PDA

View Full Version : After waiting months for DLC, Iím changing my review on steam



filmgeek47
10-17-2017, 06:55 AM
No longer recommending this game to other players. Iíve previously been quite vocal on the forums about giving the devs a chance and supporting the game. No more. The game was rushed out without sufficient content, and after months of total silence from the development team, Iím done waiting. Ubisoft and Red Storm, youíve squandered your investment, your hard work, and your reputations by releasing a half baked game as a cash grab instead of taking the time to do it right, or at least to fixing it after release with DLC. basic bugs like the control height issue havenít been addressed. Itís completely unacceptable.

Iíll change my reviews if you change course and support your game like a responsible developer, but otherwise Iím done.

Riley207
10-17-2017, 04:04 PM
This is very childish. Your review should be on the game, not based on lack of progressive content. I'm curious as to how many hours of game time you have put in to the price tag of purchase when comparing to other vr games. It's like the reviews you see where someone does not recommend a video game after 2000 hours. With an MMO I can understand this as rules change over time, but for non-mmo this is silly.

You can control your height by adjusting your height and then recentering. after 216 hours I have yet to struggle with height. This is not to say it can't be an issue but you can manually adjust it before finalizing your seated position.

You can protest to your hearts desire but I would rather have star trek bridge crew than no game at all. Somehow through all this corporate red tape and risky investment Ubisoft greenlit and allowed the game to finish with even the original series ship. This game is designed to be played and then move on, like any other standard video game thats not mmo/subscription. Expecting to be entitled to additional content which leads to actions that tarnish the games reputation is very childish for you and you alone.

tehPete
10-17-2017, 08:37 PM
@Riley207 - There's plenty to not recommend the game over; the lack of support / patches since release, the constantly-hinted-at-during-development-and-release DLC and suggestion-taking that has come to absolutely nothing at all, the fact that it's still £40 (nearing the upper-end of premium AAA pricing in the UK) on the Oculus store several months after release and content-wise is shallower than some demos... I think most of us could add a few more points to this list.

filmgeek47 represents a significant amount of the audience for this game with their views - there's nothing childish about it. Plenty of people have been holding out hope for more content to justify the premium price point the game was released at, and it simply hasn't come; prior to release the Ubi hype machine was in full swing, with not a day going by without some sponsored article or video popping up but since the release, and the PR joke of an AMA a week later, there's been nothing.

This is nothing to do with the devs most likely, and everything to do with Ubisoft. All of their VR titles so far have been hyped, shoved out, and forgotten about - it took months to get a simple but game-breaking issue that should have never existed in the first place patched in Warewolves Within. The pattern is clear, as is the fact Ubi don't give a flying toss about the fans of these games because VR is still in early adoption, and there will always be more unsuspecting people for them to essentially scam at this stage.

At this point, changing review scores is a perfectly legitimate way of protesting the current situation and if more people do it, who knows - we might actually get some kind of legitimate, non-PR response from Ubi as a result. Just because someone who may have put a lot of time into the game - hoping that, based on the hype, it would become a 'complete' game one day - decides to change their review score to reflect their opinion of what the game truly turned out to be, does not mean that they're being childish and the fact you feel so would suggest that you're incognizant of the full scope and history of the situation. To put it plainly, your calling them 'childish' is childish in itself; if you want to counter filmgeek47's post, please feel free to attempt this without slurs or personal attacks, as they only undermine your position.

filmgeek47
10-17-2017, 10:48 PM
@Riley207 I'm simply expressing my frustration with the game. It's my opinion. You have the right to yours as well, but I'd appreciate it if you stop attacking me personally.

For what it's worth, this is a first for me. I've rarely if ever gone out of my way to criticize a game developer, both because I've had friends who worked in the industry and because I have respect for how much work goes into a game. That said, I think this game has an unusual lack of content relative to most video games produced by AAA companies. True, it's a trend in VR, but most of those short VR games cost $20-30, not $50. The format of this game also makes it incredibly easy for the devs to create new content, because they're reusing 90% of the same assets for every mission. Bottom line is, this has been marketed and sold as a polished Star Trek experience in VR, and unfortunately the utter lack of content has kneecaped a game with enormous potential.

The truth is, I'm glad I bought the game. I enjoyed it for almost 60 hours, because I'm a die hard Trek nerd and I've got enough of an imagination to simply look past the rough edges and repetitive gameplay.. But it really pisses me off that Ubisoft has chosen to release a slew of rush job VR titles, and I didn't want my previously positive review to help make them money when they've released a $50 game that feels like it should be in steam early access. I've posted it here in the hopes of getting the company's attention, because what I really want is for them to invest in some DLC in order to flesh out the game and make it what it should be (double the campaign length with greater replayability and mission variety). I've tried to reach out the company directly many times (even sent a polite e-mail to their CEO's public address) and was met with generic PR responses of "we have nothing to announce." I'm hoping something that affects their bottom line might get their attention.

Riley207
10-18-2017, 02:39 AM
Let me help you both break down my post since my post wasn't read properly.

#1. my reason for posting in this thread is to call out someone changing their mind in telling others to NOT buy this game because they had fun. It seems like dishonest behavior to drive an agenda.

#2. Filmgeek started a personal thread opening the door for personal responses. "Iím changing my review on steam" "íI've previously been quite vocal on the forums " " Iím done waiting" "youíve squandered your investment" "Itís completely unacceptable" "Iíll change my reviews if you change"

#3. tehpete states "filmgeek47 represents a significant amount of the audience for this game with their views - there's nothing childish about it." Of course there is nothing childish about having an opinion thats negative to the game. what you are failing to read in my post is the act of using a review to further an agenda. "Your review should be on the game, not based on lack of progressive content."

#4. Filmgeek posting a good review at the beginning could be for two reasons. First reason is that the game ACTUALLY is fun to play from the start. The Second reason is that he wanted to over hype the games content in hopes of getting more. If the first reason is true, then it would appear childish to change the review when the game hasn't changed. It seems misleading to tell others to not buy the game because "now" you're not having fun many hours later. if the Second reason is true, then you are only using the review as a tool to further your agenda, and not using it as an actual review. Upvoting a review because you want more, and then down voting BECAUSE you haven't received more is childish. which leads to my final statement, Expecting to be entitled to additional content which leads to actions that tarnish the games reputation is very childish .

#5. tehpete states "the fact Ubi don't give a flying toss about the fans of these games because VR is still in early adoption, and there will always be more unsuspecting people for them to essentially scam at this stage."
So the scam you are telling me to believe is that the money I spent on the game is a waste when I play on an aegis bridge and the original series bridge, as well as cross platform playing with people around the world. When did we all become so entitled to an always evolving game growing bigger and better? This leads into my comment, "Somehow through all this corporate red tape and risky investment Ubisoft greenlit and allowed the game to finish with even the original series ship. This game is designed to be played and then move on, like any other standard video game thats not mmo/subscription."

filmgeek47
10-18-2017, 02:54 AM
@riley207 You caught me. I have an agenda. I want the developers of this game to release an appropriate amount of content for 50 dollars. I gave it a positive initial review because I made an obviously incorrect assumption that the devs would follow through with what was strongly implied by their AMA on Reddit, that they would release more content. As theyíve failed to do so, Iíve changed my review to reflect that unlike the vast majority of the games out there, these devs are doing literally nothing to support their game only a few months after release. No press, no bug fixes, no content releases, no communication (except to say they have nothing to announce at this time, which is PR speak for we canít tell you if weíre ever doing anything for this title ever again). Not only that, but as was highlighted by virtually every review of the game, they released a $50 title that, for most people, will result in 8 hours of gameplay. The context of the game has changed, and so I have changed my review. My hope is that a pattern of negative reviews will convince Ubisoft to add content, giving us all a better game, and them more money, which is a win-win for everyone. If you think thatís childish, feel free to ignore my post.

tehPete
10-18-2017, 02:27 PM
filmgeek47's response is more than adequate, but to add:

"Somehow through all this corporate red tape and risky investment Ubisoft greenlit and allowed the game to finish with even the original series ship. This game is designed to be played and then move on, like any other standard video game thats not mmo/subscription."

The only risk to investment was the fact they had no plans to support it post-release; if there were regular updates / new features / DLC as were suggested in the pre-release hype and AMA, this game would basically be printing money for Ubi at this point. If you aren't aware of the pre-release hype campaign, the AMA and everything else, you are not in a position to call someone 'childish' for daring to exercise their consumer rights. There's a Suggestions board on this very forum for the game, in which plenty of passionate Star Trek fans have given their input as requested, only to be completely ignored; Ubi have also engaged the community on the DLC / future content topic on more than one occasion. Five minutes on any forum, any discussion board will show you that the community expected DLC pretty much unanimously.

I feel the stockmarket concept 'pump and dump' is the basis for most of Ubi's software releases these days, & it 100% applies to STBC. The 'illusion' of the possibility of future DLC was planned and maintained from the start of the hype campaign, specifically to deceive people into forking out AAA-money for a demo. You might be happy with your purchase and that's great, but it appears the majority are not.


..& this is all before we start talking about Ubi potentially 'poisoning the well' in terms of VR adoption by releasing half-assed, buggy and unsupported games; as long as they make back their money though, I guess the industry can go leap off a cliff, eh? I've heard a substantial number of stories now from people who bought PSVR for STBC, and have since sold their PSVR headsets based entirely on how disappointed they were with the game and Ubi's support of it post-release.