Support NeoGAF

[mcmudman]

When I played Ryse at an Area One event it definitely looked good. But the gameplay and controls didn't really interest me and were a bit boring to play. It could be just me though.

 

[Gucci Messiah]

I wouldn't imagine most forum goers give reviews much credence. The problem people have with review scores though is that they do directly impact game sales, and by proxy the chances for similar titles/sequels.

This is why we live in a world of Call of Duty now. Reviews generally shat themselves with glee over the first few, especially the first Modern Warfare, gave the franchise over-inflated scores for several more iterations going forward as basically a legacy title, and as a result it has sold incredibly well, done better on metacritic than it should have, and the industry as a whole looked for ways to ape it.

Same with Madden a few generations ago. It continually got over inflated scores due to popularity and EA's PR muscle, resulting in a self perpetuating cycle and sales dominance. Madden 2005 has a Metacritic of 91. NFL 2k5 has a Metacritic of 90. Any sane person who actually likes football games and has played both can see a MASSIVE gulf between the two games in pretty much every possible way, and one cost less than half the price of the other. Yet on average reviewers recommended Madden to their readers over 2k5. End result was that Madden still out-sold 2k5 and EA then struck a deal with the NFL to make sure they never had to worry about competition again, which the NFL was all for since Madden was the football game. If Madden had instead gotten the low to high 70's the franchise deserved sales might have been much more equal and the NFL would have had real concerns about cutting one of the two titles out of the market.

Reviews don't matter for hardcore gamers on a per game basis, but they do direct the industry down specific roads. Shoddy game review practices by journalists inherently weakens the industry. They're the last gateway of quality control for an industry that half-asses it's internal QA/QC pretty regularly.

Your average gamer doesn't check review scores so I don't think they impact sales as much as you think.

 

[Gbraga]

"What the combat system relies on, rather than complexity, is timing. Getting the timing right on parrying an enemy blow, then the combination in which you strike back, and the precise timing of each of those strikes, is what Ryse is all about. It's a very tight focus for gameplay, but I found it to be highly satisfying. Its simplicity is a big part of why it works."

So what? What does one thing has to do with the other? Parrying an enemy requires tight timing in DMC4 too, hell, probably tighter than Rising, and it's not the only thing you can do.

 

[Mr_Zombie]

Once the Polygon review is out of the way we can see how the real reviews stack up.

who? lol

Just wait until the real reviews hit.

This is the review source that NeoGAF deserves, but not the one it needs right now.

Let's wait for more serious gaming sites...

It's hilarious how people start to downplay sites/reviewers only because they don't belong to a group of the most popular USA/UK sites. Because, you know, all those magazines and gaming sites outside USA and UK (and there are a lot of them) are obviously worse and less professional and their opinion is meaningless. Instead let's wait for IGN, Gamespot, Eurogamer, EDGE, Kotaku, Polygon and other outlets that are constantly shit on for being unprofessional (especially if you don't agree with their current opinion - see every thread about a reviewer who dares to give a hyped game low-ish score, or reviewer who was obviously "moneyhatted" because he liked a game that other people don't) and yet the only ones that publish those "real reviews".

 

[SlasherJPC]

Some random site that doesn't have the backing of Giant Bomb, Polygon, or IGN reviews a game, and it doesn't count right? People are so stuck on name brands so to speak. I'd rather trust regular gamers and people I know versus then the things I've seen this industry as a whole pull. Not saying it's always the case but I can't turn a blind eye to some of the things that have been pulled over the years.

It's hilarious how people start to downplay sites/reviewers only because they don't belong to a group of the most popular USA/UK sites. Because, you know, all those magazines and gaming sites outside USA and UK (and there are a lot of them) are obviously worse and less professional and their opinion is meaningless. Instead let's wait for IGN, Gamespot, Eurogamer, EDGE, Kotaku, Polygon and other outlets that are constantly shit on for being unprofessional (especially if you don't agree with their current opinion - see every thread about a reviewer who dares to give a hyped game low-ish score) and yet the only ones that publish those "real reviews".

Just saw this above me after I posted. You read my mind sir.

 

[Drek]

So why don't we just start comparing Crash Bandicoot to God of War which this is scenario similar too

Mario to Call of Duty?
Uncharted to Dance Central 4?
.
.

The only basis of these 2 games is they are platform exclusives so instead of looking at each in their own merit, we need to bring up console warrior bullshit

You don't? I compare every game to every other game internally already. I have a genre bias I take into account when trying to make comparisons, hence why I think Final Fantasy IV is better than Super Mario World, but that doesn't mean I can't intelligently discuss how Super Mario World is an inherently superior game.

Pro tip: anyone who can't compare any game to any other game in an objective fashion shouldn't be reviewing games, and anyone who uses the "opinions, man!" cop out shouldn't either. Quality is not subjective, it's binary once you purge all forms of bias from the equation.

 

[Mendax]

Oh fucking hell get over it. Justice for Cerny and justice for shitty main character design.

Ryse has always looked an average game when it comes to the game play department and it's pretty obvious that reviews will be all over the place.

justice??? how on earth..

 

[RetroStu]

No... gonna have to agree with Bundy on this one. Killzone seems a far more impressive game from a technical standpoint (Textures, resolution, framerate, etc). If nothing else it is at least graphically consistent, whereas in everything I've seen thus far with regard to Ryse, while the player character and some of the areas look very nice, most of the enemy NPCs look like total ass in comparison. Very visually jarring imo.

Regardless, it's probably pointless to compare two games with such wildly varying visual styles, I can only speak to which one has proven the most consistently impressive title to look at in my view since it's announcement.

Eh?, not to me and the framerate on Ryse seems smooth and consistent from the tons of vids i have watched, i haven't seen any slowdown and textures look great, Killzone has quite a lot of low res textures when you get close.
Each to their own though.

 

[hoos30]

Interesting that 3news doesnt have a single ps4 review only xbox one

It's a long flight from NZ to New York.

 

[Tom Penny]

Potenial GOTY.

 

[MThanded]

Potenial GOTY.

true

 

[xxgrplayer]

 

[gogosox8]

So a couple of things stood out in this review. One, is that the reviewer says that you can either buy upgrades via the xp you get from killing enemies or buy them from in game currency (presumably). That begs the question why does there need to be an xp system if you can just buy all of the upgrades? Seems like it should be one or the other. Either use xp system to buy upgrades or use in game currency, not both. That just strikes me as awfully gamey, especially for a game so focused on realism.

Second is that he brought up the fact that you basically are only sword and shield the whole way through and you really don't get any new moves via the upgrade system, just stuff like more health, do more damage, etc. That sounds really boring to me. I guess the reviewer liked all the kill animations but wouldn't that get tiring after the first hour or so of the game? It sounded boring just reading. Mashing a over and over again and then every once in a while pushing x doesn't sound like much fun. And its funny that the reviewer brings up Heavenly Sword. Heavenly Sword was very shallow mechanically and had some performance issues but had great art direction and a pretty cool story with interesting characters. Sounds an awful lot like Ryse to me after reading his review.

 

[Drek]

Your average gamer doesn't check review scores so I don't think they impact sales as much as you think.

The industry tries bonus payouts to them. This is an agreement both publishers and developers have agreed to. Publishers "target" metacritic scores with how they fund titles. Publishers frequently bribe review outlets with exclusive access, trips for "coverage", etc. and threaten reduced access going forward to influence review scores.

This is how the people in power of a multi-billion dollar industry treat review scores, more particularly metacritic review scores. You don't think they have legitimate tracking to prove that reviews impact the average gamer's buying choices and are just sinking millions upon millions into targeting review scores on a hunch?

 

[Zephyrus]

Your average gamer doesn't check review scores so I don't think they impact sales as much as you think.

but they do follow word of mouth. And which games get talked about the most? The ones with the best scores.

 

[HawksWinStanley]

If an unknown site gives a good review then they're written off. If a well known site gives a good review then they're paid off.

 

[Gucci Messiah]

but they do follow word of mouth. And which games get talked about the most? The ones with the best scores.

No, the ones with the biggest marketing budgets. I didn't see people hyping up software like Catherine outside of hardcore gaming circles and that got great reviews.

The industry tries bonus payouts to them. This is an agreement both publishers and developers have agreed to. Publishers "target" metacritic scores with how they fund titles. Publishers frequently bribe review outlets with exclusive access, trips for "coverage", etc. and threaten reduced access going forward to influence review scores.

This is how the people in power of a multi-billion dollar industry treat review scores, more particularly metacritic review scores. You don't think they have legitimate tracking to prove that reviews impact the average gamer's buying choices and are just sinking millions upon millions into targeting review scores on a hunch?

I'm sorry but this is the impression I got reading your post:

Not everyone is paid off brah

 

[Khalifa Jayy]

Sounds like you have to be quick with your timing during combat events.

Nicely done hahaha

 

[LiK]

I don't believe him.

 

[Spider from Mars]

If an unknown site gives a good review then they're written off. If a well known site gives a good review then they're paid off.

Don't you know how game reviews work? Low scores are troll/click bait attention seekers and high scores are paid for by publishers.

 

[hwateber]

The game is very pretty and I'm a sucker for spectacle sometimes. Still not sold on the combat but I'm ready to be proven wrong though. I'll eat crow and commit senjutsu.

 

[Jeels]

The mighty power of the Xbox One console should be trademarked.

Good first review, but don't really trust it. Need to see a variety of scores.

 

[Zephyrus]

Let me just say that a game that had every single video show mediocre combat and animations, had basically the majority of videogame sites saying it was boring and average, score that high is enough to make me call money hats.

Microsoft is invested in making the xbox one looking like the best system of the two.
They certainly have to since it launches after the 100 dollars with superior hardware, PS4.

What's the best way to do it? Have it's launch games rated high.

Come on people. It doesn't take a genius to see that this isn't beneath a company that is historically known as buying their way into everything.

Call me a fanboy, call me deluded, call me everything you want, but don't deny this likely possibility.

I refuse to believe that Crytek's and Microsoft's marketing was so bad that it showed us for months the worst parts of the game and now the game is suddenly good.

Not to mention how a reviewer (can't honestly remember which one) mentioned they reached half of the game in about 90 minutes.

 

[Winterfang]

The game is very pretty and I'm a sucker for spectacle sometimes. Still not sold on the combat but I'm ready to be proven wrong though. I'll eat crow and commit senjutsu.

Naruto is that you?

 

[fantomena]

Im gonna wait till the embargo opens. I never trust any review which releases before the embargo lifts.

If Ryse get's tons of 8/10, 9/10 and 10/10 AFTER the embrago lifts, then I will trust it, but not now.

 

[Zephyrus]

No, the ones with the biggest marketing budgets. I didn't see people hyping up software like Catherine outside of hardcore gaming circles and that got great reviews.

Two words.

DEMON SOULS.

Barely marketed. Had tremendous word of mouth. Spawned a, now, hugely awaited series called DARK SOULS.

Even Catherine got great sales for the abysmal marketing it had.

Marketing won't do shit when your title gets a mediocre score unless your brand is recognized worldwide.

 

[Drek]

I'm sorry but this is the impression I got reading your post:


Not everyone is paid off brah

Did I say everyone was paid off? Or are you just going to ignore the many, many, many tales of publishers doing every one of the practices I mentioned?

Or in "image encapsulating impression of response" form:

 

[Gucci Messiah]

Naruto is that you?

"Believe it!"

 

[Maxy]

I have no idea, but are there any confirmed cases where video game review scores have been bought?

 

[PartTimeWarrior]

3news playing Ryse

 

[silver.tongue]

Interesting that 3news doesnt have a single ps4 review only xbox one

Not gonna give the site clicks, but this is a eye opener, guys.

 

[Derrick01]

.....

I think I'll just wait to see the normal reviews, not that I really trust them any more than I do 3news. This is a heavily cinematic, linear game that relies way too much on graphics at the expense of gameplay. I predict most of the western press will at least like it to some degree.

 

[Kade]

The industry tries bonus payouts to them. This is an agreement both publishers and developers have agreed to. Publishers "target" metacritic scores with how they fund titles. Publishers frequently bribe review outlets with exclusive access, trips for "coverage", etc. and threaten reduced access going forward to influence review scores.

This is how the people in power of a multi-billion dollar industry treat review scores, more particularly metacritic review scores. You don't think they have legitimate tracking to prove that reviews impact the average gamer's buying choices and are just sinking millions upon millions into targeting review scores on a hunch?

Your name really set the tone for this post.

 

[Trey]

If Polygon gives this a 10, don't expect NeoGAF to be accessible for days.

Anything over a 7.5.

"How did this score higher than Last of Us and Killzone???"

 

[Winterfang]

Let me just say that a game that had every single video show mediocre combat and animations, had basically the majority of videogame sites saying it was boring and average, score that high is enough to make me call money hats.

Microsoft is invested in making the xbox one looking like the best system of the two.
They certainly have to since it launches after the 100 dollars with superior hardware, PS4.

What's the best way to do it? Have it's launch games rated high.

Come on people. It doesn't take a genius to see that this isn't beneath a company that is historically known as buying their way into everything.

Call me a fanboy, call me deluded, call me everything you want, but don't deny this likely possibility.

I refuse to believe that Crytek's and Microsoft's marketing was so bad that it showed us for months the worst parts of the game and now the game is suddenly good.

Not to mention how a reviewer (can't honestly remember which one) mentioned they reached half of the game in about 90 minutes.

I'll play devil's lawyer here. I can't watch videos bit wasn't the Gamespot stream and later trailers show a rise in quality?

 

[Fistwell]

Not gonna give the site clicks, but this is a eye opener, guys.

Why not and how so, in that order.

 

[drgambit]

3news playing Ryse

YES

 

[piratepwnsninja]

Not gonna give the site clicks, but this is a eye opener, guys.

Really? Or could it be because PS4's not out in New Zealand until the end of the month? Of course not. Has to be a conspiracy, though.

 

[hwateber]

Naruto is that you?

Believe it! No, I don't have the talk no jutsu that SenjutsuSage does. I'm still looking for that extensive Ryse combat write up he made based on never playing the game

 

[MikeE21286]

The game looks real nice. I'd love for it to actually be good.

 

[Gucci Messiah]

Did I say everyone was paid off? Or are you just going to ignore the many, many, many tales of publishers doing every one of the practices I mentioned?

Or in "image encapsulating impression of response" form:

Pretty much, maybe you should go back and read your own post.

Keep that tinfoil hat on tight.

 

[RetroStu]

Really? Or could it be because PS4's not out in New Zealand until the end of the month? Of course not. Has to be a conspiracy, though.

Pretty much, it would be funny if it wasn't already boring 3 months ago.

 

[Nemesis_]

Not gonna give the site clicks, but this is a eye opener, guys.

Sony have sent barely any PS4 stuff to AU or NZ media yet. It's eye opening how many people don't realise there's more to the world than just NA if we're going to get profound.

 

[Into]

Predicting 7.5 from Polygon, they will give it the same score as Game of the Year contender The Last of Us, they have to. Its just perfect

 

[-MD-]

If this thing gets higher than a 7/10 average I'll eat a house.

 

[FUNKNOWN iXi]

I can wait to see so many people meltdown if the reviews are generally positive for this game.

 

[Zephyrus]

I'll play devil's lawyer here. I can't watch videos bit wasn't the Gamespot stream and later trailers show a rise in quality?

Unfortunately, I can't comment on that since I haven't exactly been following this particularly game. Just enough to know it was the stinker of the bunch.

Hence why I don't talk about any other xbox one launch titles.

 

[Drek]

Your name really set the tone for this post.

In what way, pray tell?

Pretty much, maybe you should go back and read your own post.

Keep that tinfoil hat on tight.

So your belief is that industry PR has never tried to influence a review score?

 

[SlipperyMoose]

If this thing gets higher than a 7/10 average I'll eat a house.

What size house we talking about hear?

 

[Gucci Messiah]

Two words.

DEMON SOULS.

Barely marketed. Had tremendous word of mouth. Spawned a, now, hugely awaited series called DARK SOULS.

Even Catherine got great sales for the abysmal marketing it had.

Marketing won't do shit when your title gets a mediocre score unless your brand is recognized worldwide.

Demon Souls is the exception rather than the rule, you're not going to win this argument.

And Catherine sold well for the budget. Compare the money and buzz that game received to something like Call of Duty or Assassins Creed.

Bigger marketing budget = high sales
High review scores =/= high sales