Good on them for not compromising. If people people took a stand, we might not see so much in the way of controversy.
It's Reality or Nothing for Six Days in Fallujah
- Thread starter Andy Chalk
- Start date
I think this would have been mostly ignored until they drummed it up. I didn't see much on it before the controversy. Then, people started acting like they'd canned some big name game. Maybe not AAA, Rockstar or similar title, but still.Marowit said:
Had there been no controversy, I'm pretty sure it would have been released to a lukewarm reception and forgotten.
Dude, EVERYONE would buy a game called "Six Days in Bullcrapistan". EVERYONE.
Does anybody else have the feeling that the game is going to suck anyways, regardless of hype? I don't mean mediocre, either...I have a bad feeling that this game will be absolutely abhorrent in the gameplay mechanics department. Like, bargain-bin-three-weeks-after-release bad.
Does anybody else have the feeling that the game is going to suck anyways, regardless of hype? I don't mean mediocre, either...I have a bad feeling that this game will be absolutely abhorrent in the gameplay mechanics department. Like, bargain-bin-three-weeks-after-release bad.
If only more companies had guys in them like Atomic. Standing up for what they believe in and supporting the medium to a powerful extent.
I hope they do release this game, I'd buy it launch day, I honestly had never heard of Fallujah before this game, and since hearing about this I've struck up conversation about it and tried to start learning more about it. The same way a movie or book would catch my attention, this game has.
The game may be getting free press, but at least it isn't going to Atomic's heads, and they're sticking to what they said they'd do. It's small, but in VGs nowadays, that's big, especially when we have EA and Activision making sacrifices to appease their wallets and sales. Not saying Atomic is clean of that, but at least they're willing to stand by what they said they'd do
I hope they do release this game, I'd buy it launch day, I honestly had never heard of Fallujah before this game, and since hearing about this I've struck up conversation about it and tried to start learning more about it. The same way a movie or book would catch my attention, this game has.
The game may be getting free press, but at least it isn't going to Atomic's heads, and they're sticking to what they said they'd do. It's small, but in VGs nowadays, that's big, especially when we have EA and Activision making sacrifices to appease their wallets and sales. Not saying Atomic is clean of that, but at least they're willing to stand by what they said they'd do
It will have small niche market but with a name change it will have larger market. If you are going to spend $x million on a game, making better return on the money is always a better option. You may think they are being high minded but they are there not, making more money means that they pay more taxes. More taxes means either the rate of increase of the budget deficit reduces or more fiscal stimulus. OK its in a small way but but that how an economy works, that kind preciousness isn't going to reduce the 12% unemployed. It depends what you think is important, not spending your life paying off crippling interest from past mistakes or a video game getting respect from extra credits.qbanknight said:
How will a name change increase the market? Are the majority of gamers offended by the current name? Does the name make them not want to pick it up? I don't see how a name change would affect the game's sales if it was released tomorrow. The only thing that a name change would do is get a publisher to be more eager to pick it up and keep it out of the news. Hopefully a publisher will pick up the title and releasealbino boo said:
They'd need millions of preorders, and then they wouldn't sell much afterwards, dooming it to failure.Rainboq said:
Also seems like an investment a lot of people wouldn't be willing to take.lacktheknack said:
What if the budget runs out due to unforseen circumstances? There'd be no game and a bunch of pissed off people.
Anyway, bravo to Atomic Games for not selling out. It's hard to find integrity these days. I might even pick up a copy of this game, eventhough I'm not a big fan of war games. Not 20th century plus ones anyway.
Good for them for sticking to what they believe in and not caving under the pressure. This is the kinda thing the industry needs, people who are willing to stand in the face of the idiot hordes and defy them. Now if only more from the industry could do the same, I'm looking at you EA.
why don't they ask the public to donate?
only 50 dollars per person would probably be enough. although it does mean we pay more, I belive it is a fair price to pay for the statement alone.
do they really need a publisher? with a good enough game it should get publicity by itself.
and publicity mean sales.
right?
only 50 dollars per person would probably be enough. although it does mean we pay more, I belive it is a fair price to pay for the statement alone.
do they really need a publisher? with a good enough game it should get publicity by itself.
and publicity mean sales.
right?
Yes, it is. I just don't know what "Palooza" is. I was hoping it was a joke, rather than blatant idiocy.
No the name should stick. It attracts attention in the sea of copy-pasted military shooters (not saying this game won't be). Whereas other games try to avoid a specific location, flat out calling this game after a real, historical location raises emotion (both positive and negative, mostly negative). So people will be intrigued by this and be more likely to look into it to see if it's worth their money. Not saying these guys are not trying to make money and trying to do something artistic. They are trying to do both. And yes money is always going to be a concern. And you want to make big money for your studio? Then you have to set yourself from the pack and show the world what you can do. But how to attract others if you don't have brand recognition? Then you name your product after something people DO recognize and work from there. It's ok to both respect a company for doing something new and for trying to expand its profit margin by taking a risk that would introduce more people to a scenario they are unfamiliar with or, better, attract someone who isn't a gamer to play their games based on the subjectalbino boo said:
I am kinda surprised that Activision or EA has not decided to publish the game. Hopefully Atomic does find a publisher for the game because it does sound pretty interesting. I can't stand censorship. If someone does not like the game that is fine but they should not censor or deny the game to other people just because they don't agree with what the game portrays.