Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

61 Excellent

About JackTV

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Nice to see a voice of reason. The crowd is tough to crack.
  2. If that’s the case, that’s a bad deal for them. According to Gun, they never anticipated the demand/success the game initially had. If you take everything the game put in place, they could turn everything they’ve done into their own property. I’m not a DBD fan, and I think Last Year looks corny. The only game I really think could outdo them is Hide or Die, and that game is still early. The core of the game was theirs at one point anyway. It’d be the same game, sans the license. But the loss of the license is also the loss of a lot of restrictions. If this is the way F13 has to go, let it go, and move forward with their own property in the future. The core of everything is theirs. Im still trying to figure out what all the hate is about. Is it about Uber Jason? That’s what I keep seeing. If that’s the case, people are crying over one model and one map. If it’s NOT the case, they’d be mad that Uber Jason/Grendel was the last content being made anyway, because they’d want more. At this point, I’d just move forward with their own stuff.
  3. Sean gave them the license for free. It wouldn’t make sense for him to put restrictions on it. But, stranger things have happened.
  4. “Not now or in the future” does mean never. That’s how I took it as soon as I read it. Honestly, this has been the case since all this went down. I’m not sure how people thought they’d come back to the game after they posted it in print that they were not. It’s the same as when they said they were not legally allowed to release new content, and people here were fighting them on it. They’re still fighting them now. If they were able to release it, they would’ve. They can’t, so they won’t. The debate ends there.
  5. If they don’t have time for say, another two years, will people still be playing? If they can’t guarantee some sort of revenue stream, they’d be working for free. That’s a risk that would almost certainly close their doors.
  6. This might be the end of F13, the license. But the game (the concept) doesn’t have to die. No one has rights to that. The more I think about it, the more excited I am at the possibilities. There are downsides to licenses. You’ve got to stick to the source material. But what if there was no license involved? Not every map has to be in the woods (but they shouldn’t just be squares with a bunch of stacks in the middle like DBD either) Killers could be different, not just a different version of the same killer (but they shouldn’t look goofy as hell like the killers in Last Year either). Theres a lot that can be said for creating your own IP, while keeping the core gameplay you created under a license. And, with an original IP, no one can take that away.
  7. They could always create their own IP. The licenses boost sales, but that’s only initially. We obviously love the game beyond the license. There’s a lot that can be taken from this experience that can be applied in an all-new property. I’d play it. They were doing that before the license came along anyway.
  8. If I’m correct, there needs to be revenue coming in to continue working on something. Why would a developer create content they cannot release? Food needs to be put on the table. Families need to be taken care of.
  9. Not a good business decision to weasel out on anything. Every project you work on has your name on it. Maybe I’m just being naive, but if I were a game maker — developement or publishing side — I wouldn’t intentionally burn bridges by weaseling out. I don’t know... blaming the people who brought you the game — who have nothing to do with the legal stuff to begin with it — sounds counter-intuitive.
  10. I covered this on my own channel, and it’s something I think a few folks missed the first time. People made their arguments — over and over again — but couldn’t accept the facts. From their website: “We’ve now been forced to accept that the lawsuit makes future content for the game, including alternate play modes, new playable Jasons and Counselors, and new maps, unfeasible now or in the future.” Most notably, the “unfeasible now or in the future” part. From the moment this statement was posted (actually before this), there was never going to be anything added to the game, even if the dispute got a ruling. So although I’m as bummed as everyone else, I can’t understand why some members continue to fight them on this. It sucks, but I think they’ve been very clear.
  11. Are players with short attention spans cut out for this game regardless then? Serious question. I don’t know what it’s like to have a short attention span; I’ve always been a patient person. Short attention spans are a sign of the times, sure. It’s the “get-in, get-out” mentality of games like Fortnite that are taking over Youtube, because sitting still is overrated. So when speaking of F13 — a game where you die and must wait until the end of the round to play again — is it a game that can hold their attention? Because it sounds to me like, if it’s all about keeping your attention, you’ll abandon the game when the DLC stops anyway. And regardless of the current situation, the DLC was always going to stop. There were never plans to keep releasing DLC. There’s only so much that can be released to begin with and, support for games cease when the game stops bringing in revenue and/or the developer has moved on to their next project.
  12. We just agree to disagree. There’s more content currently in this game than there is in the casual homogenized $60 releases. I think about the online shooters like COD and BF, for example, and the content for those games are made up primarily of paid map packs. Take away what you’re told to pay for, and those games are pretty bare- bones. Same with the single-player games. Detroit just recently released, and a player might get ten hours out of it. But, you also have the option to buy the, “Super Exciting Special Edition”, where you pay $20 for an extra hour of gameplay. Probably more important than the quantity of content, is looking at the player base that continues to play it, including those still active here on the forums. It’s all in the eye of the beholder. If I paid a premium price for this game, I’d feel ripped off. But I can’t really complain about a lack of content now, considering what’s released since launch has been free, and how many hours I put into it. But, I’m also more satisfied now because I was there when the game had only three maps, so there’s that.
  13. At this point, to me, the game is now worth a price point much closer to what the asking price was ($40). When the game launched, it was most certainly a demo. Three maps and no offline play. The content released since really helped to round out the total package. And of course, thinking about the size of the team trying to add content while simultaneously fixing things plays a role. As much as I wanted new content however, not every F13 movie has to be represented in-game in order to make it complete. There’s nothing wrong with subjective opinion, but it’s not the objective reality.
  14. Yeah, I waited... again, the zombie apocalypse thing was tired even when that game first came out. And I generally stay away from AAA games to begin with, at least in terms of horror. But that’s just me; playing through it now, I don’t see it as horror. But indeed, shame on me for waiting so long, and for not seeing through the premise. While I don’t think it’s scary, I’m now seeing many of its amazing qualities, even this early in the game.
  15. I bought the remastered version and it came with everything. I’m digging it. Not a fan of the friggin’ clickers though...