@gesi1223But really though, should I feel obligated to pay sixty dollars for a game that isn't as good as Smash Bros and doesn't blow my mind with its ideas? I don't think it's totally unrealistic for an audience to be indifferent to a game when that's the transaction they're offered.
I feel bad for them, but did anyone HONESTLY expect this game to be a smash hit? At some point, these developers and publishers need to get realistic about what sells and what doesn't. While this game seemed well playing enough, it was destined to failure when they slapped the 60 dollar price tag on it instead of making it a low cost downloadable game.
I'm sure the developers were being realistic. You don't see them making some kind of bitter outcry about it. It's the audience that are not being realistic, with their "smash bros killer" mindset and thinking devs always have the time and funding to make every single idea they have into something that will blow everyone's minds.
I don't find $60 for an "ok" game to be worth it either, but a ton of them are made and no one does anything about those. I'm only pointing out the fact the devs are being blamed for bad sales, when it's more the fault of publisher and consumer. Sure the devs could have come up with something totally different, it could have been a way better. But they are not to blame for bad pricing and the people who can't enjoy the game because its not smash bros.
Private messaged by accident