Poll of the Day > Lol nobody cares about Days Gone since it's no longer exclusive.

(+) Yeah! (+)

I remember PS4 owners hyping up that game for years even after mediocre reviews.

---

ITT: Nobody cares about games that are also on PC.

---

Never heard of it

Looks like their days are gone.

---

why are you talking about this game of all a sudden. it came out on pc months ago

---

Cotton_Eye_Joe posted...

I remember PS4 owners hyping up that game for years even after mediocre reviews.

I remember most PS4 owners ceasing to care about it 20 minutes after it came out because of how mediocre it was.

People today barely hype up good games after they've been out for a few months, no one was talking about Days Gone at all.
---

never cared about it, it's boring generic crap.

also, they aren't zombies
---

I loved the game myself.
---

I dont remember many people caring about that game at any point.

---

Uh I feel like I remember that game being among the dozens of zombie games from E3 a few years back? Am I mistaken?

wwinterj25 posted...

ITT: Nobody cares about games that are also on PC.

It's an exaggeration, but there is a tendency for people to hype up exclusives more than multiplats because they see it as an opportunity to justify their system purchase to everyone else. If a previously-planned exclusive goes multiplat, that goes away.

That said, I also don't remember anyone ever caring much about that game, so...

---

It was mostly Xbox fans pretending to be playstation fans hyping the game up.

Cotton_Eye_Joe posted...

hyping up that game

Literally no one

---

I don't know what that is

---

papercup posted...

I don't know what that is

A game that I found enjoyable, that has some minor connections to the Syphon Filter series.

Post apocalyptic world where a disease escapes containment and infects most people around the world, turning them into mindless berserker hoards. You do missions for various groups surviving in the play area, while dealing with infected and non friendly groups. One of the high points in my opinion is dealing with infected hoards, where you will fight against 50 - 500 infected in a group.
---

Cotton_Eye_Joe posted...

I remember PS4 owners hyping up that game for years even after mediocre reviews.

No. They didn't. It was released and promptly forgotten about. If anything, i saw more people shiting on it before release than were excited for it. It was even released for PS Plus users like a year later.

---

I was told despite middling reviews it actually is alright. Like nothing super but there's some decent stuff in there

---

I liked the game, I thought it was fun. The main character is pretty unlikable though.

I don't think anyone cared about it before.

---

Ever since I read the phrase "95% of the internet is imagining a person that doesn't exist and getting super mad about their opinion(s)" I just can't help but see everything through that lens. This topic is about something that never happened and people that never existed and half the comments are simply people pointing that out, lol

I remember when the game was first shown off, and the responses were either

"Wow, another zombie game, BUT OPEN-WORLD"
or
"Wow, another Open-World game, BUT WITH ZOMBIES"

---

Did anyone else at least enjoy the horde fights?
https://imgur.com/p5xysgI
https://imgur.com/drDWuwt
---

DeltaBladeX posted...

Did anyone else at least enjoy the horde fights?

Yeah the horde fights were fantastic. Otherwise the game is fairly pedestrian, but fun nonetheless

---

days gone was like a fun version of GTA

---

RoboXgp89 posted...

days gone was like a fun version of GTA

First time I've seen anyone type that.

---

Raccoon City Stories

---

The devs chastised people for not buying their game full price. You don't come back from that.

---

DeltaBladeX posted...

I loved the game myself.

I think I got it for free when it was one of those monthly games. I really enjoyed it.

Veedrock- posted...

The devs chastised people for not buying their game full price. You don't come back from that.

That's not what happened.

In speaking about Days Gone being introduced to PS+ and garnering an uptick in fans, some of whom were asking why there was no sequel planned, one of the people who worked on the game brought up the point that not supporting a game when it releases will hurt it's chances of success and therefore the chance for potential sequels.

He was referencing the Days Gone situation, but also speaking generally, to the success (or failure) of all video game titles.

---

Mead posted...

I dont remember many people caring about that game at any point.

Their loss, the game is fantastic

DeltaBladeX posted...

Did anyone else at least enjoy the horde fights?
https://imgur.com/p5xysgI
https://imgur.com/drDWuwt

One of my favorite aspects of the game

I also loved that you can reset the horde missions once they're all complete and experiment with new ways to take them down and completely mow down hordes in the first few regions that otherwise gave you trouble the first time around

Far-Queue posted...

Yeah the horde fights were fantastic. Otherwise the game is fairly pedestrian, but fun nonetheless

I was skeptical at first but it wound up being one of my favorite games

What I loved most is the perfect balance between story and open world activities with the latter not being overwhelming and just pointless filler

---

Veedrock- posted...

The devs chastised people for not buying their game full price. You don't come back from that.

it wasn't even worth the time I spent downloading it for plus
---

Far-Queue posted...

<u>one</u> of the people who worked on the game brought up the point that not supporting a game when it releases will hurt it's chances of success and therefore the chance for potential sequels.

It's also worth noting that he wasn't even part of the studio at the time he said it, because he'd left after the game was finished.

But also to be fair, he was a bit of a prick about it. He came across a bit pissy and aggressive in tone, and that's never going to be received well by the people you're attempting to criticize. Which is a large part of why the general reaction to his comments was along the lines of "Maybe people would have paid for it if it was actually worth that much. If you want your games to sell better, make better games."

As he himself pointed out in the same interview, God of War sold really well at launch, so it's not just people being unwilling to buy new games at full price. Can't even necessarily point to the fact that God of War was a follow-up to an existing franchise as an excuse for why people were willing to buy early, because Horizon Zero Dawn did really well at launch as well (obviously well enough to spawn a sequel of its own), in spite of being an entirely new franchise/IP. Days Gone didn't sell poorly because people wait for sales or other alternatives, it sold poorly because it was a mediocre game in a vastly over-saturated genre with literally nothing to set it apart or make it look like a must-buy. I know I passed on it after seeing game footage of Let's Players online playing it and it looked like bland mush.

But even aside from that, his point was a bit disingenuous anyway, because it wasn't solely because of sales that they didn't get approval for a sequel. It's been explicitly mentioned that the main reason why Sony rejected a pitch for Days Gone 2 was because of the mixed critical response to the game AND because the studio took too long in development of the first game (neither of which involve sales numbers). Sony basically saw a game that would have been a poor return on investment no matter how you slice it (since the entire point of an exclusive title is to spur interest in the console it's on, which requires the game to be popular in and of itself, and you need to get that exclusive on the shelves in time to actually help push console sales), and passed (rightfully so).

And even beyond all THAT, there's also the argument that consumers should never buy games at launch in the current environment no matter what - because developers and publishers are so anti-consumer at this point that it's almost a necessary self-defense mechanism to wait a few months before buying a title to make sure it actually works (*cough*Fallout 76*cough*Cyberpunk*cough*), and that the publisher isn't going to add in secret microtransactions or other bullshit a month or two in. Can't even argue that some publishers are more trustworthy than others, or more likely to release a mostly bug-free game at launch, because there are very few publishers left that haven't pulled some sort of bullshit or other at least a few times (and in Cyberpunk's case, a LOT of people who were willing to trust CD Projekt Red got fucked hard in the ass with a rusty knife-edged dildo). Trust needs to be earned. Loyalty needs to be earned.

If your entire business model requires stupid people to blindly buy your substandard product on day one in order to consider it a success, maybe you need a better business model. Or a better product.
---

Well said, PO

---

Man these types of games all have similar stories.
---