Crackdown 3 Review Thread - MC: 60 OC: 62

[DonFerrari]

Machiavellian said:

thismeintiel said:

You realize Phil didn't just pop into existence when he was named the head of Xbox in 2014, right?  He's had leadership positions within MS Studios for over a decade, now.  And since 2014, he has overseen several studios closing, one being Lionhead Studios in 2016, as well as the cancellation of several promising games.  You say his vision is different, yet he too publicly defended the DRM fiasco and being the head of MS Studios probably played a role in its inception.  Either that or he is just some "yes man," and that is why he is in charge, now, because he won't question the higher ups.

This scapegoating of Don Mattrick, who hasn't been with the company for almost 6 years now, just to cover Spencer's ass is either naivety of the nth degree or just willful ignorance. 

Why would you care about anything until he was actually head of the Xbox division.  Where you in the conference rooms when decisions were made.  Do you even know how any of those decisions went down or if he fought for them and lost.  You are making judgement on information you have no clue on what happen.  I have worked for MS in the past and can tell you that certain titles may sound important but there are a lot of layers to them.  I have no clue what he contributed or not during the times he wasn't the boss, but as the boss, I can directly see what his vision is now.  

I am not covering Spencer ass, for some reason you believe a huge company like MS moves like a developer.  So what exactly are you blaming Spencer for since he gain control of the XBox division.  How hard do you think he may or may not had to change senor management to actually purchase new studios and the other efforts since his term.  Stop acting as if you have all the information or even know how MS work because right now only thing I see is you making an opinion on what you believe happen or has happen.  Nothing moves fast at MS, that is the first thing you should know.

Problem is, that Phill have promised for like 4-6 years to improve 1st party. And we have had people in the site defending that it isn't something he can do over night, but then on 6 month window they buy/increase/create 5-10 studios? It clearly shows that it wasn't something in the top of their list until now, and he have been lying for a long time.

zorg1000 said:

Cerebralbore101 said:

You're not buying it with Gamepass though, just renting it, or paying for a Netflix-like service. 

You are side stepping the point.

He really isn't. When you see reviews the tier of the game in question certainly affects the score. I don't see reviewers using similar metrics to evaluate GTAV, GoW, etc compared to let's say Celeste, Flower, etc.. they are on their tier about top notch, they have high score, but you can hardly defend that if the Indies or A tier were judged as harsh as they do to AAA they would hold their scores.

LudicrousSpeed said:
I have also wondered for awhile, what kind of impact GamePass has both on expectations for games, and how people feel about them after playing them. I paid $50 for the UE of State of Decay 2, so it doesn't apply, but how would I feel about CD3 if I paid $65 for it as opposed to paying $10 a month and getting it on the service? Maybe this helps explain some of the gap between how the general gamer attitude about Crackdown 3 is as opposed to reviewers.

I would say people are more lenient when they pay less for that content. Sure that a game won't become the best or worse you ever played based on being free or costing over 60 USD. But the middle term can certainly be affected by how much it costed.