-
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.
Crash Bandicoot N Sane Trilogy - Review Thread
- Thread starter Kenzodielocke
- Start date
This is how you get embarrassing
Did you actually think this was a good post that made sense?
swearing-circle
Member
They absolutely should.
Psychoward
Banned
Yeah complaining about enemies in a platformer having predetermined loops and dying in one hit totally makes sense lol
Really the only disappointment for me seems to be 30fps
Crimsonclaw111
Member
Lol you think this is gonna outsell Mario? Alright.
Can't speak for other sites/outlets, but we have a rule that states not to discuss pricing in reviews. Prices fluctuate constantly, a game's final build/quality - patches aside - doesn't.
Nah that'll be knack 2
Yes easy - one on a system that has, what is it, 60 million sold compared to another which is a tiny fraction of that...
Only Gamespot gave it a 6, and this has roughly the same Metacritic score as DKC: TF. Seems positive to me
The Crash trilogy combined barely outsold Super Mario 64, and the Playstation had 3 times as many users as the N64. And that's when the games were new, not a remaster
They absolutely shouldn't, except maybe in extreme cases where someone is trying to, like, sell a game that lasts 5 minutes and is priced 60$.
Fantastical
Death Prophet
I would be EXTREMELY surprised
That Gamespot review really is lazy trash. It's a couple paragraphs long and seems like it was written in minutes once Peter remembered he had to crank one out. Like, why bother at all, aside from the obvious business-related concerns, if that's the work you're going to do. In both quality and content, it's pretty bad.
I don't care about the score because it's one out of many for a fucking decade old videogame series, but still, it's a bad look. Just admit you forgot to do your homework.
I don't care about the score because it's one out of many for a fucking decade old videogame series, but still, it's a bad look. Just admit you forgot to do your homework.
Yautja_Warrior
Member
Solid reviews, good to see it they did a good job overall. As a fan of the originala I'm looking forward to some old school platforming again.
I have no strong issue with the Gamespot reviewer playing only half of each game. By that point the game mechanics and design would be pretty well established. Nor with the general argument that he found it frustrating in certain ways wrt difficulty and scored it lower. The review itself does seem a bit thin and pencil whipped, independent of those things though.
A review's purpose is to inform people on whether or not something's worth buying. Price should absolutely be a factor.
Bronetta
Ask me about the moon landing or the temperature at which jet fuel burns. You may be surprised at what you learn.
Thats just bad policy then. Most consumers want to know if its a good value proposition.
You know what many reviewers do? They comment on if the game is worth the asking price at launch. Have a little blurb: buy now, buy when price drops, dont buy.
McMoneyman
Member
Good scores.
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
Does it have any PS4 PRO features?
Bronetta
Ask me about the moon landing or the temperature at which jet fuel burns. You may be surprised at what you learn.
1440p
phantasmic_glaive
Member
That's great you like it. I like Crash 1 because of the difficulty as well (I dont think it has anything else over 2 or 3 frankly) but it will never not be bullshit design to me. Whenever I read Crash 1 is fair I just cringe. Naw, not really. There is a reason they changed aspects of Crash 1 for this remake.
Anyway, enough of me complaining about it
Yea, I agree.. I should've elaborated on "languish". It's hard as hell but I like that and it would be hard for me to go to 1 after finishing 2 or 3. So I'll just play em in order.
Knack 1 was some bs too..
I don't think it's that bad of a policy to leave the value proposititon to the reader. For example if a 60$ game is 10 hours then you can mention this in the review. This might be worth 60$ to some, might not be to others. Then half a year later if the game is 30$ the review is still relevant as well.
A bad game is a bad game, whether it's 10$ or 60$.
Gotdatmoney
Member
The whole point of this gaming culture including publishers sending reviewers early review copies is to entice people to buy the game near launch. Not including price in the equation doesn't recognize the reality of how game releases work. Why even put out a review at launch then?
Pai Pai Master
Banned
This post is the real embarrassment.
ChaosZeroX
Banned
Is the gamespot reviewer serious? They said they weren't changing gameplay lol
sloppyjoe_gamer
Gold Member
If i'm reading a glowing review of a game at launch that i've been either considering getting, or definitely getting, i don't care if it's $60 or $40, i'm getting it.
Same thing with a really bad review....even if the game is $10 i won't touch it.
Don't see the relevance at all of including game prices in the reviews.
Renna Hazel
Member
I guess that makes sense, but I see reviews complain about price all the time, usually when it's too high.
Perhaps. Considering it's 3 games I was expecting something closer to the 90 mark so I was definitely surprised to see some 6s and 7s in there. Oh well.
The Crash trilogy combined sold way more than Mario 64. Also, DKC scored worse than I expected as well.
Worth buying or worth playing?
Why would critical reviews be a definitive determining factor in any fan's perception? If you like it, like it on your own terms. I don't see why anyone needs to seek validation in their position while trying to reconcile it with whatever the Metacritic score is.
Retro Edge
Member
This is classic crash and belongs to it, I would be angry if they changed that.
Or dissuade/advise against should the final build not meet certain standards....right?
So free-to-play games are based in a separate "reality" as you call it?
Gotdatmoney
Member
Because games in the middle of those extremes exist maybe?
I mean, y'all want to have someone's opinion about a game be influenced by how instead they could have bought $40 of My Little Pony merchandise or pay for their health insurance, you do you.
I personally think incorporating price into a review in any way, positive or negative, to be a colossal waste of everyone's time.
I personally think incorporating price into a review in any way, positive or negative, to be a colossal waste of everyone's time.
GIANKRATOS
Member
I would not, considering that it will also have 4-5 months of "advantage".
If you look at video games purely as packaged goods like a vacuum cleaner or a toaster, sure.
MadClacker
Member
If you've seen footage of the game and it looked good to you - then buy it.
If you've seen footage of the game and it didn't look good to you - then don't.
If you can't decide - wait for a sale and repeat.
It's so simple.
If you've seen footage of the game and it didn't look good to you - then don't.
If you can't decide - wait for a sale and repeat.
It's so simple.
Muffin1611
Banned
Gotdatmoney
Member
That's the reviews job, that's not why we have a marketing blitz and they send out copies of games to reviewers though. Even if you never got a review copy its like, you have to connect the dots that a review is trying to tell you whether something is worth your time and you cant invest your time if you dont like ya know, buy it.
A free to play game with no monetization? As far as reviews go sure. You dont have to spend anything to see it you like it. A game with monetizatoon options? Well yes the value preposition definitely matters here.
Any how difference of opinion is fine.
OrbitalBeard
Member
I think price is a fair thing to address, but it should never affect a game's score. Put it as an aside separate from the main contents of the review.
sloppyjoe_gamer
Gold Member
Even still....if i'm reading a random game review, i just don't care about the price of the game. To me the assumption these days is that most new games are $60, and if we're lucky, $40.
All i care about is it's quality and it it's worth the time to play. Not to sound cliche, but my gaming time is limited these days, so time is more money to me than the game's actual cost seeing as i'm already prepared to spend $60 on a title if i end up getting it...if it turns out less than $60, icing on the cake.
People have different opinions in a forum -- oh no!
I disagree vehemently with that poster: I have no use for how a reviewer values a dollar. I do have use for their impressions on everything else about a videogame.