For those worried about the developer's record...

[The Former]

My friend dragged me briefly out of forum blackout with some information I just had to share for all those worried about Avalanche Software being the developer for this game. What follows is a copy/paste (more or less) from a comment I shared in another thread:

Here's how Avalanche games have reviewed on Metacritic, starting with the earliest that appears on the site (listed as "Metascore / User Score"):

• Prince of Persia: Arabian Nights (Dreamcast): 58 / 6.2
  
• NCAA College Football 2K3 (PS2): 71 / 7.6
  
• Rugrats: Royal Ransom (PS2): N/A / 7.6
  
• Tak and the Power of Juju (Gamecube): 71 / 8.3
  
• Tak 2: The Staff of Dreams (Gamecube): 75 / 8.6
  
• Tak: The Great Juju Challenge (Gamecube): 75 / 8.0
  
• Dragon Ball Z: Sagas (Xbox): 51 / 6.9
  
• DISNEY OWNERSHIP BEGINS
  
• Chicken Little (Their first game on PC!): 71 / 7.3
  
• 25 to LIfe (Xbox): 41 / 7.3
  
• Chicken Little: Ace in Action (Wii): 72 / 8.2
  
• Meet the Robinsons (PC): 69 / 7.5
  
• Hannah Montana: Spotlight World Tour (Wii): N/A / 6.5 (Interestingly, the three reviews it did have are 70, 66, and 56, much higher than I thought they'd be.)
  
• Bolt (Xbox 360): 57 / 6.7
  
• Toy Story 3 (PS3): 78 / 8.0
  
• Cars 2 (Xbox 360): 72 / 7.8
  
• Disney Infinity (PS3): 75 / 6.3
  
• Disney Infinity 2.0 (PS4): 71 / 5.8
  
• Disney Infinity 3.0 (PS4): 80 / 6.1
  
• Cars 3 Driven to Win (PS4): 72 / 6.7
  
• DISNEY OWNERSHIP ENDS

Admittedly, I chose the version of each game with the best overall rating. But that gave as much as it took, because in so doing I was sometimes choosing the version on the platform the game wasn't built for (such as Meet the Robinsons on PC).

So in summary, in this order, it went...

58 / 6.2
71 / 7.6
NA / 7.6
71 / 8.3
75 / 8.6
75 / 8.0
51 / 6.9
71 / 7.3
41 / 7.3
72 / 8.2
69 / 7.5
NA / 6.5
57 / 6.7
78 / 8.0
72 / 7.8
75 / 6.3
71 / 5.8
80 / 6.1
72 / 6.7

Average: 69.44 from the media, 7.29 from players

Compare this to open world giant Bethesda Softworks, who made IHRA Drag Racing[www.metacritic.com] and PBA Tour Bowling 2001[www.metacritic.com] only two years before releasing Morrowind. (By the way, that wasn't their last foray into sports gaming.[www.metacritic.com])

Bethesda averages 68.0 / 6.27. This includes all games listed as being developed by Bethesda Softworks, Bethesda Game Studios, and ZeniMax Online Studios. It does not include New Vegas, because it was developed by Obsidian Entertainment.

In other words...

The average rating of Bethesda games is LOWER THAN THAT of Avalanche Studios games.

Avalanche has a solid record, with no more stinkers than any other studio. They'll do fine. You not liking the premise of their early games does not make them bad games, on a technical level. If you're not a Disney fan, of course you're not gonna like all the games they made while they were owned by Disney. You're not the target audience. But they still reviewed very well for licensed games.

https://youtu.be/xcATRVPmwzk

[The Former]

Wow, second page already? Yep, still too fast, back under my rock I go!

[GLiTcHeD]

Well, out of 10 farts, 1 of 'm has to smell at least intriguing.
- Sokrates

[The Former]

Originally posted by GLiTcHeD:

Well, out of 10 farts, 1 of 'm has to smell at least intriguing.
- Sokrates

The only developer I can think of to not have any such farts before their first hit was CD Projekt, whose first game was The Witcher. It should have been a massive failure by the logic many are applying to this studio and Hogwarts Legacy, yet it wasn't.

[Boomshanka]

Originally posted by Lockfågel, Paradoxriddaren:

Originally posted by GLiTcHeD:

Well, out of 10 farts, 1 of 'm has to smell at least intriguing.
- Sokrates

The only developer I can think of to not have any such farts before their first hit was CD Projekt, whose first game was The Witcher. It should have been a massive failure by the logic many are applying to this studio and Hogwarts Legacy, yet it wasn't.

I've heard the game is pretty bad, i could be wrong but apparently its pretty bad.

[Kunovega]

Originally posted by Lockfågel, Paradoxriddaren:

Originally posted by GLiTcHeD:

Well, out of 10 farts, 1 of 'm has to smell at least intriguing.
- Sokrates

The only developer I can think of to not have any such farts before their first hit was CD Projekt, whose first game was The Witcher. It should have been a massive failure by the logic many are applying to this studio and Hogwarts Legacy, yet it wasn't.

The first Witcher was garbage, the second one was mediocre and the third is good but also wildly over hyped.

[𝔖𝔥𝔦𝔩𝔬]

Originally posted by Boomshanka:

Originally posted by Lockfågel, Paradoxriddaren:

The only developer I can think of to not have any such farts before their first hit was CD Projekt, whose first game was The Witcher. It should have been a massive failure by the logic many are applying to this studio and Hogwarts Legacy, yet it wasn't.

I've heard the game is pretty bad, i could be wrong but apparently its pretty bad.

The gameplay of Witcher 1 is pretty bad.

[Aluvian Darkstar]

well nothing surprising, bethesda games, especially F3, 4, TES series are ♥♥♥♥ and mostly unplayable without mods

[The Former]

Originally posted by Shilo Ohayou:

Originally posted by Boomshanka:

I've heard the game is pretty bad, i could be wrong but apparently its pretty bad.

The gameplay of Witcher 1 is pretty bad.

Was it? 81 / 8.7 on Metacritic, that's real strong for a developer's first ever game.

[Xialoh]

Originally posted by Lockfågel, Paradoxriddaren:

Originally posted by Shilo Ohayou:

The gameplay of Witcher 1 is pretty bad.

Was it? 81 / 8.7 on Metacritic, that's real strong for a developer's first ever game.

Good story/characters while being literally unplayable, essentially.

[Kashra Fall]

Originally posted by Lockfågel, Paradoxriddaren:

Originally posted by Shilo Ohayou:

The gameplay of Witcher 1 is pretty bad.

Was it? 81 / 8.7 on Metacritic, that's real strong for a developer's first ever game.

You're judging a score from now adays, vs when it first came out. People became accepting of W1 because of their liking of W2 and W3, primarily W2 as a lot of people went over to W1 when W3 was in development to see where it all started. The gameplay was subpar for a 2007 release and the graphics even more so. Is it a good game? Debatable, but the lineup you've shown here doesn't show much more than "Average" and people are expecting "Amazing!" which isn't the dev's problem, but people's expectations.

[CheeseLord]

Originally posted by Lockfågel, Paradoxriddaren:

It does not include New Vegas, because it was developed by Obsidian Entertainment.

Cause if it did, your point would be irrelevant.

[Kunovega]

Originally posted by Lockfågel, Paradoxriddaren:

Originally posted by Shilo Ohayou:

The gameplay of Witcher 1 is pretty bad.

Was it? 81 / 8.7 on Metacritic, that's real strong for a developer's first ever game.

Did you play it?

I agree with the Edge Magazine review "The game fumbles its potential with unanticipated incompetence"

[The Former]

Originally posted by Kashra Fall:

Originally posted by Lockfågel, Paradoxriddaren:

Was it? 81 / 8.7 on Metacritic, that's real strong for a developer's first ever game.

You're judging a score from now adays, vs when it first came out. People became accepting of W1 because of their liking of W2 and W3, primarily W2 as a lot of people went over to W1 when W3 was in development to see where it all started. The gameplay was subpar for a 2007 release and the graphics even more so. Is it a good game? Debatable, but the lineup you've shown here doesn't show much more than "Average" and people are expecting "Amazing!" which isn't the dev's problem, but people's expectations.

Partially. The media reviews (the 81 score) came out at launch, though, and many of the user reviews are also from much further back than today. I see a 10 from 2010, two 10's from 2007, a 9 from 2011...

[The Former]

Originally posted by CheeseLord:

Originally posted by Lockfågel, Paradoxriddaren:

It does not include New Vegas, because it was developed by Obsidian Entertainment.

Cause if it did, your point would be irrelevant.

How so? Bethesda didn't develop the game, only published it. Obsidian - now a Microsoft subsidiary - developed it.

It would be no different than including Middle Earth: Shadow of War in favor of Avalanche because WB published it.

Edit: For sake of argument, I just included it (84 / 8.9) in my average. It brings Bethesda's average to 69.33 / 6.51. Still lower than Avalanche.