Hi all,

was a bit surprised that KC:D has not gotten any mention on either podcast this week. I was hoping to hear some of the crew members take on this. It is a high profile release with some interesting first week challenges that are certainly interesting.

I'm not holding my breath for a quicklook on this, though was sooo hoping they would do one.

This isn't the first higher profile game that has gotten no coverage from GB, though I wonder why if all other larger outlets are covering this (and yes I can go there and watch/read their take but I like the GB viewpoint)

Any thoughts?

GB coverage has always been a mix of what is the staff interested in combined with how many man hours can be devoted to checking out games. It's probably not on their radar, or they just haven't gotten a chance to look at it.

Maybe its just me but I hadn't heard of it at until people on the internet started talking about. Maybe I don't have my hands on the pulse anymore Im not sure. Seems like its getting attention for all the wrong reasons too.

Though I doubt that's the reason they aren't talking about. Giant Bomb has never been about covering everything and was always about covering what they were actually interacting with. If there is no interest they wont talk about it.

To be fair though its only been out 3 days and The only big name review I have seen is a PC gamer review so were early copies even sent out to most people?

I didn't even know this game existed until just the other day, let alone it being highly anticipated. Likely the Giant Bomb guys didn't either. Seriously, this game came out of nowhere from my perspective.

@vasta_narada: ...maybe but with the staff size they have and the vast variety of different interests on tastes it makes this hard to believe. I hope you're right and we will see a QL upcoming. I'm on the fence on this one and was hoping to get some insight/opinions from them. Maybe Vinny and Alex would be a good combo for the QL for this

Yeah I had no idea what this game even was until today. I'm not sure it's exactly high profile. It does look neat though, maybe a Vinny game for next week if we are lucky?

@bradbrains: It is prominently featured on their "releases this week" bar on the front page all week. I doubt they missed that. It might take over the weekend until they get to it?

It could also be that due to the controversy around the game they are avoiding it.

Isnt that an automated thing? I thought what showed there had to do with site/forum traffic but maybe im being presumptuous

I am honestly surprised at how many people on here weren't aware of it, I thought it was one of the most anticipated games for early 2018 and had heard a lot of hype for it.

What reason is that?

It doesn't seem like the type of game any of them would be really into in my opinion.

I think the OP's idea of high profile and mine are very different - this game seems like the very definition of niche.

A dev of Kingdom Come was like a bit gamergate supporter as I recall, but I really think it's more that no one (on staff) cares the game at all rather than making a statement.

I only learned of its existence at all seeing it pop up on the new release window.

Early numbers on sold copies via SteamSpy imply otherwise, especially for a game with no AAA marketing budget.

@bones8677: GB knows about this game. A few days ago, Abby retweeted about a Kotaku article with the developer.

The original tweet from Casey Malone linked this Kotaku article:

https://kotaku.com/my-e3-meeting-with-a-pro-gamergate-developer-1715511964

Casey Malone later deleted the tweet. It seems like neither Casey or Abby read the article. They just wanted everyone to know the developer was pro GamerGate.

Niche games can break out and good on them if that's what happened but listen somewhat janky Euro medieval rpg is hard to describe any other way.

I dunno if I'd call this a big game profile wise. And because it's a huge game size-wise, I bet many of them don't really plan to look at it until they have more time to play it. Or it's because of the more savory statements and whatnot slung around by Vavra. Who can say. It's pretty worthless to speculate either way, and as has been said, it won't be the first game to not get any coverage regardless if it's never touched.

I'm less surprised none of the crew talked about this game than I was utterly shocked they actually did a quick look of Elex a few months back. That was a game that absolutely should have crept by them.

So you are saying the hat in time QL got removed because someone supported gamergate or they just didn't care about the game?

I quite like the look of it myself (I'm waiting to see if some of the more egregious bugs get fixed and if they maybe do something to make the save system a bit more lenient) but I'd struggle to describe a janky open-world medieval (not fantasy) game that's been compared to Mount & Blade as anything other than niche.

To be fair. I think the only staff member that the game might appeal to would be Vinny. So if he hasn't played it I doubt the rest of them would

edit. I'm playing it and I think it great

@rihanna: That...doesn't really mean anything though. Being aware of the game's existence doesn't really mean it would be brought up on the podcast. They haven't done "new releases" in years. Retweeting something about the dev might make you aware of the game, but I would be willing to bet if Vinny hasn't played it, no one on the staff has.

Regardless, it's kind of lame and above all unfair to speculate about the intentions of any of the staff regarding the motivations of a tweet or retweet and how that might influence what they talk about on the podcast. It's also hilarious how if they HAD talked about it but hadn't played it enough they'd be getting dragged for not knowing enough about it (this happens to Abby all the time). So, I guess they just can't win.

To me, its a combination of nobody on GB having any real interest in Kingdom Come itself and they don't want to give exposure to a game that has someone on the development team who's supposedly pro-GamerGate.

Given the staffs history with these type of games and their personal preferences it’s not very surprising at all.

Considering that the section on both podcasts is 'What've you been playing?' and not 'New Releases', it seems like not too big a stretch in logic that maybe, just maybe, nobody played it yet?

Hah!

It's possible that someone on the site has just installed it but hasn't played nearly enough of it to have any kind of opinion. Some staff members share early opinions on games on the podcast, but I think they mostly do not because there can still be a lot you don't know about a game if you've only played it for like 30 minutes.

Man, now I'm bummed out.

I agree, and if it would be that niche then why would every mainstream gaming site (Gamespot, IGN, PCGamer, Eurogamer.....) cover it.

Also I would like to add that any speculation about any member on the dev team's political views should not be part of an objective review of the developers product as a whole. Imagine the many different views development team members have at companies like EA, Ubi (they state that ahead of each game), Activision etc...

Now granted, if the final product includes political views, statements etc. about gender, race etc... then that is a different discussion.

I suppose it depends on if any of the staff are interested in it.

I mean it isn't really speculation the guy is on record saying some pretty foul things.

Everyone is free to weigh that however they like but as someone who learned of this game a few days ago and was only mildly interested that news is enough for me to just give it a hard pass.

It doesn't really look like a game anyone on staff would get into.

It's possible they won't cover this because of the lead developers pro Gamer-Gate stance, and that's understandable to me. Same with the A Hat in Time QL because of the JonTron affiliation. It's all speculating of course unless the staff says anything, but they are in a position where they can choose not to cover a game for such reasons.

As for nobody on staff being interested in it, that's also very likely though Ben did QL Elex recently which was similarly a very European RPG that is pretty difficult and intended for a more niche audience. I don't know if he knew much about it going in though.

Most major video game sites such as IGN, GameSpot, PC Gamer, etc. didn't have a review up, or still don't have a review for this game. So I don't think there was any pre-release media support for this game until its launch. GB plans their entire week with Monday morning meetings, so I can see them not prioritizing this due to the lack of availability at the time.

This game also shares some similiaries with Witcher 3, which most of the GB staff didn't have an overwhelming interest in. The only person that I could see trying this out would be Vinny.

I wouldn't mind seeing it, i just don't think there's much to see, it seems to be a fairly sparse game.

If this is the reason, it's a shame (same goes for A Hat in Time).

Determining what pieces of entertainment are worth your attention based on the views and opinions of its creators is a road towards madness, exponentially more so when you're talking about something worked on by a large team of people. When you have games or films are that worked on by dozens or hundreds of people, there is an almost guarantee that there will be individuals involved that hold unpopular opinions, that is a reality that has to be accepted.

For an individual person, if they choose not support a game because there are people involved whose views they disagree with, that's their decision. For a website whose users expect coverage of relevant industry releases, it's not acceptable. It's their job to cover the industry, essentially blacklisting games because they don't agree with members of the development team (especially in cases where those views are not represented in the game), is not okay. If they feel strongly, someone should write an editorial to accompany the formal coverage, but pretending a game doesn't exist is the absolute wrong approach as far as I'm concerned.

EDIT: I'm not saying this is definitely the case with KC:D, if they're just late disregard this in relation to that game, but I still think it applies to A Hat in TIme, since its quick look was inexplicably removed from the coming soon and never addressed.

@ll_exile_ll: I might see this if Giant Bomb were a different website with a very different approach to coverage but it's a place where the things looked at are largely based on how they feel about them and not a need to be impartial to the industry as a whole.

It's a token cult hit PC RPG. Seems like a good game with a lot to offer, but I feel like it's a Rorie or Vinny game, though.

@ll_exile_ll: In addition to what @efesell said, they also have skipped entire games out of lack of interest. I think this idea that GB must cover all games is coming from a weird place that is in actuality "GB must cover the games I want them to cover for the reasons I want them to." There are plenty of releases that GB skips that no one bats an eye at, or hem-and-haw over the reason for. They don't really need to give a reason for not covering something, and have a long history of not doing so, so I'm a little surprised it still comes up to be honest.

@efesell: I'd have no problem with them talking about it if they have issues with a game for such reasons, but essentially pretending it doesn't exist is the wrong way to go about things in my opinion.

In general though,outside issues with no bearing on the game itself should not be the reason to deny coverage. Oliver North, an actual war criminal, was featured heavily in a Call of Duty game they covered, but a game with some insignificant YouTube asshole with like 1 line is worthy of being completely ignored?

pretty sure it is actually perfectly 'acceptable', it is in fact 'okay', and 'their job' is not for you to determine. they aren't public servants. they can do whatever the fuuuuck they want. covering every game is not compulsory. what you are describing is some other website. hell, I'm not even sure the institution you describe actually exists.

I don't think the Oliver north thing is a great comparison.

I also don't think the crew has a problem with saying negative things if they have a lot to say but they have mostly avoided thing that they are truly negative about with gamergate being one of them. They said their piece about anyone who supports that kinda stuff a long time ago so to bring it up again (if that is the reason of course) seems pointless to me.

And TBH the more I read into the guy and the things around the game the less I want to do with it.

Either way id give it a week or so to see if they even are gonna play it as it only came out 2 days ago.

@ll_exile_ll: It's a perfectly valid reason when they themselves are responsible for what they wanna cover and not being handed down assignments. A Hat in Time was probably only being looked at in the first place because it was relevant at the time and there was no enthusiasm to ensure it stuck around so when it slipped schedule then that was it.

There's plenty of other stuff going up on the site--This Is The Run, Garfield, Exquisite Corps, Ranking of Fighters, The After Show, The Bombcast, The Beastcast, Thirteen Deadly Sims, Who's The Big Boss, The Dating Games, Monster Hunter, All Systems Goku, Unprofessional Fridays, in addition to the other Quick Looks and Unfinished they upload--and they don't have to cover every game. Maybe they'll do it later? Or maybe they won't because they're not interested?

I'll add that probably the A Hat In Time QL probably didn't get pulled because of Jontron, rather because the lead developer doxxed someone and created a slander website.

With regards to this game, who knows. I wanted the crew to take a look at Dandara, but so far we just got a segment on UPF. That's just how GB is sometimes.

I was going to post that in the other thread but decided not to bring attention to it with how those gamergate people love to harass women so much. But yeah, like i said in the other thread the developers ties to gamergate, alt right, and seemingly being pretty shitty all around will likely get this game overlooked by the staff. And with them not being all to big on discussing politics and things it would probably only get a casual mention.

Also the game really wasn't on my radar that much, i saw some vids that looked interesting a while back and checked the thread last week and discovered the stuff about the developer spazzing out and decided to pass. Game looked like a slightly interesting mount and blade clone with a lot of jank, i was surprised at how well the cutscenes were done though.

I'm sure waypoint will have some stuff to say about it at least

@theshrubber: This is my takeaway, and why I think it's sort of silly and equally frustrating to speculate or get one's knickers in a twist over the potential why of it when sometimes it's literally just because it didn't happen. And even if it was for a great reason, they never really say why anyway, so it's all just wasted energy.