Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
This topic has been locked 
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
1 
Report this post
But these hypocrites want to do the same with other games just for having requested services from an external company.
For the clowns who think like this, stop listening to your influencers and think for yourself. Or are you not the ones who say that: It doesn't matter who makes the game, it only matters that it is good"
This game has 95% positive reviews and why do you think that is? Magic? A conspiracy?
No, it's because it is an incredibly fun and well-made game.
I think for myself and I left a negative review of Shadow Gambit way before randomly finding out about SWI thing today. I criticized the bland character roster made as if it was filling the diversity department quotas - and turns out, it's EXACTLY how it went.
It all adds up now, especially if you've been following breadcrumbs left by devs here and there in their posts. Real time tactics is a niche genre, Mimimi were simply not making enough sales to be able to afford the budget for this game. I suppose for them it was the choice between making a deal with ESG devil, or no game at all - so they (perhaps begrudgingly) chose the former.
Well, everyone has their opinion. But for me how the characters look is not the most important thing about a game, I don't like some of the designs either, but you know the most important thing about a game is its mechanics and that it is fun.
And as you can clearly see, I'm not referring to you, I'm referring to those who now want to boycott or don't want to give a great game a chance, they are doing exactly the same thing for what they criticized others for doing with the Harry Potter game.
If this were a mediocre or bad game I would understand it but as you can see from the steam reviews this is a great game for people who like the genre, if it weren't it wouldn't have so many positive reviews.
If those people want to criticize that consulting company, let them do it. But I don't know what they think they are going to achieve by coming to the forums to criticize another company and wanting to discourage others from playing it.
In any case they are not going to develop any more games.
It is easy to not support a bad game.
It take commitment and integrity to not buy good ones and to stand up for our moral convictions.
Those individuals who don't bend on a whim only deserve respect for demonstrating loyalty to their values and being dedicated to them.
If it was either of the previous games, I would agree. But this one, it tried to do a leap from real-time tactics to an open world party RPG. A clumsy one, sure, but all those dialogues and side stories do still take a large enough chunk of the game to warrant consideration. And that part of the game is unfun to engage with, not in the least because of quota-filling character stereotypes. Can the game be enjoyed despite that, focusing on gameplay? Well, maybe, if we're willing to overlook it being dumbed down - a direct result of bigger levels and increased roster.
Although even avoiding crew quests I found myself unable to play more than a level per session, due to how quickly it got boring for me. Whether it's the balance, lack of challenge, or the game not being much more than a flavor reskin of Mimimi's previous ones - or maybe all of that combined, I don't know.
Positive reviews do not equal sales though, and lack/predominance of negative reviews does not necessarily mean the game is good either - perhaps people who don't think much of it simply did not get it in the first place?
Hogwarts Legacy was a super easy choice for me - my country does not subscribe to the "trends", so in my mind it was simply the creator of my favorite universe facing an ugly social media legal system caricature ("cancel culture") for daring to have an opinion. And generally speaking, I find it weird some people would go out of their way to not enjoy something that brings them fun, simply because the creator's outlook happens not to align with their own.
Obviously the game didn't sell well, it came out a few days after Baldurs Gate and it's a niche game.
Many of those people who come talking nonsense on the forums don't even know it existed or they forgot.
But I'm not talking about sales, that doesn't matter to me, what I'm talking about is that those people who, just by hearing that the studio worked with that history consulting company, come to the forums to talk nonsense without even knowing anything about it. game.
It's not the studio's best game, but it's not a bad one either.
Exactly, now other clowns on the other side are doing the same thing with any game that has worked with those who consult stories.
Like that clown who spoke before your answer.
They talk about integrity and stupid things like that, literally the same thing they said with the game of Harry Potter.
If you tried a game and you didn't like it, that's perfectly fine, but these clowns come to say "I removed it from my wish list." As if we cared about that.
In my country we don't care about these discussions either. and seeing it as an outside, the two sides that fight all the time act exactly the same as each other.
trying to cancel things that according to them go against their moral clock.
I only care that a game is entertaining and doesn't want to take money from me every time.