-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
ZombiU (WiiU) Review Thread [Embargo up, reviews ahoy, OP Updated]
- Thread starter EatChildren
- Start date
My eyes cannot roll any further to the back of my head.
ShockingAlberto
Member
Not my reasoning, I haven't played the game, but Klepek said something along those lines yesterday.
He is reviewing the game though, so if your review or experience with the game disagrees with his assessment, I am sure many would find it enlightening.
The Mana Legend
Banned
I don't mind the cricket bat thing. I absolutely loathe melee weapons breaking after a few uses and you having to find some other weapon somewhere. Even in survival horror where this makes sense it still bothers me.
So having one continuous bat that doesn't break is much better for me than grabbing stupid shit that breaks and just annoys me.
So having one continuous bat that doesn't break is much better for me than grabbing stupid shit that breaks and just annoys me.
snowdog1971
Banned
Who the buggering flip are The Globe And Mail (Toronto) and why are Metacritic allowing them to contribute to a game's Metascore..? They've given the game a 5/10 and brought the game's Metascore from 71 to 69. If I'd have worked on this I'd be fuming on the damage that the Globe And Mail, Gamespot and Game Informer reviews have done. :Oo
Only 11 review scores included on Metacritic so far so hopefully the score will go up once they add in some of those 8s.
Only 11 review scores included on Metacritic so far so hopefully the score will go up once they add in some of those 8s.
ScreenSplitter
Member
Realistically I'd only ever use the cricket bat anyway, for exactly the reason you think. Also, it's a British game innit, deal with it geez.
Well, it didn't stop Dead Island (the devs previous game) from having an array of melee weapons, and for the most part this game isn't a whole lot different when it comes to combat.
I didn't care for DI so I'm more interested in the divisive reviews than anything else.
Christberg
Member
For a game like this, they'd wind up (more or less) all being functionally the same. You could MAYBE implement a hunting knife that'd be a one hit kill weapon but with a higher risk factor since you have to get closer. Anything beyond that (IMO) would be a detriment. Baseball bats and crowbars would be roughly functionally identical and realistically unless you're a fencing expert a sword would be useless.
The only thing this game has in common with Dead Island is the first person perspective and zombies. Beyond the coat of paint they're totally different.
Pcgames.de: 84%
http://www.pcgames.de/ZombiU-WiiU-236997/Tests/ZombiU-im-Test-fuer-Wii-U-1036318/
Gut!
http://www.pcgames.de/ZombiU-WiiU-236997/Tests/ZombiU-im-Test-fuer-Wii-U-1036318/
Gut!
v0mitg0d
Member
Exactly!
I picked up a Wii U yesterday and had 6 people over, hang'n out. We played Mario U for hours and had a totaly blast! To change things up we played some ZombieU and everyone was totally into it.
I was slowly walking around (not to create dramatic viewing for everyone watching, but because you HAVE to be careful!) and everyone loved the tension. The way The Prepper's voice only comes through the Gamepad had everyone totally thrilled--because it's very similar to holding a walkie-talkie.
The atmosphere is fantastic. The environments are excellently constructed. I LOVE the dirty, grimy feel of the game, and the film on the screen does a good job of conveying that.
This is not L4D. This is a little more like the original Resident Evil games where a single zombie can spell doom.
One funny anecdote: I reach a point where several zombies were on the tail and as I ran from them in unfamiliar territory I inadvertently ended up cornered in a closet. I spun around to face the door and slammed it shut! An unknown number of zombies began to bang on the door and it visibly began to weaken. Everyone in the room was already freaking out because I only had a few bullets left. My pistol had not been upgraded at all so it's spread was fairly wide. I switched over to the cricket bat knowing I wasn't a good shot. The zombies broke through and we AL screamed it was hilarious!
Anyway I smashed a few over the head but there were just too many (4) and couldn't hold them off. Here's the crazy thing! Once on of the reached me I instant began mashing the buttons expecting that to help, but I just died. I was done. That was it! I've been so trained by video games for a struggle I just expected it to happen, but once it didn't everyone in the looked around and we all went "ooooooooooooooooooh!!"
Man, it's a great game! If you like survival horror you owe it to yourself to pick this up.
Personally I think it's fantastic.
TwEE-N-Toast
Banned
Is anybody else finding the dual analogue control a bit weird in this compared to other games? Its sliding around and Im over shooting were I mean to aim and end up spinning or looking at the ceiling.
Diditaltrends: 8.5/10
http://m.digitaltrends.com/gaming/zombiu-review-survival-horror-reborn/
I like this trend.
http://m.digitaltrends.com/gaming/zombiu-review-survival-horror-reborn/
I like this trend.
snowdog1971
Banned
Lmfao, sounds very reminiscent of me and a mate playing the first Resident Evil game on his PS1 when it first came out. We both nearly shat ourselves when the zombie dogs crashed through the windows lololol.
The first few Resident Evil games were great to play with a friend taking turns, looks like this is going to be similar. Love it!!!
GregLombardi
Member
IGN and especially Gamespot are starting to look like idiots IMO.
Best way I can describe this game for me is that it's got that "launch game feel." That's both a very good and a slightly bad thing. I'm enjoying it so far and would definitely give it a rating of "good", but I think it's going to simply feel dated when I come back around to it in a year or so. There are a few things that could have been easily improved I think, but as is, I'm not regretting picking it up one bit.
Doc Holliday
SPOILER: Columbus finds America
I've only played about 45 minutes, it creeps me the fuck out. Great Success!
I wonder why the red steel comments have stopped. Where are all the paragons of foresight? How will we ever know what to think without their guidance?
Why? Because they gave it a bad score? Did you even read the review?
GregLombardi
Member
This, plus its super frustrating because I literally have made the decision to not open my Wii U based upon some of the early reviews of Zombi U. Like, that game was the make or break game for me.
Yes I did. Because they gave it a bad score for themselves, not for the audience it is intended to target. The audience of this game looks at their gripes like they are normal things for a survival horror game.
Baconsammy
Banned
Because of their scores?
snowdog1971
Banned
Not IGN so much imo because they at least gave it a grade within a reasonable distance of the average, and a review score of 63%, whilst low, isn't the sort of score you'd give a game that's broken. It's a score you'd give a game that's above average and nothing special.
The Gamespot, Game Informer and Globe And Mail Toronto (lol, why are they included by Metacritic again..?) scores are scores you'd associate with a game that's almost unplayable, or in the case of the Gamespot score a game that's flat out broken.
It's good to see a few more 8s coming in, any game that brings us back to old-school survival horror deserves high scores after we've been plagued (lol) with action horror games for so long imo.
Can you be any more incorrect about that second paragraph? Have you even read how the score breakdown works for Gamespot? 1.0-2.0 represents broken games. 4.5 does not. Don't get your personal description for score mixed up with what the actual publication says.
So you're saying that they should give scores that satisfy their audience. Yes?
GregLombardi
Member
They should grade a game based upon its relevance to the intended target audience. It is becoming alarmingly clear they did not do that.
Explain to me how the grade was not relevant to the intended target audience. Also, a score is only a numerical summary AT BEST for the written review.
Even so a few different skins would've fooled the majority and made for some variety.
snowdog1971
Banned
Read the paragraph again. I said a score you'd associate with a game that's broken, ie. anyone that hasn't seen the way that Gamespot categorise their scores. If the average person is looking at the list of reviews on Metacritic and sees that bloomin great big red 45, they'd assume at first glance that the game is broken regardless of the scoring system that Gamespot uses.
It all comes down to the average person's perspective.
And it seems pretty obvious to me that the poster above is quite correct - the reviews from those publications are ridiculous in comparison to the vast majority of them.
GregLombardi
Member
GAMESPOT said:
The intended audience are survival horror fans. Not action horror fans. This reviewer is looking at this game in comparison to Resident Evil 4+, when he should be comparing it to Silent Hill or Resident Evil 3 or less.
And yes: a 45 / 100 implies a completely broken, worthless game. A complete failure. Trust me when I say that I know on GAF there are people with agendas. But the people praising Zombi U on this forum right now are people I know NOT to have had agendas in the past. In fact there are people who, if anything, dislike games on Nintendo systems that are praising it.
Something is wrong.
Two things,
One, you sound insane
Two, the user reviews, based on 115 rankings, are about the same as the aggregate critic reviews (7.1 vs 70)
Was the target Call of Duty Hardcore players?
It doesn't matter if that's how people see it. Many publications lay out what each score represents and regardless of how YOU or OTHER PEOPLE see it, the score stands for what the publication means. Also, if people are really attributing so much merit to the numerical value of a game then that kind of sentiment I believe is flawed.
One of the reasons I don't like metacritic is that each publication has their own definition for what a score means and not all publications use the same type of grading system. If you want to make an informed purchase you shouldn't spend 1-2 seconds looking at the score but take the time to read the detailed review people wrote.
Okay, so you have a problem with the writing of the review. Not the score. The score is a result of the review, yes I understand that but that has NO relevance to the argument of the score being irrelevant to the target audience.
superchunk
Member
So overall (just reading OP) it looks like a great game. NewEgg has shipped it and I will get it by Wednesday. I can't wait.
hoverboarder
Member
Played this game today and..
IT'S GREAT!
IT'S GREAT!
I don't understand that intent of your post.
No it doesn't. Stop spewing out nonsense and read this.
http://www.gamespot.com/misc/reviewguidelines.html
GregLombardi
Member
If you'd like to get into the semantics of it, you're correct. What I am saying is that Gamespot reviewed this game in a way which has been shown to not be representative of the title's quality to its target audience.
AlexMeloche
Member
Still have a better Metacritic than RE6!
...on 360.
No it's not the semantics of it. You're stance was represented as something entirely different and then you shifted the argument entirely. This doesn't build great ethos for your argumentation at all. Semanticity has nothing to do with it.
Also, from what I read of the game's review, and what I played with the game before it launched, I'm inclined to agree with Maxwell Macgee's review for the most part. I don't think they reviewed the game wrong. He found many faults and problems with the game and found that the mechanics and systems aren't cohesive at all. They allow for exploitation. And the game as a whole fails to deliver something truly good on any level. He made this quite clear in both the written and the video review. Audience has nothing to do with the analysis and conclusion he came to.
Skiesofwonder
Walruses, camels, bears, rabbits, tigers and badgers.
Nobody post this yet?
Literally right when you start the game, the first thing you see. I :lol'd.
Literally right when you start the game, the first thing you see. I :lol'd.
NotoriousLynx
Banned
I only really trust Game Informer and GameSpot, and those were the only really negative reviews, so it looks like I'm not getting this game. Too bad, I thought it was really cool of Ubisoft to basically reboot their first series, Zombi, in such a new manner. I would of much rather of had it be Killer Freaks from Outer Space, because it sounds much more fun than another zombie game, plus you can do a lot more with aliens than you can with zombies.
SlasherJPC
Banned
Nobody post this yet?
Literally right when you start the game, the first thing you see. I :lol'd.
omg lol that rocks..
Skiesofwonder
Walruses, camels, bears, rabbits, tigers and badgers.
I'm assuming so.
You're doing it wrong.
You trust or distrust opinions of individual reviewers, not necessarily websites as a whole.
KittenMaster
Member
On launch day I decided "screw it" and put the $60 down the drain for a 4.5 game. The game already had a couple of 70's-80's which IMO are scores that say to me "we were not paid to hand out this score" (well, maybe they could have still been paid but I'm not here to be correct and just) and I wanted another game for the Wii U.
I already feel like I'm trying to learn to figure out how to handle the levels optimally. Throwing scrubs at a problem until it goes away makes me feel terrible at a game. I've restarted twice now and may do so again later after figuring out what to do for the next parts.
I already feel like I'm trying to learn to figure out how to handle the levels optimally. Throwing scrubs at a problem until it goes away makes me feel terrible at a game. I've restarted twice now and may do so again later after figuring out what to do for the next parts.
I saw that as well. I started cracking up.
Vyse The Legend
Member
It was not there when I started my game early yesterday. So, yes, it's new and added in lieu of the reviews.
GregLombardi
Member
I'd love to know your agenda Kayos.
There is a clear inconsistency and you are ignoring it by using logical semantics, or by using Gamespot's own definition for its scores.
News flash: Gamespot is a reviewer within the entire realm of reviewers, not THE reviewer of the world. What they state that a score "says" on their website does not encompass the interpretation of that score within the confines of "good versus bad" games in the world. On a 1-10 scale, a 4.5 (or a "poor" game as they themselves put it) is generally a game deserving neither play or praise in any way shape or form. For its target audience, this is a game that will not come close to even satisfying or pleasing them.
Except the text of the review appears to ignore all that. Instead, it compares Zombi U to a bunch of things the later Resident Evil games did correctly.
Also, impressions of GAF'ers who have no bone to pick either way are leading me to conclude that that review is just outright wrong, and misleading. Again -- I know the Nintendo fanboys. It isn't just Nintendo fanboys who are liking the game.