Three Hopes surpasses 1 million units shipped

[ciphertul]

28 minutes ago, Fabulously Olivier said:

And we're the last community who should be engaging in that behavior because our franchise almost did fail, and almost did end entirely. We should know better, and I am ashamed that we do not.

Don’t hold everyone to your standards, each person has what they value and it probably different then yours. 2 of my favorite series have more then likely died. One of them had the game I wanted to fail. Do I regret it? Maybe a little but that doesn’t change how I feel about that game.

18 minutes ago, ZanaLyrander said:

When you don't buy a game, the developer has no idea why

This is a bit false, to a company it all or nothing. If sales are bad, it’s the fault for the players they didn’t support it, no matter what the reason is. That is why Dead Space died originally. 

Pretty much it all comes down to A) buying the game which sends the message “Oh they like how this is going keep making that way now.” Or B) not buying the game which is “Oh, the players don’t want this series anymore”.

[ZanaLyrander]

3 minutes ago, ciphertul said:

This is a bit false, to a company it all or nothing. If sales are bad, it’s the fault for the players they didn’t support it, no matter what the reason is. That is why Dead Space died originally. 

Pretty much it all comes down to A) buying the game which sends the message “Oh they like how this is going keep making that way now.” Or B) not buying the game which is “Oh, the players don’t want this series anymore”.

I think we're agreeing with each other without realizing it. This is kinda what I meant, that the company can only make assumptions about why a game doesn't sell. And even if it sells well enough to continue the series, if it sold worse than the previous game in the series, the creators can only guess as to why. There are ways to gather information about how players play a game, about who plays a given game. Gathering information about the people who chose not to buy the game is much harder, it's why I believe positive feedback is easier to provide than negative feedback. If you support games that do certain things, that establishes a pattern developers can eventually notice. But when I choose not to buy two different games, often it's for entirely different reasons, and if you picked ten people at random who also chose not to buy those games, odds are good many their reasons were also different from my own, so the developers don't get much information from that. But 'this game did well, make more games that do things like this' is a message developers can learn from, and often do, as successful games often lead to games that imitate them.

[ciphertul]

12 minutes ago, ZanaLyrander said:

I think we're agreeing with each other without realizing it. This is kinda what I meant, that the company can only make assumptions about why a game doesn't sell. And even if it sells well enough to continue the series, if it sold worse than the previous game in the series, the creators can only guess as to why. There are ways to gather information about how players play a game, about who plays a given game. Gathering information about the people who chose not to buy the game is much harder, it's why I believe positive feedback is easier to provide than negative feedback. If you support games that do certain things, that establishes a pattern developers can eventually notice. But when I choose not to buy two different games, often it's for entirely different reasons, and if you picked ten people at random who also chose not to buy those games, odds are good many their reasons were also different from my own, so the developers don't get much information from that. But 'this game did well, make more games that do things like this' is a message developers can learn from, and often do, as successful games often lead to games that imitate them.

So I guess I’ll try to explain what I mean a bit more. I get what you are saying and this isn’t trying to argue with you but to help clarify my feeling better.

Take Shin Sakura Wars, it was supposed to be a hard reboot to the series and breathe new life into it. However it had a genre change that a majority of fans didn’t like. It when from Turn based strategy to Musou-lite hack n’ slash. The game flopped, and pretty much ended the chance of Sakura Wars coming back. (I believe it is officially on hold but it’s highly unlikely). The old fans made it clear they would rather kill the series then see it continue as a new genre. Is that right? Depends on who you ask, I don’t think so as I enjoy SSW. So could they have done that in a better fashion?

To further explain what I mean to Olivier:

Refusing to support a game do to a genre chance is perfectly fine thing to do. Wish a game would fail is a bit sad but also fine, they are keeping it to themselves. They could be out there review bombing, and actively attempting to dissuade others from buying.

Edited August 23, 2022 by ciphertul

[Fabulously Olivier]

Regardless of intended message, successful boycotts also send an unintended message - this fanbase is unreliable.

 

You want more games like the first FEW? Cool. Great. If this one flops, it's done. They don't care why it flops. They care that it does. Koei has other options. Fire Emblem is one of many current licenses, and while it's successful, there are other successful licenses with less volatile fanbases.

 

One Piece? Easy million (2 million now) copies with no fuss, and there are plenty of other anime IPs of similar scale that they could be getting in touch with Bandai to do. Dragonball, Naruto, My Hero, Bleach, etc.

 

Persona? Sold 1.3 million copies. The only significant controversy was angry Nintendo fans at the start when the leaked game title turned out to not be Persona 5 Switch. That controversy died the moment people actually played it.

 

Zelda? The fanbase is so big that the vast majority of the fanbase can reject the game (which they did) and it will STILL outsell everything else.

 

Just between their existing partners - Bandai, Nintendo, Sega, and Square, they have a wealth of potential IP with fans who don't get mad about everything (and by all means, I am guilty of that as well).

[ciphertul]

25 minutes ago, Fabulously Olivier said:

You want more games like the first FEW? Cool. Great. If this one flops, it's done. They don't care why it flops. They care that it does. Koei has other options. Fire Emblem is one of many current licenses, and while it's successful, there are other successful licenses with less volatile fanbases

The only thing I can say to this is, while you right that IF Hopes had flopped it probably would have been the end of FEW, that someone wanting 1 game to flop doesn’t mean they want the series too.

[Fabulously Olivier]

25 minutes ago, ciphertul said:

The only thing I can say to this is, while you right that IF Hopes had flopped it probably would have been the end of FEW, that someone wanting 1 game to flop doesn’t mean they want the series too.

The problem mindset isn't not buying something or not buying it at full price. That's personal prerogative and no one is entitled to your money.

 

The issue is wanting it to flop. This isn't an issue of nuance. As we've established, the death of a franchise hurts both those who like it and those who don't. If one game dies, it can kill a series, and much bigger series than FE have died with one bad game.

 

Propogating a negative PR campaign can do a LOT more to hurt sales than not buying something. Death by youtubers is a very real thing, and I'd argue that fan controversies (which I'll admit to being very much a part of) are likely responsible for FEW never getting to another reportable sales benchmark, just as positive fan demand for a sequel (which I was also very much a part of) was likely responsible for us getting a sequel, and Three Houses sequel/prequel/spinoff demand (cough, which I was not a part of, cough) was likely responsible for the direction they went.

[ciphertul]

19 minutes ago, Fabulously Olivier said:

The problem mindset isn't not buying something or not buying it at full price. That's personal prerogative and no one is entitled to your money.

 

The issue is wanting it to flop. This isn't an issue of nuance. As we've established, the death of a franchise hurts both those who like it and those who don't. If one game dies, it can kill a series, and much bigger series than FE have died with one bad game.

 

Propogating a negative PR campaign can do a LOT more to hurt sales than not buying something. Death by youtubers is a very real thing, and I'd argue that fan controversies (which I'll admit to being very much a part of) are likely responsible for FEW never getting to another reportable sales benchmark, just as positive fan demand for a sequel (which I was also very much a part of) was likely responsible for us getting a sequel, and Three Houses sequel/prequel/spinoff demand (cough, which I was not a part of, cough) was likely responsible for the direction they went.

Look if one person saying they wanted it to flop based on their own personal feelings has sent you into a spiral of “negative PR” and death by YouTuber then you need to step back and get your thoughts in check. One person isn’t gonna ruin the franchise, and as you clearly need to understand that wasn’t their intention at all. You can be as passionate as you want but, as it seems to me your mindset is what cause problems. The game sold well, stop bringing what ifs in now.

[Jotari]

3 hours ago, Fabulously Olivier said:

When I think poor quality, I think games with no story, and next to no content (Destiny!)

Hold up there. That perfectly describes Tetris, and I would not describe that as a poor quality game. In fact it's as close to perfect as a game can be.

Edited August 23, 2022 by Jotari

[Fabulously Olivier]

9 minutes ago, Jotari said:

Hold up there. That perfectly describes Tetris, and I would not describe that as a poor quality game. In fact it's as close to perfect as a game can be.

I mean, Tetris is endless, and Tetris didn't vault years worth of content that people paid for. 

 

48 minutes ago, ciphertul said:

Look if one person saying they wanted it to flop based on their own personal feelings has sent you into a spiral of “negative PR” and death by YouTuber then you need to step back and get your thoughts in check. One person isn’t gonna ruin the franchise, and as you clearly need to understand that wasn’t their intention at all. You can be as passionate as you want but, as it seems to me your mindset is what cause problems. The game sold well, stop bringing what ifs in now.

It isn't one person. The Japanese review bombs are an issue for long tail sales, and we do likely still need those to surpass the numbers for P5 Strikers bare minimum.

[lenticular]

1 hour ago, Fabulously Olivier said:

If one game dies, it can kill a series, and much bigger series than FE have died with one bad game.

I don't really have a dog in this fight, but I am curious. Which series are you thinking of that have been brought down just by a poorly received game? The closest ones I can think of are ones where the problem was a single bad game and some pretty awful mismanagement, like Fable or Mass Effect. What are the ones you're thinking of?

[ciphertul]

5 minutes ago, Fabulously Olivier said:

It isn't one person. The Japanese review bombs are an issue for long tail sales, and we do likely still need those to surpass the numbers for P5 Strikers bare minimum

Then we where arguing to separate points, I was only talking about this forum alone. Those who review bomb are almost as bad as scalpers.

[Fabulously Olivier]

Just now, lenticular said:

I don't really have a dog in this fight, but I am curious. Which series are you thinking of that have been brought down just by a poorly received game? The closest ones I can think of are ones where the problem was a single bad game and some pretty awful mismanagement, like Fable or Mass Effect. What are the ones you're thinking of?

I mean, bad games do tend to come from mismanagement. Those aren't usually unrelated. 

 

Mass Effect, Fable, Banjo Kazooie, Overlord (and that was a spinoff!), Golden Sun, Marvel vs. Capcom (thus far), Medal of Honor, Rampage, etc. come to mind. For Warriors games, the Dynasty Warriors Gundam series is possibly this, and Dragon Quest is definitely this (and it wasn't even bad!) Some you can find with a quick google search.

 

We probably all have some formerly dear franchises lost over one game. Personally, it hurt to put Overlord on that list. I love Douchebag Pikmin.

[ZanaLyrander]

Well, at very least there are some signs that Mass Effect may not be dead after all. The collection sold very well, and I've heard another game is in the works. It's one of the things I find comforting about video game franchises. Even if a single bad game kills interest in new games for the franchise for a while, if the franchise was strong enough, with at least a few truly good games, nostalgia for the older, good games in the series will eventually drum up enough interest for more, especially in this age of remakes and remasters, which serve as an excellent way for creators to test the waters and see how much good will exists for a franchise that has been quiet for a while. Many franchise I believed to be dead have revived many years later. Not all of them of course, but it's nice to know that there's always hope for these sorts of things.

[Fabulously Olivier]

13 minutes ago, ZanaLyrander said:

Well, at very least there are some signs that Mass Effect may not be dead after all. The collection sold very well, and I've heard another game is in the works. It's one of the things I find comforting about video game franchises. Even if a single bad game kills interest in new games for the franchise for a while, if the franchise was strong enough, with at least a few truly good games, nostalgia for the older, good games in the series will eventually drum up enough interest for more, especially in this age of remakes and remasters, which serve as an excellent way for creators to test the waters and see how much good will exists for a franchise that has been quiet for a while. Many franchise I believed to be dead have revived many years later. Not all of them of course, but it's nice to know that there's always hope for these sorts of things.

Yeah. Sometimes there's a light at the end of the end of the tunnel. Often there isn't.

 

Even as a fan, I'm not deluded enough to think that any Warriors franchise, mainline or otherwise, has the level of prestige necessary to survive going on ice. Unfortunately, that probably includes the Gundam fans who haven't gotten a new game in almost 9 years.

Edited August 23, 2022 by Fabulously Olivier

[Tediz64]

Okay for the record, I didn't say i wanted the game to flop. That was someone else. I simply said the quality was low (which i'd like to amend for better accuracy). The cost of production for this game wasn't very much but they choose to slap a high price tag on it when they could literally sell it for less, go beyond breaking even, and sell even more copies since a person wouldn't be intimadiated from buying a $60 game. Also what happened here was, i saw the title of this thread and people were praising the game's success but after pondering it over for a bit, i thought "let's tell Koei/IS that we want a higher quality product since they can clearly see what like this franchise but also make sure we tell them the flaws we saw in this game". I then proceeded to try to evaluate/assess this game fairly while not gushing over it like a fangirl at a Justin Beibar's concert. It is fun, i like the new character designs post-time skip, i want them to improve the interface a little as far as the classes go and give us more diversity on the battlefields. But most people already shower them with that praise and tell they can fix those few things so i wanted to cover something different. I didn't want to condemn this game into oblivion.

7 hours ago, ZanaLyrander said:

Um... no, you can not, that is an inherently subjective claim, a statement of opinion. No one can objectively declare something to be poor quality.

Here let me see if using an analogy will help me make the point when i'm talking about quality in correlation to price/worth. If you go to a fast food joint the price you pay there is pretty reasonable. Most of their resources are bought from a supplier that can mass produce it cheaply. The nutritional value of the ingredient is low, the effort the assemble the burger (fry the nuggests or french fries) and sell it as a combo isn't much, and what they charge per unit helps them make profit. So all in all, selling a combo for say $7 to $10 is reasonable. Now look at a restaurants you go inside to sit and wait for a server to hand you a menu. The quality of their ingrdients is better since it is fresh and depending on where you are dining at, can even be nutruitional. The cook actually prepares the meal as they are ordered so more effort is clearly exerted into assembling your meal. Plus you even have a server checking up on you (depending on establisment) to make sure you are content with your experience. Ergo it is fair and reasonable for them charge higher amounts (i can't give examples since it varies so widely across the board so i'll do just one. Breakfast at Ihop/Denny's can range around $11 to $15 and it is reasonable for how much you get on your plate compared to a cheaply assembled breakfast crossiant at McDonalds for $6).

In essence, this game is kinda like a combo from a fastfood place such as Burger King (metaphorically speaking). Most of the frame was already pre-made from their previous titles, character models were imported from FE:3 Houses, they gave is 13 to 14 maps, they grabbed the same mold from the same game and only gave us 3 zones to walk around in (the monastery comparable to our main camp, the 2nd floor comparable to our temp camp during chapter 1/2, and the 3rd floor comparable to space camp during the hidden chapters of 15/16) so they didn't even do anything new. I could go on but i think you get the point. This is literally the lowest effort they exerted into making a 60 dollar game. Compared to say for example Dragon's Dogma which is priced at $30 and has a pretty expanisve engine running it with a giant open lush world, great cinematics, impressive AI that also learns and grows built into your allies that travel the world with you, and so much more. Plus capcom will let their game go on sale from time to time and can take off as much as 70% off. Meanwhile Nintendo is the most stingey company that won't let their biggest IPs go on sale but maybe once a year or every other two years and for barely 30% off. How many times have you seen Smash Ultimate or Mario Kart Deluxe go on sale? That i can recall, maybe 3 or 4 times over the course of 5 years for as low as $40. 

6 hours ago, ciphertul said:

I will also add that most gamers have had a game that they wish would fail, most of the time it’s not done out of spite but out of the hope it doesn’t continue down a path the player doesn’t enjoy. I know I have done that.

On terms of pricing appropriately, worth is a very subjective topic. As you all know Worth is what someone is willing to pay for it. While you can full regret paying that much for it and feel that it wasn’t worth it to you. However what it’s worth to you have little to do with how much it’s worth for everyone else. It sold well meaning many felt it was worth 60$, if they didn’t they would have waited until a sale to pick it up. 

A person's perception of a game's worth/value is subjective, but what isn't is the the cost of production. That can be measured most definitely and be done so in a fair/objective manner. Plus going 1 step beyond that, deciding what the company should market the game for so they can profit, can also be done fairly from the consumers. This is poorly constructed and that is being generous, and all i want is for the game to be priced accordingly when you can see other games are priced for less that were created with more care. The worst part is, this game won't go on sale considering what studio owns it, but probably maybe once per year and only for a measly 30% off at most.  

5 hours ago, Fabulously Olivier said:

And if that's in response to anticonsumer business practices, fair enough. Otherwise, not fair enough. 

 

And we're the last community who should be engaging in that behavior because our franchise almost did fail, and almost did end entirely. We should know better, and I am ashamed that we do not.

Do you remember when they gave us peg/stub legs in Awakening? And how we (figuratively speaking) bashed them over the head for it? Heck, even Kotaku (a major game critiquing/review site) ran an article on them telling them it was unacceptable. What did they do? Fix it in Fates. They actually had little feet. You may be anxious or worried of overly criticizing a game to the point where it may see it's own existence cease but many, and i mean thousands, of people aren't. I'm not going to stop pushing against them to give us better quality games. Even if the community isn't unified and working together in a way that is organized and professional, someone still has to call them out. Companies pour millions into marketing and have a Public Relations (PR) department. They have people with a salary of over $80,000 annualy (i did a quick search on it) whose sole responsiblity is to provide feedback to the executives in a report on what they can do to maxmize their profits. They have small teams of people who scour the internet (especially sites dedicated to a franchise like this one) not just to search feedback to help improve their games, but to also avoid doing things that will piss the community off (like how there was a segment of people blasting them for not adding japanese audio to the game in Fates). Plus they need to do this in order to follow the trends and captalize on what is popular (like unfortunely making FE into a waifu collector with Awakening/Fates and then also giving the people more representation they are asking for [[more non-heterosexual characters like in FE 3 Houses]]). Remember when Bernadetta's support conversation caused a controvsery so they rolled out a secet quiet update that patched it? How do you think they became aware of that? Because major outlets like IGN, Kotaku, and Polygon called them out for it. I don't think it wise to silence discontent or to dimisss those individuals. It isn't in your own best interest. If and when they roll an update out for this game, it'll be because we are all talking about it and someone in some small department is scrolling around on various review sites/forums. They'll measure the cost of giving us what we want along with the projections if it'll sell well. You really shouldn't underestimate their network for gathering info and someone analyzing it. These people are playing with big bucks and you better believe they allocated someone telling them these kinds of things. If we had people who create content on platforms like Youtube state at the beginning/end of their video that their evaluation/assessment wasn't intended to dissuade others from buying the game but be a message to the studios of what they could do better, and then said person had millions of views and a proportionate thumbs up, we could communicate way faster and effiencetly. Then this entire process wouldn't be so tricky to navigate or be painful for the consumers or the developers. However very few people can articulate their thoughts that well while sending a message, try to be a positive influence in the industry, and be fair/objective in their evalutions so sadly, that isn't the way things are. I'd go on but...i don't know what if i'm saying is even registering with you. I'm not sure you are actually seeing things from my perspective. Which by the way, i'm not trying to persuade you over into agreeing with or trying to turn this into a discussion of one of us is correct while the other is incorrect. I get that the gaming enviorment is pretty volatile and has bad actors in it, but i really do want what is best for all of us (or at least i think/hope so most of the time)

[ZanaLyrander]

19 hours ago, Tediz64 said:

Okay for the record, I didn't say i wanted the game to flop. That was someone else. I simply said the quality was low (which i'd like to amend for better accuracy). The cost of production for this game wasn't very much but they choose to slap a high price tag on it when they could literally sell it for less, go beyond breaking even, and sell even more copies since a person wouldn't be intimadiated from buying a $60 game. Also what happened here was, i saw the title of this thread and people were praising the game's success but after pondering it over for a bit, i thought "let's tell Koei/IS that we want a higher quality product since they can clearly see what like this franchise but also make sure we tell them the flaws we saw in this game". I then proceeded to try to evaluate/assess this game fairly while not gushing over it like a fangirl at a Justin Beibar's concert. It is fun, i like the new character designs post-time skip, i want them to improve the interface a little as far as the classes go and give us more diversity on the battlefields. But most people already shower them with that praise and tell they can fix those few things so i wanted to cover something different. I didn't want to condemn this game into oblivion.

Here let me see if using an analogy will help me make the point when i'm talking about quality in correlation to price/worth. If you go to a fast food joint the price you pay there is pretty reasonable. Most of their resources are bought from a supplier that can mass produce it cheaply. The nutritional value of the ingredient is low, the effort the assemble the burger (fry the nuggests or french fries) and sell it as a combo isn't much, and what they charge per unit helps them make profit. So all in all, selling a combo for say $7 to $10 is reasonable. Now look at a restaurants you go inside to sit and wait for a server to hand you a menu. The quality of their ingrdients is better since it is fresh and depending on where you are dining at, can even be nutruitional. The cook actually prepares the meal as they are ordered so more effort is clearly exerted into assembling your meal. Plus you even have a server checking up on you (depending on establisment) to make sure you are content with your experience. Ergo it is fair and reasonable for them charge higher amounts (i can't give examples since it varies so widely across the board so i'll do just one. Breakfast at Ihop/Denny's can range around $11 to $15 and it is reasonable for how much you get on your plate compared to a cheaply assembled breakfast crossiant at McDonalds for $6).

In essence, this game is kinda like a combo from a fastfood place such as Burger King (metaphorically speaking). Most of the frame was already pre-made from their previous titles, character models were imported from FE:3 Houses, they gave is 13 to 14 maps, they grabbed the same mold from the same game and only gave us 3 zones to walk around in (the monastery comparable to our main camp, the 2nd floor comparable to our temp camp during chapter 1/2, and the 3rd floor comparable to space camp during the hidden chapters of 15/16) so they didn't even do anything new. I could go on but i think you get the point. This is literally the lowest effort they exerted into making a 60 dollar game. Compared to say for example Dragon's Dogma which is priced at $30 and has a pretty expanisve engine running it with a giant open lush world, great cinematics, impressive AI that also learns and grows built into your allies that travel the world with you, and so much more. Plus capcom will let their game go on sale from time to time and can take off as much as 70% off. Meanwhile Nintendo is the most stingey company that won't let their biggest IPs go on sale but maybe once a year or every other two years and for barely 30% off. How many times have you seen Smash Ultimate or Mario Kart Deluxe go on sale? That i can recall, maybe 3 or 4 times over the course of 5 years for as low as $40. 

A person's perception of a game's worth/value is subjective, but what isn't is the the cost of production. That can be measured most definitely and be done so in a fair/objective manner. Plus going 1 step beyond that, deciding what the company should market the game for so they can profit, can also be done fairly from the consumers. This is poorly constructed and that is being generous, and all i want is for the game to be priced accordingly when you can see other games are priced for less that were created with more care. The worst part is, this game won't go on sale considering what studio owns it, but probably maybe once per year and only for a measly 30% off at most.  

Okay, while perhaps a bit longwinded, this much I can understand, though I admit this feels more like a complaint about the modern games industry rather than this game in particular. I agree that pricing all new triple-A games the same regardless of demand is silly and needs to stop, since essentially no other industry does this, and instead performs market research to set prices so as to maximize their profits. It's especially silly with video games given how minimal the cost per unit is, almost all the money in games goes towards development, once the game is made, making copies is dirt cheap, especially in an age of digital distribution. Plenty of games would likely make more profit if they put more thought into their pricing rather than just pricing every game the same. I don't think pricing has anything to do with 'fairness' or cost of production, every business sets prices to maximize their profits, expecting otherwise isn't realistic, but I do think some games would actually benefit from a lower price tag, and would make more money by reaching a wider audience than they otherwise would.

Nintendo refusing to put older games on sale or lower prices over time is a separate problem, one that I agree is rather silly behavior for a game company, but not relevant to a discussion of a new game I suppose, you wouldn't expect a game this recent to go on sale anyway. Comparing the prices of older games that have had their price decrease over time (and may have cost less to begin with given pricing at the time) to the price of a new game is a bit unfair.

Game companies should set prices at what the market will bear. If a decrease in price will help them sell enough additional games to make them more profit overall, they should do so. But if not, I don't think it's reasonable or realistic to expect lower prices if it won't result in higher profits overall. The game sold quite well given the niche it occupies, I personally doubt a $40 or $50 price tag would have sold enough additional units to result in higher profits, but I'm not an economist, it's hard to estimate how many people would have bought this game at those price points who didn't buy it at $60.

Edited August 24, 2022 by ZanaLyrander

[IonicAmalgam]

What I don't get with review bombing is why folks view the 1 thing as a cause for a 1 or 0 score. It really undervalues all the effort that others who were not responsible for the 1 thing put into the game itself.

[Fabulously Olivier]

15 minutes ago, IonicAmalgam said:

What I don't get with review bombing is why folks view the 1 thing as a cause for a 1 or 0 score. It really undervalues all the effort that others who were not responsible for the 1 thing put into the game itself.

The ones that particularly annoy me, and Three Houses was a victim of this, are console exclusivity review bombers. Fuck them.

[MagicCanonBalls]

16 hours ago, Tediz64 said:

Are you actually okay with being ripped off like that

Yes. Because I don't ever want to play witcher 3, not even if it's free. Seriously, I thought about pirating it to see what the fuss is about and I saw how big the file is and I nope'd out of the website. 

And just to clarify I wasnt assuming your stance on other game like pokemon when I write "you". I just meant ppl like you in these communities that like to come out with these idea on how it could be better or where it can be improved but they all sounds horrible to me. It's not wring to have ideas, per se, just don't like the tone presented as if these aspects you mentioned are objectively bad and not worth the game. I work in a restaurant. Customers told us our soup is too salty, so we reduce the saltiness a bit, then entirely different customer group told us it's getting lighter and wondering are we skimming on the ingredients. So right now we just follow the recipe and adjust when a customer complaint or request. Unfortunately the same cant be said for game, but the thing I want to say we all like to think our opinion is right and we as consumer should have the final say, but we are not all the same. I dont mind reusing assets, heck I dont even realize it. I thought PoR story was bad and Ike is too generic, and then I joined online forum like sereneforest and reddit to discovered I am in the minority. To this day I still dont understand why ppl think PoR story is better than Awakening, but I dont go and say to their fans they are being ripped off or how the game is bad and need improvement so that it become my version of good game.

[DarkSage861]

Idk too much about this debate right now but the conclusion I got from some of these messages is about money and all I have to say about that is even if you make a lot of money from a product, doesn't mean it's good

Just ask WWE 

[Fabulously Olivier]

1 hour ago, DarkSage861 said:

Idk too much about this debate right now but the conclusion I got from some of these messages is about money and all I have to say about that is even if you make a lot of money from a product, doesn't mean it's good

Just ask WWE 

Considering wrestling is the only "sport" I find even remotely watchable, I think WWE is a good product.

 

Now is it humane to its workers? No. That's another story.

[Jotari]

6 hours ago, DarkSage861 said:

Idk too much about this debate right now but the conclusion I got from some of these messages is about money and all I have to say about that is even if you make a lot of money from a product, doesn't mean it's good

Just ask WWE 

If we cannot use money has an indicator of what is good, then what can we? My personal subjective opinion? The subjective opinion of a bunch of dudes smoking pipes who refuse to say Macbeth in a theatre? Money has at least a modicum of objectivity to it in terms of quality assessment. Course it is also marred by the reality of advertising, funding and the "right place at the right time" element. I don't personally like wrestling. It seems incredibly silly, and not in a good way. Yet a lot of people do like it. Why is that? I can come to only two conclusions. One, it actually is good even though I personally don't like it. Two, everyone likes it is an idiot. And the notion that everyone who disagrees with me is a fool is one I just can't get behind. I'm arrogant, but not that arrogant.

Edited August 27, 2022 by Jotari

[Seazas]

Average FE fan when they see a harmless spinoff with appeal that isn't for them: "Wow, that game should fail!"

Irony aside, I made my stance on this very clear lmao.

Edited August 27, 2022 by Seazas

[Florete]

10 minutes ago, Jotari said:

If we cannot use money has an indicator of what is good, then what can we? My personal subjective opinion? The subjective opinion of a bunch of dude smoking pipes who refuse to say Macbeth in a theatre? Money at least a modicum of objectivity to it in terms of quality assessment. Course it is also marred by the reality of advertising, funding and the "right place at the right time" element. I don't personally like wrestling. It seems incredibly silly, and not in a good way. Yet a lot of people do like it. Why is that? I can come to only two conclusions. One, it actually is good even though I personally don't like it. Two, everyone likes it is an idiot. And the notion that everyone who disagrees with me is a fool is one I just can't get behind. I'm arrogant, but not that arrogant.

Why do you need any specific indicator? Just use your own judgement. When looking into a game I'm on the fence about, I look at what the general playerbase says about it long before I consider how well it sold.

[Jotari]

42 minutes ago, Florete said:

Why do you need any specific indicator? Just use your own judgement. When looking into a game I'm on the fence about, I look at what the general playerbase says about it long before I consider how well it sold.

I do use my own judgement. Frequently, often and with great explanation. But I don't think my own opinion is an ultimate authority on whether something is good or not. Only whether I respect and or enjoy it.