Support NeoGAF

[FireFly]

I think the real problem is that some of you have a hard time accepting that people like me consider Xbox output mediocre regardless of platform, because Xbox games on PS automatically make the 'console-war' argument redundant.

So ignoring is about the last option left.
That, and bribery. (Imagine that being standard practice from MS and their fanbase, in full display in this thread)

When I asked you to clarify your opinion, you stopped responding, so I doubt you have any interest in good faith discussion.

 

[Buggy Loop]

Why would I find suddenly find it interesting, because it's going to release on Playstation?

In due time in due time little warrior. I'm sure one day after tasting a Microsoft game you won't gag.

You're right the war is over

I can play both Microsoft and Sony 3rd parties on PC

 

[Killjoy-NL]

When I asked you to clarify your opinion, you stopped responding, so I doubt you have any interest in good faith discussion.

Must have missed it. Can you quote it again?

 

[Heisenberg007]

As marketed, yes. It's been marketed as a sort of uncharted clone but in 1st person. And honestly, as I'm playing through it (have %28 of achievements), the big set-piece parts were actually the lamest by far and are not really the focus of the moment-to-moment gameplay.

With that said, the bulk of gameplay actually revolves around exploration, puzzle solving and stealth. Those aspects should have been the key focus during the marketing phase instead of showing off big set-pieces. Specifically how multiple approaches can be made for the same "mission".

I understand your points. But I wonder what people associate Indiana Jones with: big action set pieces OR stealth and multiple approaches to do the same thing.

I do believe they read the market wrong, and perhaps that's what we're seeing in CCU and potential sales data, despite good reviews.

 

[Killjoy-NL]

In due time in due time little warrior. I'm sure one day after tasting a Microsoft game you won't gag.

You're right the war is over

I can play both Microsoft and Sony 3rd parties on PC

I bought Blops 6 and like it.

Good enough?

 

[Little Chicken]

5th most played on Xbox, ahead of GTAV, Minecraft and Marvel Rivals

 

[BigLee74]

5th most played on Xbox, ahead of GTAV, Minecraft and Marvel Rivals

Haven't you heard? It doesn't count if they've not bought it on PC at full price!

 

[Little Chicken]

I think the real problem is that some of you have a hard time accepting that people like me consider Xbox output mediocre regardless of platform, because Xbox games on PS automatically make the 'console-war' argument redundant.

So ignoring is about the last option left.
That, and bribery. (Imagine that being standard practice from MS and their fanbase, in full display in this thread)

The real struggle is that you pop up in every Xbox thread with an opinion nobody cares about.

 

[Three]

When I asked you to clarify your opinion, you stopped responding, so I doubt you have any interest in good faith discussion.

He's clarified it already and it's an opinion. I personally don't think the game is all that great either considering how some are hyping it up. It's a bit janky at times, has easy puzzles, poor combat and bad AI. I've seen numerous people call highly rated games mediocre. Games rated much higher than IJ even. It's not a big deal and opinions vary. As he keeps saying it's an opinion about a multiplatform game and there is no war to be had. It's just some people having an issue with his opinion about the game and taking it personally. They're more likely warring than not.

The real struggle is that you pop up in every Xbox thread with an opinion nobody cares about.

This coming from you of all people.

 

[Killjoy-NL]

The real struggle is that you pop up in every Xbox thread with an opinion nobody cares about.

Persecution-complex again.

I'm barely in any Xbox thread and Indiana is a Playstation game as well. To me, it's a Playstation thread.

 

[Little Chicken]

Haven't you heard? It doesn't count if they've not bought it on PC at full price!

I don't know how these mentalists are able to operate in the real world.

 

[rodrigolfp]

Are you seriously asking this stupid question. Tango and Arkane Austin says hi.

Says hi to Microsoft at best. Not my problem as a consumer if MS is offering the game on gamepass.

You don't see how that is a problem for MS if most people think this way?

I am not MS. I am a costumer and MS is offering the game on gamepass.

A very small percentage of the total addressable market has Game Pass. And the game isn't available on all tiers of Game Pass day one. It's only available on GPU and PC Game Pass.

So it's not like everybody from that TAM is getting the game. If the sales are low, that means that the majority are opting not to buy/play the game.

Nothing is stopping those people to get Gamepass and play there.

 

[FireFly]

He's clarified it already and it's an opinion. I personally don't think the game is all that great either considering how some are hyping it up. It's a bit janky at times, has easy puzzles, poor combat and bad AI. I've seen numerous people call highly rated games mediocre. Games rated much higher than IJ even. It's not a big deal and opinions vary. As he keeps saying it's an opinion about a multiplatform game and there is no war to be had. It's just some people having an issue with his opinion about the game and taking it personally. They're more likely warring than not.

There's a difference between having an opinion about the inherent quality of something ("this game is badly made") and having an opinion about how you personally perceive a given product ("I don't think I would enjoy this game/TV series/movie"). The former merits discussion, while the latter is just an expression of preference.

So which type of opinion is involved in a claim about X title being mediocre?

 

[Heisenberg007]

Nothing is stopping those people to get Gamepass and play there.

True. That was my point, too. That those folks are likely not interested. Otherwise, they could have got GP for $1 and play the game.

 

[Little Chicken]

I'm barely in any Xbox thread

 

[ChorizoPicozo]

As marketed, yes. It's been marketed as a sort of uncharted clone but in 1st person. And honestly, as I'm playing through it (have %28 of achievements), the big set-piece parts were actually the lamest by far and are not really the focus of the moment-to-moment gameplay.

With that said, the bulk of gameplay actually revolves around exploration, puzzle solving and stealth. Those aspects should have been the key focus during the marketing phase instead of showing off big set-pieces. Specifically how multiple approaches can be made for the same "mission".

you are completly wrong. it was marketed as an exploration and adventure, puzzle heavy game first and foremost.

in fact Ryan's form IGN was using PR speech when referring to the game in one of his previews using, Adventure-Action instead of the most common way of the term: action-adventure

 

[rodrigolfp]

Thank you for the reminder of why I mostly game on consoles

Because playing downgraded, with worse resolution, IQ, performance and controls is better that just a restart.

True. That was my point, too. That those folks are likely not interested. Otherwise, they could have got GP for $1 and play the game.

Their loss. Game is very solid. Especially after arriving in Egypt.

 

[kunonabi]

I understand your points. But I wonder what people associate Indiana Jones with: big action set pieces OR stealth and multiple approaches to do the same thing.

I do believe they read the market wrong, and perhaps that's what we're seeing in CCU and potential sales data, despite good reviews.

I mean I'm a huge Indy fan, aside from the last two movies, and the last thing I want out of an Indy game is a first person stealth game with a bunch of meandering busy work.

 

[Heisenberg007]

Their loss. Game is very solid. Especially after arriving in Egypt.

I'm sure. The reviews have been very good - by critics and users' alike.

Commercial performance is the only question mark left on this game now.

 

[dragonyeuw]

Beats me. I have very little interest in a new Xbox, and I've been an Xbox gamer since the day the first Xbox launched. I'm sure there are a few die hards who would pay $2000 for a next gen Xbox, but that's not a business strategy.

You and me both. Owned the original Xbox from Nov 2001, had like 3-4 360s ( the first two RROD naturally), Xbox One X and had Series X but sold it this summer because I just didn't see the point anymore. I still buy any Xbox games of interest on Steam or Windows, so they're still getting my money one way or another. I'll be grabbing Indy physically on PS5. I'm just not smart or imaginative enough to see how a next gen Xbox fits into the current gaming landscape.

 

[rodrigolfp]

I mean I'm a huge Indy fan, aside from the last two movies, and the last thing I want out of an Indy game is a first person stealth game with a bunch of meandering busy work.

Good thing you don't need to go stealth and doesn't have a bunch of meandering busy work.

I think the real problem is that some of you have a hard time accepting that people like me consider Xbox output mediocre regardless of platform, because Xbox games on PS automatically make the 'console-war' argument redundant.

Good thing the game is not an "Xbox mediocre output". Is a very solid Microsoft/Machine games game, on PC at least.

 

[Astray]

The real struggle is that you pop up in every Xbox thread with an opinion nobody cares about.

 

[Astray]

you are completly wrong. it was marketed as an exploration and adventure, puzzle heavy game first and foremost.

in fact Ryan's form IGN was using PR speech when referring to the game in one of his previews using, Adventure-Action instead of the most common way of the term: action-adventure

That's from the hands-on.

The official game trailers (those are the videos that have the most reach) were all focused on set-pieces and cutscenes.

 

[TVexperto]

Game has so many details, its great, also love the animations of the enemies

 

[ChorizoPicozo]

That's from the hands-on.

The official game trailers (those are the videos that have the most reach) were all focused on set-pieces and cutscenes.

everything is part of the marketing.

interviews, hands on, preview and are meant to contextualize those ads.

but as i said in the past. This was an ill conceived game from the get-go.

what you said at the beginning of you comment, was exactly this game's issue: People wanted and expected an "uncharted" game.

 

[MMaRsu]

.

what you said at the beginning of you comment, was exactly this game's issue: People wanted and expected an "uncharted" game.

No they didnt and we should be glad its not another boring third person shooter.

 

[ChorizoPicozo]

No they didnt and we should be glad its not another boring third person shooter.

the numbers don't reflect that. and since the beginning, there was dissapoinment around the First Person pov .

and i put uncharted inside quotations. so, im not talking about those games either

 

[BigLee74]

After playing it I am 100% behind their choice for a first person perspective. It is a much more immersive experience.

It hit me that it really was the way to do things when I was standing in the secret Vatican treasure room staring at hundreds of treasure items. So much detail would be missed were the camera zoomed back to accommodate the character.

Also, and I'm very sure they played on this big time, but how great does it look when the iconic Indy shadow is cast in front of you when the lighting is right? Tip top stuff right there!

 

[dragonyeuw]

If those last two movies hadn't come out, Indy might still have some value as a nostalgic franchise that ended on a high note. I'm still not sure if anyone under 40 cares, though. It just goes to show you once again that an objectively good game does not guarantee success.

We've seen well received Alien, Terminator and Robocop games in recent years inspite of those franchises being decades past their heyday. I don't think a poor showing for Indys last film outing will necessarily turn off younger gamers, as long as you market him as a new character ( which he basically is to Gen Z). They basically have to care about him in the here and now gaming space, not because he was a relevant movie pop icon 30-40 years ago. I suspect this game with positive word of mouth will get better traction on PS5. Heck, we may even see a Switch 2 port. It may end up with a long tail instead of blazing out of the gate, hopefully. It deserves to do well.

Speaking of those Terminator and Robocop games, I'm wondering if Indy would be better off as an AA game like those were. Having AAA money behind it means there is more pressure to hit certain sales metrics to get that ROI.

 

[MMaRsu]

the numbers don't reflect that. and since the beginning, there was dissapoinment around the First Person pov .

and i put uncharted inside quotations. so, im not talking about those games either

Uncharted did horrible on PC.

Why would you think a boring generic third person shooter would get more buys?

Let me fill you in on something, it wouldnt

 

[ResilientBanana]

This did better than Uncharted on Steam.

https://steamdb.info/app/1659420/charts/

All-Time peak for Uncharted was 10,851

 

[Puscifer]

Please keep up fellas. Also add in Palworld.

Certain games also are worth purchasing long term. High on Life didn't do big numbers either, but I also couldn't tolerate that game more than 2 hours

 

[MMaRsu]

This did better than Uncharted on Steam.

https://steamdb.info/app/1659420/charts/

All-Time peak for Uncharted was 10,851

Must have been an ABSOLUTE FAILURE then according to some posters here

And also a mediocre game

 

[Aguero9320]

the numbers don't reflect that. and since the beginning, there was dissapoinment around the First Person pov .

and i put uncharted inside quotations. so, im not talking about those games either

You haven't seen any meaningful numbers. Better to wait before you go full condescension.

 

[ChorizoPicozo]

Uncharted did horrible on PC.

Why would you think a boring generic third person shooter would get more buys?

Let me fill you in on something, it wouldnt

again my dude. im not taking about uncharted, I'm taking about "uncharted"

 

[jm89]

This did better than Uncharted on Steam.

https://steamdb.info/app/1659420/charts/

All-Time peak for Uncharted was 10,851

Uncharted came years after on PC not only that the sales are carried by playstation.

Indiana jones on the other hand most likely will not be carried by sales on xbox, and what other metric does that leave indiana jones on xbox to be comercially successfull? Engagement? Gamepass growth? Hopefully we hear from phil soon...

 

[ChorizoPicozo]

You haven't seen any meaningful numbers. Better to wait before you go full condescension.

steam number are not going up. it's done

and as I said previously, I was expecting 30K, which is taking into consideration the GP effect.

so, there are two options.

1. The GP effect is bigger
2. There was not enough interest in the game to begin with


i think number 2 is the likely scenario. why?

1. CoD didn't boost GP/Xbox numbers in meaningful way
2. Indiana Jones pre order numbers were not that high in the first place.

 

[Aguero9320]

steam number are not going up. it's done

and as I said previously, I was expecting 30K, which is taking into consideration the GP effect.

so, there are two options.

1. The GP effect is bigger
2. There was not enough interest in the game to begin with


i think number 2 is the likely scenario. why?

1. CoD didn't boost GP/Xbox numbers in meaningful way
2. Indiana Jones pre order numbers were not that high in the first place.

Steam was one of the most expensive ways to play it... There were much better options - not a surprise if people took them (which we don't know, yet).

It's weird to me to see such definitive 'failure' statements, using just one segment of the market. I'd be amazed if most people didn't take the Gamepass option for this, which is what Microsoft wants them to do - it's kind of the whole point for them.

 

[vaibhavpisal]

After playing it I am 100% behind their choice for a first person perspective. It is a much more immersive experience.

It hit me that it really was the way to do things when I was standing in the secret Vatican treasure room staring at hundreds of treasure items. So much detail would be missed were the camera zoomed back to accommodate the character.

Also, and I'm very sure they played on this big time, but how great does it look when the iconic Indy shadow is cast in front of you when the lighting is right? Tip top stuff right there!

This is a first person game through and through.

Hopefully no one is wasting their time wanting this to be 3rd person at this point. Though I am noticing some of them in this thread who haven't played it.

 

[Aguero9320]

This is a first person game through and through.

Hopefully no one is wasting their time wanting this to be 3rd person at this point. Though I am noticing some of them in this thread who haven't played it.

The third person obsession with this is strange to me also. Plays so well in first person, and the switches to third person when they happen are at the right times, and feel pretty natural.

 

[Killjoy-NL]

This did better than Uncharted on Steam.

https://steamdb.info/app/1659420/charts/

All-Time peak for Uncharted was 10,851

Big difference is that Playstation doesn't need PC to stay relevant.

It's apples to oranges.

 

[vaibhavpisal]

The third person obsession with this is strange to me also. Plays so well in first person, and the switches to third person when they happen are at the right times, and feel pretty natural.

3rd person will make it worse IMO.

 

[demigod]

Uncharted came years after on PC not only that the sales are carried by playstation.

Indiana jones on the other hand most likely will not be carried by sales on xbox, and what other metric does that leave indiana jones on xbox to be comercially successfull? Engagement? Gamepass growth? Hopefully we hear from phil soon...

Comparing a launch game on PC vs an old ass port. Let's see them compare it to Tomb Raider.

 

[MacReady13]

I don't know if you understand the cognitive dissonance in your post, on the one hand you are criticizing MS for what they have done but on the other hand you are telling us to give them more money this makes literally zero sense

If you spend the money to buy this game, they will see that we, the gamers, want games like this. No one purchased Hi Fi Rush and look at how that turned out? Oh yeah, they had great engagement numbers on gamepass... And what does that mean? Microsoft see and ONLY care about dollar signs. Buy the game so they can see it is a viable way forward. No point in not buying this game cause you don't want to give Microsoft money- too late for that. They own them, so may as well show the devs full support.

 

[ResilientBanana]

Big difference is that Playstation doesn't need PC to stay relevant.

It's apples to oranges.

Maybe, but now you see why it's difficult to use Steam numbers for everything.

 

[ResilientBanana]

Must have been an ABSOLUTE FAILURE then according to some posters here

And also a mediocre game

I'd say yes to the mediocre game part. I started Uncharted on PS3 and it seemed like a cheapened on-rails version of Assassin's Creed.

 

[demigod]

I'd say yes to the mediocre game part. I started Uncharted on PS1 and it seemed like a cheapened on-rails version of Assassin's Creed.

Tomb Raider or Assassins Creed? Make up your mind.

 

[tmlDan]

No they didnt and we should be glad its not another boring third person shooter.

but what if you find this even more boring than a third person shooter? just walking around and when combat begins i dread it.

I get seen in the vatican area and the entire armed forces attacks me lol

 

[ChorizoPicozo]

Steam was one of the most expensive ways to play it... There were much better options - not a surprise if people took them (which we don't know, yet).

It's weird to me to see such definitive 'failure' statements, using just one segment of the market. I'd be amazed if most people didn't take the Gamepass option for this, which is what Microsoft wants them to do - it's kind of the whole point for them.

Ok, so I have to assume you've always thought Game Pass do indeed hurt game sales, right?

because remember, there was this weird spin that GP in fact, increased game sales.

then reality hits:

assuming we are in the same page. I don't know why is hard or weird to understand the use of the word, failure. because you should understand that Indiana Jones is loosing revenue when someone access the game via GP instead of buying it.

and as I also said (pointing out what Phil and Sarah said - bunsiess update, Bloomberg interview-) Xbox/GP didn't grow. this is why they NEED to release games on PS.

So, Indiana Jones is indeed a financial failure. That is not up for debate. maybe it changes when it drops on PS5

 

[Aguero9320]

Ok, so I have to assume you've always thought Game Pass do indeed hurt game sales, right?

because remember, there was this weird spin that GP in fact, increased game sales.

then reality hits:

assuming we are in the same page. I don't know why is hard or weird to understand the use of the word, failure. because you should understand that Indiana Jones is loosing revenue when someone access the game via GP instead of buying it.

and as I also said (pointing out what Phil and Sarah said - bunsiess update, Bloomberg interview-) Xbox/GP didn't grow. this is why they NEED to release games on PS.

So, Indiana Jones is indeed a financial failure. That is not up for debate. maybe it changes when it drops on PS5

Absolutely do not agree. Microsoft chose to launch Gamepass, and chose to put Indiana Jones on it. I think your definition of 'failure' is outdated - you're using old metrics, and whether you think Gamepass is a good thing or not is irrelevant - as long as Microsoft offer it as an option, it is undeniably the best offering for the gamer to play Indiana Jones, over paying $60 on Steam for it. Presumably, if Gamepass doesn't work for them, they will stop doing it. It's literally 'their business'.

I haven't bought it. I would have bought it. I might have bought it on Steam if Gamepass didn't exist. I have Gamepass so I didn't need to buy it on Steam. I have Gamepass so I didn't need to buy it anywhere. It's part of my subscription, and the best game I've played this year. I am very happy with the situation. They "sold" it to me, just in a different way.

Not sure why that is hard or weird to understand.