I saw the EZA review along with Angry Joe's and it sounds like this game isn't very good. What's surprising is that this game has been in development for years. So for it to release in this current state just seems awful.

Actually, I would hope the game developed by a large studio over several years, with a large budget and state of the art facilities, would have at least as much content as an indie game developed by a handful of people. 

Either way, it's not a comparison that puts Rare in a good light.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HFIiVRgxq1I

Lol this guy is legitimately terrible a video games,  at 52:00 he misses the same jump as the Takashi guy multiple times and this is after it's been changed to make it easier.  It's followed by 3 hours of him being brutal and getting mad.  He ended up giving the game a 10/10 because he knows he'll get exposed if he complains about it.

You wanna know the greatest lie gamers ever told? That reviewers have to be good at games to review them.

Also Cuphead and Sea of Thieves are not even close to the same thing. 

I watched the whole video, you can clearly see his disappointment, seems like wasted potential.

Lol $60 for this... yeah.

Looks legitimately beautiful, albeit barren of content

I like him too, but I can get why people can dislike him. He has a way of being brazen and off the handle, and he looks as inexperienced in front of a lot of people.

But he's passionate about videogames and board games too. If you sit down and listen in between his angry rants, he will give some smart and partial points about the games; actually well-thought remarks with some humor sparkled into it. He puts some thought and effort into his reviews. He also looks (or tries to look) for positives in a so-so or bad game. He's far from perfect, but he's a good reviewer and that's all that matters, right?

You can disagree, but I thought he stated clearly why he was disappointed. Maybe you are content with what the game offers, others aren't because they had an expectation that wasn't met.

To me this game feels like a strong argument of $20 at launch with expansions along the way. Asking $60 now with the promise of updates is hard for reviewers who need to get reviews out now instead of six months in the future. Right now it may be a 4/10 at $60, and it could be a 9/10 in a year at $20.

I never got getting worked up about reviews, if you're having fun, enjoy the game.

So you have official numbers on how many employees are at Rare, how many of them worked on SoT, and how big the budget is? Please share your sources, would make for interesting reads, thanks!

NMS = SP game with randomly generated worlds using shared assets. SoT = essentially a pirate themed MMO. It’s a stupid comparison to begin with, NMS was literally designed to have endless content, which was part of its problem imho. Please tell us how you’d think a multiplayer shared world game should have as much content as a game designed to generate an endless amount of planets and animals. 

Let me make it clear though, I’m not a SoT apologist. I got it in a GamePass sub I already had, and would not have paid $60 after what I saw during the betas. It has too little content and too high a price.

I think they probably knew the game isnt worth 60 dollars, but they wanted to market gamepass and they succeeded. Even when people know that the game is shallow they will try it on gamepass. People criticising the game not being worth 60 dollars and being shallow actually made them feel that Gamepass is more worth, because they dont lose any money trying games they might not like.