Goriginal Content

Hyrule Warriors RV

GN Instagram best-of

Xeodrifter diary #7

GN Podcast #474

Cubemen 2 review

EoD - Smash streams!
 

ZombiU - video review


Also check out:
Discussion Preview
17 total comments (View all)
User avatar
19 Nov 2012 17:46

Damnit. It's Red Steel all over again.

I'm looking forward to the incredible sequel in a few years that nobody will buy :(
No Avatar
19 Nov 2012 18:02

Turner4590 wrote:Damnit. It's Red Steel all over again.

I'm looking forward to the incredible sequel in a few years that nobody will buy :(

dude, U have to look around, this isnt a red steel situation at all, there were 2 or 3 "bad" reviews, everybody else likes this game, and u should check out impressions on sites, seriously. theres more than 1 or 2 reviews out there
User avatar
19 Nov 2012 18:03

That's a review I can believe. It's a shame, Red Steel again...... wow
User avatar
19 Nov 2012 18:09

The game still looks great to me. This is pure survival horror, not action horror!
No Avatar
19 Nov 2012 18:11

Tons of people are loving this game. I'd check out Penny Arcade for some good opinions of it.
User avatar
19 Nov 2012 18:14

Too bad the multiplayer is only local
No Avatar
Anonymous
19 Nov 2012 18:21

The consensus from people actually playing the game is that it's great, and reviews attacking it are baffling. There's definitely a disconnect between the experience of most gamers posting about the game and what the low score reviews are saying. The review scores themselves have been all over the place.
User avatar
19 Nov 2012 19:01

DragonGirl wrote:The consensus from people actually playing the game is that it's great, and reviews attacking it are baffling. There's definitely a disconnect between the experience of most gamers posting about the game and what the low score reviews are saying. The review scores themselves have been all over the place.

I'd imagine that people who spent an upwards of $300 to play this are going to be a little more inclined to find some good in it than reviewers who get the console and the game for free
No Avatar
19 Nov 2012 19:12

DragonGirl wrote:The consensus from people actually playing the game is that it's great, and reviews attacking it are baffling. There's definitely a disconnect between the experience of most gamers posting about the game and what the low score reviews are saying. The review scores themselves have been all over the place.


Watch the vid. It shows major problems. People who buy games aren't critics and so they are less discerning about a games' problems.
User avatar
19 Nov 2012 19:14

Seems like a good review. He backs everything he states with evidence and doesn't randomly bash the game.
User avatar
19 Nov 2012 19:21

There is a major disconnect with the reviewers, and what I have experienced while playing the game.

The only complaint I have, 4 hours into the game, is that it is too dark (as in it needs better lighting)
User avatar
19 Nov 2012 19:55

Well, if you carefully pick every single point he makes in the video, you will find out that only some very few are indeed true bad things and the rest of them are either nit-picking or glitches that were taken care of with the day1 update of the game...So, I guess 8.5/10?
No Avatar
19 Nov 2012 21:23

cbbomb wrote:
DragonGirl wrote:The consensus from people actually playing the game is that it's great, and reviews attacking it are baffling. There's definitely a disconnect between the experience of most gamers posting about the game and what the low score reviews are saying. The review scores themselves have been all over the place.


Watch the vid. It shows major problems. People who buy games aren't critics and so they are less discerning about a games' problems.


Yeah, and so far the critics have been pretty revealing.
Gamespot 4.5 (Terrible site/known for shovel reviews)
IGN 6.5 ('im and Gamespot are like bros)
Game Informer 60/100 (Oddity, but seeing how it's Gamestop's only line in reviews is pretty telling. GI is only good for exclusives and interviews)
Gametrailers 6.5 (The only outlier, as I don't tend to have much of a problem with them)

Were the ones giving shovel reviews.
Now let's look at some of the positive reviews:
Eurogamer 9/10 (For the most part I tend to agree with them. They also don't have too much in the ways of controversy and bribed reviews like I can find for the likes of Gamespot/IGN)
Joystiq 9/10 (Don't think much of them)
Destructoid 8/10 (Better, but dunno 'bout that Sterling fellow)
Edge 7/10 (From what I've found, Edge is pretty rough, and doesn't adhere to the "8-10" ratio that a lot of review sites have. Plus they were pretty positive from the looks of it)

Any review site that was able to put time and effort into the game got a lot out of it. And the sites who are known to have terrible critique and shove 9.5-10s across the board for any publisher whose got $$$ have been giving the shovel reviews.
Now, I am not one to usually say this, but the so-called "repetitive combat" and "bad controls" are what make this game. Seriously. I know, weird. But think back. Did Resident Evil have clunky controls/piss-poor combat and shovel AI? Yes. Did Silent Hill have the same? Yes. The most relished and remembered Survival horror games tended to be the ones with imperfect designs, because they complemented the fear and hopelessness of the struggle. That's WHY these games works. And THAT'S why "real" survival horror fans are jumping to this game, cause that well has been dried up for so long! And THAT's especially why reviewers *coughgamespotcough* are giving it shovel scores, because they don't know how to digest this content. And historically, survival horror games tend to get mixed to negative scores, barring some exceptions. (Resident Evil)

And even beyond that- One thing I've been hearing is that the scores have been "all over the place". That's not even true. We have 4 bad scores. And ten scores that say it's a really great game with some minor but not broken flaws. That's not "all over the place". Not even close.
http://www.metacritic.com/game/wii-u/zombiu

Saying that the people who are playing it don't know how to discern whither or not it's a bad game is just asinine. Are you are saying they should be sheep and only listen to IGN telling them that killstreaks are a thing and that every game should have them?
User avatar
19 Nov 2012 21:35

This game is anything but Red Steel. I haven't come across a single glitch yet (though maybe I've just been lucky), and it accomplishes everything the dev team promised it would. That alone makes the game, in my opinion, a success. It's just a matter or whether you like survival horror or not. And I mean REAL survival horror, not an action game with a horror skin.
User avatar
20 Nov 2012 05:23

@jameshop92

Jim Sterling is a good reviewer...I also find myself agreeing with him in almost everything he says...

And he gave Mario Kart 7 a 5/10! He is a HERO!
User avatar
20 Nov 2012 08:28

Darth Vader wrote:
DragonGirl wrote:The consensus from people actually playing the game is that it's great, and reviews attacking it are baffling. There's definitely a disconnect between the experience of most gamers posting about the game and what the low score reviews are saying. The review scores themselves have been all over the place.

I'd imagine that people who spent an upwards of $300 to play this are going to be a little more inclined to find some good in it than reviewers who get the console and the game for free

Pardon me while I believe people who actually play games to have fun over journalists. Plus this isn't the only launch title I got, so I'm less inclined to be biased towards hating it.
User avatar
21 Nov 2012 02:05

Triforce of the Gods wrote:
Darth Vader wrote:
DragonGirl wrote:The consensus from people actually playing the game is that it's great, and reviews attacking it are baffling. There's definitely a disconnect between the experience of most gamers posting about the game and what the low score reviews are saying. The review scores themselves have been all over the place.

I'd imagine that people who spent an upwards of $300 to play this are going to be a little more inclined to find some good in it than reviewers who get the console and the game for free

Pardon me while I believe people who actually play games to have fun over journalists. Plus this isn't the only launch title I got, so I'm less inclined to be biased towards hating it.

It's not like I'm disagreeing with you. I'm just pointing out something I've noticed myself. It's like in the past when I've pirated games - I never beat 'em or even fully enjoy them because I didn't pay for them, I'm less able to see the value in them

View the full discussion!

Quickie Search

"Advanced" Search

Anti-social Tendencies

Advertisements

RSS feed trough

News Feed
Top Stories
Console News
Portables News
Podcast Feed
GoNintendo Radio Feed
Twitter Feed

Affiliates + Friends

Destructoid
Gamersyde
Modojo
TheBitBlock
Anime Your Way