View Single Comment
There are a lot of games that have long learning curves that are well-recieved, but almost all of them are games that are meant to be played for many (often hundreds of) hours. The idea is that you are rewarded for your time-investment. They include many online multi-player games, turn-based strategies (like Civilization), certain rogue-lites, grand strategies...
Even many 80-hour RPGs get panned for having unintuitive controls that take too long to master, and rightfully so.It's not legit to simply declare:
For those that pan the controls as broken or non-functional, I am telling you those people are giving you an unfair reaction
If someone took the time to play through the tutorial and every single level once with an open mind, that is plenty enough effort to give a "fair" opinion. What if the controls took about 30% longer to master and the game was, say 30% shorter? Then would the criticisms be fair? What if the controls took 300% longer to learn and the game only had 1/5th the game time? Is criticizing a game for the investment it asks of it's audience never fair?