|
God no.
I'd say the truth for most of us is probably something like: it's a game that's seen more work than many, but it's not made to our taste.
Granted, yes, it definitely draws a lot more criticism and scrutiny because of the license controversy, and the greater problem it's a symptom of, that being that Vryce is a jackass.
(I have no idea if it would be fair to say that now, but 10-15 years ago the guy made a lot of enemies in the community with his antics, and that kind of bad press has a kind of inertia and life all its own.)
Without the controversy, for most people in the community, I imagine it would be just another popular game that isn't to their taste and that they choose not to play.
It depends on the kind of game. Med is the kind of game where many players start one character and play just that character for as long as they play the game. For a lot of games, that isn't the case, and character variation/customization becomes a much bigger issue, since it's one way to offer players a very different experience with each successive character up to a point.
They're either not true, or they require a very contrived and biased set of metrics to be "true." For example, to compare Med with a game wherein there are thousands of customization options on a player character and even be in the running, you'd need to decide that each of that game's unique classes, races, specialization choices, skills, etc. is really not a feature. I assume most sane people not working for Med would consider them features.
|