Titireasca
Neo Member
Our review here if anyone cares http://www.softpedia.com/reviews/games/pc/Dying-Light-Review-471503.shtml
P.S.: It's PC version.
P.S.: It's PC version.
-
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.
Dying Light Review Thread
- Thread starter Jimmyfenix
- Start date
jellies_two
Member
Not so fast. Not everything in games is entirely subjective otherwise it would be pointless to even pass judgement.
There is a subjective component, but reviews usually try to give less weight to personal preferences and highlight issues with the game that most people will uncover.
I think Dying Light has *objectively* better game mechanics than fc4: better co-op function, better mission structure, better skill and weapon progression and so far, better mission variety. These things contribute, hugely, to fun. The other things can be considered a wash, or are more subjective. Such as: I prefer jungles, or, I prefer guns to melee.
It is hard to see why one particular reviewer would either put personal preferences for, say, gun play, above these mechanics, unless they flat out state "well I'm giving it a lower score because I am tired of zombie games and just prefer militia games".
Basically I'm convinced most people will enjoy playing this game as much as, or more than, far cry 4, for reasons of better game mechanics, not for reasons of personal preference.
Karak
Member
That's of course pretending anyone knows the basics of other peoples game-play styles or if they did or didn't rush or if that is their style in the first place. Playing a game for long periods of time isn't instantly bad, or playing it strictly like a game and not walking through a level staring at every flower(I am blowing those out of proportion on purpose). Nor is playing a game slow and looking at everything bad. There is a middle ground.
Also if its their only job(or its on a weekend or if the gamer just wants to) its totally fine for someone to do nothing than play through it, hell I did that as a kid for 15 hour sessions and it doesn't mean someones rushing but it also doesn't mean they will gather more useful information in that time.
No one, no one can see into the mind of someone else and magically identify how they planned to go into something. That is why it is best to find reviewers or players or forum goers you know play in a similar manner to you and utilize their decision to make yours.
King Tubby
Member
You say this as though the people disagreeing haven't played the game. The more I play it, the less I understand giving this game a 5/10, even on a scale where that's simply average or mediocre. It's does some things very well and does not really feel like another game I've played before, except for Dead Island of course and that was not a game I cared for very much. This feels like an 8/10 to me.
fun is subjective. The premise of something being "objectively less fun" is ridiculous, as previously described. Lots of people find lots of things very fun that I find not fun at all; I have no recourse by which to say they're objectively wrong.
Jimmyfenix
Member
Added to OP
jellies_two
Member
Fun is the natural result of well designed games. Otherwise Nintendo would not exist.
If game mechanics are OBJECTIVELY better, then fun is usually the result. So you can say that something is objectively more fun because of the link. With an unstated but obvious "likely to be.." in there.
I'd like to think that reviewers are capable of spotting the difference between poor game mechanics, that stymie fun, and good ones, that promote it.
Which is why I'm confused if the same preson gives a higher score to (say) far cry 4, or Watchdogs, which have game mechanics problems, but are in many ways similar derivative open world quest-a-thons. Unless the score is mostly influenced by personal preference for a style of game. In which case the review is less useful unless you know the reviewer very well.
Anyway it looks like Jim will be an outlier score, even when measured by his own "5 means mediocre" scale.
In other words most reviewers will end up scoring this around their FC4, Watchdogs score, or maybe higher, and that's probably about right.
Where are people getting it takes itself way too seriously? I'm jumping over zombies, sliding into them and setting off hilarious traps. How on earth does that offer a serious nature to the game? The main quest feels slightly serious in that you are trying to stop some crazy guy from using an untested vaccine that could potentially wipe out the quarantined area but other than that most quests have been rather light-hearted.
titan andronicus has whole plotlines stolen from ovid.
Constantine81
Banned
Thank God for Jim Sterling.
Conkerkid11
Member
First off, one of the first attacks you learn lets you literally sprint at a zombie, jump at it, and kick it with both of your feet. Then there's the drop kick.
Second... http://i.imgur.com/5i1PeTr.webm
swazzyswess
Member
post of the year.
Dying Light's story and glitches/bug are the real negatives from the 6 or so hours I've put in so far. It's predictable to the point where you see each plot twist from a good mile away and most missions are simply fetch quest this, fetch quest that.
Where the game is quite enjoyable is in it's combat and traversal, upgrades to both weapons and movement boost this even further later in the game.
It's also pretty satisfying to just hop around with Friends in Co-Op, you can do both story content and side missions with specific mini objectives for Multiplayer (Get here first, kill the most zombies etc.).
Unfortunately I ran into a pretty ugly bug that wiped both my level progress and removed all my weapons. This was triggered by my friends game crashing while in Co-Op. The game lets you choose a new save file from open story missions (if you wish) and gives you adequate gear to make this not game breaking but it's still a major pain. In my case I had to replay about 45 minutes and lost a couple of well crafted weapons.
Where the game is quite enjoyable is in it's combat and traversal, upgrades to both weapons and movement boost this even further later in the game.
It's also pretty satisfying to just hop around with Friends in Co-Op, you can do both story content and side missions with specific mini objectives for Multiplayer (Get here first, kill the most zombies etc.).
Unfortunately I ran into a pretty ugly bug that wiped both my level progress and removed all my weapons. This was triggered by my friends game crashing while in Co-Op. The game lets you choose a new save file from open story missions (if you wish) and gives you adequate gear to make this not game breaking but it's still a major pain. In my case I had to replay about 45 minutes and lost a couple of well crafted weapons.
Constantine81
Banned
Ok, I get that you're having fun with it. But shouldn't a score of 8/10 be reserved for something truly deserving of it? Something that feels different, new, and unique? You could make the argument that the score represents how much fun the reviewer had. But then how can you tell the difference between a game that gets an excellent score for its innovation, versus one that just got one because it's fun? 5 seems about right for a game that does the same things so many other games do, but does them with little less polish. Don't you think?
indigo-cyclops
Member
I had that exact same glitch last night. Was kicking zombies off the side of the building. It was quite funny.
Why does an 8/10 have to be something that's "different, new and unique"? Dying Light really isn't like a lot of other games, just because the individual parts of the game are similar to other games doesn't mean it is on the whole. There has never been another open-world zombie game like this with parkour.
old manatee
Banned
Thank you for making my point. The mechanics are zany slapstick comedy but the graphics, story, and characters are really dark and serious. It's also an open world game that starts with quite a bit of walking down narrow apartment hallways. It's a really tone deaf experience.
What in the hell? This is absolute nonsense.
The mere fact that you have to include a qualifier, not once, but twice ("usually," "likely to be") makes it nonsense right off the bat, even if "how much one enjoys something" wasn't a wholly subjective phenomenon. Which it is. Plenty of people enjoy games with horribly broken and unpolished mechanics. There's nothing objective about it. Even pinning down which mechanics are "good" and which are "bad" is subjective in itself.
NavyPharaoh
Member
This game is so far away from a 5/10, how did he even beat it that quick & other people are still working thru it.
I was playing shadow warrior & GTA 5, but since I got dying light, that's all I can play when I can play.
I was playing shadow warrior & GTA 5, but since I got dying light, that's all I can play when I can play.
My Newborn steals all my time!
That very point is brought up in the review! You should probably read it!
Post of the month at least.
TheRedSnifit
Member
Gonna wait for the Eurogamer review on this.
Glad to see review scores still upset some people, I'd miss the entertainment if they didn't. Here is a gem: http://www.gamespot.com/videos/feedbackula-gta-v-review-revulsion/2300-6414760/#livefyre allover a 9/10 not being a 10/10. Then again, it was about that pos gtav, and saying anything bad about gtav is like asking for a punch in the face.
deeptech
Member
Me too , i had to see one gameplay video to get that impression , seriously. It really is just as he said , played really safe , "AAA" style , nothing new except the name. It's just boring to watch it , let alone play. But hey, that shit gets most of the 8s and 9s these days , so it's all good...
Megatron
Member
Did you play the game or are you just basing that on the video? How far did you get?
I haven't played it yet, I'm just curious.
It's a point not even worth raising these days, for more than just comparison at least. Nearly all games take something from one or more other games and even those that don't do anything new or different with the mechanics they're "stealing" can end up being decent games. I'm not far at all into this game yet, but it feels like it's more than the sum of its "stolen" parts.
GHG
Gold Member
Exactly.
The point is that we have reached "creative saturation" as far as big budget games are concerned these days. Every game steals elements from other games, nothing is truly original anymore. All that matters is how its all put together and whether it feels coherent in the final product, not where individual elements are "stolen" from.
Its better to simply say you didn't like the game and that it didn't resonate well with you than to draw up comparisons to other games and attempt to shame the game as being unoriginal (especially when its clearly not considering the core mechanics).
But this is the "golden standard" that we have come to expect from gaming journalists these days. Where the respective audiences of the journalists ate looking to be "entertained" rather than listen to or read a rational critique of the game.
This is why people take their favorite games journalists opinions as gospel. Not because it makes sense, but because they happen to "like" that person or find them "funny".
These guys know they are in the entertainment business, so instead of behaving like professional journalists they play up to the personality that their fans have become accustomed to liking.
I think that people have a little bit of a childish view of originality (especially with that Shakespeare comment). The shape of the plot and mechanics do not have to be original, they do not have to be "innovative". However, what things do need is to present unoriginal content in a different way - i.e., they need to bring something to the table and not simply steal from it.
So, if two different games have parkour or whatever, one can be really bland while the other stands out in the way it's implemented. Like even though Shadow of Mordor "stole" from Batman and AC, it brings its own flair to the gameplay mechanics that make it exciting.
tl;dr Thank God for Jim Sterling
So, if two different games have parkour or whatever, one can be really bland while the other stands out in the way it's implemented. Like even though Shadow of Mordor "stole" from Batman and AC, it brings its own flair to the gameplay mechanics that make it exciting.
tl;dr Thank God for Jim Sterling
PetriP-TNT
Member
I usually like Jims reviews but the last paragraph where he calls my mother a "stanky ass ho" went a bit too far and now I am on a personal vendetta
GHG
Gold Member
I'm curious here as to what the rationale is here?
What unique "flair" did Mordor bring to the table from a gameplay perspective?
Conkerkid11
Member
The entire nemesis system.
Also not understanding why we're now suggesting that a game needs to be innovative in order to receive high ratings.
I mentioned Far Cry 4 receiving a higher score from Jim earlier because it's a very similar experience to Far Cry 3, and was the second most bug filled game I played last year. I wouldn't rate it low because it's not unique. I would rate it low because it wasn't even close to being a finished game.
You might be onto something here... Anyone know if he reviewed Mirror's Edge?
NavyPharaoh
Member
Would u read a review of a game that got 5/10? THAT score says it all.
GHG
Gold Member
I agree on the nemesis system but I meant more from the perspective of the moment to moment gameplay (combat and traversal mechanics) since that is what the review is getting at.
One could argue that the difference in dynamics between day and night in dying light could be its "unique" feature (the game has actually been marketed as such) but instead we will ignore that for the sake of writing a hyperbolic and despondent review to appease the fans of Jim Sterling.
Lord Phol
Member
I really did not like Dead Island. The setting, the unpolished and repetitive gameplay, the way the combat felt. Alot of people keep mentioning that this feels like Dead Island, but to me it's like a whole other game. Killing zombies is just so much more satisfying (gets better the more you level up as well) and the addition of parkour makes for some interesting and fun traversing that I really haven't experienced much in an FPS before (I know about Mirrors Edge).
I also quite like the atmosphere (good atmosphere is a big positive in my book) and the music is great. The story isn't anything new but it definetly works and I find the characters to be pretty likeable. As I'm writing this I've only played for 10 hours+, but I would definetly give this my recommendations to anyone who isn't zombie-fatigued.
On the negative side I could see the formula becoming tiring after awhile, but so far I'm still enjoying it.
TLDR: Atmosphere, great combat, parkour and polish makes this a whole other game than Dead Island to me. Which is only a good thing!
I also quite like the atmosphere (good atmosphere is a big positive in my book) and the music is great. The story isn't anything new but it definetly works and I find the characters to be pretty likeable. As I'm writing this I've only played for 10 hours+, but I would definetly give this my recommendations to anyone who isn't zombie-fatigued.
On the negative side I could see the formula becoming tiring after awhile, but so far I'm still enjoying it.
TLDR: Atmosphere, great combat, parkour and polish makes this a whole other game than Dead Island to me. Which is only a good thing!
King Tubby
Member
This game is just fun as hell, 12 hours into it. It's not stellar in any one area except that traversal and combat just work and feel very satisfying, and since that is the core gameplay experience, that is enough. I hope it reviews well because I want to see more games in this vein.
As for being innovative, yeah it does crib a lot of things from other titles but as a whole package there isn't another game I can say I've played that is quite like this, even if it is similar in many regards to an Ubisoft title. I'd say in fact that Shadow of Mordor is a great comparison - a game that takes many things from the Ubisoft template, but does it better.
As for being innovative, yeah it does crib a lot of things from other titles but as a whole package there isn't another game I can say I've played that is quite like this, even if it is similar in many regards to an Ubisoft title. I'd say in fact that Shadow of Mordor is a great comparison - a game that takes many things from the Ubisoft template, but does it better.
Cave Johnson
Member
From Jim Sterling's review:
That right there is all I need to hear about this review. It is exactly the kind of information I want to know right before I buy the game and this criticism here clearly points out to all the red flag concerns I had for this game. So far, no other review or impression has even contested these criticisms solidifying the fact that it is an integral criticism to this game.
That right there is all I need to hear about this review. It is exactly the kind of information I want to know right before I buy the game and this criticism here clearly points out to all the red flag concerns I had for this game. So far, no other review or impression has even contested these criticisms solidifying the fact that it is an integral criticism to this game.
Darn, I wish I hadn't unlocked the curb-stomp finisher. A little too overpowered for how easy it is to trip enemies. I already miss having to club them several times in the back of the head before they'd die. I like a bit of effort.
Also, I now own two different handguns and a plethora of 30 bullets pooled between them. I don't like them very much though. DL definitely aint a shooting kind of game.
Also, I now own two different handguns and a plethora of 30 bullets pooled between them. I don't like them very much though. DL definitely aint a shooting kind of game.
PrivateRyan
Member
Agree with this.
I hate the token deduction of points from a review score because a game isn't "innovative."
Surely the more pertinent point is whether it feels fresh or stale, which isn't in direct proportion to how "innovative" it is or how many mechanics it has "stolen."
This mostly sums up what I think of Jim's review. I respect him as a dude who talks about games, but I honestly believe his review is 'wrong' in the sense that he's asking something from the game that's not there.
Information? It's unfounded speculation - which he admits!
That doesn't belong in reviews.
Messofanego
Banned
Cave Johnson
Member
Which part?
NavyPharaoh
Member
I can only imagine what this comment would've been if you would've stayed with your vision. Instead Warner Bros got to u and this comes off as snarky comment #8766
5/10
What on flippin earth are you talking about?
You're being sarcastic or something, right?
The sentence with the part coloured in red. The part underlined before it also, if I'm honest.