YOOKA-LAYLEE is a disappointment!

Reserved for modern gaming discussions.
User avatar
Stalvern
Posts: 366
Joined: June 18th, 2016, 7:15 pm

Re: YOOKA-LAYLEE is a disappointment!

Postby Stalvern » April 5th, 2017, 6:40 am

Sonicx9 wrote:But the thing I am sick and tired of with Kickstarter games that get lots of money/stretch goals reached that get hyped to being the next best thing and end up being less than stellar to what they where promised/shady business practices/controversies that make you wish you did not donate money to the kickstarter campaign in the first place!

Why are you so convinced that it'll be another Mighty No. 9 when Shovel Knight, Elite: Dangerous, Thimbleweed Park, Shantae: Half-Genie Hero, and tons of other projects have turned out perfectly? All signs point to Yooka-Laylee being a success too. The absolute worst it could be at this point is something like Broken Age, not a classic, but competent and perfectly enjoyable. (Also, you probably missed my last post because of the moderation lag, but I made what I think is a pretty good point about the Metacritic score; I hope it's reassuring.)

Honestly, I don't understand why you can't let yourself enjoy the anticipation of what is practically guaranteed to be a good game. Life can be hard enough as it is; you don't have to invent trouble for yourself.

Atarifever wrote:Think about it: If you don't reach your goal on Kickstarter, you get zero dollars, even if you were only $1 away from your goal. Once you reach the goal, you get all the dollars. What is a Kickstarter project developer to do? Why offer to port to everything of course. Wii U port? Absolutely. Vita port? Yup. Dreamcast port? Sure, why not. Once you have the money from those suckers, combined with the money from the PS4, PC, and Xbox One people, you can take all the money,and refund the money to the people on the niche systems. Doesn't affect you getting the rest of the money. And in the meantime, niche system owners are spreading the word about your project far and wide, to attract as much money as possible, because they are the highest stretch goals every time.

Yooka-laylee did this with Wii U. Nintendo fans pitched the product everywhere. Nintendo fan sites posted every update. Places like Gamespot and IGN gave it extra coverage by putting it on Wii U specific pages. A bunch of money towards the goal was gathered by people aiming for that exact stretch goal. Yooka-Laylee's developer got a ton of benefit by "offering" a Wii U port. Then they cancel it and don't bat an eye. To me, that is as shady as anything done by any big publisher, and just "being indie" should not excuse it. It's shady business, and Kickstarter's business model ensures it will happen frequently.

What is this nonsense? They didn't do anything remotely like that. All platforms were determined and planned from the beginning; the closest thing to what you're raving about was a stretch goal for faster porting, which was completely reasonable (and which they delivered on). There wasn't even a Switch when they started, only vague rumors about something called the "NX". When they couldn't get the game to run properly on the Wii U, they moved it to the Switch to keep it on a Nintendo system - tell me how much money they saved by ditching the Wii U when they had to start again on a completely new platform.

Absolutely nothing about Yooka-Laylee has been "shady". Everyone involved has known what they're doing, done their best, and gotten a complete game ready for release exactly when they promised it. It's a model Kickstarter campaign, and only spiteful cynicism could paint it otherwise.

BanjoPickles
Posts: 143
Joined: June 18th, 2015, 3:05 pm

Re: YOOKA-LAYLEE is a disappointment!

Postby BanjoPickles » April 5th, 2017, 9:56 am

All of the nontroversy surrounding the metacritic scores of Yooka-Laylee illustrates everything that is wrong with the gaming community's over-reliance on review scores. Did you read the reviews? I did and, for the most part, the biggest knocks against it are that it is everything that they said it would be: it's an N64 game with extra polish, the same camera issues, bad voice acting, etc. What were you expecting, a 10/10? The game was essentially made on a shoestring, in comparison to the AAA Rare/Nintendo games of the 64-bit era.

What's frustrating to me is that anytime a game isn't heaped with praise, people automatically leap to the worst case scenario. "OMG, it's like Mighty Number 9 all over again!" Umm, no. Mighty Number 9 was a broken, boring game that was trying to sell itself as the spiritual successor to Mega Man when it was anything but. It's like those who claimed that the 3DS, upon launch, was the new Virtual Boy! In fact, every system that Nintendo has released has, at some point, been compared to their biggest failures. It's annoying!

I say relax, give the game a chance, and read the actual reviews instead of those misleading numbers in the summary.

User avatar
Atariboy
Posts: 500
Joined: April 7th, 2015, 11:07 pm

Re: YOOKA-LAYLEE is a disappointment!

Postby Atariboy » April 5th, 2017, 10:32 am

Judging by the video review I watched yesterday, all it needs is a patch to hopefully iron out frame rate issues.
Hopefully the Switch version arrives without even needing that to be done.

Otherwise it seems like they largely accomplished what they were after, and successfully created a spiritual successor to the Banjo Kazooie franchise.

Stalvern wrote:Also, you cite the Metacritic score as a bad sign, but have you read the reviews themselves? The negative ones basically say that it's too much like Banjo-Kazooie, which you should probably take as a good sign. Apparently, the worst criticism they can come up with is that it's exactly what you wanted! :lol:


Sounds like the reviews that the last Fatal Frame saw. Every media person involved with the Wii U was calling for Nintendo of America to finally wake up and localize a Fatal Frame game at long last. Yet they finally did and it suddenly saw tons of ~70% scores from these same people, with the big complaint boiling down that the mechanics and such are too much like the original Fatal Frame trilogy.

Perhaps not the best of news for everyone, since if you wanted the formula mixed up or had never experienced the franchise, it very likely wasn't the result you were hoping for. But if a traditional sequel that doesn't reinvent the wheel was just what you were looking for, then it's exactly what you want to hear from reviews.

I wanted a 2005 era Fatal Frame game in HD, and got just that. I trust I'll get a similar experience from this platformer, assuming that they iron out the technical issues before the Switch port arrives.

Sonicx9
Posts: 400
Joined: April 27th, 2015, 6:37 pm

Re: YOOKA-LAYLEE is a disappointment!

Postby Sonicx9 » April 5th, 2017, 10:53 am

But keep in note that games like Shovel Knight, Elite: Dangerous, Thimbleweed Park, Shantae: Half-Genie Hero, got little too no hype compared to Yooka-Laylee and Mighty No. 9. I have noticed a trend where crowdfunded games that have little to no hype turn out better, while the more hyped ones tend to turn out worse for some strange reason. It may be better then I think it is, but the one that would be a better judge is Dave the Video Game Critic because he is not biased like the mainstream critics, so he should review it?

Sonicx9
Posts: 400
Joined: April 27th, 2015, 6:37 pm

Re: YOOKA-LAYLEE is a disappointment!

Postby Sonicx9 » April 5th, 2017, 1:36 pm

BanjoPickles you are right, I am tacking the review scores for grant, and maybe I should wait till I see the user reviews from Metacritic/Steam, because I have seen a trend where the users often given lower scores to games that have been rated high (examples include STREET FIGHTER V: http://www.metacritic.com/game/playstat ... -fighter-v and http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/street-fighter-v and TOKYO MIRAGE SESSIONS #FE: http://www.metacritic.com/game/wii-u/to ... essions-fe, etc) Did you notice how big the critics/user scores gaps are so maybe the same thing will happen for Yooka-Laylee, go figure?

snakeboy
Posts: 112
Joined: April 30th, 2015, 3:40 pm

Re: YOOKA-LAYLEE is a disappointment!

Postby snakeboy » April 5th, 2017, 2:35 pm

Gleebergloben123 wrote:This game doesn't come out for another week. Even though I haven't played it but pre-ordered it, I give the game 38/100.


I don't know, I think you might be under rating it a bit. From my non-experience with it, I would give it a 41/100.

User avatar
Atarifever
Posts: 347
Joined: April 12th, 2015, 5:55 am

Re: YOOKA-LAYLEE is a disappointment!

Postby Atarifever » April 5th, 2017, 3:50 pm

Stalvern wrote:
atarifever wrote:
Yooka-laylee did this with Wii U. Nintendo fans pitched the product everywhere. Nintendo fan sites posted every update. Places like Gamespot and IGN gave it extra coverage by putting it on Wii U specific pages. A bunch of money towards the goal was gathered by people aiming for that exact stretch goal. Yooka-Laylee's developer got a ton of benefit by "offering" a Wii U port. Then they cancel it and don't bat an eye. To me, that is as shady as anything done by any big publisher, and just "being indie" should not excuse it. It's shady business, and Kickstarter's business model ensures it will happen frequently.

What is this nonsense? They didn't do anything remotely like that. All platforms were determined and planned from the beginning; the closest thing to what you're raving about was a stretch goal for faster porting, which was completely reasonable (and which they delivered on). There wasn't even a Switch when they started, only vague rumors about something called the "NX". When they couldn't get the game to run properly on the Wii U, they moved it to the Switch to keep it on a Nintendo system - tell me how much money they saved by ditching the Wii U when they had to start again on a completely new platform.


HAHAHAHA! I originally read this as if you were serious. Yeah. They "couldn't get Yoo-freaking-kaLaylee to run on the Wii U." I heard they also couldn't get PacMan 2600 to run on Xbox Scorpio.

As for the stretch goal being for a port for Wii U vs. a day one port for Wii U, you have just split a hair so fine you needed a scanning electron microscope and a laser to do it.

Okay, let me tidy it up so it meets your rather outlandish requirements:

The developer promised a port to Wii U owners in their Kickstarter, so Wii U owners backed it, spread the word, etc about it. The Wii U version that was promised got it additional coverage on IGN, Gamespot, etc. pages and Nintendo fansites. The stretch goal promised console ports (including Wii U specifically in the goal) on day one. Then, because ancient 5-year old HD hardware cannot handle uprezed Banjoo-Kazooie (despite handling games like it for 5 years), it is cancelled and moved to a flashy new console with few launch year titles, out of the goodness of the developers dear, sweet little angel hearts. The Wii U owners who backed it are refunded their money, just like I said, the coverage and support and money helped release the Kickstarter funds, just like I said, and the developer gets to make a splash on shiny new hardware to boot.

Oh yes, so much different from what I said. How could any of that appear shady.

User avatar
Stalvern
Posts: 366
Joined: June 18th, 2016, 7:15 pm

Re: YOOKA-LAYLEE is a disappointment!

Postby Stalvern » April 5th, 2017, 4:43 pm

Atarifever wrote:HAHAHAHA! I originally read this as if you were serious. Yeah. They "couldn't get Yoo-freaking-kaLaylee to run on the Wii U." I heard they also couldn't get PacMan 2600 to run on Xbox Scorpio.

It's built on the Unity engine, which is a hot mess on the Wii U and has a history of hampering indie development on the system. Graphical demands have nothing to do with the problem.

Atarifever wrote:The developer promised a port to Wii U owners in their Kickstarter, so Wii U owners backed it, spread the word, etc about it. The Wii U version that was promised got it additional coverage on IGN, Gamespot, etc. pages and Nintendo fansites. The stretch goal promised console ports (including Wii U specifically in the goal) on day one. Then, because ancient 5-year old HD hardware cannot handle uprezed Banjoo-Kazooie (despite handling games like it for 5 years), it is cancelled and moved to a flashy new console with few launch year titles, out of the goodness of the developers dear, sweet little angle hearts. The Wii U owners who backed it are refunded their money, just like I said, the coverage and support and money helped release the Kickstarter funds, just like I said, and the developer gets to make a splash on shiny new hardware to boot.

Do you realize that this evil plan presumes that the user base of the least popular system since the Dreamcast is the linchpin to "release the Kickstarter funds" for a game that reached its funding goal in less than an hour and a million dollars in less than a day? Did all of that money come from the Wii U? Did even half of it? Everyone was hyped up for the game; the idea that Playtonic had to specifically exploit Wii U owners is ludicrous. This plan also presumes that the best way to "make a splash on shiny new hardware" is to promote the old hardware up to the last minute and then pull a switcheroo - what a great marketing tactic, drop the base you've been playing to and shift to a new one. If the Wii U was so important to this success, how friggin' stupid would Playtonic have to be to throw all that money away? Either the Wii U was instrumental or it was disposable; you can't have it both ways.

GTS
Posts: 61
Joined: January 29th, 2017, 2:43 pm

Re: YOOKA-LAYLEE is a disappointment!

Postby GTS » April 5th, 2017, 6:05 pm

Regarding the reliance on scores and opinions, I recently posted a video where I purchased a Switch system and Bomberman at the launch. I was surprised by how many people in the comment section scorned me for not buying Zelda. They thought it was a ridiculous decision, and were quoting the Metacrtitic scores and the overall consensus that it was a wonderful game. Yeah, Bomberman ended up being not that good, but I wanted to play Bomberman die to having played the other games in the series. My overall point is that I think it is important to make informed decisions, but some people (younger perhaps) take it too far by forming deep opinions on games they haven't played. Goes for movies too. Most of the people who have an opinion about Ghostbusters haven't even seen it. From what I heard, it's pretty funny.

User avatar
Atarifever
Posts: 347
Joined: April 12th, 2015, 5:55 am

Re: YOOKA-LAYLEE is a disappointment!

Postby Atarifever » April 5th, 2017, 7:45 pm

Stalvern wrote:Do you realize that this evil plan presumes that the user base of the least popular system since the Dreamcast is the linchpin to "release the Kickstarter funds" for a game that reached its funding goal in less than an hour and a million dollars in less than a day? Did all of that money come from the Wii U? Did even half of it? Everyone was hyped up for the game; the idea that Playtonic had to specifically exploit Wii U owners is ludicrous. This plan also presumes that the best way to "make a splash on shiny new hardware" is to promote the old hardware up to the last minute and then pull a switcheroo - what a great marketing tactic, drop the base you've been playing to and shift to a new one. If the Wii U was so important to this success, how friggin' stupid would Playtonic have to be to throw all that money away? Either the Wii U was instrumental or it was disposable; you can't have it both ways.


See, I'm not saying it's the linchpin. I'm saying Playtonic (and any other indie dev on Kickstarter) has as their best first move claiming they will release on everything. That way, you have the best chance of reaching funding. Adding niche systems has an outsized effect, as those people really, really want any game. The added benefits of the niche audience is they will promote harder than anyone, and the very fact that they are niche ports grabs additional headlines.

When Raretronic announced a high def Banjoo, they probably weren't sure a modern take on the completely dead 3D platforming collect-athon genre was going to sell well. I mean, obviously Microsoft has felt that way for years, doing very little with that particular franchise. So it's a little silly to claim that somehow Playtronic knew this would be some smash hit project before they put it up. Good for them they made $2 million. The day before they didn't know if they'd make two dollars.

I also find it funny you will say obviously the Wii U base is small, but in the same breath claim that somehow shifting to the Switch was somehow going to hurt them with the Wii U's non-existent playerbase. Better to sell to a possible large audience over the next 5+ years than to an already proven small group, isn't it?

Again, if you think I'm saying Wii U fans were the only reason this Kickstarter reached, I'm not. I'm saying they got months and months of support from that community (on forums, fansites, podcasts, etc.) and in the end had to provide them nothing. Additionally, they certainly didn't know the day before they submitted that they wouldn't need the Wii U support financially to reach the goal.

Again, what did they end up risking by announcing the port on opening day? Nothing. What did they gain? Months and months of free added publicity and advocacy, and the possible needed financial support. Once they didn't need that, but after they had enjoyed the advocacy and press, they dropped it. Oh yes. You're right. Once you realize they didn't have anything to lose by dropping the Wii U port, but waited ages to do so, you certainly make it look less shady.

Here's what they said themselves on Kickstarter:

If our initial Kickstarter funding goal is reached, backers can be assured that the Playtonic team will deliver a complete and satisfying game package. However, given the opportunity and additional resources required, we have a list of ‘dream’ additional extras – and release structures - that we’d love to deliver in order to make Yooka-Laylee an even better game.

If funded, Yooka-Laylee will be released for Windows, Mac, Linux, Xbox One, PlayStation 4 and Wii U. However, the exact release timing and scope of each version will be determined by the success of this Kickstarter campaign and specifically, our stretch goals.

We’d love to be able to guarantee a simultaneous, day-one release on all platforms in order to satisfy every Yooka-Laylee backer. In order to do this we’ll need to significantly expand our resources and budget, and if we can reach the funding number required we’d be excited to do so.


Also not shady to say, in black and white: "If funded, Yooka-Laylee will be released for Windows, Mac, Linux, Xbox One, PlayStation 4 and Wii U. However, the exact release timing and scope of each version will be determined by the success of this Kickstarter..." and then deliver nothing. "But it was in development and was difficult" you will say. Yes. A purchased product was specifically promised to people who paid for it, then it was pulled when it was a little tough to deliver. Again, so much less shady in that light, right?
What does that matter though right? It's not like people have other things they could have done with the money in the meantime; especially people prone to supporting Kickstarted projects. It's not like indie devs not just remaking games they made in their glory days couldn't have better used that money to fund their new, original projects. Even the Wii U money from there could probably have helped some of these many, many smaller projects.


And of course you're going to claim they received very little advocacy or press over the Wii U port. This is so because why would the spiritual successor to Banjo by ex-Rare folks going to a Nintendo system be a news item that writes itself, or be appealing to Nintendo fans, right?

You can claim all day that this is conspiracy theory stuff. However, I'm not claiming an elaborate conspiracy at all. I'm claiming it was easy for ex-Rare guys to say they'd make a Wii U port too, back before they knew how much money they would make. I'm claiming they likely assumed a new Banjo game would appeal to Nintendo fans. I'm claiming they likely assumed Nintendo fansites, videogame press, and gamers would like the story of a new Banjo game coming to a Nintendo system. I'm claiming at the start of this, they intended to make a Wii U port. You somehow think all of that is too amazing to be believed. I cannot imagine why. None of it could be anything other than the obvious truth, unless you think the people at Playtronic are drooling imbeciles.

The shady part is fishing for donations and press on Kickstarter, then just dropping whatever you don't want to work on in the end, once you know who you do and don't need, and once you've taken every possible advantage in the meantime. I don't see how the story, as it played out, looks like anything else.


Return to “Modern Gaming”