Take Two, the one who owns Rockstar, 2K and more

[Senvi Holença]

If you want to do some damage and ask for answers, don't restrain yourself on just review bombing KSP2...

[PopinFRESH]

Originally posted by Yoda Layheehoo:

Originally posted by DefNotABot:

So we should make RockStar games pay for the failure of the KSP2 team? How old are you?

…You talk like if Rockstar is a person and not a company which primary objective is to profit..

You talk as if all companies are supposed to be charities

Of course a companies primary objective is to maximize profit in order to generate a return on investment for its owners/shareholders. But I’d be willing to wager that you actually have no idea what maximizing profit actually means economically.

[Zerotheliger]

Originally posted by Tux:

dishonest.
any review that does not review the actual game and the actual game play is a dishonest review

someone doesnt understand the point of a protest. the point is to be unavoidable. and so everyone who considers buying any of their games knows how easily this company abandons games. take two dying would be a good thing.

[Zerotheliger]

Originally posted by Zyrohex:

Originally posted by MangoMan:

yeah k. I also changed my mind partially on what I was saying.

targeting other games could indeed be dishonest if those reviews do not reflect the value of those games.

and I can accept that "any review that does not review the actual game and the actual game play is a dishonest review" mostly, except it should also involve price. in other words "this game is good but not worth the price; not recommended" is a valid review. (or even "this game is mostly bad but it is worth the small pricetag; recommended"; also valid.)

but yes, "this game is good but I don't like what the publisher did with some other game"... is less so. on the other hand it is still a valid expression of recommendation to purchase. "I do not recommend this game because the publisher did something bad."

actually I'm torn whether that's valid or not. that is not strictly dishonest; that is an honest position to hold and an honest answer to the question "do you recommend purchasing this game?".

I think if the review said the equivalent of "THIS GAME SUCKS" when you really mean "I used to like this game but now I hate the publisher", ok that is dishonest because you didn't say what you mean. but if you don't like publisher and you say you don't like publisher, that is not dishonest. that is honest.

it's more like it's an unexpected or unusual criteria to use to determine your recommendation or lack thereof. but unless it states somewhere that that is not a valid criteria for recommendation, then it shouldn't be a problem.

If you have beef with a studio/dev, you should post it somewhere like reddit. I believe every studio/publisher on Steam have a discussion board (click on the entities name from the storage page to get to it) where you can also post or leave remarks regarding those entities. Game reviews should be catered for the game in question.

Amazon applies a similar principle where product reviews are targeted for the product itself. Any feedback for the seller should be left on their store front, not the product itself.

telling people to protest in places where less people will see lmao. as if thats how protests ever worked.

[Zyrohex]

Originally posted by Zerotheliger:

Originally posted by Zyrohex:

If you have beef with a studio/dev, you should post it somewhere like reddit. I believe every studio/publisher on Steam have a discussion board (click on the entities name from the storage page to get to it) where you can also post or leave remarks regarding those entities. Game reviews should be catered for the game in question.

Amazon applies a similar principle where product reviews are targeted for the product itself. Any feedback for the seller should be left on their store front, not the product itself.

telling people to protest in places where less people will see lmao. as if thats how protests ever worked.

Protest what? What are you protesting? For what reasons and why? And what data or facts do you have to support this protest of yours?

[DefNotABot]

Originally posted by Zerotheliger:

Originally posted by Tux:

dishonest.
any review that does not review the actual game and the actual game play is a dishonest review

someone doesnt understand the point of a protest. the point is to be unavoidable. and so everyone who considers buying any of their games knows how easily this company abandons games. take two dying would be a good thing.

How easy they "abandon games"... T2 purchased Kerbal Space Program in May 2017 and KSP 2 started development in 2019 with an expected release date of Dec 2020.... "those bastards just abandoned us! They only paid 70+ people for 66 months and counting for a game that was expected to take 15 months... They should have spent any amount of money and time on this and since they didn't, I'm mad"

Imagine you hire a home builder and they tell you your home will be complete in 1 year, but 5 years later the home is like 25% complete... You gonna "abandon" that builder or just keep paying them forever?

[Senvi Holença]

Originally posted by PopinFRESH:

Originally posted by Yoda Layheehoo:

…You talk like if Rockstar is a person and not a company which primary objective is to profit..

You talk as if all companies are supposed to be charities

Of course a companies primary objective is to maximize profit in order to generate a return on investment for its owners/shareholders. But I’d be willing to wager that you actually have no idea what maximizing profit actually means economically.

Good to know you support scam. companies love you

[Senvi Holença]

Originally posted by Zyrohex:

Originally posted by Zerotheliger:

telling people to protest in places where less people will see lmao. as if thats how protests ever worked.

Protest what? What are you protesting? For what reasons and why? And what data or facts do you have to support this protest of yours?

You are either playing dumb or defending something you don't know ♥♥♥♥ about..

[Zyrohex]

Originally posted by Yoda Layheehoo:

Originally posted by Zyrohex:

Protest what? What are you protesting? For what reasons and why? And what data or facts do you have to support this protest of yours?

You are either playing dumb or defending something you don't know ♥♥♥♥ about..

I'm not defending anything. What are you going to protest? And based off what facts?

[Shepherd]

Originally posted by Yoda Layheehoo:

Originally posted by Zyrohex:

Protest what? What are you protesting? For what reasons and why? And what data or facts do you have to support this protest of yours?

You are either playing dumb or defending something you don't know ♥♥♥♥ about..

Not sure who's the one playing dumb here. I read the Early Access disclaimer, did you? It clearly states there are no guarantee's the game will ever be finished and that you should only pay for Early Access if you are interested in playing the CURRENT version. So, if you didn't read the disclaimer, you don't really know what you are talking about and are just complaining because you feel stupid for not understanding Early Access.

[darkrajin]

Take 2 caused problems with development. They are corporate entity that is only concerned with money. They don't care about the people that play their games. They don't care about their developers. It's best to avoid buying any game developed by take 2, or companies owned by Take 2.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/lizlanier/2020/06/04/take-twos-reported-poaching-and-contract-cancellation-ends-with-original-kerbal-space-program-2-studios-closure/?sh=5994f55c2d69

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bJAi5Wu3W08

[type-1]

Let's get something straight, they're not reviews they are recommendations. Steam asks users to vote on whether they recommend a game or not and then gives us a space to write why we do or don't recommend a game.

Not recommending people buy a game because of it's publisher actions is a completely valid reason to recommend against purchase.

[Zyrohex]

Originally posted by darkrajin:

Take 2 caused problems with development. They are corporate entity that is only concerned with money. They don't care about the people that play their games. They don't care about their developers. It's best to avoid buying any game developed by take 2, or companies owned by Take 2.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/lizlanier/2020/06/04/take-twos-reported-poaching-and-contract-cancellation-ends-with-original-kerbal-space-program-2-studios-closure/?sh=5994f55c2d69

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bJAi5Wu3W08

Blindly listening to some random youtuber is proving my point even more. None of you can use any critical thinking on your own to question things.

The whole premise of their argument is based around the bloomberg article posted about T2 yanking the contract from Star Theory = https://screenrant.com/take-two-star-theory-games-contract-controversy/

According to a report on Bloomberg, Take-Two pulled out of the contract of developing Kerbal Space Program 2 from Star Theory Games two years after the game's development started.

This sound or look familiar to the situation we are facing today? If not, why do you think T2 would decide to yank this contract after they've been "hard" at work for those past 2 years on KSP2? Maybe because they had nothing to show for those 2 years of hard work? Maybe because they barely had a functional tech demo with little to no progress (do you not recognize the tech demo they shared back then looks awfully familiar to what we got at EA launch)? Maybe T2 was recognizing the signs of a studio who could not operate in their own capacity? Or perhaps Nate Simpson was using his used car salesmen tactics to convince T2 this whole thing was salvageable.

These are details none of us have any evidence on; at most, it's all theoretical, based on the loose information we've managed to scrounge together. If, in fact, the publisher did recognize that Star Theory was failing miserably, they could have pulled the plug right then and there to save themselves a whole lot of money that EA sales would never have recouped, yet they decided to continue with development. Why do you think they would continue with development if the first two years were already off to a bad start? They'd already invested two years' worth of resources into the game, so why continue?

Point is, trying to use what little info there is as some sort of way to justify ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ on a publisher across all their games is absolutely ridiculous, and just f-ing stupid. We don't have all the facts or data to make that determination. Please use some common sense and try to think or question things for once.

[darkrajin]

Take 2, A scummy corporate company. Did corporate scummy things to the developers working on KSP2. We ended up with a crappy game. No amount of boot licking Take 2 will change that. The results while disappointing it's not surprising.

[type-1]

Originally posted by Zyrohex:

Maybe T2 was recognizing the signs of a studio who could not operate in their own capacity?

That's it right there! Everyone is acting like take 2 did the wrong thing by closing the studio, but the studio was obviously not going to deliver a product.

[darkrajin]

There was problems as far back as 2019 dues to Take Two.

https://www.videogameschronicle.com/news/2k-allegedly-pulled-ksp2-from-its-developer-then-poached-its-staff/