LoneWolf83 said:
But people know one can't blow up a steam pipe by hacking it. I know, suspension of disbelief, but that can only go so far, how far depends on the individual though.
It's pointless to argue what is and is not possible in video games, because it's fiction, EVERYTHING IS POSSIBLE. You don't even have to look far for an example, just take a look at the latest Saint's Row game. The only question is, "(how) can you justify it"? Blowing a steam pipe can happen. If it's a modern system, it most assuredly has a computerized overwatch system. You can hack those. You just close the transport valve on the main line and disengage the pressure regulation system. Pressure will build up in the pipe and since you disabled the emergency release, it will continue to build. If you time it well enough, just before the whole line reaches critical pressure you can open a release valve at a given spot and the explosive decompression will do the rest. Is it techno-babble that most people will just take your word for? Yes. Does it sound even vaguely plausible? Yes. Does it fit into the game's world? Sure. Suspension of disbelief will do the rest. This is enough for most people, and "most people" is what game devs need.
I don't want to make excuses or explanations for game devs, but games are really just fiction. If they say that pipe burst by waving your phone at it, then you have two options. You can roll with it and enjoy the ride or you can sulk and question the validity of a single gameplay element in a fictional world, where you run around with tons of guns strapped to your back shooting and robbing random civilians and somehow not get thrown in jail after the first five minutes just to play Prison Rape Simulator for the rest of the game.
That would make a better game. The sad thing is the lowest common denominator the suits on the video game companies keep trying to appeal to is a minority, most people (I think) would like a little more complexity in their games. Just look at Dark Souls, with little marketing it became a success, if it had the marketing budget Watch Dogs had it probably would have been a much bigger success.
I doubt it. Marketing was never a measure or maker of quality or success. It's just a rain of bullsh!t to cover up a game's shortcomings and/or hype it up so high you impulse-buy the hell out of it on launch regardless of it's quality. Once they have your money, they don't give a rat's ass if you enjoyed the game or not, they made you pay them money, their work is done. The real measure of quality is word-of-mouth and community support. In fact, it's better to have LESS marketing and let the game speak for itself. The easiest example is Minecraft. It didn't have ANY marketing whatsoever, it was a tiny hobby project of one guy that he put on the internet for sh!ts and giggles. Now even your grandparents know what Minecraft is (or probably played it too) and Notch is swimming in diamonds in his solid gold jakuzzi. Dark Souls got a huge cult following, because it has a very peculiar art style, world, gameplay, and a murderously punishing difficulty curve. The devs somehow hit the golden ratio of the elements they put in to strike cult gold. But even though it has a very dedicated fanbase, it's still a niche game for the exact reasons it's so popular with it's own audience.