Support NeoGAF

[Air Zombie Meat]

For bare moments.

Its fucking nothing

Yeah I know but technically it's a pause. Everything you're forced to do in the inventory is the real chore, the stuff that can be quick switched really isn't a problem.

 

[MTC100]

Wow it's almost as if you didn't even watch the video about pirating nintendo games.... I also love how you're trying to throw around the idea that he's a Microsoft or Sony shill. Just shows you really have no clue how to defend whatever viewpoint you have.

I know that he was being cynical in that video but it's beyond the point. He loves to get it on with Nintendo, to be honest they are a rather easy target too and you get a lot of attention by attacking them, good and bad. So I get why he does it, perhaps Sony and Microsoft are just harder to really penetrate the way he likes to and therefore he keeps concentrating his energy on the "smaller" companies, like the Third Parties and Nintendo

And if you look in the comments and even this thread you see why, people are fed up with Zelda getting so many good scores, many of those people haven't played the game yet and perhaps won't ever play it, they are all so full of hate because this idiotic japanese company achieved something neither the Third Parties, Sony nor Microsoft could this generation(aside from GTA and TLOU which were available on the lastgen too): Release a Game in this day and age that almost universally gets praised by critics and player base a like for being a masterpiece. People need to get over that kind of toxic jealousy. Nintendo finally released an AAA-Title with Breath of the Wild, something no one would have expected from them, a game packed with content, you may like or not, in a living, breathing world that doesn't tell you what to do and where you should go. Of course it's not perfect, no game is or will ever be.

Still, a game that was 6 years in development with up to 300 individuals contributing to it at times, it's only natural that this game would get high praises from critics, fans and even newcomers a like. You can mock it's design decisions, yet they are what got the game to where it is with 52 "perfect" scores, even though many of those reviewers acknowledged the shortcomings in framerate drops and not on par with current gen visuals, they still praised it for the package the game presented.

 

[lvl99 Pixel]

To be honest, I didn't like the weapon durability mechanic at first. However, it soon became clear to me the positives. For one, it allows me to play around with different types of weapons. For another, it changes how I approach combat. Instead of just attacking and dodging, I actually use runes, bows, shields, etc. in combat.

yeah, im not too far into the game yet but it does get you using a variety of weapons, whereas if I just had one good sword I wouldn't bother doing anything else.
My weapon slots got full quickly, which told me that I should be using them more freely. Not sure how it would take someone an entire game to figure that out, or play based on a whim that you need to hoard them and then blame the game.

I dont know if the

Spoiler

infinite supply of bombs

ever stop doing damage, but its not like you're ever running around without a weapon

 

[pizzaparty]

As someone who also hates weapon degradation that gameplay has completely turned me off the game, is it common for weapons to break that quick or is it just cleverly edited to look that way? The constant interrupting of the combat is also a huge turn off, that alone would force me to avoid most combat encounters after awhile.

The weapons used in the video seem to be the Traveler weapons, Rusty weapons, and Boko weapons. These are all weapons found in the first maybe 30 minutes of the game. There are mid and late game weapons with considerably higher durability.

 

[blankempathy]

Yeah I know but technically it's a pause. Everything you're forced to do in the inventory is the real chore, the stuff that can be quick switched really isn't a problem.

What's the problem with the inventory?

 

[LordRaptor]

Thank fuck for Jim, at least someone is speaking out about the bad points of Zelda.

I dont understand how nearly everyone can think its a perfect game, with some of its features and what I've seen and heard some criticise about it. Oops sorry, shouldn't have insulted your precious game unless I've played it.

...is this a serious post?
"Thank god someone is finally negative about that game I've never played but I can't believe is good even though lots of people say it is"

 

[stephen08]

As someone who also hates weapon degradation that gameplay has completely turned me off the game, is it common for weapons to break that quick or is it just cleverly edited to look that way? The constant interrupting of the combat is also a huge turn off, that alone would force me to avoid most combat encounters after awhile.

Depends on the weapon but yeah, it's not uncommon to break a weapon or two per fight with a group of 5+ enemies. Especially at the beginning when you use enemy weapons more frequently.

 

[Nepenthe]

This was never the question. The question is can you judge on its own merits, can you look behind your own nose. Ebert reviewed all the time movies which were not the kind of he prefers, but he was able to review them fairly and sometimes even gave them high scores.

When you approach something with "I don't like thing. Lets focus on the negative and ignore the good as much as possible", you suck as reviewer.

So yes, reviewing something you normally don't like is fair. But you should be able to take your own bias into account instead of being lead by it.

The poster I quoted said that if something isn't fun, it deserves to lose points, full stop. If fun is all that matters in determining a score, and not as you said the ability to review things outside of your comfort zone with some level of understanding of how the game works both as a whole and as a sum of its parts, then the answer to my question would be: yes, I am as qualified to review Forza as anyone else and I don't really have to appeal to more reasonable justifications, because if it's not fun, then the game should lose points.

 

[Plum]

There was a review thread with more posts than this very thread for that. Don't think any if the reviews said it was perfection though, a couple said it might be the best they've ever played. Something I may end up agreeing with once I can finally stop exploring.

Yep, I can't think of anyone who says or even implies 10/10 is literal perfection outside of people who seek to discredit those scores.

 

[Lanrutcon]

So you think it's more likely that all 60 of those reviewers are biased? You might want to have a good hard look at why you want to believe that, because the evidence just isn't there for you to have come to that conclusion.

First off, reread my initial post. My criticism isn't leveled at the reviewers: it's aimed at the people that are desperately dissecting Jim's review. Those same people didn't bat an eyelid when the 10/10s rolled in. Those are perfect scores. They indicate the game the perfect and has absolutely no flaws. Think about that for a second. Not a great game, not an amazing game, a perfect game. You don't think that warrants a little scrutiny? Folks have the time to call Jim a clickbaiter because he gave the game a decent (not even a terrible) score, but they don't have a second to go "gee, maybe 10/10 is overdoing a bit".

 

[Akhe]

Unfortunately, it makes you work harder for it than you should, buried as it is under a pile of small but constant irritations that collaborate to form a thick crust of frustration around a delectable center. Breath of the Wild is a delightful adventure, one that tries its utmost to be as big a pain in the arse as possible."

Are you serious? I even don't know if the games back in the 80/90's had been released today...

 

[hank_tree]

The trick is to let go and take weapons as they come. I think the core issue is some players (like yourself) like making a connection with their gear and the sentiment/feel they get from that. This is fine in 99% of rpgs/action games, but in Zelda it's not the point.

Embrace that weapons are transient. Once you do this you then literally never have to farm them or get irritated about it. All weapons break, it's a fact of life in Zelda. Now you can improvise though any situation and have a nicer, more chilled time.

I have no attachment to my weapons and that actually discourages me from both combat and exploring. I just avoid combat as much as possible. Most chests offer me weapons or shields that I don't want or need. So all there is left to do is the Shrines and the main story, because the rewards for exploring are rarely worth it.

 

[EmCeeGramr]

First off, reread my initial post. My criticism isn't leveled at the reviewers: it's aimed at the people that are desperately dissecting Jim's review. Those same people didn't bat an eyelid when the 10/10s rolled in. Those are perfect scores. They indicate the game the perfect and has absolutely no flaws. Think about that for a second. Not a great game, not an amazing game, a perfect game. You don't think that warrants a little scrutiny? Folks have the time to call Jim a clickbaiter because he gave the game a decent (not even a terrible) score, but they don't have a second to go "gee, maybe 10/10 is overdoing a bit".

10/10 does not mean perfect.

 

[MTC100]

...is this a serious post?
"Thank god someone is finally negative about that game I've never played but I can't believe is good even though lots of people say it is"

That's the type of person I was talking about a few posts earlier, the 80(!) 90-100 scores mean nothing, they are either from fanboys, bought or give Zelda a 10 because nostalgia, duh! Those three 60-70 scores are the only ones not lying

 

[Air Zombie Meat]

What's the problem with the inventory?

It's a bit of a pain to scroll through to change armour or eat something. Not really any worse than other games but not ideal.

 

[lukeskymac]

damn, where was all this outrage when Jim gave TLG a 6/10?

not that I'm surprised. At least on gaf, I would say Zelda is the one fanbase that trumps the Uncharted fanbase in terms of toxicity, and that's one hell of an accomplishment.

As a TLG GOTG truther myself, I can summarize my reaction like this:

"Oh, he doesn't get it. So his opinions on games of this particular type hold less weight to me. Huh."

And then I proceeded to play TLG again to see if it really does hold up. Yup.

 

[Floody]

The weapons used in the video seem to be the Traveler weapons, Rusty weapons, and Boko weapons. These are all weapons found in the first maybe 30 minutes of the game. There are mid and late game weapons with considerably higher durability.

Ah, okay thank you. Was a little worried it was always like that.

 

[King_Moc]

First off, reread my initial post. My criticism isn't leveled at the reviewers: it's aimed at the people that are desperately dissecting Jim's review. Those same people didn't bat an eyelid when the 10/10s rolled in. Those are perfect scores. They indicate the game the perfect and has absolutely no flaws. Think about that for a second. Not a great game, not an amazing game, a perfect game. You don't think that warrants a little scrutiny? Folks have the time to call Jim a clickbaiter because he gave the game a decent (not even a terrible) score, but they don't have a second to go "gee, maybe 10/10 is overdoing a bit".

Nonsense. A 10/10 doesn't indicate that at all. It pretty much says it's the best we have in this genre at this point. To claim a 10/10 is saying it's utterly perfect is a ludicrous statement.

 

[AESplusF]

As someone who also hates weapon degradation that gameplay has completely turned me off the game, is it common for weapons to break that quick or is it just cleverly edited to look that way? The constant interrupting of the combat is also a huge turn off, that alone would force me to avoid most combat encounters after awhile.

No they really do break that quickly though you can find new ones very easily. Imagine finding an awesome looking sword only to realize that it breaks in 10-20 hits, I don't know why people defend this system, it's pretty clear to me that the game would be better off without the durability system entirely, or at the very least, with a means of repairing weapons (without permanent breakage).

 

[hank_tree]

Nonsense. A 10/10 doesn't indicate that at all. It pretty much says it's the best we have in this genre at this point.

A 10/10 also does not mean that.

 

[Hasney]

Those same people didn't bat an eyelid when the 10/10s rolled in. Those are perfect scores. They indicate the game the perfect and has absolutely no flaws. Think about that for a second. Not a great game, not an amazing game, a perfect game. You don't think that warrants a little scrutiny? Folks have the time to call Jim a clickbaiter because he gave the game a decent (not even a terrible) score, but they don't have a second to go "gee, maybe 10/10 is overdoing a bit".

That's not how review scores work. It's the highest score, not perfect. Maybe that's why you're hung up on it? None of them said the game was perfect, but the score reflects the highest recommendation they can give it. The full experience is top makes, not literally perfect.

 

[C.Olimar788]

dont do it then? if you dont want to pause to change weapons, just dont do it

you wanna to run away, and pretend you need to change your weapon realistically, you can do it


also, how can it be a sting on immersion, your fucking weapon just broke, what are you going to do? use a new one, the weapon you are using is not very efective against the enemy you are fighting, what would you do? use a different weapon!

You literally cannot change weapons without pausing, what are you talking about? Running away literally changes nothing, and would still interrupt the flow of combat? It's a sting on immersion because the entire game world literally stops while you are forced to pick something new to work with, which breaks the flow of combat and just feels janky and bad - at least, in every single game I've ever played, so maybe Zelda is miraculously somehow different and it feels natural for the enemies to stop moving while you do some quick inventory management, who knows.

It's something that could be easily fixed by just having the game auto swap you to your next weapon in your inventory if your current one broke, ooooorrrr I dunno, maybe making weapons slightly more durable so that you don't have to worry about them breaking on you while you're in the middle of fighting a bokoblin?

 

[Schlorgan]

With how the last thread went, I expect this to go very smooth and civil.

 

[Plum]

With how the last thread went, I expect this to go great.

This thread's 24 pages in, you're a bit late, mate

 

[Lanrutcon]

Nonsense. A 10/10 doesn't indicate that at all. It pretty much says it's the best we have in this genre at this point. To claim a 10/10 is saying it's utterly perfect is a ludicrous statement.

Then we interpret the scores completely differently.

 

[freethoughtbubble]

Can we all agree that the idea that a 10 symbolizes literal perfection is stupid? Like, if you honestly believe that, think about it for like 5 seconds and reevaluate whether you still think that. If the answer is yes, I'd love to you read your thoughts on how that's possible.

 

[RRockman]

First off, reread my initial post. My criticism isn't leveled at the reviewers: it's aimed at the people that are desperately dissecting Jim's review. Those same people didn't bat an eyelid when the 10/10s rolled in. Those are perfect scores. They indicate the game the perfect and has absolutely no flaws. Think about that for a second. Not a great game, not an amazing game, a perfect game. You don't think that warrants a little scrutiny? Folks have the time to call Jim a clickbaiter because he gave the game a decent (not even a terrible) score, but they don't have a second to go "gee, maybe 10/10 is overdoing a bit".

You got that wrong! 10/10 does NOT Mean perfect! many of those reviewers even mention that in either their review or their review system. Destructoid is one example. You are throwing around claims that none of us are reading or investigating these 10/10 reviews and as you have probably realized that is incorrect. Now I ask you, did you actually read those reviews, or are you talking out of your hat?

 

[SomTervo]

I have no attachment to my weapons and that actually discourages me from both combat and exploring. I just avoid combat as much as possible. Most chests offer me weapons or shields that I don't want or need. So all there is left to do is the Shrines and the main story, because the rewards for exploring are rarely worth it.

Well, side quests and other treasure hunts (for rupees and gear) are worth it. Korok Seeds are fun to find for their own sake due to the mechanics, imo. Also I've come to love combat and how unpredictable it is - again for its own sake, and not caring about weapons still doesn't get in the way.

 

[Hasney]

Then we interpret the scores completely differently.

But since the people actually making those scores on their own scale invented their own individual scales, maybe you should interpret them how they intended them to be instead of applying your own scale?

 

[Principate]

Then we interpret the scores completely differently.

10 out of 10 has never meant perfect otherwise there's no point in even using a 10 point scale.

 

[hank_tree]

Can we all agree that the idea that a 10 symbolizes literal perfection is stupid? Like, if you honestly believe that, think about it for like 5 seconds and reevaluate whether you still think that. If the answer is yes, I'd love to you read your thoughts on how that's possible.

You've come to the wrong thread, mate.

 

[Emperor_Uriel]

It's not like people hate limited bullets in games, right?

No, but I would hate it if my guns broke every time I fired a full clip.

Plus, most shooters have an unlimited use melee attack that doesn't degrade. So it isn't really an apt comparison.

 

[blankempathy]

It's a bit of a pain to scroll through to change armour or eat something. Not really any worse than other games but not ideal.

Maybe dpad down should have been a quick menu for foods. I found the inventory standard. I liked that I could auto organize outfits.

 

[Nothing1016]

First off, reread my initial post. My criticism isn't leveled at the reviewers: it's aimed at the people that are desperately dissecting Jim's review. Those same people didn't bat an eyelid when the 10/10s rolled in. Those are perfect scores. They indicate the game the perfect and has absolutely no flaws. Think about that for a second. Not a great game, not an amazing game, a perfect game. You don't think that warrants a little scrutiny? Folks have the time to call Jim a clickbaiter because he gave the game a decent (not even a terrible) score, but they don't have a second to go "gee, maybe 10/10 is overdoing a bit".

10/10 does not indicate perfect. I don't understand why everyone thinks this. Read their guidelines.

http://www.polygon.com/pages/about-reviews
http://m.ign.com/wikis/ign/Game_Reviews
http://www.gamespot.com/review-guidelines/

 

[AESplusF]

Ah, okay thank you. Was a little worried it was always like that.

Considerably higher durability is not saying much when the other weapons are so incredibly quick to break, even the high durability weapons will break faster than a souls weapon.

 

[elrechazado]

10 out of 10 has never meant perfect otherwise there's no point in even using a 10 point scale.

Some would say that's exactly why we use a ten point scale, and that ten not meaning perfect is exactly why the review scale is actually 7 to 10, rather than 1 to 10.

 

[guyssorry]

The game and its combat are all about balance. I don't think Jim understands this. I am not a huge fan of weapon degradation (it really annoyed me in Witcher 3), but I have never had an issue in this game because there are weapons all over the place. It's cool, though. It's just a video game, and Jim is entitled to his own opinion, but I do think his approach of the game and its systems is not the best.

 

[aBarreras]

You literally cannot change weapons without pausing, what are you talking about? Running away literally changes nothing, and would still interrupt the flow of combat? It's a sting on immersion because the entire game world literally stops while you are forced to pick something new to work with, which breaks the flow of combat and just feels janky and bad - at least, in every single game I've ever played, so maybe Zelda is miraculously somehow different and it feels natural for the enemies to stop moving while you do some quick inventory management, who knows.

It's something that could be easily fixed by just having the game auto swap you to your next weapon in your inventory if your current one broke, ooooorrrr I dunno, maybe making weapons slightly more durable so that you don't have to worry about them breaking on you while you're in the middle of fighting a bokoblin?

if you kill someone he drops his weapon, if you hit it really hard it drops his weapon, if you shock it, he drops his weapon, you can set them on fire, there there is plenty, PLENTY of ways to fight without stopping to change to a new weapon

 

[Wallach]

Then we interpret the scores completely differently.

There is no valid interpretation where 10/10 means it is a "perfect" game. People are not capable of producing such a concept. Especially not hundreds of people working in tandem in endlessly complicated ways with restrictions wrought by basic realities of technology. Any scale that claims 10/10 means the game is "perfect" is implying that their review scale actually only goes up to 9/10.

 

[CronoShot]

10 out of 10 has never meant perfect otherwise there's no point in even using a 10 point scale.

There's also no point in using a 10 point scale if no game can ever possibly get a 10/10.

Every single game ever made and every game that will ever be made has flaws. No game is ever, ever going to be truly perfect.

 

[pizzaparty]

Considerably higher durability is not saying much when the other weapons are so incredibly quick to break, even the high durability weapons will break faster than a souls weapon.

Souls doesn't drop weapons every enemy encounter.

 

[lvl99 Pixel]

You literally cannot change weapons without pausing

it feels the same as the weapon wheel in doom 2016

granted, you dont need to use it in doom, but I really don't see how its a bad thing to pause the game for a split second to change weapon. Seems really nitpicky imo.

 

[MTC100]

No they really do break that quickly though you can find new ones very easily. Imagine finding an awesome looking sword only to realize that it breaks in 10-20 hits, I don't know why people defend this system, it's pretty clear to me that the game would be better off without the durability system entirely, or at the very least, with a means of repairing weapons (without permanent breakage).

You're welcome to think that, I am no big fan of it either, however the points that speak for it are still valid and it was the game designers decision to make it so. You won't be able to change that by complaining, so how about trying to work with the system as is and use other stuff than just melee weapons, I said it already: Boomerangs and Bows don't break that easily, Link changed quite a bit compared to the other Zelda games and he has incredibly powerful tools at his disposal with the slate, why not use them instead of only going melee?

 

[Hasney]

It's a bit of a pain to scroll through to change armour or eat something. Not really any worse than other games but not ideal.

Honestly, as someone who likes the weapon degrading and would actually enjoy the game less without it, I wish they could do armour better. I'd love a quick swap for my cold, hot, battle, climbing and swimming outfits.

 

[SomTervo]

Considerably higher durability is not saying much when the other weapons are so incredibly quick to break, even the high durability weapons will break faster than a souls weapon.

Yeah but it's not Souls, and is balanced around adventure and loot progression, so that's fine.

 

[Floody]

No they really do break that quickly though you can find new ones very easily. Imagine finding an awesome looking sword only to realize that it breaks in 10-20 hits, I don't know why people defend this system, it's pretty clear to me that the game would be better off without the durability system entirely, or at the very least, with a means of repairing weapons (without permanent breakage).

Depends on the weapon but yeah, it's not uncommon to break a weapon or two per fight with a group of 5+ enemies. Especially at the beginning when you use enemy weapons more frequently.

Ah, worried this game just won't be for me then, I really really hate weapon durability and games that have me opening a menu during combat frequently, hell can't stand it outside of combat much either.

Considerably higher durability is not saying much when the other weapons are so incredibly quick to break, even the high durability weapons will break faster than a souls weapon.

Worse than Dark Souls 2? Because that was bad enough for me to drop the game.
Thanks for the replies everyone.

 

[Chairmanchuck]

Plus, most shooters have an unlimited use melee attack that doesn't degrade. So it isn't really an apt comparison.

You also have an unlimited bomb attack, you can throw around stuff and kill enemies like that and later in the game

Spoiler

you get the master sword, that doesnt break, just has to reload

.

 

[NotLiquid]

First off, reread my initial post. My criticism isn't leveled at the reviewers: it's aimed at the people that are desperately dissecting Jim's review. Those same people didn't bat an eyelid when the 10/10s rolled in. Those are perfect scores. They indicate the game the perfect and has absolutely no flaws. Think about that for a second. Not a great game, not an amazing game, a perfect game. You don't think that warrants a little scrutiny? Folks have the time to call Jim a clickbaiter because he gave the game a decent (not even a terrible) score, but they don't have a second to go "gee, maybe 10/10 is overdoing a bit".

Since we're holding Jim as someone who's more "honest and stringent" on reviews, so to speak, why don't we see what he has to say what a 10/10 is?

A 10 represents the finest of the fine, an exemplar of its genre, and the current game of its type to beat. While nothing in life is perfect, these games come as close to the ideal as one can get. Such a score is not given lightly, and is reserved for true pinnacles of the medium. A pinnacle can be relative – another game may eventually come that bests it, but for now, this is the kind of stuff the industry ought to strive for.

Damn. Even he admits that giving a game a 10 doesn't mean it's perfect. I don't think anyone else who was willing to give this game a 10 doesn't realize this either. You can always find flaws in games that are considered benchmarks by people. Super Mario 64 for instance; most retrospective reviews of that game harshly criticize the camera even though that was considered revolutionary back then. Not a 10/10 by standards now perhaps, but back then? Shit was a fucking masterpiece.

 

[Principate]

Some would say that's exactly why we use a ten point scale, and that ten not meaning perfect is exactly why the review scale is actually 7 to 10, rather than 1 to 10.

That's not the reason why, plenty of movie and music etc critics have no problem using the full scale. The 7-10 is largely a video game reviewer problem and self selecting nature of video game reviewers.

 

[RangerX]

Jim Sterling has always laid out his points in the Jimquisition in a clear,concise and critical manner. Sure he hams it up for some giggles but the dude understands games critique. The people saying hes being controversial for clicks are way off the mark. I'm not a huge fan of weapon durability but if it is implemented properly, as with any system, it can work. I haven't played BoTW so I can't comment there.