My review - A Polarising Game

[robcram]

Full review in the video. The topic was already discussed here - https://steamcommunity.com/app/1139900/discussions/0/2965016081059112393/ and here - https://steamcommunity.com/app/1139900/discussions/0/2965016081069648999/ in terms of the game's difficulty, and the master elitist fans residing shot down complaints with the usual git gud remarks. Seeing as I've played the game, I can honestly say the game would be far more inclusive if it allowed players to tweak the difficulty. As it stands, some people are just going to rage quit which is shame. My video makes the sections look easy but I can tell you I died 100s of times across the 16 missions.

https://youtu.be/cQu65BeCjh4

Ghostrunner is an acquired taste game with a neat premise and a mixed execution. On one-hand, the combat, whilst frustrating at times is the best part of the experience. It feels great when you can clear a room of enemies using all the skills and deft moves at your disposal. However, when things don’t work when they should, or the level design feels like it’s deliberately fighting against you because you didn’t line up your jump angle properly, or use a specific move when required, it begins to grate and blood boils over, and that’s before the numerous cheap deaths. Prepare for plenty gamer rage moments to the point of contempt! The story is perhaps somewhat forgettable, and the puzzle/platforming sections mar the pacing. If this was just a combat game it would have fared better.

Ghostrunner then, will be a polarising game, which unfortunately One More Level, lean strongly on the side of, it’s tough-as-nails, and if you don’t like it then play something else mentality. A shame, because a little tweaking, some alternative play options, would have made it a more enjoyable experience all-round.

Pros:

- fast visceral combat
- great cyberpunk visuals
- excellent soundtrack
- decent 8-10 hour length

Cons:

- Dull puzzle platforming sections outside of combat
- too much Trial and Error
- Forgettable story
- lack of modes
- some control issues

[Fullmetal]

John Doe eredeti hozzászólása:

Fullmetal eredeti hozzászólása:

Indeed. And besides, that doesn't mean it won't find an audience who will buy it enough to fund the next game. Fromsoftware is there to prove you can make hard games, without any difficulty options, and still sell well and be able to fund your next game.

Fromsoftware example is a bit out of the ballpark here, as they defined the "souls" genre to the mainstream. When you make a game like DS which was already pretty big in 2013 and still sells, you're looking at A LOT of money. By that, I don't mean couple bond cases of money, but more of a vault of money. Paying for the Unreal Engine or people to do voice for your game costs nowhere as much, I can ensure you that.

Toadman might be a better example with their Immortal: Unchained, and while they didn't make as much money as expected, even they made enough money to buy the IP for Project: IGI re-make, and gave up on Immortal: Unchained - and it still sells.

That said, you're probably looking at selling your game to a wider audience such as more consoles and whatnot, when you go from your first indie game to a more known developer, etc.

Oh and, about this game being a game of death or dying 100s of times... the OP probably doesn't know what he's doing. I could slide left to right between two enemies and a wall in the demo all day.

I wouldn't use immortal unchained as a better example, since problems with that game is not even related with its difficulty. DS is a good example because when it first launched, fromsoftware was not that big. I mean, they didn't even have budget enough to make moving mouths on the game (which later because kind of an artistic design and adopted on other titles). Since my point is precisely that difficulty will not hinder sales enough for the developer to not profit if the game is good, don't know if immortal is a good one.

Another good example is hollow knight, which is very hard for the non-initiated, and still sold well. Celeste is another one, it has a godmode, but not an "easy" mode (as I said, the most I'd admit in these games is a god mode).

[John Doe]

Fullmetal eredeti hozzászólása:

John Doe eredeti hozzászólása:

Fromsoftware example is a bit out of the ballpark here, as they defined the "souls" genre to the mainstream. When you make a game like DS which was already pretty big in 2013 and still sells, you're looking at A LOT of money. By that, I don't mean couple bond cases of money, but more of a vault of money. Paying for the Unreal Engine or people to do voice for your game costs nowhere as much, I can ensure you that.

Toadman might be a better example with their Immortal: Unchained, and while they didn't make as much money as expected, even they made enough money to buy the IP for Project: IGI re-make, and gave up on Immortal: Unchained - and it still sells.

That said, you're probably looking at selling your game to a wider audience such as more consoles and whatnot, when you go from your first indie game to a more known developer, etc.

Oh and, about this game being a game of death or dying 100s of times... the OP probably doesn't know what he's doing. I could slide left to right between two enemies and a wall in the demo all day.

I wouldn't use immortal unchained as a better example, since problems with that game is not even related with its difficulty. DS is a good example because when it first launched, fromsoftware was not that big. I mean, they didn't even have budget enough to make moving mouths on the game (which later because kind of an artistic design and adopted on other titles). Since my point is precisely that difficulty will not hinder sales enough for the developer to not profit if the game is good, don't know if immortal is a good one.

Another good example is hollow knight, which is very hard for the non-initiated, and still sold well. Celeste is another one, it has a godmode, but not an "easy" mode (as I said, the most I'd admit in these games is a god mode).

Actually it is a better example as it didn't defy any genres other than gunsouls pretty much, which is pretty much a non-existing genre with couple games like Remnant and that other Brazilian game around... and what were the problems with Immortal again? You're making it sound like it was unplayable, I finished it when it was launched. Granted it was HARD AND BUGGY, so the problems WERE with difficulty actually... and grinding at times. But once you got the grasp of it, with launchers and snipers, things became easier.

I was also relying this heavily on the amount of money they make off the games, also if you don't know about Immortal: Unchained properly, why are you commenting as such to it?

[Fullmetal]

John Doe eredeti hozzászólása:

Fullmetal eredeti hozzászólása:

I wouldn't use immortal unchained as a better example, since problems with that game is not even related with its difficulty. DS is a good example because when it first launched, fromsoftware was not that big. I mean, they didn't even have budget enough to make moving mouths on the game (which later because kind of an artistic design and adopted on other titles). Since my point is precisely that difficulty will not hinder sales enough for the developer to not profit if the game is good, don't know if immortal is a good one.

Another good example is hollow knight, which is very hard for the non-initiated, and still sold well. Celeste is another one, it has a godmode, but not an "easy" mode (as I said, the most I'd admit in these games is a god mode).

Actually it is a better example as it didn't defy any genres other than gunsouls pretty much, which is pretty much a non-existing genre with couple games like Remnant and that other Brazilian game around... and what were the problems with Immortal again? You're making it sound like it was unplayable, I finished it when it was launched. Granted it was HARD AND BUGGY, so the problems WERE with difficulty actually... and grinding at times. But once you got the grasp of it, with launchers and snipers, things became easier.

I was also relying this heavily on the amount of money they make off the games, also if you don't know about Immortal: Unchained properly, why are you commenting as such to it?

Because there are a lot of better examples of highly successful games that are hard and don't have difficulty settings. Even remnant, that you mentioned, would actually be an example of a more successful game in this regard. The fact immortal: unchained had just limited success by itself is a reason not to use it as an argument, considering the point being made. Besides, you don't even say why defining a genre is something that should make a game get off the list anyway. If anything, it reinforces the argument, since the point is just to say that you can make hard games that are successful and make more than enough money for the company to fund subsequent games.

[Wicker]

"the game would be far more inclusive if" - Lack of 'Inclusivity' is not a valid criticism.

[John Doe]

Fullmetal eredeti hozzászólása:

John Doe eredeti hozzászólása:

Actually it is a better example as it didn't defy any genres other than gunsouls pretty much, which is pretty much a non-existing genre with couple games like Remnant and that other Brazilian game around... and what were the problems with Immortal again? You're making it sound like it was unplayable, I finished it when it was launched. Granted it was HARD AND BUGGY, so the problems WERE with difficulty actually... and grinding at times. But once you got the grasp of it, with launchers and snipers, things became easier.

I was also relying this heavily on the amount of money they make off the games, also if you don't know about Immortal: Unchained properly, why are you commenting as such to it?

Because there are a lot of better examples of highly successful games that are hard and don't have difficulty settings. Even remnant, that you mentioned, would actually be an example of a more successful game in this regard. The fact immortal: unchained had just limited success by itself is a reason not to use it as an argument, considering the point being made. Besides, you don't even say why defining a genre is something that should make a game get off the list anyway. If anything, it reinforces the argument, since the point is just to say that you can make hard games that are successful and make more than enough money for the company to fund subsequent games.

Yeah and what's your point? Selling a lot doesn't make a game good, neither does sell less make it bad. That's literally the stupidest argument as far as these things go. You could check the monthly so called top releases of Steam to see how much crap games, HARD AND EASY ones, go by there. Remnant was heavily broken in the dynamic difficulty, had no anti-cheat and over all it was just crappier than Immortal for me. It was also a lot more cheesy.

The point is, EVEN with LESS sales than expected, you ARE still making A LOT of money. I don't think you even understand how much money 1000s of copies of a game makes. It's enough money to fund ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ MULTIPLE games after your first game if you're talking about stuff like DS, and yes, DS wasn't even a polished game - even the third game. I played DS3 and the camera was all over the PC with KB + mouse and the menu page was broken. You would expect by the third game for them to fix their crap, right? Well, guess what? Save that for the 4th, different game... Sekiro in this case. Do you think a lot of devs really care? If so, you're fooling yourself.

Well your point was game being hard and making money to support next game... and they did tone down the difficulty of the game a bit on Immortal (while adding saves outside of Obelisks as well), you had to look at YouTube to know how to make effective gun combinations. I say that is hard and they did make enough money. You don't know how much money they made, that is disclosed, needless to say, it made more than enough money for the next IP because they're working on it in a very RELAXED manner.

I don't disagree that hard games could sell, they obviously do. Case in point is not even just it.

[Proper Skux]

It's really emblemetic of the whole discussion that talking about the difficulty and elitism surrounding that style of the design was a small part of the topic here but immediately caused three whole pages of folks desperate to huff their own farts about why gate keeping the game is a neccessity and good.

[robcram]

You are right, people want to just focus on the:

"it was too hard for him therefore he sucks at games and should take up gardening."

I made several other complaints and even praised the combat, but people want to ignore that and just focus on

"the reviewer sucks because it was too hard whereas I am godlike and will beat the game easily."

It will be interesting once people play the full game like I have and agree or disagree with my sentiments based on more than just the demo.

I linked to the one hit kills post in the op. I don't think the game needs to change that at all. It is in essence the USP of this game. However, a tweak to enemy reaction speed, and accuracy in an easier mode would open the game up to more players. Interesting how some gamers don't want more players enjoying the game.

[7zH]

robcram eredeti hozzászólása:

Interesting how some gamers don't want more players enjoying the game.

Damn dude, you really didnt understand anything that was said here. Now i'm starting to wonder if you got into content creation with the mentality of "i surely want to make more money" as well. I bet you did, you cheeky bugger.
It's up to the developers, if they consider that's ok to put more time and money so more people should enjoy the game and if that will preserve their intended core experience of the game. It's NOT up to YOU or anyone else BUT the DEVS.
So instead of complaining about it, how about starting to respect their decision? When you're going to make your own game, you'll be the one to decide, but until then it's not your decision.

[robcram]

I understand fully, no need to try and assault my credibility though. I think changing the one-hit kill would ruin the game. I've never said they should drop that. Sure it's up to developers what they do with their game, I am merely offering suggestion. Maybe they will take that on-board for this or their next game.

[Proper Skux]

I'm glad that elitism extends to such facile ideas as "well if you want to give a critique you ought to have cooked your own meal yourself"

Just, bastions of intellect sparkling through the night.

[John Doe]

robcram eredeti hozzászólása:

You are right, people want to just focus on the:

"it was too hard for him therefore he sucks at games and should take up gardening."

I made several other complaints and even praised the combat, but people want to ignore that and just focus on

"the reviewer sucks because it was too hard whereas I am godlike and will beat the game easily."

It will be interesting once people play the full game like I have and agree or disagree with my sentiments based on more than just the demo.

I linked to the one hit kills post in the op. I don't think the game needs to change that at all. It is in essence the USP of this game. However, a tweak to enemy reaction speed, and accuracy in an easier mode would open the game up to more players. Interesting how some gamers don't want more players enjoying the game.

I'm sorry that we're not high classed enough to get the early full game streamer / reviewer or whatever the crap treatment.

Also the argument went heavily towards other games, as for Ghostrunner, yeah the 360 headshots can be annoying from those laser beams, but there are ways of countering against that. The longer range you fight from and use slow motion, the better protected you are against them. It's A LOT easier for the enemy to one shot kill you when you're very close to it and messing around.

I know the full game will be harder but from the demo, it didn't seem all that hard to me. I don't think I've ever seen an enemy all the time has his back turned on just stay dead on one point in any of the other hard souls titles spoken here. I have however in this game.

[Proper Skux]

TBH I'm looking forwards to a tough titanfall/ME style game.

I just find it hilarious how much people will bend over to prevent accessibility or giving players the tools to make informed choices.

Very Big "look I like this band but you just wouldn't *get it*" 15 year old energy.

[John Doe]

Sucrose eredeti hozzászólása:

TBH I'm looking forwards to a tough titanfall/ME style game.

I just find it hilarious how much people will bend over to prevent accessibility or giving players the tools to make informed choices.

Very Big "look I like this band but you just wouldn't *get it*" 15 year old energy.

Titanfall was not even a hard game and it was actually a mech control / FPS title. This is more of a Mirror's Edge type of game.

Seems like you're failing at your own examples while crapping on everyone else's comments.

[7zH]

Sucrose eredeti hozzászólása:

I'm glad that elitism extends to such facile ideas as "well if you want to give a critique you ought to have cooked your own meal yourself"

Just, bastions of intellect sparkling through the night.

You are missing the entire point, but it’s alright. We love you anyway.

[Proper Skux]

John Doe eredeti hozzászólása:

Sucrose eredeti hozzászólása:

TBH I'm looking forwards to a tough titanfall/ME style game.

I just find it hilarious how much people will bend over to prevent accessibility or giving players the tools to make informed choices.

Very Big "look I like this band but you just wouldn't *get it*" 15 year old energy.

Titanfall was not even a hard game and it was actually a mech control / FPS title. This is more of a Mirror's Edge type of game.

Seems like you're failing at your own examples while crapping on everyone else's comments.

My sentence literally made no description of titanfall as a tough game.