that's disappointing. i haven't bought it, but it definitely looks like a solid game.

Well, it's no problem for them, they'll just churn another Gears of War with some slight variations, CliffyB will say some stupid things to promote it, and it will sell some more millions in the consoles.

--- Replying to paketep -----
nothing wrong with that...

I did not like this game at all. The idea sounded cool, but it just didn't grab me once I started playing it. The lackluster sales are surprising because the 360 version even had the Gears 3 early beta access. They dropped the price on this game pretty quickly so I'm sure that didn't help on the profit end of things.

If they just bring a Gears clone to PS3 and 360, then they will definitely make a lot of money.

it felt like a filler inbetween Gears games (although I stopped playing the gears game after #1). Sort of like a filler song on one of your favorite band CDs.

I went into the game expecting it to flop, but found myself enjoying it immensely. As I said before, it hooked me with "Waggleton P. Tallylicker!"

Also, I'd like to point out that on story and content level, it delivered on better booze jokes, plot, and crude humor than the new Duke Nukem. There's a lot going for Bulletstorm - including a good co-op mode that works good even when playing by yourself - a good boost for replay value.

I can only see the marketing as its flaw. "Buy the game and get Gears 3 Beta access = This game sucks so bad, we have to attach Gears 3 beta to it to generate sales." At least, that's the general perception. Then, once the Gears 3 pre-orders started, suddenly there was no need to get Bulletstorm anymore - the Gears 3 pre-orders shot it down. Even the marketing stopped.

It's sad - it's a great game put out to pasture before it could complete a normal sales cycle.

EA did the same thing:

"Buy this crappy COD clone called Medal of Honor and gain access to the Battlefield 3 beta!"

I like Bulletstorm. Only thing is they could've easily put co-op into the campaign. This is the problem with making something different in the game industry. A dev takes some fun ideas, put the game out, it doesn't sell millions as expected, then they go back to making clones of other games.

It's no secret that I really enjoyed the game. For me, it had that fun factor many games fail to capture. I completed it on each difficulty and maxed out my character in the cooperative Anarchy Mode. It wasn't a very deep co-op experience, but again, it was fun.

It may have helped that I had more than a few good co-op partners. I'm sure a co-op campaign would have helped sales, but it seems to me that what drives sales for the big boys is a robust multiplayer VS mode with deep character/class progression. How many people are still playing through Reach or Black Ops campaigns right now?

Bulletstorm had no versus mode, and a rather limited (aesthetic changes only) progression system. Having a fun campaign will only get a rental from folks in this economy. It's a shame. I would have enjoyed a sequel.

This game only needs LAN and Campaign Co-op to be excellent, imho

Actually, what it needs is a Co-optimus co-op Thursday revival. Too bad my schedule sucks for the next 2 weeks.

I tried the demo, and hated it.

Then I got lent the game, and actually really enjoyed it. It was more story driven than I expected, and the levels were absolutely stunning in places.

I also found the skill-shot system to be a secondary focus in the game, which is different to how it was sold to me. Trying to get some of the moer difficult skill shots was rather fun.

I have to say that I didn't particularly like the profanity in the game - it was quite childish, and just made me feel uncomfortable. I think they marketed the game wrong, as I would not have played it had the game not been lent to me.