Do you see Hype for a game to be Beneficial, Negative or a bit of both?

[Nick]

It's pretty simple. Does too much hype ruin something? Does it elevate it to awesomeness? Anybodies guess... I guess.

[Cookie Monster]

The hype around a game doesn't really change what I think about it, whether I like it or not.

[Raype]

Completely negative. Hype doesn't make the resulting game any better. What it does do, however, is drag in a bunch of people who normally wouldn't like the game in the first place. While this can be a good thing, the problem is that once they end up with the actual game itself they can be far too overcritical. Which leads to a massive hate backlash when the game "fails to live up to the hype". For example, too many people that play a certain game/series and suddenly whine because of mechanics that are a core part of whatever makes that game/series what it is and wish it was more like a competitor. The people who knew what to expect likely wouldn't heap hate upon a game for being exactly what was expected. You see this a lot when a game is hyped as a *whatever* killer. In other cases, hype is just used to oversell a game. If the hype happens to be something the game can't live up to, then there's bound to be problems even if the game itself happens to be quite good.

[JKDarkside]

Negative by far.

Usually.

If it's just one source hyping something, I get interested. It's how I got into Persona and Odin Sphere, because PLAY magazine kept giving them glowing reviews.

[Slacker Magician]

The hype around a game doesn't really change what I think about it, whether I like it or not.

I'm the same.

[Gypsy]

If it's just one source hyping something, I get interested. It's how I got into Persona and Odin Sphere, because PLAY magazine kept giving them glowing reviews.

I try to research games myself (look at JP game footage etc...) and then just go for what I like.

That being said, overall hype is positive and negative for any type of media. If something is receiving awesome ratings before it comes out and such there will be increased initial sales. It's also negative because well...this

Which leads to a massive hate backlash when the game "fails to live up to the hype".

[LeftyGuitar]

I see it as mostly negative. Look at GTA IV.

[Adramelech52]

I think it's negative.
1.Sometimes for me the "hype" seems to be only artificially produced
2.Other good (or even better) games get smaller chances to be noticed.

[Tsukasa]

The hype around a game doesn't really change what I think about it, whether I like it or not.

Same here too.

[Knightshade]

I see at as mostly negative to much hype and the game not living up to it etc. but on the flip side as an rpg player since the days of the first dragon warrior I saw the positive about the hype around final fantasy 7 in the fact that it introduced a whole new generation to rpg's.

[Alan Heer]

Hype is negative. The flaw is that devs and publishers see a game as a success when it sells big. To make it see big they try to convince critics that their game is awesome. Sometimes even, the hype is bought and when that happens the critic isn't honest, but corrupt. Instead of a game's success being based on it's ups and downs, it is based on corrupt critics. Fanboys become brainwashed either by the corrupt critics or the hype in general into thinking that the game is better than it really is. They then spread more hype and flame anyone who thinks differently. This tends to curse middle tier games more than lower tier strangely. Final fantasy 13 is one such game. It's a decent game, but hype was put out from the beginning making it the definitive final fantasy game. Famitsu gave the game an almost perfect score with 39 out of 40. Fanboys everywhere were orgasmic over screenshots in magazines. But screenshots don't tell the whole story. The game does have incredible graphics, but it has many flaws. For me, gameplay and story beat graphics. Another is Call of duty and Halo. For the call of duty title I 'm talking about the modern warfare series. Modern warfare was decent and it quit the trend of making every war game about WWII. But Modern warfare 2 was basically a carbon copy of mw and black ops is the same as mw2 that makes them almost the exact same game. Halo 1 was a decent game as well, but Metroid prime was better. Halo really got kind of repetitive, but it was still decent nonetheless. Halo 2 was riding on halo 1's curtails and halo 3 was riding on halo 2's curtails. Neither was a big improvement on the previous title and in some places became even more tedious. Both series are pretty much the same thing over and over yet rabid fanboys still flock to them as if they are gods of the games. The same is happening to Gears of war now and fps games in general all seem to copy either the modern warfare type or the space marine just as fps games flocked to be ww2 games.

[Nick]

The way I work with my games is the same as with Music and movies. I'll read a review every now and then. But I wont let it cloud my judgement. Its my taste. I'll check out the demo. Then probably get it if it's nice. But the way I see it Hype works both ways. It's important to have Hype for games although sometimes it pisses people off. Just imagine how dull the market would be without a lot of Hyping. People want something to look forward too. I for one, couldn't care less about whether a game is overhyped and whatnot just as others have said before me. And then there is this.

For me, gameplay and story beat graphics. Another is Call of duty and Halo. For the call of duty title I 'm talking about the modern warfare series. Modern warfare was decent and it quit the trend of making every war game about WWII. But Modern warfare 2 was basically a carbon copy of mw and black ops is the same as mw2 that makes them almost the exact same game. Halo 1 was a decent game as well, but Metroid prime was better. Halo really got kind of repetitive, but it was still decent nonetheless. Halo 2 was riding on halo 1's curtails and halo 3 was riding on halo 2's curtails. Neither was a big improvement on the previous title and in some places became even more tedious. Both series are pretty much the same thing over and over yet rabid fanboys still flock to them as if they are gods of the games. The same is happening to Gears of war now and fps games in general all seem to copy either the modern warfare type or the space marine just as fps games flocked to be ww2 games.

I guess its because they make money. . While I mostly agree on what is said there. Like with Call of duty some games feel more like a yearly expansion pack than a new game. As you said, gameplay and story matter more. In gameplay terms you've got to admit Call of Duty is up there with the best of them with Multiplayer and I guess Singleplayer also. It's just real fun. People like fun . Same with Gears of War. I'm just not that sure about Halo. Lets be honest it got much more acclaim than it deserved. But I think it hard to improve in that area(Talking about Cod and Gow of course)(Oh look another thought bubble! But I guess Cod should start with the stopping because the titles are getting too many, too fast. Activision has a Habit of milking there pour franchises to death). Sometimes the reason the developers stick with the same core mechanics and don't give many improvements(The way some see it) to the sequels. Is probably because it wants to stay true to the Franchise formula by refining the gameplay and not alienating the people who bought them in the first place. Just Take Command and conquer 4 for instance. It tried to break the formula and try something innovative. And well it doesn't hold a candle compared to the previous games.

What makes me sad these days is the fact that everybody is so quick to label things as "clones". Especially hardcore fanboys... You know... The type that go on about the Console War as though it's interesting and everything. Just because they picked one console and got stuck with it. Then just when something rivals their exclusive title they cry clone for some reason. Another thing is when people buy a FPS and then just magicly assumes its gonna be innovative. Come on people... its an FPS. You go in. Shoot. Shoot a bit more. Own everybody. Game Over... There's rarely a hint of creativity. Remember I said rarely and not never. If people really wanna see innovation. They should play Indie Games. Their cheap and a lot of them are fun. That's where the real new Innovative Ideas are born.

I guess what Ive been trying to say with this excruciatingly long post is... Its not polite to Fart in public.

[Nemkoon]

Overhype is negative, its just people trying to get you to collapse under peer pressure.

[Inferno.]

I don't let myself get hyped for games anymore. I don't watch previews, look at articles revolving around a new game that's coming out or anything like that anymore.

The only game I've hyped myself for this year is Dirt 3. But only because I know it's going to be fucking awesome.

I tried to stop myself getting dragged into the LA Noire hype, so hopefully I can hold off buying it until it's dropped to around £20 used.

[Frog Knight]

Hype is negative, it makes me spend more money on a game than it is worth