Opinions on how TCR & FG are dealing with AAMFP criticism

[Quizerno]

you'd prefer a PR bullshit over an honest opinion?
when there are stupid hateful negative comments by the thousands by people who think that because they're desappointed by a game and they spent 20 of their precious dollars they have to be gianormous assholes about it, even if you probably try not to think about it, you have to be a buddhist monk not to have a bit of an epidermic reaction.

False dichotomy, I'd prefer them to be professional and honest without doing PR bullshit.

Yes, there are assholes. Assholes do not invalidate sensible criticism.

I obvisouly won't speak for them, but their jobs is to make games, not sit quietly and take loads of craps from strangers for free. The smart move would possibly not to react at all, even on this forum that is overall a little less crual.

It's not entitlement to complain when you did not like the product. If you're a development studio, it makes sense to listen to those complaints.

Ok so they may have overhyped the fear elements, and it was really more an advertising thing than "intellectual honesty", and maybe not such a good idea (also a bit funny and ironic I think after reading it).

Yes, false advertising is not a good idea. Just as lying is not a good idea.
I agree that customers should do research before buying a product, but first someone eventually HAS to buy the product in order to see what the results are.

I missed all of this as "fear" and "horror" alone is not what dragged me to the FG series.

But you even can't really say they failed at it, "fear" is a subjective feeling, it's doesn't go on a scale or meter (not more than sanity...), there are very different kind of fear.

Horror is subjective yes. But they failed at making a "game" they succeeded in making a walking simulator.

I also think that there a few flaws in the game, but from what I've red from the Chinese Room people, from frictional games approach, and from playing the game, I feel they completely succeeded at what they set out to do in the first place, and for every little thing people don't like they have an honest justification that fits their artistic vision, and they wouldn't had it any other way. For me this shows intellectual honesty, and intergrity, something that's a bit underrated in the whole "video game industry".

I think they succeeded very well in creating the game they wanted, and I enjoyed the game they created, and I thought it was scary, though in a less suspenseful manner than TDD.

Artistic vision is a bad excuse. They did Dear Esther, they did Korsakovia, they did Conscientious Objector. They've done their artistic vision, they've had plenty of time to do it on their own.

They were making a successor to Amnesia. If their vision was quite different from the original game they could have emphasized such. Before release, we got interviews and snippits of them comparing it to the original. After the release we're getting quotes of them saying "they didn't want the game to be scary" and flat out admitting that the game isn't like the original.

Ninja Theory, under Capcom, did their artistic vision of the Devil May Cry series, DMC. People didn't want their vision, they didn't want a reboot. The game suffered as a result on release. Same thing happened to the new Syndicate and The Bureau.

Psyonix, under Square-Enix, will be doing their artistic vision of the Legacy of Kain series, Nosgoth. A multiplayer F2P MOBA based on the singleplayer series. They've already received tons of criticism for it and their changes to the lore.

If you want to do your own artistic vision, make your own IP.

If you use an existing IP, don't be surprised when people complain.