crustcyb
Heavy International
- 27 September 2005
Ugh... another "reviewer" with half-a-dozen followers wanting attention. At least he's not as CRINGY as the other one (the one with the pathetic word thumbnails like "Amazing", "DISMANTLED" , "ARROGANCE" , "IRONY", etc.), when looking (only) for more views and more followers. Facepalm.
Here's the deal: If the devs didn't want the reviews to be "bombed" as they were, they should've simply delayed the game until they were able to fix stuff like the bad controls, the inventory, the lack of narrative (or whatever they might do or not with it), or everything else that needs fixing... Point is, games should be reviewed as they COME OUT... NOT AFTER patches, NOT AFTER mods. This total BULLSHIT of releasing a game and then fixing it along the way must STOP. Cyberpunk can be cited as an exception because the original release didn't even RESEMBLED a videogame (and even so, some outlets gave that initial CATASTROPHE ratings higher than Crimson Desert's 6-rating, which is beyond ABSURD), anyways. Not the case with this fully "realized" game.
I mean, why not just enjoy the game and that's it...? All this cringy need for validation makes these people sound like 15-year old kids, literally.
That said, same way I don't trust some media outlet pundit, in which his employer (the outlet) probably have an agenda, I also don't trust "consumers" who probably suffer from the condition that I really don't wanna cite again, and are looking for validation for the big amount of money they spent on this game (70 dollars, if I'm not mistaken). And neither "reviewers" who get the game for free and show their "feelings" towards the developer because of that, like that CRINGY Digital Foundry Sony fanboy, John Linneman, aka Dark1x.
That being said, again, I guess I'll wait for Angry Joe's review. He buys the games (at least from what I know) and he has review bombed a PLETHORA of games, and deservedly so... Probably way more than games he praised (hi-ratings and that "badass seal of approval). He has no reason to ass-kiss this dev, or this game.
Here's the deal: If the devs didn't want the reviews to be "bombed" as they were, they should've simply delayed the game until they were able to fix stuff like the bad controls, the inventory, the lack of narrative (or whatever they might do or not with it), or everything else that needs fixing... Point is, games should be reviewed as they COME OUT... NOT AFTER patches, NOT AFTER mods. This total BULLSHIT of releasing a game and then fixing it along the way must STOP. Cyberpunk can be cited as an exception because the original release didn't even RESEMBLED a videogame (and even so, some outlets gave that initial CATASTROPHE ratings higher than Crimson Desert's 6-rating, which is beyond ABSURD), anyways. Not the case with this fully "realized" game.
I mean, why not just enjoy the game and that's it...? All this cringy need for validation makes these people sound like 15-year old kids, literally.
That said, same way I don't trust some media outlet pundit, in which his employer (the outlet) probably have an agenda, I also don't trust "consumers" who probably suffer from the condition that I really don't wanna cite again, and are looking for validation for the big amount of money they spent on this game (70 dollars, if I'm not mistaken). And neither "reviewers" who get the game for free and show their "feelings" towards the developer because of that, like that CRINGY Digital Foundry Sony fanboy, John Linneman, aka Dark1x.
That being said, again, I guess I'll wait for Angry Joe's review. He buys the games (at least from what I know) and he has review bombed a PLETHORA of games, and deservedly so... Probably way more than games he praised (hi-ratings and that "badass seal of approval). He has no reason to ass-kiss this dev, or this game.
...