I stopped caring about the Zelda games after that one. It was such a slog that I stopped playing it before the halfway mark. Gave Skyward Sword a chance too, but nope, and I will never play BOTW.
It's just a fact. Facts can be stated. Some games do get better later on.
I'd say those often go hand-in-hand. People who think a game is bad because they don't really understand how to play it yet.why are people talking about learning curves when OP is complaining about later good content being gated by earlier bad content? those are entirely different concepts
It's a perfectly valid defense, some games are slow burns. And you've never watched a television series that started off bad or slow and got better? I find that hard to believe.
I think it's valid in that it's 100% true that some games and shows and books etc. are great once they get going.
That said, I don't think there's anything wrong with some people being unwilling to put in that time until it gets good. Time is precious, especially the older and busier you get and there are a ton of great games, movies, books etc. that are great from the start that can be enjoyed.
Just a to each, their own thing on whether things that have slow starts, or bad/slow sports here and there, are worth their time and effort. Games, shows etc. are some life altering/life defining experience to anyone with any semblance of a life in the real world. So people aren't missing out on anything of import IMO if they choose to spend their time only on things that are engaging from the start and consistently so throughout.
I disagree. There is a number of things that I feel have good parts that are actually good enough to make up for wading through the shitty parts. I assume people who give actually that advice feel similarly, which is why they give that advice to begin with.No you shouldnt. "The first X hours/seasons/books are bad but it gets better" is shitty advice to give anyone. There is no shortage of media out there, you can just go and engage with something thats good from the start. I'd rather watch a series thats three good seasons than waste my time on one thats one bad and two good seasons. You're never getting the time you "invested" to get to the good stuff back and the good parts are never good enough to make up for wading through the shitty parts.
So if you know a game or show is amazing, something you really enjoy and think your friend would enjoy, but with a flawed start, you'll purposefully keep that info from your friend because you know better than them how they should spend their time?No you shouldnt. "The first X hours/seasons/books are bad but it gets better" is shitty advice to give anyone. There is no shortage of media out there, you can just go and engage with something thats good from the start. I'd rather watch a series thats three good seasons than waste my time on one thats one bad and two good seasons. You're never getting the time you "invested" to get to the good stuff back and the good parts are never good enough to make up for wading through the shitty parts.
the main example used at the end of the OP is FFXIII, and i don't think people disliked the first half of that game because they didn't understand the gameplay systemsI'd say those often go hand-in-hand. People who think a game is bad because they don't really understand how to play it yet.
FFXIII being used as the poster child for this kind of defense of a game is not really fair in my opinion. It's infamously bad in that sense because the "good" part that people refer to is like 20 hours into the game. OP is making a blanket statement about people who make these statements but rarely are they making it in a way that's comparable to FFXIII.the main example used at the end of the OP is FFXIII, and i don't think people disliked the first half of that game because they didn't understand the gameplay systems
Right, which is why we should tell people when a game they aren't enjoying the start of gets quite a bit better, so they can make that decision themselves.I think it's just something that varies from person to person. Some people have a ton of free time and/or don't play a lot of games a year and are more willing to be patient for games with slow starts, boring parts mixed in you have to power through etc.
Others have less free time, or play a ton of games a year, and have little patience for such things and will pretty quickly drop things pretty quickly and move on to something else if they aren't feeling it.
Well, that's an extreme over exaggeration.If the game developer can't keep my interest from hour 0 to hour 20, you better believe I'm not going to play until I get to hour 20 because some diehards feel that it "opens up" or "gets better" from that point forward. If I am just genuinely not enjoying my time with a game, I set it down. I usually hit that mark around the 1 to 1.5 hour mark. To be fair, I have gone back to several games with a fresh mind and have blown through that initial 1 to 1.5 hour mark for games that I wasn't initially feeling (hello there Hollow Knight and Divinity: Original Sin 2). But I'm firmly in the camp of "keep me entertained or I walk". I forget what game it is, I think it's Final Fantasy XIV or XI where people are insistent that once you hit Level 80 (lol) or something, the game truly shines. I'm sorry, but if the game isn't fun for Levels 1-79, I sure as shit am not interested in burying my time to see the true wonder that is Level 80.
Is it? Replace level 80 with level 20, or 10, or 5. Whatever. The burden is not on me to be bored with a happy, little smile on my face for several hours (straight out of the gate) thinking "This is fine. I'm so bored I could fall asleep. I could be playing any other game in my backlog, but this is fine. Just be bored. This is normal and I will reap the rewards in 15 hours." It's on the developer to make me, the player, interested once I boot the game up. If I'm an hour or two in and not a single worthwhile thing has occurred in my experience with the game, why do I owe the game or the developer any additional time? They had their chance and they blew it. Onward to better games.
I think the point people are making is that the time investment is worth it. If that's not for you, that's fine... but your attitude about the situation is extremely off putting. Developers don't owe you anything and just because you're not having fun doesn't nullify the fun other people are having.Is it? Replace level 80 with level 20, or 10, or 5. Whatever. The burden is not on me to be bored with a happy, little smile on my face for several hours (straight out of the gate) thinking "This is fine. I'm so bored I could fall asleep. I could be playing any other game in my backlog, but this is fine. Just be bored. This is normal and I will reap the rewards in 15 hours." It's on the developer to make me, the player, interested once I boot the game up. If I'm an hour or two in and not a single worthwhile thing has occurred in my experience with the game, why do I owe the game or the developer any additional time? They had their chance and they blew it. Onward to better games.
Games are a lot like movies and books in the sense that sometimes you need to take time to set things up, set the scene, introduce mechanics, and gradually ramp things up. Some games are a slow burn and I have no problem with that.
Right, which is why we should tell people when a game they aren't enjoying the start of gets quite a bit better, so they can make that decision themselves.
Every hour that I spend being bored by a game is another hour I could be putting towards a good game. The industry is DEEP with developers & games that don't have enough players or enough love because it's impossible to either a.) spend the money required to obtain all of those games or b.) spend the hours available in your life to play all of those games. As consumers, we're in a great position because we can be picky about how we spend our time. You're right, though - the developers don't owe me a thing. However, if I can avoid wasting my money on certain developers or if I can pull the eject cord on and avoid my time with certain games, I will. And when friends and peers ask me what I think of a game I can tell them, "absolutely nothing happens in the first two hours; I wish I could tell you more, but I gave up and moved onto (good game) instead". So while they don't owe me anything, I'll think twice about where I put my time and money the next time they release a game. If you consider that to be off-putting, then I apologize.I think the point people are making is that the time investment is worth it. If that's not for you, that's fine... but your attitude about the situation is extremely off putting. Developers don't owe you anything and just because you're not having fun doesn't nullify the fun other people are having.
I think the point people are making is that the time investment is worth it. If that's not for you, that's fine... but your attitude about the situation is extremely off putting. Developers don't owe you anything and just because you're not having fun doesn't nullify the fun other people are having.
40 hours in? Are you talking about when you get skells? Cause I feel like the game is good as soon as you get control of your character.I think it speaks more to the misuse of "better" than "40 hours in".
Xenoblade Chronicles X is a game that really pays off its slow momentum 40 hours in. It's a shame to say the game isn't good before that, it's just pretty slow.
I don't think you can be that blunt about it, and I think you're made some generalizations that don't actually pan out.
I also find that it's usually just not really true. Games tend not to radically change how they play after a few hours.
They may not change their foundation but games can and often do either add new mechanics or change up the pacing as you progress which can make a big difference.
Yep. Good but kind of slow to progress.40 hours in? Are you talking about when you get skells? Cause I feel like the game is good as soon as you get control of your character.
It definitely has a slow tutorial (all the characters telling you about NLA/BLADE and getting your first missions in with Elma and Lin) so I can see that. X's pace is weird because it has linear and open progression at the same time. It'll take a long time to get your skell but you can swim over the final continent of the game a few hours in haha