This is quite the harsh review

Its not so much a Scathing review but coming from a disappointed fan (although the beginning with the 'publishers' was a bit odd)
while some people are just calling Uber scammers (which can easily be ignored) most of the reviewers and 'fans' of the game where disappointing with the release.
There are 2 basic fan-bases that Uber has (that i have noticed)
1) The early-access fans: the ones who want to be a part of the development process of the game
2) The release fans: people who love the idea but want to wait for the 'full game' and get the experience from the game.
This is the fan-base that Uber has for the most part...disappointed....because as so many point out...the game does not feel 'ready' and features are missing despite the fact that the early-access fans are telling everyone that Uber will add those things "SOON" ...or lately...."Someday" which just doesnt cut it for release fans. Release fans waited for that full 'effect' of PA, and pretty much everyone would have been happy if Uber delayed release, because everyone knows that delaying a game to fix/improve it is way better then a broken release O.O

A square that allow you to move over to the other edge is a torus, I never said torus and sphere are the same thing.
The point is their difference is insignificant from a gameplay perspective, and a torus isn't troublesome for UI like a sphere.

Their major differences are about narrative elements. PA was largely marketed around narrative elements like planet smashing. Anything that make them less visually appealing would gonna hurt the game's marketablity, even if the gameplay behind them are mostly the same.

well I can understand anyone who gives a negative critic to this game after it being "released".

It is a good game, but it's far from finished. So how can it be released... if you release a unfinished game, you have to make it free 2 play.

because an unfinished game is way better with microtransactions?

It's finished in the mind of uber.

Not that they want to stop working on it, but yeah, they consider it to be finished enough to release.

Minecraft.

Another one of these threads...

Look, a negative review.... PILE-ON!!!

People need to accept other people's views and not get hurt every time they see this, it's going to happen, some people are disappointed.

Why don't we get some threads started up talking about the positive reviews?

My thoughts? He has some valid points, and he's right to be disappointed in some cases. Move on? I think we should.

Or, we can just compress the negative review reaction threads together, as we really should have done.

You are talking about a cilinder shape, that would be easy to fit with a flat texture indeed.
But it would be weird looking planets. Gameplay would be a bit like on metal planets where the poles are also unusable.
But a realistic looking solar system is more interesting compared to a couple of cilinders flying around

A torus isn't a cilinder, quote wikipedia:
Topologically a rectangle is the fundamental polygon of a torus, with opposite edges sewn together.

No need for several torus visually flying around. You can still represent them as planets with a separate solar system view or something, and make the rectangle playfields damaged when the planets collided.

That's not the issue. Only crazy people would have an issue with different opinions.

The problem is people are spreading misinformation.

Not hurt in the slightest.

Just trying to get some correct info out there rather than these constant misinformed "reviews"

I dunno guys, is it really the reviewers fault he couldn't find the PiP? The game does a really good job of confusing the uneducated, and on top of that it has almost zero information in game, one is expected to go to external material to learn how to play. Most of the rest of the review is his opinion.

I just got done playing and recording some Chip's Challenge. Just getting it to run, I can't really share empathy for someone who can't do some research in the slightest to get something to work for them.

I don't get it. So many reviews are like this. Is this the rest of our lives? If someone has trouble with something, it obviously was poorly designed and is a useless compilation of programming? So everything has to literally spoonfeed the user and be completely surface deep and generic and boring?

People need to figure out how to google, find what they need to accomplish what they want with something they have, and become useful. Just sayin.

10 years in the future, a game is going to not label a single item on a UI, and people are going to complain the feature is ambiguous, and I am going to remember back in Red Alert 2 all those buttons at the bottom bar, that my friend never used but I learned what they did by actually looking up information.

http://www.quartertothree.com/fp/2012/03/24/the-official-journey-review-faq/
Q: Why isn’t your review objective?


A: That’s not how I write. Furthermore, I would argue that’s not how a review works. To me, a review is one person articulating his experience with a movie, a book, an album, a game, or whatever. That person will bring his own voice, context, and even baggage to the review, none of which is “objective”. If you want objective reviews, try IGN. I hear they’re very good at that sort of thing.

So he admits his review is his wild fancy. Nothing to see here, go home. He claims the game does a poor job informing. Sorry brian, guess you wrote a whole wiki for nothing

I respect no man who can't keep a wiki tab open while doing something. I switch from minecraft to terraria to starbound, I switch wiki pages, I keep them listed in my bookmarks. I respect no man's review if I can't respect his methodology.

"People need to figure out how to google" is not the answer to a missing tutorial or some basic information.. Just because you're comfortable with that, doesn't mean everyone else is.

That is quite the harsh elitists view I have, on someone giving quite a harsh review.

I used to read encyclopedias and manuals and special reference guides back when the internet wasn't popular, back in the 90s. I used to watch cartoons too, and I was a very work focused kid, but I also knew how to get information even then. On astronomy, history, other random facts. Even video games had guides. That is why I respect the Angry Video Game Nerd. As bad as some Nintendo games were back in the day, some of them were more bearable with a guide, and they existed in obtainable print copies even back then.

I think it's fair to say that quite a few games have done pretty well without holding the playes hand all the way, and letting them work it out for themselves. Mine craft etc.

Guys, you're overreacting with those threads. This it's just a bad review on a tiny site, no point in getting anxious.

Wait for big reviews from sites like IGN, which actually matter to a games reception.

Minecraft is not an acceptable example, choose another.

Harsh? Inaccurate? Scathing? He used a fair tone, backed his arguements with valid reasoning, and highlighted both positives and negatives. I couldn't agree more with some of the things the reviewer said, and didn't find a single factual inaccuracy.

Intelligent reviewer has reasoned opinion backed with detailed explanations. Fan base outraged. More news at 9