Ya know, I don't believe in arguing with people who say they didn't like something I did.
The way I feel about it is - I had my say. I made it, or I helped make it. Now the audience gets to have their say. They can say they liked it or they can critique it. It's all part of the job. I'm not the kinda guy who thinks I should go on Twitter to argue with someone's reaction.
Having said that, you're asking me about the review world. That's not quiiiite the audience.
You've asked me what i think.
Well, I read a review today from a website/publication that will remain nameless. In it, the horde mechanic, the show-stopping center piece of the game, it wasn't mentioned once. Not ONCE. There were other tells, but it was pretty clear that this reviewer played the game for several hours and then wrote his review. He did not complete it.
Days Gone was always meant to be a slow burn game and story. For better or for worse, it was designed for you to take your time. The best story beats and the best game play happen much later in the game, and it's clear that the nature of game reviews and this slow-burn philosophy of game development are not compatible.
These journalists, the ones that rush in, they do NOT take their time, they do NOT play the game on the terms the game presents, because it is their job to put out an article on a deadline.
I think that's not only too bad, but misleading to actual audience members who would like to read an actual review of what we actually did.
In any case, when I make something, I make something that hopefully is somewhat unique. Something I like. My record Revenge of the Crashtones -- I don't think it's for everyone. But if it hits with you, it may, in fact, hit you hard because I'm trying to speak through it with an honest, hopefully unique voice.
So that's all to say -
People that liked Days Gone seem to have LOVED Days Gone. That's what we set out to do, and that's gonna have to be good enough for me.