I dunno, I feel the MP is balanced, has tons of depth, and a lot of options for custom games. I think that constitutes "great", as far as standards are concerned. Maybe it's not something you prefer, but I don't think that lessens the achievement of the team with a significant MP product.
The game has a demo, which has free MP, and SP content.
I suppose I'm just burnt out on all the negativity around videogames anymore. No one is willing to give things a chance, or have fun. It's all first impressions and review scores anymore, which is really unfortunate. I feel like every gaming community out there, in some way, is jaded to the bone and very irritating to me.
I would agree with everything outside some balance issues and matchmaking. They built a robost MP mode with depth, options and strategy, I don't think anyone would disagree there.
As someone that considers themselves fairly up on Insomniac and ratchet games I didn't know there was a demo with all that. I would push that BIG when the Vita version comes out. If the game (demo) is 'good' then people will play the demo and buy the full version.
I think GAF is very much that way, GAF is quite elitist, GAF is an elite in itself, not just anyone can get an account whenever they want. I don't hang out enough places online to say whether or not the whole gaming demographic is they way, I doubt a 8 year old wanting to pick up FFA is too worried about review scores. A games success is so much more than first impressions or review scores.
Part of the problem is there is so much choice these days, people have vast Steam libraries that they either wont play or will barely play. With so much out there people want to make sure they spend their pleasure time playing the best games for them. People turn to reviews, first impressions, word of mouth, to help choose what they play and is considered worthy.
Review scores are part of that but they aren't the end all of things, an extreme example, but if the next CoD got terrible review scores it wouldn't sell any less, the name, legacy and marketing would make it sell, but the one after that, would get hit. All4One disappointed people and so the next game, FFA, had to suffer, A4O hurt the reputation.
As for first impressions, well, they are important, not just in games but for everything. If people give off a bad first impression then it take effort to change that impression. It's built into us as humans. It can go both ways to, the impression Brutal Legend gave off with its demo was wildly different to the game.
I think FFA's word of mouth is strong, almost everyone that has played it enjoyed it and will praise it.
FFA is a good game that deserves to be more popular than it is, no doubt, but I can see why it isn't as popular as it is.
At the end of the day the success of a game is how many people buy it and keep playing it, regardless of the games quality. For FFA you and other people can't find a game, and finding a game only requires 1 other player to be available. Someone buying the game today can play single player, then try and go online and find no one, that's a failure. The game might be commercially or critically successful but those of different aspects.
To say FFA is failing or not doing well is not the same as saying it is a bad game or Insomniac did a bad job. There are loads of external factors like the market, legacy, vita delay that would play into that.
I think it's important to look at the bigger picture and be balanced about it, you can't simply look at the game and say it was good and had good practises, it should've done well.
Hoping that Vita release + New Content will boost the activity and hopefully get more people talking about this awesome MP title (because it is absolutely awesome).
