Does "it gets better later" put you off when considering purchasing a game?

[Spirit]

"It gets better later" can, at times, be a helpful criticism to help understand a game before you play it.

It is best suited to some genres more than others (like a 70+ hour RPG or rather short indie game), but it ultimately means that you're likely to experience a large portion of a game (perhaps even the majority) before you start enjoying it.

When you see "it gets better later" does it put you off playing or purchasing the game?

 

[DeactivatedUser1]

I play very few series, so I don’t run into this much.
I saw this with Mario & Luigi: Dream Team and I still played it.
I also see people say some of the beginnings of Zelda games are bad and I haven’t disliked one yet. (The beginnings, I don’t like two Zelda games)

 

[Dio]

"It gets better later" can, at times, be a helpful criticism to help understand a game before you play it.

It is best suited to some genres more than others (like a 70+ hour RPG or rather short indie game), but it ultimately means that you're likely to experience a large portion of a game (perhaps even the majority) before you start enjoying it.

When you see "it gets better later" does it put you off playing or purchasing the game?

If it means a slow opening sequence. No it doesn't put me off. I actually like a game that gives you time to immerse in the world first before the story kicks off big time.

I'll use SS as an example which everyone here should know. Without that long opening the player wouldn't care about Zelda enough to want to save her.

I think it is worth knowing first that a game's opening is like this if you haven't seen a trailer which showcases heavy action or else you might get the impression the whole game will be slow. But knowing that I am happy to play a game with a long opening sequence.

 

[Alita the Pun]

yes actually, that is the main reason why I have only ever attempted to play twilight princess a few times. The opening is so incredibly slow and boring for me, and my friends always say it gets better later, but I don't have the patience to sit through this boring tutorial.

 

[A Link In Time]

I'm not going to invest the time into something that doesn't grab my interest in the first hour or two. If the core mechanics or story of a game aren't entertaining by then, I would rather not slog through the experience.

 

[Vanessa28]

Nope it doesn't put me off at all. I'm someone who likes to judge things for myself. It could be helpful to people who struggle with a game and find it boring or too easy but personally I like to figure it out for myself.

 

[Woyogoyo]

It does a bit. The quality of a game is generally a matter of opinion, and the person telling me that is likely a fan of the game, which means they're probably at least a bit biased. Why should I waste my time and money on something I don't enjoy for only the vague promise of future payoff?

 

[beste-spellen]

When you see "it gets better later" does it put you off playing or purchasing the game?

It puts me off playing, because it happened more than once to me that the game did not get better later on at all...

yes actually, that is the main reason why I have only ever attempted to play twilight princess a few times. The opening is so incredibly slow and boring for me, and my friends always say it gets better later, but I don't have the patience to sit through this boring tutorial.

I love TP, but I can only agree about this.

 

[Jirohnagi]

Only in a few cases where it didn't actually get better at all SS for example just kept hand holding you throughout via fi.

 

[Farore's Chosen]

Yes. Sometimes I have fallen in love with games that took a while to get better, but for the most part, it doesn't exactly thrill me to know that games hafta take a while to be enjoyed.

 

[Doc]

I can't think of a single time. There are a few games where introducing the setting or learning the controls takes a little bit of time. Spiderman on the PS4 was recently like this for me, where the tutorial stage took some time before I found the game and its combat interesting.

Besides, if I see a positive review that says "it has a slow beginning," I still view that as a positive review.

 

[Quin]

I have no problem with it if the slow beginning actually pays off. Old Monster Hunter games always have slow beginnings but they teach you mandatory things which help you enjoy the hunt way more.
I see it as a straight downside in games like TP and especially SS. It hurts so much that it putts me off replaying them despite being great games.

 

[Castle]

It's never a point in anything's favor.

I once had an english teacher give me the only helpful lesson I've ever received from an english teacher. "If your paper can't hook me in its first three sentences it doesn't matter how good the rest of it is. I'm failing it."

Writing Rule No.1: Don't Waste Your Audience's Time

Any of the games that critics say "get good" some 40+ hours in that I've played are either garbo from beginning to end or I've just flat never gotten to that point.

There is a brief point in Final Fantasy XIII where the game stops being a 40 hour long hallway. This is the point at which people claim the game "gets good." No it doesn't. It just stops being a hallway. The only good thing that can be said about this point in the game is that the story mercifully stops happening so you can finally run around an open field slaying minibosses. This entire section of the game is entirely optional and beside the point because it doesn't even award anything useful and you'll just end up grinding yourself out to max level as a matter of course anyway once the game turns back into a hallway again.

Morrowind is a game I've never even reached the "gets good" point in, despite literally dozens of attempts to do so. What it takes to get there is so gadawfully insufferably boring I can never take it and end up uninstalling. A year and a half later I somehow get the hankering to try again. Yup. Same thing this time. Got a little farther but ended up giving up again. Reconvene again in a year or so. Repeat as necessary.

Why should anyone have to tolerate an insufferable slog for untold hours for the sake of a promise that "It gets good later on I swears!"

No! No No No No NO! And more importantly, WHY???

Make it good now, or don't bother at all.

 

[the8thark]

When you see "it gets better later" does it put you off playing or purchasing the game?

Games like Splatoon are just like this and are a turn off to me. On the other hand they are made like this on purpose to keep people always playing the game to try out each new thing drip fed to the player.

It's never a point in anything's favor.

I once had an english teacher give me the only helpful lesson I've ever received from an english teacher. "If your paper can't hook me in its first three sentences it doesn't matter how good the rest of it is. I'm failing it."

We have the exact same principle at Toastmasters. If your speech can't hook someone with the introduction, then you've lost the audience.
We're not arrogant enough to fail bad speeches because there was no hook at the begining. Still it is a serious room for improvement that we do put into our speech evauluations so the speakers can learn to improve this aspect of their speeches.

 

[DarkestLink]

Usually that means "****ty tutorial section". So no. I'd rather get that stuff over with instead of having it hanging on my neck the entire game like Fi.

Morrowind is a game I've never even reached the "gets good" point in, despite literally dozens of attempts to do so. What it takes to get there is so gadawfully insufferably boring I can never take it and end up uninstalling. A year and a half later I somehow get the hankering to try again. Yup. Same thing this time. Got a little farther but ended up giving up again. Reconvene again in a year or so. Repeat as necessary.

If I had to guess, you're underpowered and slow as hell. I got to a part where I felt Morrowind was more enjoyable, but it definitely has its problems.

1) It puts all of its eggs in one basket: The main quest. I will admit that the Telvanni are my favorite Mages Faction in TES, but overall the faction quests suck, the factions aren't that interesting, and...well either there's not enough good characters or there are too many characters that the good ones are kinda drowning in a sea of crap.

2) The power scaling is awful. I know people love to praise Morrowind for how you rise from Zero to Hero, compared to the Dragonborn who is...immediately the Dragonborn, but the power scaling for Morrowind (and especially Oblivion) are kinda bad. On one hand, the enemies don't scale, which is good IMO since it does give you a sense of improvement, however, the leap in power is just...ridiculous. Unlike Oblivion and especially Skyrim, it feels like you were meant to raise your skills with trainers. On one hand, this keeps money relevant. On the other hand, the moment you find that Master Enchanting/Alchemy trainer, you leap from "Zero" to "God" instantly. Now you can shoot 50 foot 100 damage fireballs like a machine gun, the gear actually recharges unlike magic, and you can fly around like a deity. Compare this to Skyrim where I felt my rise to a "God-like" status was more incremental. Personally, I'm glad stuff like spellmaking is gone, because I don't think this kind of growth would be possible if it remained.

3) The roleplaying options feel...limited. It's a smaller issue, but still irksome in my opinion. It was a bit of a problem in Skyrim, but whereas the Dragonborn has some leeway on who he wants to be, the PC in Morrowind in Nerevar, like it or not. You're a hero and an empire toadie and you get no say about it. Same with the Hero of Kvatch.