GiantBomb Blogs and News

I think it sucks they had to rebuild the game after the Unreal Engine failed them.  I would have love to support the game by purchasing, but it just doesn't seem good enough for me.

I think it's a shame.  You have to wonder if there would be this much hate for the game if D.D. didn't go on his rampage on EGM Live way back when.  Sure, maybe people wouldn't like the game either way, but there wouldn't be loads of finger pointing that "ha ha, you only got a Metacritic score of such-and-such."  Would people have even cared about the Metacritic score if D.D. hadn't made his bet with NeoGAF?  Games that get scores like this aren't laughed at or ridiculed on forums this badly.  If this were any other game people would take a look and move on.  Honestly I think some people did focus their attention on the game's flaws because of the situation, but you would hope that the professionals scoring this game know what they're talking about.  I'm about 5 hours into it and I can see it getting between a 60-80 if you're using a 100 point scale.  I'm really enjoying it, so I would be more towards the 4 stars/80% side, but it does have it's flaws.  I went to a couple stores today just looking around, not even expecting to see the game on a shelf, and I easily heard a dozen people ask for it between 4 stores.  Maybe it's just because we're in a game drought, maybe it's because people liked the demo, or maybe it's because of curiosity over the controversy.  Either way, I've typed too much and I really need to get back to playing this.  Aside from D.D.'s controversial ways, keep an open mind and be respectful of people's opinions.  If someone likes it, they like it, if not, they don't.  Just have fun playing games, damn it.  Now back to my regularly scheduled game.

...for acting like this game would be godlike, when it really just falls in the suck-okay range (or so reviewers say...).  oh well, i was never really interested, didnt really like the demo, i guess im not buying this one.

I think there were faults on all sides. You really can't quantify a right and a wrong here: there are things that have been said about NeoGAF that are absolutely true. Then again, Dyack really should have known what he was getting into when he registered- GAF is a hive-mind for the most part, and a very active troll-everyone-but-yourself community. Overall, nothing about the drama affected my opinion of the game remotely.

I find it to be a very capable dungeon crawler, with a story that isn't the greatest, but is definitely better than most. The controls are easy to use and fun (for me). I can't say I understand complaints about preciseness or them being hard to get the handle on at all. That seems pretty ridiculous to me; it's one of the reasons why I think everyone should try the demo at least twice (unless it was really the story or pace that bored them, not the controls/combat) and get to know the controls more deeply before judging them.

I'm perfectly fine with people dissing the game- my problem is with the heavily misinformed. I'm going to state the 3 most commonly mistaken facts about Too Human, one that I'm willing to bet over 80% of the people who may read this have gotten wrong at least once:

• Too Human was *not* in development for 10 years. It's been a concept for 15, but it has only been developed for the 360 and the Norse theme for about 3, counting the Unreal Engine debacle.
• Silicon Knights did *not* sue Epic because the engine did not work- they sued because Epic failed to provide several components of the engine that they were expecting in the contract. Apparently, this was due to negligence and the impending release of Gears of War. SK only wants their license fees and small damages back- nothing more. 

• Too Human is not an action game, or an action RPG. Very specifically, it's a dungeon crawler that incorporates elements from the ARPG and Action genres, broadening the combat possibilities to be combined with the excellent customization offered by a deep ARPG/loot whoring game.

These common mistakes tend to marr people's opinions of both the developer Silicon Knights and the game itself, and it really irks me to see that. Besides Denis, there is a very capable team working on that game who rely on him for a voice- and while he may not have done the best job, I really don't like to see their good name's slandered at the expense of a couple people who don't like that a developer has *opinions*. Yes, Denis could have represented himself much better, but apparently he is too human, just like us (terrible pun intended).

All in all, I look forward to the rest of the trilogy, I look forward to putting a ton of time into Too Human, and I look forward to following and being a part of its faithful and growing community in the coming years. A shout-out to all of my cohorts over at www.TooHuman.net, and to the rest, Too Human fans or not- Happy Gaming!

-Jayge

I think this is one of those games where you get all this hype for years, a few excellent screenshots at the begining of the console's lifespan which become pretty standard midway through the console's lifespan when the game actually releases. This is exactly what happened to Zelda: Twilight Princess and it is a curse that is caused by eager developers who can't wait to show off what they've been busy on for two weeks. I'm sure the game is great but as Silicon Knight's next big masterpiece it just couldn't deliver on Eternal Darkness' legacy.

I think its sad to see someone with as much passion and excitement for the craft as Denis face these hardships. I really do. Almost makes me want to buy the game just to see another project made by him. Because I totally and fully respect people with as much passion  for what they do as Denis. I also think its nice to see a developer speak his mind about everything. I much rather have a dev go through all this drama than just being quiet. Screw "bad publicity". Show your passion for what youre creating in every way you can. More power to him!

I think everyone should shut up about what Dennis says, and his attempts at pointing out how stupid the moderators on NeoGaf are(which is obvious), and just play the game. I unfortunately can't, but if I could, I would pick it up if I owned a 360 as a gamefly. It's an interesting looking game with average reviews, it seems like a "love it or hate it" thing.

Let the game speak for itself and not the things that went on behind the scenes

I can't bring myself to do it. I do think that Dyack brought more attention to himself and the game than he should of, especially because a significant amount of the buzz he created was negative. We all know about the NeoGAF and Unreal debacles, and neither of those boded well for the game in the end. Despite all the reasons that would seem to justify holding a grudge against Silicon Knights and Too Human, they never did in my mind. Disappointment is what I feel more than anything. There's no reason to hope for bad games and it really sucks that Too Human didn't turn out as solid as it could have been. It was obvious Dyack was coming from a perspective of being totally psyched about his game and I'll always support dudes like that.

More than anything, I'm surprised by the fact the game seems to be middling in quality. It had a lengthy development cycle and one would hope that more time would equal a better game. Apparently it didn't. Maybe the Unreal problems threw a bigger monkey wrench into the development than I originally thought?

If Too Human is about the dangers of becoming the thing you're fighting against. I think Dyack had all this drama planned. In his campaign to bring down whinny crying forum posters. He became a whinny crying forum poster that can get on 1up Yours. So, I guess Dyack wins for 1 upping the GAFers. All of this was about Dyack proving he is the smartest man alive.

It's pretty funny that everyone gets so worked up in the hype of games that look mediocre. Then they get really surprised when the game comes out and get mediocre reviews. People never learn... >__>

They should have focused less on being dramatic media-whores and more on making a game that doesn't suck.

I think, after some time, we'll see that once again, no matter how many fanboys you have in your pocket and how much buzz you generate, if your product blows, people aren't going to buy it.

Too bad. It had a lot a of potential to not suck. They just screwed it up.

I beleive people should just play games that they want to play, don't get caught up in this whole debate about develiopers being lunatics, Law suits and counter suits going everywhere...

I played the demo, and it had a few kinks, but all in all it looks like a game that i'll enjoy, so i'll get it once it gets released in Australia. Too many people in the gaming community are sheep and just follow what everyone else says.

WHAT HAPPENED TO INDIVIDUALITY!!!

Make up your own minds people! If you liked the demo, GO AND GET THE GAME!.. If you didn't, then don't get the game.

Fair enough if you want to take all the bad reviews on board, but most reviewers know all too well about what the game has gone through in terms of platforms, engines, funding etc. And they judge the game on those facts.People don't generally note the reviews out there that gave Too Human a good wrap (yes there are those reviews). We wouldn't be having this conversation if it was a game that was only in development for 2 or so years. I only knew the game was in development about 6-8 months ago, so i didn't get caught up in all the crap that went on 9-10 years ago.

All i do know is, i'm not going to listen to all the power trippers out there that think their word can change everyone elses.

Get over it, either buy the game, or don't. I know what my choice is.

His fault, sorry. He made a fool of himself, and is now denying any review and saying 'no one gets it'.

What a fool.

I don't get why he was so ferociously defending the game. The combat was very stupid, and while the concept is cool, without good combat, it's a hollow shell.

I just want to say to everyone who claims Denis Dyack brought this on himself, leave it be. Can you really fault a developer for standing by his product? Too Human has been his pride and joy for the past decade and I believe his sincere enthusiasm for the game is truly admirable. Personally, I love to see developers such as Dyack and Peter Molyneux, who are enthralled by their own creations. Their excitement is what gets me excited to play their games. Sure, Dyack might have made a few missteps with addressing the public criticism, but his intentions were just. I have not played the retail copy of the game, but I certainly plan to at some point. I enjoyed what I played of the demo and the negative criticism of the game isn't going to stop me from forming my own opinion. I just hope Dyack doesn't get too discouraged by the negativity, but rather uses it as incentive to produce an even better sequel, whenever it may come.

Douchebag.

I think that Epic is like the EA of the game engine world.

They have spent the last 5 years hoovering up all the cheaper indy engines in order to eliminate any competition, and then released the UE3 engine prematurely, offering little to no support.

But on the other side of the coin, this was wholly evident for people to see, Dyack really shouldnt have wasted all that timer and money on it and should have just built his own engine (or chosen another) from the beginning.

Too Human seems to be another one of those games that could have been amazing, but due to some bad design choices, engine trouble, and general ignorance/bad business choice has been compromised. I will file it in the same box as games like S.T.A.L.K.E.R: Shadow of Chernobyl and Alone in The Dark. Although I will probably buy it anyway sooner or later, probably when it's £9.99 on play.com.

Raving about "accountability in forums" on the 1up podcast.

Heres your accountability right here.

I do feel bad for him though. I think he was a little naive about the repercussions. Hopefully he can take a lesson away from all this rather than lash out against the critisism and learn nothing.

I mean, come on, he DEFENDED the game, he said that it was "Too Innovative" and, as the core gamer audience , our tiny little minds couldn't comprehend the sheer innovation that was thrust before us.  I'm sorry, but if you're trying to get people back into your game and give in a second look, it's best not to have an insult ready for them.   Also, it really is not that innovative, when it all comes down to it, it's just another action-RPG with a mythology hook. It also has obvious problems, like the camera, the analog stick combat, the camera,  the camera,, and the camera!

Those are just my impressions on the demo, but I am more than happy to say that I am not going to be buying the game.


EDIT:  I may actually give it a second look after hearing my friends talk about it....

I still don't like Dennis Dyack though.