It was the other way around. Australia refused to let the Syndicate be released in Australia.

I hate EA, but I commend them for not censoring the game to fit some backwards standards.

That article makes it sound like he is blaming other for it's success rather then the flaws of the game. It makes them look rather immature.

This. The game has seen less marketing than indies like Bastion. Boy, how slow are you? I knew it was out since a week ago ;-P- He was right.

Do you remember the biggest criticism of Sydicate Wars? "It wasn't innovative enough".

I haven't played the game yet, so I can't say anything about it. But the reaction of some people here is exactly why I can't take PC gamers seriously any more. And the big studios probably think the same.

The main issue was that it was a generic, forgettable shooter in a market already saturated with generic, forgettable shooters. EA hoped that slapping the Syndicate name on it would drive sales (in lieu of an expensive marketing campaign), and it looks like that tactic failed utterly (as everyone should have expected).

its a miracle the stupid game sold at all, the bloom effect made our sun during afternoon at its prime look like dim light., i even wore sunglass and still wasnt enough and the extremely repeating boss battle the little chicken wont die and just kept on coming.

Ok, so now taking a 10+ years franchise and transforming it into an average generic shooter takes "courage... interesting.


The real courage would have been to make a real sequel to the game, not makes a bland fps like everybody else and their dog and slap on it the name of a beloved franchise and hoped it would sale more.

Honestly I have to say that I am kind of happy that, for once, such a lowly marketing scheme didn't work as well as they hopped it would.
Exactly, based on reviews and comments of peoples who actually played it, the biggest flaw of the game was not even that it had nothing to do with the originals, but more that, even on it's own right, it was nothing more than a bland and easily forgotten shooter.

That's the thing - it wasn't generic. It was overly short, perhaps somewhat too scripted, but Starbreeze brought a few interesting things to the table, not least the breach system. Co-op was good fun.

All the hating comes from the fact that it's EA and that it's not an RTS. The fact that EA are cunts has nothing to do with the fact that Starbreeze did come up with a surprisingly good game. Nothing I'd have paid €60 for - I got it for €20 - but certainly worth it as a budget title.

The whole affair stinks of bandwagoning and fanboyism.

It is a shame, more people should try it, at least before they bash it. Starbreeze made solid shooter with some innovative ideas, the game is a bit on the short side and a bit generic (especially the story...), but it is not bad at all - it should have had a wider audience.

I blame marketing also, I only knew it was out because of reviews in magazines, which do tend to be a couple of weeks after a game is released.

Am I the only one who is getting a huge desire to play the game?

Has it ever been featured in a sale?

Edit: 17€ on play.com

http://www.play.com/Games/PC/4-/26495924/Syndicate/Product.html?searchstring=syndicate&searchsource=0&searchtype=gameall&urlrefer=search&strefer=gameall&searchfilters=s{syndicate}+c{362}+&cpage=1&cur=258

If it wouldn't take a freaking week to get here.

It hasn't been indexed yet, and for reasons unknown, Gamestop here in Germany are openly selling the PEGI version. That's where I got mine.

Yes, a few times actually. Last I remember was around 18USD on Amazon during the MAYHEM sale, IIRC.

Unless it's one of those itches you have to scratch NAO! then I suggest waiting, I expect it to go on sale for maybe even lower during the summer.

But I've been wrong before, so ... ;)

Talking about failed marketing ;-)

Hey - I would have liked to see someone try this. I imagine stages as going from stone age to the future, with the character changing as he goes along. There could be upgrades based on the tech threes, bosses could be other civilization rulers, there could even be some sort of strategic elements of capturing cities for upgrade points. Something along this lines.

Actually, could there not be a lot more innovation in gaming if just the gamemakers sat down more and thought "What if?"

I thought Civ 5 was an excellent mystery puzzle game on the DS.

I always smile at the black or white logical fallacy of 'false dilemma'.