Support NeoGAF

[EventHorizon]

Depends on the test. Good test grading follows the bell curve for an agreed upon normal distribution .

I disagree. A good test should be calibrated so that 100% represents an excellent understanding of the relevant material. When trying to make tests that instead focus on trying to force the average to a lower percent like you suggest, the test ends up testing more trivia type knowledge that really isn't relative.

Note: I am referring to artificially forcing the mean average lower. If the core material is really that hard then that is fine.

Depends how desperate I was to see a doctor. Ideally, I'd like to see a doctor who got 100%. After all, what happens if my ailment falls in the 30% of content he didn't grade on?

Likewise, if I wanted a video game, ideally I'm going to go for one that's of the highest quality. But if there's nothing new out and I want something to play, I'll happily check out the more "average" titles. Besides, it's all subjective anyway. I quite enjoyed Golden Axe: Beast Rider.

The whole argument you're making is silly anyway, Reviews are subjective critique. American testing if usually multi-choice and short answer questions of fact retrieval. Apples and oranges.

And nobody died from playing a bad video game.

Well you are making my point. The doctor that you consider good is not at 50%. As you said, you'd have to be desperate to see him. Same is true for video games.

First off testing isn't all objective. Have you ever taken an advanced literature class. Second there are objective parts of a game review like performance and image quality. Finally we are talking about the subjective nature of what we consider a "good" score. It is the scale itself we are discussing not how the scores on that scale are determined.

 

[UpUpDownDown]

Great reviews! Wasn't expecting any 10s to be honest.

Loved the first, didn't have time to try the second so I should be sitting real pretty for this one!!

 

[Stoof]

So. Is this a good summary?

Small sites love it, fans seem to be buzzing, and the bigger sites are dinging it, a sonys game, hypocritically again (because they know they can get away with it).

So, just another "average" sony franchise that will sell 2-3 million? Same thing happened with killzone.

That is the opposite of a good summary.

 

[And_Gignac]

Are reviews really that bad?

I mean, it has an 81 in metacritic. Thats a decent number.

 

[Hellshy.]

How, is it different from the previous Infamous games? New or more innovative than other open world superhero games like Crackdown, Batman Arkham City, Saint's Row 4, or Prototype?

The vent jumps look like they forego the need for any platforming, are they frequent? Honestly, haven't seen any climbing.

City destruction? Particle effects?

The smoke karma bomb seems pretty innovative to me. I have not seen something like that in any open world game.

 

[erawsd]

I think its great that reviews are being hard on next gen games and encouraging devs to do more than just crank up pixels and shaders.

81 is still a great score and something to be proud of. Hopefully, Sucker Punch spends a bit more time advancing mission structure and the morality system in the next game.

 

[Creaking]

Are reviews really that bad?

I mean, it has an 81 in metacritic. Thats a decent number.

Yeah, but it's the lowest average score in the series, despite most reviewers agreeing it's the best game from said series. What sense does that make?

 

[-tetsuo-]

So. Is this a good summary?

Small sites love it, fans seem to be buzzing, and the bigger sites are dinging it, a sonys game, hypocritically again (because they know they can get away with it).

So, just another "average" sony franchise that will sell 2-3 million? Same thing happened with killzone.

Wut

 

[TrojanBlade]

This is absurd

Or its just the truth. Anyways my argument is not that IF:SS got some lower scores from these sites, but that the reviewers as usual are not being fair.

ITs a real pirty that Sony doesn't promote/promulgate/hype their games like the competition does.

I don't believe for a second Titanfall's average score would be so high if MS hadn't vaunted it so much over the last number of months.

Look at Battlefield 4! If that game had come out from Sony with all the flaws it had present when it launched, it would've been castigated.

Well this time Sony did push the game a lot more than it has in the past. You gave a good example about BF4. What a shitty game in terms of MP playability which took a long time to get fixed and even now is not perfect. But look at the meta score: 86 for a broken game!! Come on.

I guarantee if TF on XB1 was a 1080/60 game, it would have gotten 9+ scores.

Anyways got nothing more to say about this topic.

 

[BigSpleenAttack]

Yeah, but it's the lowest average score in the series, despite most reviewers agreeing it's the best game from said series. What sense does that make?

Standards change........

 

[VanCityGamer]

First of all, congrats to Sucker Punch and Sony. A Meta score of 81 is great.

This is a tough one for me, though. My only experience with Infamous games is an hour of the original Infamous on PS3. I got it for free as part of Sony's Welcome Back program. It just didn't click with me. The biggest problem is that I found the projectile powers quite boring; it was a far less satisfying replacement for guns, in my opinion. Admittedly, I probably should have given the game longer to introduce new powers and mechanics. Traversal was neat, but the city seemed lifeless and dull to me. The graphics were also very mediocre, and the story wasn't doing much for me yet. I quit and never went back to the series.

Fast forward to now. The PS4 is out, and I'm looking forward to new games. I've played AC4 (8.7 from me), Resogun (8.8 from me), Outlast (9 from me), BF4 (8 from me), Don't Starve (didn't like it at all), and Contrast (6.5 from me). I've really enjoyed the system, and am excited for more. I just don't know if Infamous: Second Son is the right experience for me. The reviews are solid for sure, but I was hoping for an 85 or higher to perhaps convince me that Second Son is so awesome that it transcends negative opinions of previous games in the series; an unrealistic expectation, but it's what I was hoping for. Any advice from you guys?

 

[hohoXD123]

wow you have a problem...

if a doctor got %50 in their test, they PASSED and are considered capeable of the level of care and knowledge to diagnose and treat their patients. Iyes due to their score they may only be able to become a GP while people with higher test scores could go on to become surgeons or they would help develop new treatments. but the fact remais that the person that got %50 is a fully qualified doctor.

GPs aren't some lower level doctor or something, the person with 50% can still go on to become the top cardiothoracic surgeon or whatever. But yes, passing shows that you have the necessary knowledge to be a doctor, beyond that is largely useless compared to other factors. But again, this is all irrelevant.

Are reviews really that bad?

I mean, it has an 81 in metacritic. Thats a decent number.

It is definitely decent and probably expected tbh, but a lot of people were hopeful that it would get high 80s/90s.

 

[ShinMaruku]

Yeah, but it's the lowest average score in the series, despite most reviewers agreeing it's the best game from said series. What sense does that make?

Metacritic is hogshit. That is what that means. Actually reviews scores too but people are strange creatures that sabotage themselves.

 

[oconnomiyaki]

First of all, congrats to Sucker Punch and Sony. A Meta score of 81 is great.

This is a tough one for me, though. My only experience with Infamous games is an hour of the original Infamous on PS3. I got it for free as part of Sony's Welcome Back program. It just didn't click with me. The biggest problem is that I found the projectile powers quite boring; it was a far less satisfying replacement for guns, in my opinion. Admittedly, I probably should have given the game longer to introduce new powers and mechanics. Traversal was neat, but the city seemed lifeless and dull to me. The graphics were also very mediocre, and the story wasn't doing much for me yet. I quit and never went back to the series.

Fast forward to now. The PS4 is out, and I'm looking forward to new games. I've played AC4 (8.7 from me), Resogun (8.8 from me), Outlast (9 from me), BF4 (8 from me), Don't Starve (didn't like it at all), and Contrast (6.5 from me). I've really enjoyed the system, and am excited for more. I just don't know if Infamous: Second Son is the right experience for me. The reviews are solid for sure, but I was hoping for an 85 or higher to perhaps convince me that Second Son is so awesome that it transcends negative opinions of previous games in the series; an unrealistic expectation, but it's what I was hoping for. Any advice from you guys?

I'm in a similar position, so will be interested to hear what people say. The originals didn't click with me, but the powers this time seem more interesting and potentially satisfying in terms of combat and traversal. Plus Cole didn't click with me as a character, so the fresh start is enticing. They've got a department store selling it here for like $40 off, so I'm tempted, but I'm not convinced enough to take the plunge yet with everyone saying that it's for fans of the series.

 

[nelsonroyale]

First of all, congrats to Sucker Punch and Sony. A Meta score of 81 is great.

This is a tough one for me, though. My only experience with Infamous games is an hour of the original Infamous on PS3. I got it for free as part of Sony's Welcome Back program. It just didn't click with me. The biggest problem is that I found the projectile powers quite boring; it was a far less satisfying replacement for guns, in my opinion. Admittedly, I probably should have given the game longer to introduce new powers and mechanics. Traversal was neat, but the city seemed lifeless and dull to me. The graphics were also very mediocre, and the story wasn't doing much for me yet. I quit and never went back to the series.

Fast forward to now. The PS4 is out, and I'm looking forward to new games. I've played AC4 (8.7 from me), Resogun (8.8 from me), Outlast (9 from me), BF4 (8 from me), Don't Starve (didn't like it at all), and Contrast (6.5 from me). I've really enjoyed the system, and am excited for more. I just don't know if Infamous: Second Son is the right experience for me. The reviews are solid for sure, but I was hoping for an 85 or higher to perhaps convince me that Second Son is so awesome that it transcends negative opinions of previous games in the series; an unrealistic expectation, but it's what I was hoping for. Any advice from you guys?

If it helps the world seems a lot more vibrant then ACIV in many ways, with a much greater attention to detail. Basic traversal isnt as smooth as AC I would say, but the powers feel awesome. Visually it is more impressive than AC as well. I prefer it anyway, but I find AC games pretty damn repetitive overall.

By the way I got the original free and never really played it, and never got onto Infamous 2 because I meant to play the first before it.

 

[Spehornoob]

The reviews seem mostly fair. InFAMOUS isn't as universally praised as a series as something like Uncharted or GTA, and this looks to be an evolution on the formula more than anything. Fine with me, since I love the other games.

I do think the "it doesn't feel next gen" complaints and the GTA comparisons are bullshit, though.

 

[zebaz08]

Well, it would help if the next entry had good gameplay and wasn't just a mediocre third person shooter disguised as a superhero game.

 

[hodgy100]

GPs aren't some lower level doctor or something, the person with 50% can still go on to become the top cardiothoracic surgeon or whatever. But yes, passing shows that you have the necessary knowledge to be a doctor, beyond that is largely useless compared to other factors. But again, this is all irrelevant.

aah sorry. I wasn't trying to pass GP's as "lesser doctors" just that low grades while they may limit your job options doesn't mean you are "a bad doctor". I shouldnt have assumed.

and yeah, its a bad comparison anyway and off topic. I just found the mentality that "my doctor must have 90% test results" ridiculous.

 

[Spehornoob]

To be fair, I thought Infamous 1 totally felt like a shitty third person shooter until a third of the way or so into the game. Once you got some more powers and traversal mechanisms, the game shined, though.

 

[PeakPointMatrix]

So you'd be ok with going to a doctor who only passed his exams with a 46% rating? After all that'd be about average to you.

Yeah, so we're comparing a medical practitioner's review ratings to those of a piece consumable entertainment now?

ahaha

hahahahahaha

Hoo boy. I knew it was a mistake entering this thread, luckily I can stop reading posts while I'm ahead.

 

[Fbh]

Based on the gameplays I've seen I was expecting it to perform like Infamous 2... and it did.
Infamous 2 was one of the few last gen open world games that I really enjoyed so I'm sure I'll really like this .




I never understood all the drama around reviews.

Play the game you like guys. Not the game some random person on the internet that you don't even know says you should like

 

[FDC1]

Yeah, but it's the lowest average score in the series, despite most reviewers agreeing it's the best game from said series. What sense does that make?

You have to take account of their release date. If Infamous 1 was released today, it would not get the same score it got 5 years ago...

 

[uncledonnie]

I think 81 is actually a good score. That is, until you look at other titles. NFS rivals is like 80 and AC IV is like 84? I:SS boasts better visuals than both, but might lose out to AC's framerate, so that scale is still ok.

Comments like this completely baffle me. Graphical performance is just one factor in any review and in my opinion, hardly the most important one.

 

[BigDug13]

Halo felt crazy fresh back then. Jumping in a Warthog with a friend in the gunners seat and ripping around that planet was golden.

Halo was cool, but Halo 2 is what was truly revolutionary. Because it piggy-backed on another thing that was revolutionary at the time, the internet.

Console FPS games with online multiplayer basically started with Halo 2. PC gamers had it for awhile, not discounting that. But for consoles, it was revolutionary. Halo 1 was simply a pretty FPS game with nice local LAN and split screen co-op and deathmatch. But Halo 2!

 

[Kintaro]

Yeah, but it's the lowest average score in the series, despite most reviewers agreeing it's the best game from said series. What sense does that make?

It means a) standards change and the bar for some people have been raised by other games or b) the previous two are overrated. Or c) a combo of both. Or even d) that people are expecting more out of Sony's 1st parties now (similar on how people expect the world from Nintendo's 1st party games) and this was a little bit of let down? Who knows.

To be honest, I wonder if Sucker Punch/Sony isn't just a little bit disappointed by the overall average. 81 isn't bad at all, but it's not close to elite status.

 

[EventHorizon]

wow you have a problem...

if a doctor got %50 in their test, they PASSED and are considered capeable of the level of care and knowledge to diagnose and treat their patients. however due to their score they may only be able to become a GP while people with higher test scores could go on to become specialist doctors, surgeons or they could help develop new treatments. but the fact remains that the person that got %50 is a fully qualified doctor.

The discussion is not whether the doctor passed or not, it is whether we consider them a good doctor. No one doubts that a 50% game is still a game. It is just not a very good one.

 

[sobaka770]

Okay, I want to clarify my previous statement. There is no single power in-game which makes it next-gen. If you thought that it wast the case, then I apologise.

For me, it's more about the overall package. Previous Infamous titles felt somewhat clunky the graphics were muddy and technically "meh", now the feel of being a superhero just awes you much more. The game pushes a lot of things at the same time and makes it look easy. The most destructive powers are just that, and I don't know what tech compromises would need to be made to bring those to older gen, while maintaining their awesomeness.

Smoke traversal is everywhere, at least I have little trouble finding one or two smoke vents per building. While cool, I don't think that it, alone, can justify the next-gen feel. The game however keeps up the detail levels and framerate very smoothly even when you move around quickly or destroy a large base.

 

[sono]

Wow those are great.

 

[Hellshy.]

First of all, congrats to Sucker Punch and Sony. A Meta score of 81 is great.

This is a tough one for me, though. My only experience with Infamous games is an hour of the original Infamous on PS3. I got it for free as part of Sony's Welcome Back program. It just didn't click with me. The biggest problem is that I found the projectile powers quite boring; it was a far less satisfying replacement for guns, in my opinion. Admittedly, I probably should have given the game longer to introduce new powers and mechanics. Traversal was neat, but the city seemed lifeless and dull to me. The graphics were also very mediocre, and the story wasn't doing much for me yet. I quit and never went back to the series.

Fast forward to now. The PS4 is out, and I'm looking forward to new games. I've played AC4 (8.7 from me), Resogun (8.8 from me), Outlast (9 from me), BF4 (8 from me), Don't Starve (didn't like it at all), and Contrast (6.5 from me). I've really enjoyed the system, and am excited for more. I just don't know if Infamous: Second Son is the right experience for me. The reviews are solid for sure, but I was hoping for an 85 or higher to perhaps convince me that Second Son is so awesome that it transcends negative opinions of previous games in the series; an unrealistic expectation, but it's what I was hoping for. Any advice from you guys?

It got a 81 which is good, especially since sony was being strict as to what reviewers were aloud to talk about. I was expecting worse after I heard about tath. If you ask me its why sessler gave such a bad review. I lost all hope for reviewers after today. All this talk about not next gen enough but yet bad frame rate. dumb AI , and screen tearing are next gen enough.

 

[Servbot24]

Yeah, but it's the lowest average score in the series, despite most reviewers agreeing it's the best game from said series. What sense does that make?

The universe is chaotic.

 

[Amentallica]

Well, it would help if the next entry had good gameplay and wasn't just a mediocre third person shooter disguised as a superhero game.

What games do you like out of curiosity?

 

[Majanew]

right on!! In case of Battlefield 4, Bad Company 2's gameplay was actually better

People keep saying that weird crap... nope, still not true.

 

[BashNasty]

Yeah, but it's the lowest average score in the series, despite most reviewers agreeing it's the best game from said series. What sense does that make?

As time goes on, expectations rise.

Doesn't matter to me, I loved both of the previous infamous games and I fully expect to love this one. Honestly, I expected a few points higher on the metacritic scale, but who cares!

Haha, that was me being facetious, clearly a lot of people in this thread care.

 

[Bundy]

Are reviews really that bad?

I mean, it has an 81 in metacritic. Thats a decent number.

.... the reviews are great!

 

[Cheech]

As time goes on, expectations rise.

Not just that, but people expect sequels to do something other than just put out a prettier version of what they've already played.

Which is why I got bored as hell during Infamous 2 and stopped playing, and why I cancelled my Second Son preorder at lunch today. Not paying $60 for something I already played.

 

[megabytecr]

I used to care about reviews, but lately they are losing validity in my case. Now for those angry about an 8 I don´t get it. W101 anyone? I think the best way is to read a trusted reviewer to get an idea about the game but thats it. The rest is on you... Believe in yourself!!

I have only played Infamous 1 for a bit and I was bored and started playing something else and never came back. It could be one of those games that I have to come back and give it a chance to stick with me, but atm I don´t care enough for SS to get a PS4 yet.

Great for those that enjoy it because I have to admit that it looks amazing, I have been in the screenshot thread and the work in the graphics is impressive.

 

[oconnomiyaki]

Well you are making my point. The doctor that you consider good is not at 50%. As you said, you'd have to be desperate to see him. Same is true for video games.

First off testing isn't all objective. Have you ever taken an advanced literature class. Second there are objective parts of a game review like performance and image quality. Finally we are talking about the subjective nature of what we consider a "good" score. It is the scale itself we are discussing not how the scores on that scale are determined.

Uh... you're straying a bit here. The original point was about averages and pass marks. Now, without knowing how the doctor learned on the job, I'd probably consider a doctor who got 50% passes to be an average doctor, not Dr Nick. And I'd be happy to see them depending on what it was for. But obviously I'd rather see an excellent doctor, if not by scores then by reputation. It's the same for video games. Making 50% the average doesn't suddenly mean I want to play only average video games. It just means the whole scale is utilised and that it's easier to find out what the consensus is about what is a truly great game.

Besides, what makes a great game is subjective.

And I have a first class honours degree in English Literature, so yeah. But seeing as essay writing is about presenting a convincing argument backed up with evidence as to why you came to that conclusion, I'm not really sure limiting a pass to 30% of the scale really benefits anyone. But then I'm used to a system where 65% or so is a B.

 

[FantasticMrFoxdie]

Halo, Doctors exams, drive-by 'is this bad posts', next-gen gameplay, Metacritics

Spoiler

i still love you gaf

 

[Tidus_Great]

game looks fantastic easily the best game of this generation so far.

 

[prwxv3]

Looks like next gen gamplay is our next big buzzword.

 

[Amentallica]

I think knowing what other games score makes it difficult to accept scores of another game. Unfortunately we are human and people don't have an objective outlook. What one game is bashed for another game might have it overlooked. It's unfair and I don't expect these gaming journalists to be very accurate. You might as well try something out for yourself (unless it's Superman 64, listen to everyone in that case).

 

[A_Gorilla]

Uh... you're straying a bit here. The original point was about averages and pass marks. Now, without knowing how the doctor learned on the job, I'd probably consider a doctor who got 50% passes to be an average doctor, not Dr Nick. And I'd be happy to see them depending on what it was for. But obviously I'd rather see an excellent doctor, if not by scores then by reputation. It's the same for video games. Making 50% the average doesn't suddenly mean I want to play only average video games. It just means the whole scale is utilised and that it's easier to find out what the consensus is about what is a truly great game.

Besides, what makes a great game is subjective.

And I have a first class honours degree in English Literature, so yeah. But seeing as essay writing is about presenting a convincing argument backed up with evidence as to why you came to that conclusion, I'm not really sure limiting a pass to 30% of the scale really benefits anyone. But then I'm used to a system where 65% or so is a B.

oconnomiyaki didn't you swear to never show your face here again after you were stalking people?


And on topic, glad its got great reviews, can't wait for tomorrow!

 

[angrygnat]

It got a 81 which is good, especially since sony was being strict as to what reviewers were aloud to talk about. I was expecting worse after I heard about tath. If you ask me its why sessler gave such a bad review. I lost all hope for reviewers after today. All this talk about not next gen enough but yet bad frame rate. dumb AI , and screen tearing are next gen enough.

I actually only got to watch the first few minutes of Sesslers review and this is exactly what it sounded like to me. He wasn't allowed to conduct the review as he wanted, and he sounded really bent about it. Only Sessler knows his heart but I've seen him do this before.
Update: Finally got to watch the entire review. Sure looks like some sour grapes to me. While I don't agree with giving every game 7 or above, the 5 point scale is horrendous.

 

[WordsintheWater]

Wow, some comments in here are absolutely depressing, an 81 and some people are treating the game as mediocre. Best game in the series, if you liked the previous ones you will definitely enjoy this one and even reviews that gave the game "low" ratings say the same thing.

 

[opticalmace]

81 seems pretty solid. Unfortunately my PS4's optical drive has gone kaput, so I'll have to wait a couple weeks to play it. :\

 

[oconnomiyaki]

oconnomiyaki didn't you swear to never show your face here again after you were stalking people?

Nope. I said GAF was making me angry, so maybe I should take leave from it. I did, and I calmed down, and now I am no longer angry. But sure, keep twisting my words to vilify if it makes you happy. I couldn't care less. But please keep it on topic and stop trying to derail every thread you see me in with some weird ass witch hunt.

 

[EmCeeGramr]

You know, I was feeling pretty under the weather this morning. But now I feel happy and joyful.

 

[Loudninja]

You know, I was feeling pretty under the weather this morning. But now I feel happy and joyful.

Any reason bro?

 

[childplease]

To be fair, I thought Infamous 1 totally felt like a shitty third person shooter until a third of the way or so into the game. Once you got some more powers and traversal mechanisms, the game shined, though.

Yea the game was not that great neither was 2.

My biggest problem with Infamous 1 and 2 was the graphics and most importantly the image quality was so jarring and ugly that it distracted me the entire game.

 

[spekkeh]

Yeah, but it's the lowest average score in the series, despite most reviewers agreeing it's the best game from said series. What sense does that make?

That makes a tonne of sense, given that games are art and not hardware appliances.