to your own personal taste but if your going to be reporting information to a general community, then you have to broaden the scope beyond just yourself. And while I agree that yes the amount of hate and absurd things said on forums, boggles the mind at times. However, you've been on the internet for ages, we all have at this point right. That behavior is not exclusive to TA forums, tons of internet communities suffer from this. It's just people realizing they have anonymity and decide to show their ugly side, or just act extreme for attention. At this point though I mean you have to just be numb to it, clean it off the boards and move on. Don't take it personal. I think you take some of that stuff you read in and that fuels these "veiled attacks" of yours at times. No need to take jabs like that because there are many people here that don't post that shit up and they don't deserve to be belittled. As for my winky face, you know, I can respect someone that has a different view. That's great, but I can't respect someone that doesn't put any actions behind their words. If you don't feel free games need reviews then don't make them, it's simple. What because some people disagree with you, your going to fold? You know very well you released a "review" on RR3 because of the traffic that it's generating right now for sites. It had nothing to do with what readers here want. And when I said, I'd be surprised if the majority here take your reviews serious, I mean it in that, the content on the front page is far from a legitimate review. (most of the time) Picking up a game for 10-20min and then posting up thoughts with an attached arbitrary star system is far from anything I would consider a review. I pretty much take that stuff as just your first impression or something of the sort. When I want to honestly dig into a game you know where I go? The forums here and read what these guys have to say. I could careless about how many stars you guys give games. However, that's just the way gaming media works today right, casuals just zooming around sites to see what score their games got on metacritic, IGN, etc. I rather go to say RockPaperShotgun and actually read a well informed article. I didn't want to get into this but you replied so, I figured might as well. Don't get me wrong I greatly enjoy TA despite some of my issues listed but lately seeing some of your statements just showed such a lack of respect towards the community here. These vocal minority guys here, they make this site what it is man, don't forget that.
It was mysteriously pulled right when wait timers on RR3 went up to 20 hours. Most people assumed right away that EA had completely pulled it to not compete with RR3. What made it weirder was Firemonkeys posted that they did not know what was going on, so this led to more EA conspiracy issues. This led to a huge backlash, and then after one day, RR2 mysteriously showed back up with no stated explanation. There was a lot of anger everywhere over it. This thread probably had a ton of pages documenting that weird time. Coincidence, or planned? Who knows.
i'd go with the skyline, but that's just personal experience. i only have that one of the three you listed.
Yessir. One thing I would love clarification on from Eli or otherwise is over the confusion of weather people can or cant post about IAPs or a particular games pricing model within the app's thread. As far as I can see many games nowadays cannot be seen as separate from their pricing. One affects the other. Every review I've read on RR3 heavily outlined that the game needs to played in a way that gets the best out of the IAPs or sidesteps them completely. If a game has IAPs or any odd ways of being priced it should be able to be discussed openly as part of the experience as far as I can see. I get that ranting about them brings the mood of the thread down but thats more to do with the tone then the content. Sorry to stray but Ive seen this brought up in a few threads and it would be super dooper to get it sorted
...But aren't we generating traffic because we're producing content people want to read? I can't come up with a way to analyze that data in any other way. "This story is getting tons of hits because people don't want to read it?" Also, we're more of a game discovery site than a hard hitting game criticism site. I always thought that was pretty transparent, apologies if it's not. The tone we shoot for is "Hey, this is cool, you should check it out if you think it also sounds cool." and not "Let's deeply critique these games and analyze their themes."
Well, Lost Deputy, kind of wished Eli would have picked different verbage than this, cause it can be totally misinterpreted. First of all, it is unclear what this vocal minority is. At NZ launch, the VAST MAJORITY were on the haterz side. Then some adjustments went in, and the US version was released. At initial NZ launch, TA chose to split the thread into two parts. Because of that, that created a huge backlash causing 10 haterz threads to emerge. I for one posted, that I thought it might be best just to have one thread for all RR3 posts, cause it was painful seeing so much hate all over the place. So it wasn't just about inapps. Now Eli's wording seems to encompass anyone that has some negative comments on the game. It is unfortunate, I don't think he meant it that way, but can see why people would object to the above comments by Eli.
Wow, you haven't seen any of my screenshots? Or see http://forums.toucharcade.com/showthread.php?t=173262
