• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Arms Review Thread

Da-Kid said:
I still find it pretty sad how much Neogaf users rely on reviews instead of forming an opinion yourself. That or use reviews to brag about the game or trash it.
Click to expand...

I always think it's unfortunate when people just use reviews as ammo to assert an opinion that they already formulated before playing something. For instance, if I want a game to be great, I go out and shine a spotlight only on the good reviews, lazily discredit bad ones, and then triumphantly assert that this game I was excited about has clearly proven to be great. The opposite is also true. If I think a game is going to be trash or want it to be trash for fanboyish reasons, I might focus my attention only on bad reviews, write off any positive ones, and drop the mic after proclaiming that I knew the game would suck.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, reviews threads are consistently among the worst threads this site has to offer. The loudest voices often aren't looking for information in as much as they just seek affirmation.

Having said that, though, I think it's silly to completely write off reviews as a useful tool. Anytime someone says "why don't you play the game yourself and form your own opinion instead of just being a sheep who lets reviewers tell them what to think!?", I can't help but just kind of roll my eyes because many mere mortals are often constrained by time and/or money in terms of what they can choose to play.
 
80 is where I thought it would be. A game that lays a solid foundation, but might be worth waiting for an updated package down the line.

If Arms 2 happens it should be a killer from the off.
 
I do question how frequent the content updates for this game will be. Splatoon was pretty good post launch. But a game like this relying on characters and stages will probably be a balancing nightmare if deadlines are short. I guess Smash managed.
 
Trago said:
I do question how frequent the content updates for this game will be. Splatoon was pretty good post launch. But a game like this relying on characters and stages will probably be a balancing nightmare if deadlines are short. I guess Smash managed.
Click to expand...

We'll have to see how the balance of the current game is first. They said they used AI to balance the game and I don't think any review has complained that the AI is unfair. Some things make me wonder if they've really balanced the game ahead of the curve or it's so far behind the curve that it's not balanced at all.

For example the elements. So far electric seems like it's the best because it provides a stun long enough to combo into a throw at medium distances. Ice lasts for a bit longer but you can still punch and block when iced. Those appear to be far superior to the Stun element where it's just a longer hit stun and you need to combo prior to the punch connecting to utilize it. It could be just as it seems, that the Stun element is woefully underpowered. But because you can negate ice and electric effects by being in the air, perhaps after people figure out how to counter electric and ice with appropriate jumps, stun would be more viable as an element. In the meantime I'm sure people playing ranked will mostly use electric and ice ARMS.
 
SinCityAssassin said:
I wonder how the consensus will be 6 months from now considering it's following the Splatoon route of expanding its content.
Click to expand...

I can't see them adding anything to the game that's going to radically change the minds of the people who are down on it. I imagine they're going to add new ARMs, stages and characters.
 
I've read concerns that I had and still seem to be in the final game. Won't put 50 euros on that, I prefer to wait to see if they improve it in the coming months.
 
Servbot24 said:
How much time and money do you think people have?
Click to expand...

Yep. The big problem to day is its much harder to rent games.

Most people buy games and wouldn't rent enough monthly to justify Gamefly, local stores are mostly long since closed in many places, and Redbox has a terrible selection.

Other than stuff like this that has a beta or demo it's hard for a lot of people to try a game without buying it.

That said, I do think watching gameplay videos after release helps me make better decisions than reviews (or reviews alone anyway).
 
Steve Youngblood said:
I always think it's unfortunate when people just use reviews as ammo to assert an opinion that they already formulated before playing something. For instance, if I want a game to be great, I go out and shine a spotlight only on the good reviews, lazily discredit bad ones, and then triumphantly assert that this game I was excited about has clearly proven to be great. The opposite is also true. If I think a game is going to be trash or want it to be trash for fanboyish reasons, I might focus my attention only on bad reviews, write off any positive ones, and drop the mic after proclaiming that I knew the game would suck.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, reviews threads are consistently among the worst threads this site has to offer. The loudest voices often aren't looking for information in as much as they just seek affirmation.

Having said that, though, I think it's silly to completely write off reviews as a useful tool. Anytime someone says "why don't you play the game yourself and form your own opinion instead of just being a sheep who lets reviewers tell them what to think!?", I can't help but just kind of roll my eyes because many mere mortals are often constrained by time and/or money in terms of what they can choose to play.
Click to expand...
What! How dare you be reasonable and bring some logic into this thread! Man, NeoGaf's really gone full blown PC! Sad!

No, but seriously. Really great post. I've seen the same confirmation bias bullshit happen in too many review threads. What i'd add to that is that a lot of people have taken to having their own biases confirmed by the sales of a given game as well. Sold bad? Well, i'm not surprised. The demo bored me to tears. Looks like everybody agrees WITH ME. Sold great? Not surprised, I LOVED playing this etc.
 
Steve Youngblood said:
I always think it's unfortunate when people just use reviews as ammo to assert an opinion that they already formulated before playing something. For instance, if I want a game to be great, I go out and shine a spotlight only on the good reviews, lazily discredit bad ones, and then triumphantly assert that this game I was excited about has clearly proven to be great. The opposite is also true. If I think a game is going to be trash or want it to be trash for fanboyish reasons, I might focus my attention only on bad reviews, write off any positive ones, and drop the mic after proclaiming that I knew the game would suck.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, reviews threads are consistently among the worst threads this site has to offer. The loudest voices often aren't looking for information in as much as they just seek affirmation.

Having said that, though, I think it's silly to completely write off reviews as a useful tool. Anytime someone says "why don't you play the game yourself and form your own opinion instead of just being a sheep who lets reviewers tell them what to think!?", I can't help but just kind of roll my eyes because many mere mortals are often constrained by time and/or money in terms of what they can choose to play.
Click to expand...
Idk. I think reviews are useful for general read as to the quality of a game, but aren't really all that useful. I used to read reviews and shake my head at just looking at the numbers but...I just look at the numbers now and read more in-depth fan feedback, taking it all with a grain of salt, to judge cases where I'm on the fence with a purchase.

The text of reviews tends to be really basic and meaningless stuff. Idk maybe I just got burned on mediocre reviews and am missing the good ones.
 
Looks to be sitting around 78. I wonder how it will swing once the next wave of reviews come through (I'm assuming they are waiting for the official release to test the online?).

Regardless, I hope Giant Bomb does a review. Anyone know if Alex or Dan or someone else is giving it a try?
 
Steve Youngblood said:
I always think it's unfortunate when people just use reviews as ammo to assert an opinion that they already formulated before playing something. For instance, if I want a game to be great, I go out and shine a spotlight only on the good reviews, lazily discredit bad ones, and then triumphantly assert that this game I was excited about has clearly proven to be great. The opposite is also true. If I think a game is going to be trash or want it to be trash for fanboyish reasons, I might focus my attention only on bad reviews, write off any positive ones, and drop the mic after proclaiming that I knew the game would suck.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, reviews threads are consistently among the worst threads this site has to offer. The loudest voices often aren't looking for information in as much as they just seek affirmation.

Having said that, though, I think it's silly to completely write off reviews as a useful tool. Anytime someone says "why don't you play the game yourself and form your own opinion instead of just being a sheep who lets reviewers tell them what to think!?", I can't help but just kind of roll my eyes because many mere mortals are often constrained by time and/or money in terms of what they can choose to play.
Click to expand...


Not to mention that if you happen to buy a switch after something like the Testpunch, how else are you supposed to form opinions about the game? Nintendo won't release a demo and you're left with 2 options:

1. Read and watch reviews. These are the most objective way to see whether a game falls in line with your tastes (not all reviews are objective and I realize this, but they are better than option 2).

2. Listen to people on a forum who are much more likely to congregate in or post in threads about the game you might be interested in. This is a much less objective way of learnng about the game and its reception as most people who talk about a game will discuss it if it's either good or god-awful (with some exceptions).

I feel like the negative reviews for ARMS seem to be relatively well-written and focus on lack of content and imbalance of party modes. Not everyone has an issue with those things whereas it could be a dealbreaker for some. Both rationales are completely ok to have. It's your hard-earned money, and you should decide how you want to use the resources around to determine whether a game is worth your purchase.
 
Steve Youngblood said:
I always think it's unfortunate when people just use reviews as ammo to assert an opinion that they already formulated before playing something. For instance, if I want a game to be great, I go out and shine a spotlight only on the good reviews, lazily discredit bad ones, and then triumphantly assert that this game I was excited about has clearly proven to be great. The opposite is also true. If I think a game is going to be trash or want it to be trash for fanboyish reasons, I might focus my attention only on bad reviews, write off any positive ones, and drop the mic after proclaiming that I knew the game would suck.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, reviews threads are consistently among the worst threads this site has to offer. The loudest voices often aren't looking for information in as much as they just seek affirmation.

Having said that, though, I think it's silly to completely write off reviews as a useful tool. Anytime someone says "why don't you play the game yourself and form your own opinion instead of just being a sheep who lets reviewers tell them what to think!?", I can't help but just kind of roll my eyes because many mere mortals are often constrained by time and/or money in terms of what they can choose to play.
Click to expand...

Most of the bad in reviews comes from everything needing some X/10 score and then all of those scores going into a big final score that somehow is supposed to determine a game's worth.

The content of a review is much more important to me than whatever check mark or score at the end of the article. Someone could read through a 5/10 review and decide that the things the reviewer didn't like don't sound so bad to them and end up buying and enjoying the game. Likewise, someone could read a 10/10 review and decide the way the game is set up doesn't sound like their cup of tea and give it a pass.

Details matter. Metacritic score can go screw.
 
Yukinari said:
The modes and lack of options is one of the biggest problems i see people having.

Should let you make rooms that only use motion control or traditional controls. Not to mention 1v1v1 really is one of the worst experiences the game has to offer.
Click to expand...

Should they add an update to Smash that stops you from using GameCube controllers in certain lobbies next?
 
flkraven said:
Looks to be sitting around 78. I wonder how it will swing once the next wave of reviews come through (I'm assuming they are waiting for the official release to test the online?).

Regardless, I hope Giant Bomb does a review. Anyone know if Alex or Dan or someone else is giving it a try?
Click to expand...

jeff mentioned on the bombcast that someone out east is doing it so dan is probably a good bet
 
Steve Youngblood said:
I always think it's unfortunate when people just use reviews as ammo to assert an opinion that they already formulated before playing something. For instance, if I want a game to be great, I go out and shine a spotlight only on the good reviews, lazily discredit bad ones, and then triumphantly assert that this game I was excited about has clearly proven to be great. The opposite is also true. If I think a game is going to be trash or want it to be trash for fanboyish reasons, I might focus my attention only on bad reviews, write off any positive ones, and drop the mic after proclaiming that I knew the game would suck.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, reviews threads are consistently among the worst threads this site has to offer. The loudest voices often aren't looking for information in as much as they just seek affirmation.

Having said that, though, I think it's silly to completely write off reviews as a useful tool. Anytime someone says "why don't you play the game yourself and form your own opinion instead of just being a sheep who lets reviewers tell them what to think!?", I can't help but just kind of roll my eyes because many mere mortals are often constrained by time and/or money in terms of what they can choose to play.
Click to expand...

Confirmation bias is a hell of thing.

Since I saw that video explaining how reviews are made and why Zelda games are so we'll reviewed I tend to rely more on the collective impression and word of mouth, rather than people that are pressured to make a numeric opinion within a strict time frame.

It is a viable guide though and can make me interested on games that I was on the fence ( like Rime and Prey).
 
Reading a lot of reviews, it seems that a lot of reviewers couldn't master the controls or felt the learning curve was too high. When I first started, I didn't get it, but it only takes an hour to really familiarize yourself with the motion controls. It's a lot easier with a controller, which takes only 5 minutes to master.

I really think your enjoyment for this game will be based on how skilled you are. If you haven't mastered the controls, you won't like it. It's not really a fighting game but a cartoony interpretation of boxing. In Arms, it is all about footwork, positioning, and anticipation. Like Splatoon, I do agree it is a little light on content. It's not surprising that it is scoring roughly the same.
 
MoonFrog said:
Idk. I think reviews are useful for general read as to the quality of a game, but aren't really all that useful. I used to read reviews and shake my head at just looking at the numbers but...I just look at the numbers now and read more in-depth fan feedback, taking it all with a grain of salt, to judge cases where I'm on the fence with a purchase.

The text of reviews tends to be really basic and meaningless stuff. Idk maybe I just got burned on mediocre reviews and am missing the good ones.
Click to expand...

Sure, but you're still just replacing one tool for another there. If I'm advocating for ARMS (or whatever, the specific game is unimportant), and you respond to me that after reading GAF's impressions thread and watching some Twitch streams, it just doesn't seem like it's worth the investment, I can still deride you for not trying the game yourself first.

Mind you, I do think people might open themselves up to criticism like that if they speak too definitively. Like if I say "yeah, ARMS clearly isn't as good as Tekken 7/Injustice 2; I'm glad I didn't pre-order," it does invite suspicion that maybe you're not very qualified to make that assertion. But someone isn't in the wrong just for deciding that a game doesn't look very good to them based on information they have that stops short of actually having played the game.

Furthermore, I think sometimes even playing the game in and of itself will not lead to definitive impressions. I feel like there have been many times where my experience has been something of a rollercoaster of enjoyment. You might say "I tried the testfire and it didn't seem all that great," and I might counter with "you really need to play more. It didn't really click with me until about 10 hours in." And while that observation might be entirely accurate, is this a fair requirement for me to levy on you in order to be able to speak about the game's quality?
 
Pretty much lining up with my thoughts. The gameplay is fantastic, as is the presentation but there is not enough content at launch for me.
 
Steve Youngblood said:
Sure, but you're still just replacing one tool for another there. If I'm advocating for ARMS (or whatever, the specific game is unimportant), and you respond to me that after reading GAF's impressions thread and watching some Twitch streams, it just doesn't seem like it's worth the investment, I can still deride you for not trying the game yourself first.

Mind you, I do think people might open themselves up to criticism like that if they speak too definitively. Like if I say "yeah, ARMS clearly isn't as good as Tekken 7/Injustice 2; I'm glad I didn't pre-order," it does invite suspicion that maybe you're not very qualified to make that assertion. But someone isn't in the wrong just for deciding that a game doesn't look very good to them based on information they have that stops short of actually having played the game.

Furthermore, I think sometimes even playing the game in and of itself will not lead to definitive impressions. I feel like there have been many times where my experience has been something of a rollercoaster of enjoyment. You might say "I tried the testfire and it didn't seem all that great," and I might counter with "you really need to play more. It didn't really click with me until about 10 hours in." And while that observation might be entirely accurate, is this a fair requirement for me to levy on you in order to be able to speak about the game's quality?
Click to expand...
Yeah I wasn't disagreeing with the general sentiment of your post, just opining that I find reviews mostly useless for other reasons.

I have nothing wrong with using tools to help in purchasing decisions and nothing wrong with not giving a game a go before deciding it isn't worth trying. I do that all the time, but if I tell people I feel that way I try to couch it in my personal reasons for not trying it rather than "it is bad." (Try to do that with games I do try too...but don't always hold to that standard :p)

The thing with reviews and me is generally they are very surface level where the things that really get to me either in a positive or negative way tend to be deeper. Reviews I've read tend more to this is good, bad, awkward, etc. and don't get into detailed critique.

You get some more tunnel vision in player impressions and that is both a blessing and a curse, but I take the details and throw in some grains of salt to compensate, with my own gaming taste in view.
 
That was the quickest ban I've ever seen. KO!

Also, I'm still unsure if I'll pick it up at launch yet. I may not have any time for it.
 
Not sure if answered but is it possible to play online local co-op? Or is it like the testfire where it just switches the people on the system every other game.
 
It's good to know that ARMS has been received well across most reviewing platforms. Might not be the next greatest fighting game, but it still does what it needs to do well enough to get attention and to get people interested in buying it next week.
 
flkraven said:
Looks to be sitting around 78. I wonder how it will swing once the next wave of reviews come through (I'm assuming they are waiting for the official release to test the online?).

Regardless, I hope Giant Bomb does a review. Anyone know if Alex or Dan or someone else is giving it a try?
Click to expand...

I think Dan is reviewing it since he talked about playing the full game on last week's podcast. His main problem was it lacked more content than Splatoon.
 
mas8705 said:
It's good to know that ARMS has been received well across most reviewing platforms. Might not be the next greatest fighting game, but it still does what it needs to do well enough to get attention and to get people interested in buying it next week.
Click to expand...

That's probably the consensus of roughly all the reviews but then again, this is a Nintendo IP, we saw how slick it looks(direct), wer shown how well it runs(digital foundry), knew how well it played(testpunch) and heard how well it sounds. Were those reviews even necessary, to come to that conclusion? Probably not if you were keeping track of the game. -At least not for me, I pre-ordered the game because of the experience I've had with it during the test punch.

Perhaps scores are really stupid to look out for, perhaps all magazines should rate the way Eurogamer does. -How would you rank them then though, mankind likes listings of any kind I guess...
 
gameongreggy said:
I haven't read all the quotes, but, I will say based on yours. People should not be willing to pay 65$ for a promise of more content. The game should be feature rich, like BoTW, and then add more content. Don't release a barebones game, at least that's my opinion from the demo, and then promise more on the way. You're selling me an early access game at that point. That's just my opinion.
Click to expand...

Personally, I don't think that the amount of enjoyment relates to the amount of content. I had a great time with Splatoon and it only got better. It may not be wise to launch wise little content, but if it's anything like Splatoon, the joy of playing the game and the continuous updates kept me coming back.
 
MTC100 said:
That's probably the consensus of roughly all the reviews but then again, this is a Nintendo IP, we saw how slick it looks(direct), wer shown how well it runs(digital foundry), knew how well it played(testpunch) and heard how well it sounds. Were those reviews even necessary, to come to that conclusion? Probably not if you were keeping track of the game. -At least not for me, I pre-ordered the game because of the experience I've had with it during the test punch.

Perhaps scores are really stupid to look out for, perhaps all magazines should rate the way Eurogamer does. -How would you rank them then though, mankind likes listings of any kind I guess...
Click to expand...

I mean, we only got to play it for a few hours in a few modes. That's not necessarily representative of the whole game or its longevity.
 
joecanada said:
Consensus will be same as street fighter 5.... Buy the game on sale when the content is out.
Click to expand...

I'm not guaranteeing success in the least, but I do think the situation is a little different here. First and foremost is that ARMS is the first in a potential series. As long as people gravitate towards the novelty of the title (and that's not a guarantee), there's room for more leeway than something like Street Fighter 5. People are looking for different things in a sequel to an established franchise than they are in a new IP.

Secondly, ARMS benefits from the Switch still being in its launch window. I'm not trying to assert that Switch owners are necessarily starved for games and will buy any trash that comes along, but an 8/10 new IP will stand out more on the Switch than Street Fighter V did when it released on PS4 and PC.
 
JinjoUnchained said:
I'm hoping the OT title will be A Farewell To Arms or Arms And The Man.
Click to expand...

These were the last notable OT titles discussed, with a poll indicating that people vastly prefer the "ARMS |OT| (ง'̀-‘́)-------------ง" title so far.

ARMS |OT| (ง'̀-‘́)-------------ง
ARMS |Oh-Oh-OT|
ARMS |OT| Spring Release
ARMS |OT| Knees Weak, Arms Spaghetti
ARMS |OT| The Right to Bear Joy-con
ARMS |OT| "It's actually pretty rad"
ARMS |OT| Punched By Her Noodly Appendage
ARMS~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~(|OT|)
ARMS |OT| AGGEDON

Here is said poll.
 
What I do wish was that there was a tradition of games critique in media.

I get that my issues with them are a bit unfair and miss the point of something designed to tell a general audience "buy or not" in a timely fashion.

I'd like it if there were long form games articles that dug into it all that I could read after I played.

Edit: and the sheeple point--it is not like there aren't community darlings too.
 
LotusHD said:
These were the last notable OT titles discussed, with a poll indicating that people vastly prefer the "ARMS |OT| (ง’̀-‘́)-------------ง" title so far.

ARMS |OT| (ง’̀-‘́)-------------ง
ARMS |Oh-Oh-OT|
ARMS |OT| Spring Release
ARMS |OT| Knees Weak, Arms Spaghetti
ARMS |OT| The Right to Bear Joy-con
ARMS |OT| "It's actually pretty rad"
ARMS |OT| Punched By Her Noodly Appendage
ARMS~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~(|OT|)
ARMS |OT| AGGEDON
Click to expand...



Spring Release is by far the best by a mile.
 
LotusHD said:
These were the last notable OT titles discussed, with a poll indicating that people vastly prefer the "ARMS |OT| (ง’̀-‘́)-------------ง" title so far.

ARMS |OT| (ง’̀-‘́)-------------ง
ARMS |Oh-Oh-OT|
ARMS |OT| Spring Release
ARMS |OT| Knees Weak, Arms Spaghetti
ARMS |OT| The Right to Bear Joy-con
ARMS |OT| "It's actually pretty rad"
ARMS |OT| Punched By Her Noodly Appendage
ARMS~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~(|OT|)
ARMS |OT| AGGEDON
Click to expand...

Man, you're good at this.
 
SinCityAssassin said:
But ARMS has actual content at launch though.
Click to expand...

Well then it should do just fine seems well enough reviewed. You implied that it would be even better 6 months in so I personally would wait but yeah if the studio is known for ongoing support then early adopters should be secure .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Saros | Review Thread
Review  8 9 10 11 12
586
3K
ByWatterson replied
Mina the Hollower | Review Thread
Review  2
95
1K
gundalf replied
REPLACED | Review thread
Review 
23
1K
AJBungah replied
Motorslice | Review Thread
Analysis Review  2
77
1K
Guilty_AI replied
Invincible VS | Review Thread
Analysis Review 
0
354
Draugoth replied
Top Bottom