Any good?

[MMDE]

This game definitely wanted to be a movie, but for some reason they decided to make it a game, and it's barely interactive. It's highly scripted and linear leaving you with very little choice than to just press X at the correct locations to progress. Sure, there's some few collectibles you can find around. I'm not just saying it wants to be a movie, the pause menu even says "Resume Feature". Game is supposed to be based on a "true story", but it seems fictional and the ending is rather nonsense people don't even know how to interpret. Game often jumps you around from scene to scene without making too much sense. Even though you interact with a lot of people, there's no dialogue, only people giving each other strange looks, waving their hands around and giving you items etc. There is some written text on items around you which gives you an idea about what is happening, but it can be somewhat confusing.

 

Even if this is essentially like a walking simulator with a story, it doesn't really nail the walking part very well with it's clunky controls. It's a pain to look or walk around, and this is what you do most of the time in the game.

 

It's an easy and quick platinum, but it does require two playthroughs, and while it has chapter select there's collectibles you gotta get in one playthrough.

 

Is the story worth playing the game for? Not really. It's not like it doesn't grab you at all, but some of the appeal of this is that you find some of the scenes interesting and you want to know what is actually happening, maybe get some plot twist or something. The story is what you guessed it was, it's straight forward, there's no twist, and the ending makes no sense leaving you unsatisfied.

Edited November 24, 2017 by MMDE

[Dreakon13]

If the Journey thread was any indication, you seem to personally have a bit of a grudge with games that are shorter and perhaps overly simplistic in the gameplay department.  Which is a fair, but somewhat misguided criticism this day and age... given the direction the industry has been going through the 2010's towards emphasizing narrative and artistic direction over pure gameplay.

 

I enjoyed Virginia (can't comment on trophies).  It's far from being considered a 'great game' but the story was engaging enough to keep me curious to the end, and left enough open to interpretation to get me thinking for a bit afterwards.  That's all you can really ask for in something like this.

Edited November 22, 2017 by Dreakon13

[StrickenBiged]

I don't think you're the target audience for these kinds of things @MMDE.

 

I quite enjoyed Virginia, but I did buy it on a sale. I'd have said it was worth £5 or so for the quick plat and what there is to be got out of the game. 

 

While the story does become confusing towards the end, it is very good at evoking a feeling in the player. It's partly melancholy, partly uplifting, partly confusing. I don't really know. I just know that I felt I got my £7 worth. (IIRC that's what I spent. I recommend slightly lower as a "buy it" price because opinions differ.) 

 

I'd call it more of an "experimental interactive art piece" than a "game" in any conventional sense. 

 

It's also one of those games that you can stick into a non-gamer's hands, and get them to say things like "I didn't know games could be like this", in a good way, if you know what I mean. 

[Dreakon13]

4 minutes ago, StrickenBiged said:

I'd call it more of an "experimental interactive art piece" than a "game" in any conventional sense.

 

I think humoring the "it's not a real game" crowd like this does more harm than good, personally.  It's a game.

[Rafi_004]

Well... I hate that game ?

[DrBloodmoney]

If you are a fan of Twin Peaks, then yes.

 

If you arn’t a fan of Twin Peaks, avoid it.

 

[StrickenBiged]

33 minutes ago, Dreakon13 said:

I think humoring the "it's not a real game" crowd like this does more harm than good, personally.  It's a game.

 

Normally I would call it a "game" too, I was just trying to make it clear to people that it's one of those games, if you know what I mean.  

[MMDE]

4 hours ago, DrBloodmoney said:

If you are a fan of Twin Peaks, then yes.

 

If you arn’t a fan of Twin Peaks, avoid it.

 

 

I'm a fan of Twin Peaks, but I felt that series paid off more with it's interesting side-plots and character etc. This game tries, but it doesn't actually pay off at any point. You're just waiting for it to pay off.

 

5 hours ago, MMDE said:

Is the story worth playing the game for? Not really. It's not like it doesn't grab you at all, but some of the appeal of this is that you find some of the scenes interesting and you want to know what is actually happening, maybe get some plot twist or something. The story is what you guessed it was, it's straight forward, there's no twist, and the ending makes no sense leaving you unsatisfied.

 

And the controls were awful and why couldn't this just be a movie instead? There's no point interrupting the flow of the movie with small chores when it doesn't really add much to anything, but does make it more bothersome.

Edited November 22, 2017 by MMDE

[MMDE]

On 11/22/2017 at 4:07 PM, Dreakon13 said:

If the Journey thread was any indication, you seem to personally have a bit of a grudge with games that are shorter and perhaps overly simplistic in the gameplay department.  Which is a fair, but somewhat misguided criticism this day and age... given the direction the industry has been going through the 2010's towards emphasizing narrative and artistic direction over pure gameplay.

 

I enjoyed Virginia (can't comment on trophies).  It's far from being considered a 'great game' but the story was engaging enough to keep me curious to the end, and left enough open to interpretation to get me thinking for a bit afterwards.  That's all you can really ask for in something like this.

 

 

Do I have a grudge with short games? Nope. Have you actually taken a look at the games I've played? If you know what most of the games are about, you're one of very few I've ever talked to.  What I can assure you it's all kinds of games, and I have nothing against short games, nor simplistic games.

 

And you guys still seem to think I do this because I want to trash talk the games. Nope, I do these comments for most games I play. I say my honest opinion about the games, and will happily back it up.

 

What I'm not fan of is pompous games that try to be "artsy" at the expense of gameplay. Many of these developers don't seem to understand gameplay that well either, and certainly don't integrate it with everything else. Just reminds me of film making students who want to do art movies.

 

It's totally fair criticism if I want to enjoy the gameplay as well. I don't care that much about their artistic goal if what I get is something that feels like a chore and the gameplay is just an excuse for it to be a game.

 

And as I said, it did keep me curious to the end:

 

On 11/22/2017 at 3:44 PM, MMDE said:

Is the story worth playing the game for? Not really. It's not like it doesn't grab you at all, but some of the appeal of this is that you find some of the scenes interesting and you want to know what is actually happening, maybe get some plot twist or something. The story is what you guessed it was, it's straight forward, there's no twist, and the ending makes no sense leaving you unsatisfied.

 

So yeah, a total let down and not something I'd recommend anyone to get for the story or the gameplay. But it's a quick and easy game.

On 11/22/2017 at 4:24 PM, Dreakon13 said:

 

I think humoring the "it's not a real game" crowd like this does more harm than good, personally.  It's a game.

 

It has a tiny bit of gameplay, but I think it's closer to what one would call an interactive movie. In the case of Dear Esther, no, I don't call it a game. It's a walking simulator, where you get to walk around on an island listening to some complete nonsense (the game has no story either, and the name is just for the sake of it sounding nice, and a lot of their decisions are silly things blown out of proportions etc etc, don't get me start on that game). What harm does it do? It's pretty damn clear Virginia wants to be an interactive movie, not really a game.

 

 

On 11/22/2017 at 4:18 PM, StrickenBiged said:

I don't think you're the target audience for these kinds of things @MMDE.

 

I quite enjoyed Virginia, but I did buy it on a sale. I'd have said it was worth £5 or so for the quick plat and what there is to be got out of the game. 

 

While the story does become confusing towards the end, it is very good at evoking a feeling in the player. It's partly melancholy, partly uplifting, partly confusing. I don't really know. I just know that I felt I got my £7 worth. (IIRC that's what I spent. I recommend slightly lower as a "buy it" price because opinions differ.) 

 

I'd call it more of an "experimental interactive art piece" than a "game" in any conventional sense. 

 

It's also one of those games that you can stick into a non-gamer's hands, and get them to say things like "I didn't know games could be like this", in a good way, if you know what I mean. 

 

I'm probably not the target audience, doesn't stop me from having an opinion about the games. I'm not sure how I got Virginia. I hope I didn't pay for it, and if I did, I hope it was less than you said.  But for that it would have been a cheap, quick and easy platinum. 

 

Feeling? What I did detect from the game was some political opinions too. Honestly, not a fan of the political opinions I detected.

 

And I agree, interactive movie, and they do try to be artsy.

 

I doubt my wife would have said that. She'd be confused and bored. Wondered why should we need to press buttons all the time, and why we're jumping from scene to scene.

Edited November 24, 2017 by MMDE

[Dreakon13]

1 hour ago, MMDE said:

 

 

Do I have a grudge with short games? Nope. Have you actually taken a lot at the games I've played? If you know what most of the games are about, you're one of very few I've ever talked to.  What I can assure you it's all kinds of games, and I have nothing against short games, nor simplistic games.

 

And you guys still seem to think I do this because I want to trash talk the games. Nope, I do these comments for most games I play. I say my honest opinion about the games, and will happily back it up.

 

What I'm not fan of is pompous games that try to be "artsy" at the expense of gameplay. Many of these developers don't seem to understand gameplay that well either, and certainly don't integrate it with everything else. Just reminds me of film making students who want to do art movies.

 

It's totally fair criticism if I want to enjoy the gameplay as well. I don't care that much about their artistic goal if what I get is something that feels like a chore and the gameplay is just an excuse for it to be a game.

 

And as I said, it did keep me curious to the end:

 

 

So yeah, a total let down and not something I'd recommend anyone to get for the story or the gameplay. But it's a quick and easy game.

 

It has a tiny bit of gameplay, but I think it's closer to what one would call an interactive movie. In the case of Dear Esther, no, I don't call it a game. It's a walking simulator, where you get to walk around on an island listening to some complete nonsense (the game has no story either, and the name is just for the sake of it sounding nice, and a lot of their decisions are silly things blown out of proportions etc etc, don't get me start on that game). What harm does it do? It's pretty damn clear Virginia wants to be an interactive movie, not really a game.

 

This is unfortunately why the "user review" system fails.  There's very little objectivity in your analysis.  I don't think anyone is going to claim that Virginia is an amazing game... but the way you presume the developers are "pompous" for making something you don't agree with and emphasize your dislike of "artsy" games is a pretty strong indication that your mind was made up the second you realized what you were playing.  Kudos for starting and finishing it, but going through the motions isn't the same as really approaching games (especially less instantly gratifying ones) with an open mind.

 

Kinda like StrickenBiged said... maybe you aren't in the targeted demographic for these.  And that's perfectly okay... not everything is made for everyone.  For example, you don't like "artsy" games, I don't like open world games.  The second I see quest hubs and lists of chores to do and markers on a mini-map, I groan.  I sold my copy of The Evil Within 2 a day after it came out because of this (very disappointing after the great linear pacing of the first one).  It's part of the reason I can't stomach even a great game like The Witcher 3 nowadays.  As such, I'm probably not the right person to tell anyone if an open world game is actually good or not.

 

 

Games as a whole are interactive movies, that's kind of the point... moving pictures on a screen that you control.  It's just the degree, or style, of interaction that seems to get people's panties all bunched. 

Edited November 22, 2017 by Dreakon13

[MMDE]

On 11/22/2017 at 9:43 PM, Dreakon13 said:

 

This is unfortunately why the "user review" system fails.  There's very little objectivity in your analysis.  I don't think anyone is going to claim that Virginia is an amazing game... but the way you presume the developers are "pompous" for making something you don't agree with and emphasize your dislike of "artsy" games is a pretty strong indication that your mind was made up the second you realized what you were playing.  Kudos for starting and finishing it, but going through the motions isn't the same as really approaching games (especially less instantly gratifying ones) with an open mind.

 

Kinda like StrickenBiged said... maybe you aren't in the targeted demographic for these.  And that's perfectly okay... not everything is made for everyone.  For example, I don't like open world games.  The second I see quest hubs and lists of chores to do and markers on a mini-map, I groan.  I sold my copy of The Evil Within 2 a day after it came out because of this (very disappointing after the great linear pacing of the first one).  It's part of the reason I can't stomach even a great game like The Witcher 3 nowadays.  As such, I'm probably not the right person to tell anyone if an open world game is actually good or not.

 

 

Games as a whole are interactive movies, that's kind of the point... moving pictures on a screen that you control.  With the exception of games with nonsensical action and literally no story, and even those could be the gaming equivalent of a random hodge-podge of YouTube videos.  It's just the degree, or style, of interaction that seems to get people's panties all bunched. 

 

I don't see what the issue here is. I give my opinions on the game, and I give my reasons for it. Do you expect a review to "objective"?  If you have different opinions, feel free to utter them, but expect people to react to them as well. I don't really see the issue with any of this. I wish more people talked about the games they had played.

 

Does it matter if I'm the target audience?

 

No, games as a whole is not interactive movies.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game

 

And I know of feel you still think I'm just going after these games or something. I post about all the games I play. Sometimes I even make short or full guides of them as well. Sometimes I will praise the games and recommend them etc, other times I won't.

 

Journey I played because someone wanted help with it in chat, and Virginia I wanted as a 225th milestone, because it fits the theme I got going for my milestones.

 

It's not like I haven't seen artsy games done good, it's just that I don't think these were done well in terms of gameplay, and so they might as well have made it a movie or just a youtube video.

Edited November 24, 2017 by MMDE

[ragnarok2887]

I enjoyed Virginia for what it is.  I quite like games that try to do something a bit different and unique, so the fact that Virginia tells a half-decent story without any dialogue is, for me at least, commendable. 

[MMDE]

1 minute ago, ragnarok2887 said:

I enjoyed Virginia for what it is.  I quite like games that try to do something a bit different and unique, so the fact that Virginia tells a half-decent story without any dialogue is, for me at least, commendable. 

 

Half decent story? Which was? I mean, it could be summed up in some few lines of text and it wasn't good by any means and lead to nowhere but to confusion.

[ragnarok2887]

Just now, MMDE said:

 

Half decent story? Which was? I mean, it could be summed up in some few lines of text and it wasn't good by any means and lead to nowhere but to confusion.

Most stories can be summed up in a few lines of text.  If your objection to the game is that you didn't understand it, then that's on you.  Go play something else and be happy in doing that.

 

You asked if this game was any good and people have responded that they thought that it was, in different ways.  Who knew people had different opinions about things.

[Dreakon13]

EDIT: I'm bored of this, so I'll just get rid of my response and bid this topic adieu.

Edited November 22, 2017 by Dreakon13

[MMDE]

On 11/22/2017 at 10:19 PM, ragnarok2887 said:

Most stories can be summed up in a few lines of text.  If your objection to the game is that you didn't understand it, then that's on you.  Go play something else and be happy in doing that.

 

You asked if this game was any good and people have responded that they thought that it was, in different ways.  Who knew people had different opinions about things.

 

If I don't understand it? haha...

 

https://www.polygon.com/features/2016/10/11/13196236/what-s-going-on-at-the-end-of-virginia

 

Have fun, but maybe you're better at interpreting it and got it right?

 

And the alien stuff was hinted at from the beginning of the game, by the kid that was using the hideout and was missing or whatever.

 

My comment about the few lines of text wasn't a summary, it was pretty much the main story line.

 

The constant hard cuts, going back and forth in time and the dream sequences or whatever, it doesn't make for a better movie in any way. It's just confusing to the viewer, trying to add another layer to your story by simply making it harder to understand using such brute methods.

 

On 11/22/2017 at 11:32 PM, Dreakon13 said:

EDIT: I'm bored of this, so I'll just get rid of my response and bid this topic adieu.

 

Haha, it's you guys who feel the need to defend the games. Sometimes my posts are glowing recommendations, other times it's not. Simple as that. Be happy you haven't read what I think about Enslaved: A Journey, urgh I mean Odyssey to the West, the game that was supposed to be a movie, but they didn't get enough money for it so they made it a game instead...

Edited November 24, 2017 by MMDE

[Dreakon13]

11 hours ago, MMDE said:

Haha, it's you guys who feel the need to defend the games. Sometimes my posts are glowing recommendations, other times it's not. Simple as that. Be happy you haven't read what I think about Enslaved: A Journey, urgh I mean Odyssey to the West, the game that was supposed to be a movie, but they didn't get enough money for it so they made it a game instead...

 

I do have a tendency to be unfairly harsh on opinions I don't agree with, so I apologize if I did that.

 

I'm just the type to try and see both the good and bad in most things, including games.  I'm cognizant of the types of games I don't like, and try to avoid pushing my opinions on others with those because I'm not the right person to fairly judge them.  So when I see a review that seems to be "all bad", it just strikes me as ignorant, lazy... someone lacking in self-awareness or who simply didn't want to put enough effort into it.  Be it effort into writing a fair, unbiased review... or effort into playing the game and not letting bias cloud their judgement.  Or both.

 

It's very possible you simply saw no good in Virginia.  Considering no one held a gun to your head and forced you to post this review, my expectation is that you'd do a bang up job explaining why there's no good to be found in the game... and I can't say I'm leaving feeling very satisfied about that.  "I don't like artsy games", "the controls are clunky" (this I just don't think is true having played it), "the ending's confusing", "it wants to be a movie" (who cares), and "it's just my opinion man" are heinous reasons to post a review that reads like a 2 or 3/10.

Edited November 24, 2017 by Dreakon13

[MMDE]

4 hours ago, Dreakon13 said:

 

I do have a tendency to be unfairly harsh on opinions I don't agree with, so I apologize if I did that.

 

I'm just the type to try and see both the good and bad in most things, including games.  I'm cognizant of the types of games I don't like, and try to avoid pushing my opinions on others with those because I'm not the right person to fairly judge them.  So when I see a review that seems to be "all bad", it just strikes me as ignorant, lazy... someone lacking in self-awareness or who simply didn't want to put enough effort into it.  Be it effort into writing a fair, unbiased review... or effort into playing the game and not letting bias cloud their judgement.  Or both.

 

It's very possible you simply saw no good in Virginia.  Considering no one held a gun to your head and forced you to post this review, my expectation is that you'd do a bang up job explaining why there's no good to be found in the game... and I can't say I'm leaving feeling very satisfied about that.  "I don't like artsy games", "the controls are clunky" (this I just don't think is true having played it), "the ending's confusing", "it wants to be a movie" (who cares), and "it's just my opinion man" are heinous reasons to post a review that reads like a 2 or 3/10.

 

The clunky controls bothered me from start to end. What do I mean by clunky controls? Well, it would take almost a second to really move the way I wanted. This makes for horrible aiming resulting in always being frustrated it takes too long to look in another direction and often find yourself having to aim the other way again afterwards.

 

The artsy comment isn't exactly honest quoting, because this is what I've said:

 

On 11/22/2017 at 8:57 PM, MMDE said:

What I'm not fan of is pompous games that try to be "artsy" at the expense of gameplay. Many of these developers don't seem to understand gameplay that well either, and certainly don't integrate it with everything else. Just reminds me of film making students who want to do art movies.

 

On 11/22/2017 at 10:10 PM, MMDE said:

It's not like I haven't seen artsy games done good, it's just that I don't think these were done well in terms of gameplay, and so they might as well have made it a movie or just a youtube video.

 

So it's not that I don't like "artsy games", but rather that when their sole purpose is to be pretentious artsy games that barely give you any gameplay or just downright poor gameplay, I don't think the gameplay aspect of the games are any good. And if the artsy stuff is poor too, like in this case, I'll call it out on that as well.

 

Journey is definitely a much better game than this one. Virginia is actually a pretty bad game IMO, and so this thread is me telling that opinion to others.

[Dreakon13]

19 hours ago, MMDE said:

So it's not that I don't like "artsy games", but rather that when their sole purpose is to be pretentious artsy games that barely give you any gameplay or just downright poor gameplay, I don't think the gameplay aspect of the games are any good. And if the artsy stuff is poor too, like in this case, I'll call it out on that as well.

 

I think my problem is your assumption that it's "pretentious". What do you base that on? Were you in the room while it was being discussed/developed? Is it the fact it's artsy and you don't like it? Are all artsy games inherently pretentious, just more forgivable when you like other parts of the game? Is it the fact there isn't much gameplay? What is gameplay to you? Journey also wasn't enough for you... despite being considerably more gameplay oriented than Virginia. Where's your line, between good gameplay and bad/no gameplay? Where's the line between good artsy and poor artsy? Wherever those lines are for you... why should anyone else care? If you don't expect anyone to care... why did you post this?

 

Is it a bad game?  Or did it just go a bit too far out of your comfort zone? These are the questions I'd like to see people asking themselves before they post their little opinion pieces. Whether it's a glowing review or a scathing one. But that's just me.

Edited November 25, 2017 by Dreakon13

[Livingstone7728]

To be perfectly honest... I didn't get it... Once it started bouncing from scene to scene I couldn't really follow... Now to be fair I played after work (midnight or so) so maybe I was too tired to care... Not really my cup of tea and didn't keep me engaged whatsoever... But at 2.39$ I wasn't expecting a GOTY. My suggestion to anyone looking to buy... Wait for a sale.. That way you'll either hate it and not feel too bad about wasting your money... Or you'll love it and feel like a champ

[Killbomb]

On 12/17/2017 at 1:35 PM, Livingstone7728 said:

To be perfectly honest... I didn't get it... Once it started bouncing from scene to scene I couldn't really follow... Now to be fair I played after work (midnight or so) so maybe I was too tired to care... Not really my cup of tea and didn't keep me engaged whatsoever... But at 2.39$ I wasn't expecting a GOTY. My suggestion to anyone looking to buy... Wait for a sale.. That way you'll either hate it and not feel too bad about wasting your money... Or you'll love it and feel like a champ

 

Pretty much how I felt about it. I prefer the more conventional way of storytelling so the lack of dialogue was a major negative point to me.

[Ingberg]

I remember it was talked about on some podcasts so I bought it when it was on sale months ago and finally played it tonight. Maybe I wasn’t in the right mood but it definitely was not a “me” game. I’ll finish up the platinum run some time this week but I certainly will not be encouraging anyone to play it sadly.

 

I’m glad other people liked it but the story made no sense, the characters/environments were ugly, it controlled poorly and the pacing was off (sometimes it felt like it was dragging you through super quickly and other times walking down a hallway felt like forever). The music was good though and really matched with the tone of each scene so I did appreciate that. 

[PhantomFear94]

 

On 25/11/2017 at 1:40 PM, Dreakon13 said:

 

I think my problem is your assumption that it's "pretentious". What do you base that on? Were you in the room while it was being discussed/developed? Is it the fact it's artsy and you don't like it? Are all artsy games inherently pretentious, just more forgivable when you like other parts of the game? Is it the fact there isn't much gameplay? What is gameplay to you? Journey also wasn't enough for you... despite being considerably more gameplay oriented than Virginia. Where's your line, between good gameplay and bad/no gameplay? Where's the line between good artsy and poor artsy? Wherever those lines are for you... why should anyone else care? If you don't expect anyone to care... why did you post this?

 

Is it a bad game?  Or did it just go a bit too far out of your comfort zone? These are the questions I'd like to see people asking themselves before they post their little opinion pieces. Whether it's a glowing review or a scathing one. But that's just me.

 

This comment is everything.  Without being mean to anyone who has a respectable, contrary opinion, I feel a lot of people are dismissing this game because of ambiguity.  I personally found the story quite easy to follow, after 3 playthroughs I can more or less interpret 90% of it and im not clever. I won't go into depths here because of spoilers, but honestly, it's not too tough. 

 

For me, Virginia is the 2nd best indie game I have experienced this generation, just falling behind Inside.   It is not for everyone, but it is an experience like no other and I am platting it against after getting 1000 on Xbox over a year ago. 

 

The gameplay is super minimal. You go through a linear, surreal and slightly non-chronological story. It's very creative with cutscenes and scene changes making the game feel more like a film you are experiencing in pseudo-VR.    The way it builds on story the way it demands you play it again (why the 2 playthrough trophy isn't a hinderance) and demands you to interpret as much as understand is refreshing.  It doesn't feel lazy either, unlike other minimalist games it feels like they purposely left its gameplay minimal to enhance every other quality it has; its audio and visual cues, it's very strong imagery and music, etc.   Also strongly disagree with any feeling of "clunky-ness", I had no control issues in all my  time on Xbox and PlayStation..

 

The trophies are very creative and fun (at least for me).  They basically ask you to pick up certain things to play out scenarios later in the game, or at least for the most part. 

 

Please understand that the game isn't for everyone, you'll either love or hate it.   I think its at least worth experiencing.  

Edited February 2, 2018 by phantomfear9494

[MMDE]

26 minutes ago, phantomfear9494 said:

 

 

This comment is everything.  Without being mean to anyone who has a respectable, contrary opinion, I feel a lot of people are dismissing this game because of ambiguity.  I personally found the story quite easy to follow, after 3 playthroughs I can more or less interpret 90% of it and im not clever. I won't go into depths here because of spoilers, but honestly, it's not too tough. 

 

 

Don't overdo it too much, because as I said, the developer himself said the ending was just up to interpretation and didn't really have any clear meaning. If you're saying you "got it", that makes no sense to me, nor the maker of the game.

 

And yes, it's like a movie, but not one I'd watch. I doubt you'd sit down and watch this movie had it been a movie.

 

Judging by the comments you don't just either love or hate it. It seems most people either don't like it or find it pretty mediocre.

[Paleblood]

3 minutes ago, MMDE said:

Judging by the comments you don't just either love or hate it. It seems most people either don't like it or find it pretty mediocre.

I loved the hell out of it, so did my girlfriend.