God of War Creator David Jaffe Slams Beyond Good and Evil 2 Critics

David Jaffe took to Twitter to call gamers, specifically Foxtrot, entitled gamers as they complained about the news that Beyond Good & Evil 2 would not only be adding co-op but would have online required settings even when paying solo, something not required for their other co-op optional game, Far Cry 5.

[-Foxtrot]

Holy shit. I'm famous. Hi Mom.

Anyway, to put it bluntly and I say this with a dash of love, shut the f*** up David, if you are going to use the typical, boring ass "entitled gamers" bullshit come back to just glide over all the reasons why people are upset over the news then you obviously haven't bothered to look into the entire thing from both sides. Just typical "I'm in the industry, I better stick up for my fellow brothers in arms" mindset.

1) Online only sucks. Not everyone has a good solid connection and we know it means Ubisoft will want to monetize the game somehow, this will allow them to take an even bigger advantage over it.

2) No one asked for this. People wanted a single player, story driven platforming game picking up where the first one left off and going after the loose ends which weren't resolved. This comes back to the online only issue as nobody asked for an online, multiplayer co-op driven open world game. People waited 15 years for this and in the end this is what they waited for? Are you surprised people are p***** off over this? Jesus.

3) When we get these always online type of games it usually means the game is going to feature grindy, play with friends to boost your overall experience gameplay where we create the replay value by doing the same types of missions over and over.

4) In the future it means Ubisoft could take this game away whenever they wanted. Take the servers offline and the game becomes nothing, it's unplayable.

Oh and it seems your little followers are not quite agreeing with you huh? Guess you might be in the wrong with this one David.

https://twitter.com/davidsc...

Now you are trying to do a 180 saying we aren't entitled now and spinning it the best you can...wow

https://twitter.com/davidsc...

This guy is all over.

THINK BEFORE YOU TWEET DAVID or you'll just get owned by your followers, for example.

https://i.ibb.co/D13zsX2/Ow...

[Nitrowolf2]

The one thing I will agree with him is that the fan base for the series is very tiny. I can understand where he is coming from, but at the end of the day this is the route that Ubisoft went with and the game is named the same with a two at the end.

To me, this is like what Konami did with Metal Gear when they released Survive. Taking an existing property and hoping it has some success because of the name.

I’m sadden that we won’t be able to continue Jades adventure, so I’ll speak with my wallet

Idk who Ubisoft is trying to market this to now because players who were interested were mostly for reason 1.

[-Foxtrot]

It was tiny but it's become one of those cult classics which over the 15 years has gained a bigger following, enough for people to constantly ask Ubisoft for a sequel and the like

It's the main issue with the entire thing, people wanted a sequel and they got something completely different. We didn't get something like, for example, "Beyond Good and Evil: Otherworlds" we got Beyond Good and Evil 2, exploiting what we all wanted so they could ride the hype after they announced it all away to release.

It's not even a smaller worst case scenario like a partial online game for co-op features but still continuing on from the ending of the first game continuing the stories of Jade sticking to it's platforming based gameplay. Least in that scenario fans could be a little ticked off but have more of a chance swallowing the whole deal. However this shit...this is just too much thrown at us at once that it shows Ubisoft just don't give a crap.

If Ubisoft really cared, they'd drop the number 2 from the title, rework the game to get rid of Jade or any other characters from the first game and tell people a true sequel is or will come eventually. I'd rather wait longer for it done right then Jade's story being screwed in this crap.

This is what I would have preferred they built on

https://www.youtube.com/wat...

[HeisenbergX]

When the fanbase is tiny then you do whatever you can to make it bigger by giving the gamers and the fans of the first one what they want and that is an amazing fresh AAA single player experience (like the new GOW that probably sold 10 mil by now and it's only for one platform) not an online only game! that immediately sets off a red alert in our heads.

Speaking of the new GOW Jaffe is probably jealous and salty because of the enormous success that the game Cory and the rest of the team got. :D

[jznrpg]

It has grown over the years and not tiny like when it launched

[abstractel]

You are correct that this game is basically becoming a rent only game with a finite expiration date (unless they release a patch before they shut down the online part). You're basically paying $60 to rent a game.

I go back and play games I really love from time to time. If I end up loving BGE2 I guess that won't be an option.

[Gaming101]

Read CL Anthony's comment on Jaffe's direct Youtube response to Fox Trot.

https://www.youtube.com/wat...

I love most of Jaffe's games, big fan. Now that I got the fanboy prefacing out of the way, I do understand that people want games to be what they envisioned it to be. People don't want a Terms of Service, and a single player game you can only play as long as the servers are still running. People don't see the long term impacts of this, but what it means is the game won't be timeless the way other singe player experiences are timeless.

I understand completely why a business wants to operate this way, but if you're going to turn fans off, you have to accept the bad PR. Games that are multiplayer do well with online only like Destiny (although Destiny 2 is suffering greatly because of greed and grindy repetitive quests), but in SP games like Hitman, it didn't fare as well. What's the point of online only in SP, just so your scores can be force uploaded to a server? Does anyone actually read those servers with hundreds of thousands of names? Is any of that really that important?

If this game is co-op optional, make the internet optional so you can still enjoy the game when the servers go offline. People need to voice their opinions on this, voicing with words is more important than your wallet, because if no one buys a game, the company has no clue as to why they failed! The tricky part is understanding which voices matter, and who is complaining just to be a complainer. It's not easy figuring out what the largest number of people want, but also how to be the most profitable.

There is a growing trend for people to hate microtransactions, the Games as a Service model; and people are hating on games that have a boring grindy progress structure that is too repetitive, that just drones on and on the way the last Assassin's Creed Odyssey did, with no escape outside of buying your progress. We are literally paying more money to NOT play our games, but rather to sidestep something that feels as exciting as mopping the floor. Gaming has become a chore. Shadow of War suffered in this regard, as Microtransactions made their way into a Single Player only game, and it was done so lazily that the publisher didn't even need the bad PR. At no point do any of the Microtransactions help you in that game. They were poorly implemented so only the dumbest people bought them, which means that not only did the MTs not make any money, but they had people boycotting their game to prove a point, making them even less money.

Will Ubisoft learn from Hitman and Shadow of War? Probably not. Almost half of Ubisoft revenue comes from Microtransactions now. FUCKING HALF. I read that in an earnings report. Grand Theft Auto 5 paved the way for essentially cash cows in gaming and every other company is trying to follow this trend.

On the Mulitiplayer side, Microtransactions piss people off in Multiplayer because of the Pay to Win problem, which is exactly why Fortnite is doing so well. People are fine to spend literally billions to customize their character if it means that they get an even playing field with their MP games it turns out. Something absolutely no one saw coming, but Ubisoft aren't learning this yet, and it will likely ruin BGE2 with a littering of Microtransactions, pay to progress or do your chores "gameplay", and a game that you can only play for a few years before the servers get cut from lack of profitability.

[Muigi]

Lmaoo

[Sono421]

It's like developers are forgetting we are the customer, but they are constantly telling us what we want, and when we say no we want this, they simply claim we are entitled. Since when is wanting a product (especially a sequel) to be what we want entitled? The first one set a standard and now you're going to change that? You need to convince us to buy by offering a good product, not just expect us to buy no matter how much you change it. You make a misstep? Acknowledge it and move on, don't blame your fans, you just come off petty and childish like EA with BFV. It's in everyone's best interest to make what your fans want, don't forget that.

[lociefer]

Here's the worst thing about this whole scenario; if the game tanks, ubisoft goes: There's not enough demand for the return of BGAE, and the franchise gets shelved.

if the game succeeds, ubisoft goes: clearly this is the direction fans want this franchise going.

Either way those of us who were dying for a sequel loose, and it's infuriating

[robtion]

Exactly.

As for Jaffe 'if you dont like it don't play it'?

Uh huh, and he is calling us childish and ignorant.

[SPEAKxTHExTRUTH]

You’re best point and only point I think you needed to make was the fact that if Ubi shuts down the servers the game is no longer playable. This is unacceptable in a single player game. I understand always online for MMO’s but single player?

[DaDrunkenJester]

Well, it's not a single player game if they are forcing online and heavily encouraging co-op. Much like you can still Solo a lot of content in an MMO, you CAN solo in this game, but they're obviously going to want you to team up in certain areas.

[-Foxtrot]

Only point? Even though...

1) Ubisoft does try and monetise everything

2) No one did ask for this? Show me people in the 15 years of asking for a sequel who said "I want an open world multiplayer, co-op, always online prequel game of Beyond Good and Evil"

3) Show me a game which is online focused, where you play with friends in todays world which isn't grindy, makes you play with friends to play the same missions over and over so we create our own replay value. Some are better then others fair enough but the Division, Destiny, Ghost Recon Wildlands, For Honour, Fallout 76, even Monster Hunter World which is the best of the bunch but still has those issues, just not as big as the others

[lelo2play]

David Jaffe, a consumer has every right to criticize a product he/she purchased (or thinking about purchasing)... do you expect the consumer to take it up the b*tt without complaining?
If you buy a house, a car, a BJ, or something else, if it's not to your liking aren't you going to complain?

Oh David! Always spewing bullsh*t.
PUT THAT ON TWITTERRRRR.

[rainslacker]

Funny he wouldn't come on here and say something. It's almost as if N4G doesn't have a way to respond to people that he's calling out. Very odd.

Not that anyone would believe he was really Jaffe, but still, he could have said his piece, and not gotten heat over it, instead of back peddling within the comments of his very own tweets. Wonder if he'd thought he'd find a safe space of gamers who would just think always online was great or something. Might be a signal that he's kind of out of touch with the community, since for the most part, people in the community aren't really for such a thing, but accept it for an online only game.

[RememberThe357]

I've been pumped up for this game since it announced. I frankly love everything I've seen so far. But always online? For what?

I asked for this game, I want this game more than any other game being made right now, but damn it, I hope they don't cripple it. Always online has been bad news almost every time we've seen it, especially in story driven games. Being critical of that news is more than appropriate, even if the rest of the game of looks f#cking dope.

And frankly if Jaffe is on N4G he should know that opinions around here are not common opinions. If it was up to N4G RDR2 would have flopped and gamer gate would have turned every gaming journalist into Dickens.

[Shikoku]

Exactly could have said it better. People are getting tired of these GasS models already they are unsustainable in the long run.

[darthv72]

You are not wrong fox but just to point out there are responses for each of your points. This is what others would say:

1) Internet is much more stable and available in more countries now than it was 10 years ago.
2) Sometimes you don't get what you want but that doesn't mean what you do get is automatically bad.
3) Playing with friends is always a good thing. Unless you have no friends.
4) This has been happening for years now. Why do you think this is anything new?

[jznrpg]

Uou can respond to anything it doesn’t make it a good response

[Christopher]

1. And still goes out with the power or other issues and doesn't make it 'okay' to force online with SP. And billions of people do not have stable internet.

2. No one said it was, but if I'm shopping for what was in the first game, I wouldn't buy what they're offering just because it had the same name.

3. False. I would never play a heavily story focused game with friends. Never. I don't want anyone disrupting the game or arguing over decisions. And most of the time my friends aren't even available at the same time, so how does being able to okay with them for one hour a week being 'better' make up for the other hours I'm playing in a SP focused game?

4. Such a logical fallacy. Mass shootings have happened for years, we should just treat each one as normal? We shouldn't criticize when companies do things we don't like just because it isn't the first time? Look at SWBF2 and BFV. Those games clearly say otherwise to your implication of it will happen just because it has in the past. Even Ubisoft themselves have stepped back multiple times due to community backlash.

[FPS_D3TH]

^When the entitlement blinds you from seeing Jaffes truths. Not even surprised

[CaptainObvious878]

wow....

When utter delusion blinds you from reality.

[Rangerman1208]

Whoa that's a lot of dislikes. My guess is that they're from David Jaffe's followers lol

[-Foxtrot]

People love David Jaffe and people love always online I guess

How...lovely...

[sampsonon]

your mom wants you to throw out the Garbage.

[antikbaka]

bu..buuuu... Fallout 76 is so much more fun when play with frieeeeends!

[rainslacker]

I noticed he said "Be realistic" a lot in that second twitter thread.

Seems kind of ironic that he'd say that to the consumer. Sure, it's realistic to assume the game would never get made based on the sales of the first. Same way we can be realistic that SSoD or Quantum Break will never get sequels for the same reason.

But, to say we should be realistic that this is the only way the game could ever get produced....which basically amounts to using a franchise name for a game which is decidedly a vast departure from the original, and is nothing like what anyone seemed to have wanted, doesn't mean that the customers are being unrealistic about what they should expect to receive, it means that not expressing their dissatisfaction for what they're getting just makes them complacent.

People saying they're not going to buy a game because it doesn't offer what they want doesn't make them entitled. The industry people that want to shame critics into submission need to stop using this term. For one thing, it's a bad thing to speak ill of your consumer base....even if you're right. Time and time again, this tactic is proven to backfire. No matter how right one may be, which Jaffe isn't in this case because I saw nothing wrong with some of the discussion in that article thread

https://n4g.com/news/222818...

Just some people saying they're displeased, and what they were expecting, then a general discussion on what would have been cool.

Entitled would mean that people were demanding change or expecting change. No one is entitled until they buy the product, then want a different product. If they buy it and make unreasonable demands to what it should be, or demand/expect some form of remedy to their lack of being an informed consumer, then that's entitled. If they don't buy it, and say why they aren't going to buy it, then that's not entitlement, that's just being a critic and being a potential consumer who is expressing what they want.

[KillBill]

"Online only sucks." - really? Tell that to the Wow, LOL fanbase type. So many MMO games out there and this really is little different. I mean look at Fortnite and PUBG as being always online. Everyone for sure has there preferred game types but to imagine an online game being slammed because it is ONLINE seems kind of ignorant. And just because the first game was offline single player does not mean the completely separate 2nd game in the series has to follow suit a decade later is ridiculous.

[-Foxtrot]

We're not talking about MMO's though are we...

If World of Warcraft used to be a single player driven, story based game which was then turned into an always online MMO the point would still stand but that's not what this is about

It's a poor counter point you've brought up because they were built up with online in mind since it's part of their MMO genre. Hell it's in the genres name.

The point is Beyond Good and Evil 2 is an open world game which dosen't seem to require you to play online, this game was said to be able to be played offline last year yet now it's a different story.

Nothing about this game, even when it was shown off made you think "this game is online only"...they are just shoving that crap in so they can do some anti consumer crap in the future since its Ubisoft.

[Christopher]

Online only sucks for single player games.

Finish the thought, don't try and make it a general statement.

[KillBill]

@-Foxtrot - I don't know where you have been when the media has been released on the game but I myself instantly saw it as a multiplayer game. Never imagined it as a single player experience in the least. And again, the more than a decade old game with a small following does not dictate how the game is going to come out later when it is spun back up and looking at a return to the gaming world. Everything about that game spin was leading to a multiplayer experience. If you don't like it... tough. Many of us will be buying it and enjoying the hell out of it. You can go and play the first game where the controls were complete garbage and the gameplay doesn't hold up well in today's gaming.

@Christopher - it was literally a quote.

[Obscure_Observer]

@-Foxtrot

"Holy shit. I'm famous. Hi Mom."

You´re. I agree with most of what you said, but, you got to recognize that you´re some kind of hard to please fellow. You pretty much complain about pretty much every single game that undergo changes to stay relevant.

I remember when you complained about God of War and the new direction. And here we are.

[-Foxtrot]

"You pretty much complain about pretty much every single game"

No no no...you and others like to say that to try and "lessen" my points on here but there's been plenty of times I've said something decent or neutral but nobody gives a shit because it's not news worthy.

If there is, lets say hypothetically, 30 articles that pass through here in a day and I comment on 10 of them saying how disappointed or angry I am then the other 20 articles I've left I either don't care about either because I don't care for the game OR I have no problem with the news. In that way I technically don't have a problem with most stuff it's just I feel it's better to be more vocal about the shit I don't like because I can 1) vent about it along with other users and 2) there's a small, very small chance of it being seen by people in the industry. Hell David Jaffe just screenshot this site. It's better to vent on the shit you find angry or disappointing rather then saying a generic positive comment...I mean if you are fine or glad with something then there's not reason to really comment is there, you don't have anything to vent about or want to change.

"I remember when you complained about God of War and the new direction. And here we are"

Only thing I complained the most about with the new God of War was I feared Atreus was going to end up annoying and bring the game down by babysitting him. He didn't, I even said this in comments a while back admitting I was wrong. I never said "I hate the look of the new God of War as they've changed everything"...but I might have said something concerned wise about how there's no jump button or something but to hate on it? No. Voicing concern is different.

It's one of the rare games which changes things from the past games BUT still manages to stick to its franchises roots. Then you need to think about how exploited the franchise was years ago with so many games being made from the PS2/PS3 and PSP, we were burnt out.

[Tapani]

Let's look at Foxtrot's arguments from a critical point of view:

1) You have no idea what the model is, so you simply decided that it is something and rant about your own opinion. Your opinion is baseless.

2) Gaming is an art form. Paintings, books, movies, music and theater are not always made "fans" in mind, but are creations which derive from visions of multiple people who are working together towards a goal to realize it. It is also partly business which has entirely its own dynamics that need to be taken into consideration. You are speaking only for one person, not many, in regards to what people want. Ubisoft might even have statistical proof to throw at you regarding what people want compared to what you or "fans" want. Why would these "fans" be more right than the other people? They aren't.

3) Entirely an assumption which is baseless without any proof. Your argument isn't worth anything.

4) There hasn't been many cases where a lot of people have been dissatisfied if a very old game has been taken offline.

I'm with Jaffe here.

[-Foxtrot]

Everything you've literally just done there is EXACTLY what you're trying to call me for...you do see the irony in that right?

Saying "you don't know that" when you've just taken large assumptions aswell as your apparent "counter point"

That's pretty hilarious.

Fact is you are with Jaffe before you even saw mine and other comments. At the end of the day you can say I'm wrong or any other user here but Jaffe isn't right either so.

[Christopher]

3. It's worth just as much as yours.

4. We don't have story driven, SP focused but Co-Op optional games going offline because even Ubisoft games following that concept don't require an internet connection for playing it solo.

[Tapani]

I read what David wrote, took a look at a few of his earlier posts, seen a few of his streams as well, and in the end I read four of your long posts here. I applied a normal critical point of view to what you wrote, and that was the result. Your arguments do not hold.

You assume everything and have no proof to back yourself up. In other words: you have no idea what you are talking about.

[Christopher]

Tapani, you are entirely ignoring any research Foxtrot has done to define his opinion and then say you've read four of his posts, read some of Jaffe, watched his stream (??) And because you have researched and ignore any potential for research by Foxtrot, you are more aware than he is.

Look, Foxtrot is normally vocal when it's negative, and he's not always sharing a popular opinion, but the amount that he plays and follows gaming over the many years have shown his research. I'm not going to say he has no clue on this when he absolutely does and has been making similar statements for a while and following the GaaS trend in gaming. Most active users here have and some of them do not agree. That's normal, but that doesn't mean one side is entitled because of that opinion.

[Fist4achin]

Just another online required game pushing MP that will get buried by the more popular games.

I doubt I will be in for this round of a cool series.

[Hardiman]

Get em Fox and the "entitled" go to label these guys use is ridiculous! Also the IP doesn't have a big fan base is weak because if it's so fuc*ing small why pray Tell are they bothering to make it always online?!?! Seems like if the base is tiny then they'd be better served just delivering a solid SP game as opposed to an always online game that I assume will have an intricate market system for loot, ships etc and have to have constant updates and will probably have a big development team.

Back to Dave though, he just seems bitter to me because, let's face it Draw to Death didn't light the world on fire and this industry kinda falls into the "what have you done for me lately" category. He just seems like he'd be the guy that blamed "fans" on his failures because he's the smartest guy in any room and we just didn't get it! Like here he's lumping all of us who are rightfully outraged with this bullshit as entitled and painting us in a negative light. Where Ubisoft should for sure be taken to task for pulling this shit. He really hasn't done anything of relevance in years whereas Cory Barlog who worked on GOW as well back then and directed 2, delivered one of the best gaming experiences I've ever played with GOW! That's just for reference into my comment of him being bitter at fans and instead of doing something that's noteworthy he just makes outrageous comments.

The original may have been a small success but it's gained a cult following and if they'd have delivered a solid narrative driven prequel it would've sold very well. When talented devs are allowed to be creative with popular narrative driven SP games it pays off as GOW and Spider-Man have shown just this year. There's been more for sure especially the ones that didn't have huge bloated budgets but what Ubi did here is wrong! They should've announced this at the beginning instead of acting like you wouldn't need an internet connection. I just hope this brings the spotlight on them because EA, M$ and others usually get the most backlash but Ubisoft is notorious for nickel and diming folks.

[Lore]

I honestly don‘t care about any backlash I receive from this, but you are a fool. Everything Jaffe stated was logical and true. The way he goes about presenting his opinions at times is questionable, however educated individuals on the industry would not be agreeing with you regardless

Plain and simple don’t buy the game if you disagree with any aspects of the decisions regarding a publisher/developer.

[-Foxtrot]

Don’t care about backlash? Okay then great... don’t call me a fool when you are the bigger fool for hanging on Jaffe’s words when he’s clearly in the wrong

LOOK AT HIS LATER POSTS man, he did a 180 and apologised. Go on his twitter and look it up.

Bet you feel pretty stupid now...

[Lore]

Haha I would never feel stupid from anything regarding n4g. My opinion stands and I’m not going to waste my time going deep through a twitter feed. It doesn’t matter who stated it whether it be Jaffe or anyone else in the world.

Good luck to you sir 🥂

[jeromeface]

https://youtu.be/g0xeT8WuLV... LOL

[-Foxtrot]

Oh that’s precious

Hi Jaffe

D***

[PhantomS42]

Bahahaha face it, the trolls are getting called out and you are their leader.

[antz1104]

Best part is you just told Jaffe to STFU and he's probably going to read it. Lol AWESOME.

[ginganinja]

1. The original announcement was heavily geared towards the multiplayer aspect of it. More than likely its development meant it was harder to keep SP as offline and still make it relevant to the game they're making. Who knows? Maybe by the time the game is actually out it might have changed again. That's sort of the meaning of the word development.

2. Tough. They haven't had that for 15 years, and they aren't going to have it for a while longer. This is not that game. Ubisoft have decided to make a different game. They announced that different game in 2017. It was fairly apparent then that multiplayer was going to be a significant part of it.

3. speculation.
4. and ? Doesn't seem to stop folks enjoying countless other similar games.

[jaycptza]

you can play alone but you need an internet connection to play not a big deal I'm sure that the game wont stop the minute you lose the connection probably have a period to compensate for network related spikes/drops

[Xasthirion]

It's almost 2019. If you don't have a "good solid internet connection" then you should probably be spending your money on helping your village get clean drinking water instead of on video games. I can't believe people still use this as an argument. There are tropical islands with 100% free wifi coverage in the middle of the jungle for Christ sakes.

This is the direction games are going. It's nothing new, and it wont stop regardless of how much you cry about it. You are insignificant in this argument. For every one of you who complain online about this sort of thing, there are 1000 people who are willing to fork out a fortune on microtransactions. That's who games are for now. Adapt or die. They are far past the point of no return on these kinds of features. It's time to accept that, or accept that maybe modern gaming isn't for you.

And stop acting like you are entitled to anything. The company owns the IP, and they can make whatever game they want. You don't have to buy it, and you certainly have no right to complain about it if you don't.

[Nitrowolf2]

Jaffe screencapped me lol

[Brave_Losers_Unite]

I disagree

[rainslacker]

I'm pretty sure that's copyright infringement. I'm not sure who own's the copyright. Either N4G's parent company....or you. Might be time to call up the lawyers though.

Or...just be happy that he made you famous among his tens of followers.

[Christopher]

We have allowed his use of our site image to enable himself to project his own entitlement of what consumers are allowed to do in regards to news relating to a title in which they are interested

[NapalmSanctuary]

I'm pretty sure that falls under fair use.

[Christopher]

Stop trying to steal Foxtrot's spotlight moment! /s

[TheGamez100]

Eh....been hearing the word "entitled" alot since that whole diablo fiasco and getting pretty annoyed with that. Maybe fans are just getting sick of microtransactions and anything that heavily has to do with that? That being a very online game? We just want a complete content filled game that isnt filled with crappy microtransaction practices that we can all enjoy at our own pace without any annoying requirements like always having to be online. If it has online features such as just playing with your friends then thats great....but this way is just wrong...
It should have been advertised as an always online game at the start

This is why I never take big devs like sonys studios, cdproject red, nintendo, even smaller devs like indies, etc that still do it right for granted.
Ubi, EA, Activision, and others that are getting there like Bethesda and Capcom can all go to hell for all I care. If they ever stop this nonsense, boy will that be the day.

[nyu1]

It's because some people go too far and are too toxic. That's all. People see that and say "Entitled gamers", the problem being that they are putting anyone who's complaining.

Ofc in this case its silly. Looking at the comments it was normal.

[rainslacker]

More that some people consider that anyone who doesn't like what the company has to offer, and says they are displeased, are now considered entitled. Even if they aren't asking for anything different, or demanding it. Apparently, as consumers, or fans of gaming, we are not allowed to express what we want, and just have to accept everything regardless.

Most of this kind of stuff I see from industry professionals seems to revolve more around the "If you don't like it, shut up and don't buy it" kind of mentality, but saying entitled allows them to try and shame those criticizing, or exercising their free will to express their dissatisfaction, into being quiet, for the purpose of not disrupting any marketing campaign I assume.

[Hardiman]

That irks me as well! "Entitled " is really getting worn out because this is not a case of gamers being entitled! It's a case of gamers pushing back and hard, which I think is great. I don't subscribe to death threats and I'm sure most don't because we're not insane! I never saw the blowback EA got coming. I just figured people would take it and we'd be even closer to the day I check out of gaming but it's not just EA, Activision, M$, WB, Bethesda and Capcom. Ubisoft goes under the radar on this kind of shit all the time but it looks like this may tip the scales.

[titans9999]

David Jaffe is the one who is "ENTITLED LITTLE BRAT" he is damn lucky God of War didn't go always on line or he too would be shit canned! Fuck always on line games, and fuck anyone that makes ANY excuses for that bullshit and those money hungry assholes!

[Cobra951]

The irony is that we really are all entitled, to get what we pay for. We are all entitled, to speak our minds. The word "entitled" used as an insult is one of the most puzzling fads of our contentious times.

[IamTylerDurden1]

I enjoy Jaffe's outspoken ways, typically, but i can't fly with this. With all the heat that EA gets it seems like Ubisoft just flies under the radar. Ubisoft is the underground king of MTs and GaaS, the Eddie Alvarez of the gaming industry and i for one am happy that gamers are calling them out. Beyond is not the franchise to Ubi-ize. Always online, MTs, "not in my Beyond Good n Evil".

[Hardiman]

I believe this will be what shines the spotlight on Ubi! They seem to always sneak buy with it in their games but I think they Ubi-sized on the wrong franchise!

[opc]

Ubi flies under the radar because they typically release a ton of content at the base price and all extra DLC and MTs only appeal to people that thoroughly enjoyed like 95-100% of the base game. Plus their games drop in price pretty quickly. You can get the newest ac game for $30 right now.

[StrengthInNumbers]

Ubisoft are free to make what they want. However, It would be better to change the name of this game because it is nothing like Beyond Good and Evil. This is pretty much a new IP.

[DaDrunkenJester]

I love Jaffe lol

[Rangerman1208]

Why do I feel like you're a Fallout 76 fan?

[DaDrunkenJester]

Well,

1. This is nothing like Fallout 76. Being online only =/= Fallout 76.
2. I have actually never played Fallout 76. Saw that dumpster fire coming a mile away.
3. I think he is mostly right about gamers being entitled cry babies, but somehow MT's and Lootboxes and Online games continue to rise in sales (Granted, there are exceptions).
4. I will always love Jaffe for GoW and Twisted Metal.

[CrimsonWing69]

Look, I had a preconceived idea that this would be a familiar sequel to a strong, story-driven, single-player game. Why publishers and developers feel the need to go in this direction drives me up the wall, but at the same time I'll hold judgement till the game is released. So far this isn't the game I was hoping for.

[DaDrunkenJester]

The most rational comment on here. Good for you to wait until the final product.

[V3geta]

From what I've read this guy is pretty much for anything anti-consumer so this isn't surprising. He should do something productive instead of attacking people for expecting more out of their games.

[HeisenbergX]

Jaffe don't you have anything better to do ? it's hard being totally irrelevant huh ?

First he made me laugh when he complained about AAA games and mentioned Uncharted 4 compared two scenes how climbing is simillar to the first game ... 🤦🏻‍♂️

And now this 😂😂😂 .. ahhhh

[Platformgamer]

david, please, don't lose the last bit of respect you have

[ShadowWolf712]

Criticizing a studio decision to turn a highly anticipated sequel to an SP game into an always-online service title is not entitlement. Especially when it was once stated that there would be some offline play.

Though I'm sure you can probably find plenty of people taking it too far, or making some pretty silly demands, the premise itself is not entitlement. Jaffe is once again desperate for attention.

[Rude-ro]

You do realize that the original game was criticized before it’s release?
You do realize that the developers listened to the complaints and changed the game?
To where it commercially did not do well. Good review, poor sales.

So, maybe the “entitlement” is the wrong word, it does not change the fact that the gamers cause way too much drama that can and has effects on a game.
The original version of bgae was changed to appeal to a larger consumer base, and it failed...
How about we trust the developers?
As far as always online... it’s the same model as sea of thieves, destiny, star citizen and etc etc etc etc....
How about we let the developers present to us what we want, so we do not keep getting the boring cash grabs that are happening.

[rainslacker]

You assume that the game would have been successful in it's original form. That's something impossible to judge for a new IP. If the game looked bad enough for gamers to make enough of a fuss about it, then potentially, it would have sold poorly, because it's not like people's criticisms would have gone away when it finally released.

WHile there are instances of that happening, it isn't that common.

"How about we trust the developers?"

Sure. We trust them when they say they'll have a SP campaign. We stop trusting them when they later say that the game will require an online connection...even in the SP campaign.

[Rude-ro]

@rainslacker
Nobody had their hands on the original vision... they saw it, and they complained.
It was not for another year until players got their hands on it with its official unveiling.
And 100% it has an effect. Who was complaining vs who buys?

Now, I get the single player aspect, not fighting that point, but maybe that is not the developers vision either and now that the hardware is better, maybe they are doing everything they wanted.
Who do you cater to? The small number of people complaining with zero hands on time and stuck with nostalgia on an original game that did not perform sales wise, or go bigger?
If the content is great, then what is the issue?
I get the bad blood due to recent games that launched rather shallow, but we do not know that information yet.

[Tankbusta40]

People in the video game industry are just fvcking airheads. Stop criticizing the consumer and listen to them .

Also P.S. Jaffe...Drawn to Death..LOL

[FPS_D3TH]

Hell no, I’d rather game devs make games and armchair devs stfu and stop ruining them with their cry baby nerfs, short sighted complaints and entitlement of almost anything.

[Tankbusta40]

You need to really learn what the word entitled means...you and most people in the video game industry completely use it wrong all the time

[FPS_D3TH]

Yeah an entire industry and most people are most definetly wrong, but you’re right. But of course.

Thanks for confirming my beliefs so easily. Wasn’t expecting anything less.

[_LarZen_]

This X10000000!

The faster we get these cry babies and armchair developers to shut the F up the better.

[_LarZen_]

David Jaffe is right. Every day I get a bit sick reading comments from "fellow gamers". There's allot of parenting gone wrong with allot of people. So now we have a generation of shitheads.

[FPS_D3TH]

Everytime I log off this site I can’t help but shake my head about the aboslute state of gamer entitlement. Not even surprised game devs are leaving the industry. No one appreciates good games anymore and everyone criticizes games to no end even before they’ve released. Sure you can get upset about some business practices but some gamers are so jaded to the industry I really question why they bother anymore. Those screencapped in those tweets are some of the most negatively opinionated people on this site. It’s hilarious Jaffe screencapped them.

[rainslacker]

People appreciate good games. People don't appreciate that games keep getting the commercialization treatment where they don't really need it. Gamers don't like it when they're told games will have a SP campaign, but they'll be forced to be online to play it(BGAE2). People don't like it when games that are SP games require an online connection to get most of the content they have to offer(Spyro). People don't like being told their sexists or that they shouldn't just buy a game because they have a problem with it(BFV). People don't like constantly being told to shut up and just be realistic, because this is the way the industry is going(Most EA MT games).

There's a difference between being entitled, and speaking out against things you don't like about a game, or industry practices. Just accepting what is out there without criticism makes you a sheep. As consumers, we have every right to speak about what it is we like or want. Until these games are given away for free. Ever notice F2P games get less hate for the kinds of practices that we seem to dislike....like Always online or excessive MT?

Did you read the article's comments? Nothing they said demanded anything. They even had a good discussion about what might be good in the game in theory. They didn't seem to be hateful towards the game itself, just the nature of it's release.

But according to you, why should fans of the game be upset that a game which has a certain expectation be completely changed to be something which isn't really much like what the original game was?

[FPS_D3TH]

I’m glad he spoke up. Mans not wrong about gamers rampant entitlement and this site’s garbage comments are a key indicicator. Not even surprised some of those people are from this site who are notoriously negative about everything. Not surprised one bit.

[Tankbusta40]

Every consumer has the right to expectations, as video games are NOT free. Beyond Good and Evil 2 has been a game MANY people have waited for for ages. Not wanting to be connected to online to play a single player game is not entitlement at all, its a reasonable expectation. I hope everyone mad about it decides to NOT purchase the game as that is absolutely the ONLY way devs will ever learn.

[starchild]

Of course you shouldn't buy something you don't like. And if you really care about a game there's nothing wrong with sending the developers an email describing your ideas and why you think those things should be implemented.

You are entitled to your hopes, but you are NOT entitled to have your expectations be carried out . The people making the game are the ones that ultimately make the decisions regarding their game. You are free to buy it or not.

The problem I have with some people's attitude is that they act like they are owed something. They don't express themselves in a way that shows they are aware that they are just one person with an opinion and that at the end of the day they aren't entitled to get exactly what they want. Instead they act like spoiled, entitled brats who think their tastes and preferences are the only valid ones and that they are somehow owed the product exactly as THEY envision it should be. They then go on a giant tirade bashing the game, even continuing after the game has released.

I don't care what anyone claims, that's not constructive criticism aimed at trying to influence the developement of the game in a positive and respectful way, that's nothing more than a prolonged tantrum in which they incessantly bash the game and its makers. It also amounts to a form of trolling toward fellow gamers that do like the game. It becomes nothing but overblown drama and toxic negativity to the point that gamers who enjoy the game can't even discuss it without being inundated with hateful comments telling them how utterly sh*t it supposedly is for not conforming to these fanatics' demands.

[rainslacker]

So, instead of just calling out those people in a conversation here on the site, addressing them directly, he went and screen capped them to use his safe space twitter account to try and get support for calling the community entitled? Something that his own followers said he was wrong on.

It's not entitlement to say what you aren't happy with in a game. If that were the case, we have all been "entittled" at some point in time, because we have all expressed something we don't like about a game. Why is it entitled to say that we won't buy a game that is online only? Why is it entitled to make assumptions on why the companies did this. Why is it entitled to say that these companies should maybe look at what the community is saying, instead of wondering later why their game is failing?

While the community doesn't have to be 100% pandered to to make a successful game, there are times where the fans of franchises exist within the community, and a lot of times they should be listened to. especially when a game that was receiving little heat, suddenly has a lot of hate thrown its way over things that the gamers in the community have been saying they don't like for a very long time now.

Maybe its more entitled that the industry thinks that the community of supporters...their potential customers, can be insulted and disregarded because all they're expected to do is pay money for the product, and there will be plenty of people to do that, regardless of these "entitled" consumers on forums. I mean....ask EA how all those entitled consumers affected their bottom line.

What it comes down to, is that the consumer has every right to be entitled. They have every right to express what they want and don't want. The people in the industry have every right to make whatever they want. And in the end, the consumer has every right to say why they do or don't like something, buy or not buy that product. And it only becomes entitlement when the industry people say, "Well, you better get used to it, that's what's coming"....kind of like Jaffe did in some followup comments. It's the height of entitlement for these companies to say, or believe, that their customers should just accept whatever they may bring out.

[ajax17]

Oh, I'm sorry David. I like to be able to play SINGLE PLAYER GAMES if my internet goes out. Fuck me, right?

[DaDrunkenJester]

Well, I don't think it's a single player game, so that would be hard to do.

[Christopher]

It is. The announcement of co-op as an option was recently revealed, but can still be played entirely solo.

If it goes co-op only, it will be even more heavily criticised as they would have completely changed the game from what it was announced as let alone what its fans have wanted.

[UCForce]

It’s more about Ubisoft foolish decisions. Ubisoft just killed the Beyond Good and Evil series for the sake of online. This made me feel disrespected to David Jaffe even more.

[Imalwaysright]

Oh yes Jaffe. You better damn well believe that I'm entitled to spend my money on the things that I want. You and your cronies, on the other hand are not entitled to have it.

[Zjet]

Online only games have expiry dates.

I will never buy one, I want to own my games that I pay for, games as a service have their place, but not in single player games.

If the next Halo or Assassin's Creed has no offline it wouldn't fly, so it shouldn't fly here

It's ask uch about accessibility as it is about media preservation.

Anyone remember Drawn to Death? No because it's online only and had no legacy and flopped even though there is a cult following.

[DaDrunkenJester]

Drawn to Death isn't remembered ONLY because online only lol Don't try and pull that.

[rainslacker]

Criticizing people for saying they don't want a game that's online only maybe is a sign that people don't care for online only that much. People are free to express that they don't want something, they don't need to be called out for it.

People can argue with them, but it shouldn't be from the producers of the game, and not from a 3rd party celebrity developer who this doesn't affect. If they're calling out the hostile people who make threats, or take things too far in their criticism, then fair game, but I notice a lot of this calling out is generalized in a way that dismisses those who are more down to earth in their dislike of what's going on.

[xander70769]

Always online is pure garbage. It is something devs/publishers use for leverage over gamers, and it strips your consumer rights away. instead of paying $60 for a game so that you can play it any where, any time so long as you have a console and power, now you are spending $60 to RENT TIME on a server. Internet connection goes down? Can't play. Server goes down? Can't play. Dev decided they don't like you for any reason? Banned from server and can't even play by yourself offline. And when the dev eventually shuts the server down permanently, it will be like the game never existed - CAN'T PLAY. Gamers cannot let this become the norm for single player games. This model only makes sense for strictly MMO experiences, and yet we are seeing more and more in other types of games for no other reasons than publishers want to monitor you and control how and when you play the game, and for how long.

[SegaGamer]

So it looks like people in the gaming industry are going to start calling every gamer that complains "entitled" now.

The complaints I see about Beyond Good and Evil 2 are completely valid, it's not entitlement at all.

What the hell has happended to the gaming industry? The constant pushing for more money has completely gone to their heads and alienated them from their audience. It's like the movie industry where if you criticise the new Ghostbusters and Star Wars films then you are a misogynist and / or racist.

[rainslacker]

The gaming industry...or at least some within it....have become entitled. They think that whatever they make should just be accepted without criticism. That those who have a problem with their work should just pipe down, so they can peddle their wares on the unsuspecting, uninformed, or those who just don't care one way or another.

i've noticed that this sense of entitlement within the industry tends to only come from those who try and do things that the consumer doesn't take a liking too. The two major places you see this apparent entitlement from gamers is with online only games, or forced connection requirements, and excessive MT implementations. Then it seems the industry becomes entitled to think that the consumer should just accept that, so in an attempt to shame the consumer by calling them entitled, they become entitled themselves thinking that they should be without critique.

I do agree that there are similarities between what's being done with entitled name calling and being called sexists because of those movies, but if you look at what's being done in those cases, there is often more vitriol surrouding them. But that comes more from push back through defense mechanisms because it feels like we're being attacked over this and being disregarded. But that said, the new Ghostbusters was a good movie, and I think it was unfairly criticized, even though the nature of the inclusion was pretty blatant. Star Wars inclusion is just heavy handed, and ultimately meaningless, and usually eye-rollingly stupid....like the equal rights droid in Solo. It seems to be more about social commentary than about creating a good story...something the original movies, or even the prequels, didn't bother with much.

[sampsonon]

"While we can see Jaffe’s point of view on the subject, it is worth noting that even in this day-and-age where almost every gamer on the planet has an internet connection, not everyone has the money to afford a high-speed connection for games like Beyond Good and Evil 2, with a ton of data that would allow them to stay online all the time and not be overcharged. Just a simple thought that maybe Jaffe should mull over for a moment."

then they have bigger issues and should worry about them more than worrying about video games.

[xander70769]

There isn't a single logical reason to require an internet connection for a single player game.

[DaDrunkenJester]

Well its not a single player game? It's an online Co-op game. So therefore there are plenty of logical reasons to have it online.

[xander70769]

The game can be played by yourself without a co-op partner, unless they've changed that since I last looked into it. So it is not exclusively co-op, which would be stupid if it was. Again, there isn't a single logical reason to REQUIRE internet connection, and I challenge you to think of even one.

[UCForce]

@DaDrunkenJester People want the sequel and want continue the story of first one. I guess you never play the first one, haven’t you ? Are you seriously defending the publishers who heavy modernization on consumer ?

[rainslacker]

Bigger issues? Like not wanting to pay for better internet? Maybe not having great internet available in their area? Maybe not having internet at all because they just don't want it?

Good internet doesn't cost that much nowadays, and to assume that people are financially unsound because of bad internet is really just presumptuous. I didn't have good internet until late last year, and I have no financial difficulties.

While what the quote suggests is true, maybe it's more that Jaffe shouldn't consider this at all, because he is not responsible for this game, and his own game failed, which was also online only. If the market doesn't want an online requirement, then the game is going to fail. Some games will appeal to a larger group of people, thus can overcome this problem....like COD or Fortnite. But a game like BGAE? It's a cult classic game to begin with, and since there is no logical reason to require a connection for SP...although optional is fine...it seems the devs/pubs have more to worry about that people won't buy the game.

[Hardiman]

Price rarely factors in. It's availability and areas that do offer decent speeds are expensive. Most that don't have good speeds would pay if better was available. In fact they tend to have more disposable income because it is more expensive to go the others routes. Ever try to game online or download a game with satellite internet that caps out at 10 gigs then drops to dial up days?!?!

[antikbaka]

Yeah yeah..some media figure said the same about BF V critics. Look where is game now and who is right

[BlaqMagiq1]

Respect lost for Jaffe there. He clearly doesn't understand the situation here.

[Sophisticated_Chap]

Personally, I think the biggest entitled baby is David Jaffe himself. There is nobody in the industry that moans and complains more than he does.

[MWH]

if he's going to support this kind of gaming model and disrespect the aware community then he can stfu. I respected the man for his achievements but the man is gone and the achievements is all that left.

[opc]

These companies should be happy about getting this type of feedback for free.

[trooper_]

Criticism is what propels the industry forward. This always online crap will ruin gaming.

[RabbitFly]

David Jaffe is just as entitled to his opinion as anyone on here. And he makes some decent enough points.

The knee-jerk reaction to anything GaaS that has become the trend on this site or others is also not a reflection of the market as a whole, where GaaS games are still dominating in sales.

We can not like it, but trying to pretend like these games aren't being made for an audience is just ignorant at this point.

I agree, not every game has to be a GaaS and every game probably shouldn't be a GaaS. However they still serve a purpose within the market and serve us as gamers something that single player games and multiplayer games without a GaaS model cannot.

Beyond Good and Evil 2 is looking good. Yes it is a big change from the original, but aren't we also constantly complaining about the lack of innovation? And when games like God of War and Assassin's Creed finally renew their formulas to great success we are now going to scold another game for trying something similar?

I don't know. Seems hypocritical to me.

[Christopher]

***where GaaS games are still dominating in sales.***

No they're not unless you count just a few. Spider-Man, God of War, SMB, and even Ubisoft's own AC Odyssey falls outside of GasS as everything is entirely optional and every element of the game can be experienced without ever buying real cash items.

Fortnite and the like aren't the entirety of the market. They're are a ton of non-GaaS games that have been breaking records this year alone let alone this generation.

[RabbitFly]

I get what you are saying, but I am not arguing that single player games is dead. So it feels a bit like you are making a straw man out of my point.

GaaS are very much a big part of the market. And it is not only a few games. We have to consider games like GTA 5, Call of Duty, Battlefield and Overwatch within these models. On Pc we had League of Legends, Dota 2 and Smite.

Even Counter-Strike would now be considered a GaaS. The Sandbox Survival wave that we had on PC that directly led to Battle Royale games trending to the point of dominance.

GaaS have been a big part of popularizing many new genres in gaming.

I am all for us having more single player games and more unique experiences, but I see this constant negativity around GaaS as irrational.

These games are still offering new things to us as players, that are worthwhile experiences for those that enjoy them.

Also I never argued that AC: Oddysey was GaaS. That part of the argument was talking about how this community is so quick to criticize games like CoD, Battlefield, Fifa, NBA2K and not that long ago Assassin's Creed for being too formulaic, but when Ubisoft wants to change up the formula for Beyond Good and Evil they are criticized for it, simply for the fact that the game can be considered GaaS.

It is an irrational reaction that does not hold up the the standard that this community seems to want to set when it comes to innovation within the games industry.

Edit: Also, single player games breaking records does not mean that they make anywhere near the amount of money a successful GaaS does. But that was never my argument, and it never will be. I have been around for long enough too see the success of one game within a genre ruin the market entirely. Simply because all the companies think they can replicate that success. I was simply pointing out that there are a lot of players that enjoy these GaaS experiences. And the trend on sites like this seems to be ignoring that fact. It's like we are pretending that the people that play these types of games only do so because they are forced.

[Christopher]

***I get what you are saying, but I am not arguing that single player games is dead. So it feels a bit like you are making a straw man out of my point. ***

***where GaaS games are still dominating in sales***

I specifically addressed a point you made. What is straw man in that? YOu said GaaS games are dominating in sales, but they aren't.

How is addressing a specific point and nothing else a strawman argument? I didn't make it about anything else but your claim that GaaS are dominating in sales.

***It is an irrational reaction that does not hold up the the standard that this community seems to want to set when it comes to innovation within the games industry.***

GaaS is not innovation, it's marketing and price gouging. How many more articles do we need to see of $10 cash-only items in games to make you understand that?

[RabbitFly]

"I specifically addressed a point you made. What is straw man in that? YOu said GaaS games are dominating in sales, but they aren't. "

Well you didn't. You made the claim that other single player games are also selling well. That does not dispute my point, nor does it address the point I made. Nor did I make any point that would indicate I believed those single player games to sell badly.

"GaaS is not innovation, it's marketing and price gouging. How many more articles do we need to see of $10 cash-only items in games to make you understand that?"

And this is exactly the knee-jerk reaction I am talking about. Games that utilize a GaaS model have definitely innovated within the industry. Like I mentioned earlier. The open world sandbox survival genre is built upon the founding principles of GaaS. Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare popularized progression based multiplayer. League of Legend and Dota 2 have made Esports reach new heights, both in commercial success and popularity.

Games such as Warframe and Destiny have modernized the loot grinding formula of Diablo to reach new markets.

Do you seriously not think that DayZ wasn't innovative when the mod first launched? If so you are missing out my friend. Although impossible to experience anymore, those first months of DayZ were truly a unique experience that explored entirely new feelings in gaming.

I mean we can go on. GaaS is more than microtransactions, and anyone that thinks that is the only justification for such design are simply ignorant.

I am not saying that the industry's seemingly sole focus on making GaaS or how everyone now wants to make a battle royale mode is great for the industry or even a good thing, but it is inevitable.

It is exactly like what happened after WoW made it's success, everyone wanted to make a WoW-clone, or after League of Legends got successful, everyone wanted to make a MOBA, or after Modern Warfare captivated the market, everyone wanted to make a military shooter.

These trends do see diminishing returns in a big way, both in innovation, quality and sales. However that does not mean that games made on a GaaS model are automatically bad. Making such blanket statements are undermining the millions of gamers that prefer games built on such models. And when it comes to Beyond Good and Evil 2 it is literally undermining innovation. Like I said before. The arguments that are being made is that people wanted a sequel to Beyond Good and Evil that more closely followed the formula of the original. Instead we are getting one of the most innovative and ambitious titles that Ubisoft has ever developed.

It has the potential to fail horribly, as does any title, it also has the potential to fail horribly by the nature of being a GaaS. I am just saying that it being a GaaS does not automatically make it a bad game, and claiming such is nothing but hyperbole.

[SpinalRemains138]

No, David. Nothing about this is good. Your attitude is one of entitlement, not ours.

[Relientk77]

David Jaffe goes on N4G? Cool, I didn't know that.

[XiNatsuDragnel]

Well my dude I'm buying the Bgae 2 that I wanted not this "new" IP.

[moomoo319]

So, Jaffe, middle-aged man that cant make a successful product anymore. Are you going to design a new game, maybe one that is fun and actually sells? Or are you just going to YAP YAP YAP YAP YAP about other people like a tabloid bitch until you fade further into obscurity. Everything he says and does reeks of complete desperation.

[Nacho_Z]

I like the look of it but I understand why fans of the first game are confused and annoyed. I wouldn't be happy to wait in seemingly futile hope for years and years for a sequel to a game I loved only for it to be unrecognisable when it finally arrived. For example I'd be gutted if the next ES game was online only.

They should probably have just billed it as a new IP.

[Smokehouse]

Jaffe is better than that. Using the buzzword of the month is peewee level. I’m so sick of seeing “entitled” everywhere. If it was in context then fine but it’s not. It’s a lame excuse to end an argument. Like calling someone a racist because you don’t like their opinion when it has nothing to do with race. I liked Jaffe because he used to be real talk. This ism bullshit is about as fake as you can get.

[Helljumper92]

People complaining about always being online like they don't need wifi haha

[kevnb]

Why attack customers? I don’t think he works for Ubisoft at the moment, but how does this help anyone? Many people are letting Ubisoft know what they want and if Ubisoft doesn’t listen they won’t buy it, period.

[Psychonaut]

I am not super up to date on David Jaffe but didn't he peak in the PS2 era? I mean the God of War 18 is the best selling in the series, and he isn't attached to that. He left Eat, Sleep, Play when they had a multi-game deal with Sony. His next studio also folded after his drawn to death game bombed, and the game itself is going brick March 2019. I guess I don't see the "mystic" around this guy.

[Hardiman]

It seems he did peak in that era. Also from his comments it seems he hasn't played the new GOW. Might do him some good to play a modern masterpiece like that to get an idea about what people want in 2018 from a game!

[WitcheRivia]

So after being past his prime & his games flopping, he decided to do live podcasts for less than 100 viewers.

[madpuppy]

Man do I hate the narrative that includes the word "entitled" to describe gamers.
It's disingenuous and foolhardy to say the least.

[AK91]

And Jaffe has officially become a complete shill.

[DimensionalSound]

Entitlement and childish behavior from gamers is very real; that's not what this is though.
At the very least, if you don't like what's happening with BGE2, just don't buy the damn game.

[william_cade]

Cool- David doesn't like people complaining about SP franchises turning into MP always online cash grabs. Maybe he should make an always online GoW?

[Psychonaut85]

Jaffe- Don't like it don't play it.
Us- oh you mean like your piece of shit game Drawn to Death?

[HylianMigz]

is he still mad his game did bad?

[titans9999]

Shit, I was really looking forward to this game, now I am not, and David Jaffe is an idiot for thinking us gamers should have to put up this bullshit!

[WeAreLegion]

I love his channel and he's a fun watch. But yeah, I disagree.

[spwittbold]

I remember when David Jaffe was relevant.

[CrowdNex]

From what I've read this guy is pretty much for anything anti-consumer so this isn't surprising. He should do something productive instead of attacking people for expecting more out of their games.

[Mister_Wolf]

This gen has been such a fucking mess. Ever since that Microsoft announcement of the Xbox One, there has been attempt after attempt by many publishers and developers to shit on consumers. This gen is one gen I want to leave behind asap. If it wasn't for the Sony's and Switch's first party support I'd have packed in gaming entirely this gen.

[chris235]

i am terribly sorry, but this pr stunt with always online is an old hat. first, i‘ve been online for the past few years and i am not even supporting anything multiplayer. so i don’t get the whole argument why people are pissed. second, and most important: the title beyond good and evil triggers a lot of nostalgia in everyone of us, but the game wasn‘t that good to begin with. at least i don‘t need this rehash.

[Hardiman]

The problem isn't not having access to internet, it's having access to consistently good internet. There's a very large percentage that have satellite or Jetpacks and those have caps after 10 or 15 gigs and then it's turtle time for the rest of the month. Good for looking at articles bad for streaming or gaming online!

That's not the main factor here though and it's not hard to see where the anger comes from.

[jetkeeper]

good news

[esherwood]

Game looks fun to me

[Helljumper92]

Gamer: *Playing single player game*
Internet : *Goes out*
Gamer: Oh shit let me keep playing with out my internet connection because it doesn't matter it's just single player.
SAID NO GAMER EVER.