That's a turn around. Last I read, you had this on your "buy later" list after some other titles heh.
In any case, this is my most wanted game of the year and no IGN score could possibly change that. In reading this, it became clear to me that this game is doing exactly what I wanted and hoped it would, despite what the reviewer's final conclusion is. Obviously a 8.6 is a great score. I'm not one of those "9.0+ or else!!" dickheads.
I have honestly never read IGN for RPG reviews and I doubt anyone who was seriously into them would. This isn't meant to be offensive, I just think that's how it is. The guys there generally don't seem to have a large love of the genre and, really, I can't expect them to invest the time into a good RPG that many of these games deserve. They obviously have a lot to cover and it's not feasible.
It honestly kind of bothers me when a review of a game that really has no stand-out, unique qualities gets a 9.5 and something like SMT gets a 8.6, but what can you do? Citing something like "turn based battles" is rather useless as the game makes good use of them and is well paced based on everything else I read. It's not as if this game hasn't tried something new with the battles... the press system sounds quite interesting.
I'm rather tired of games being judged upon what someone feels they
should include rather than what they actually
do include. That's not to say ignore the flaws, but, in my mind, turn based battles are not completely antiquated or problematic if utilized well. A game not making use of real time battles just because you prefer them is no reason to knock down a score. I'd like to think people would at least try to be objective and realize while they might not love turn based systems, it doesn't mean they're poorly done. I'm not saying that this review is saying these things to that extent, but I get the impression that it was an issue for the reviewer... and I forsee a lot of other places bringing it up.
Between SMT's auto mode, the general speed of the battles, the press button system and the demon recruiting, I'd say it's doing plenty of interest over most other battle systems as it is. In fact, I'm personally getting tired of every other company attempting to inject real time button nonsense into every RPG. Most of these systems aren't even done well as it is and the possibility of real time battles are not part of why anyone who plays the SMT series plays it to begin with. I don't feel it fits them.
People are willing to go bat-shit insane over being able to remove characters from battles in FFX on the fly (wow, welcome to DQV territory)... but then something like this comes along that is obviously much deeper in almost every respect in terms of battles alone and it's apparently a flaw or point to nitpick (and I realize I'm nitpicking too heh). It's strange reading a review citing things that are interesting or well done and then coming to a lower score than games that have reviews full of mostly complaints and magically get a better one. I doubt they're even by the same reviewer, so I'm not faulting him, it just makes me think less of the site as a whole. I don't quite understand it, but everyone has their opinion, I guess.
I have a feeling this is going to be another one of those games where the reviewer will say he wish he scored it higher in the future. Much like the guy who reviewed Valkyrie Profile for IGN. These sorts of games may not win you over as quickly, but they stand. Who knows, I'm just saying lol.
The only review I really am interested in for this game is from Ferricide, as I'd like to see his collected thoughts on the game. Someone who very obviously has given this title the time it should receive for a proper review. If he also winds up at the same score, that's fine by me, but I would personally put more stock in what he has to say about it.
In any case, I think it's a good score and I hope it encourages people that might have not paid attention otherwise.
---------------------------
Edit - The only thing I have a hard time getting around is this (I don't have any problems with the rest of the review, opinion is opinion and everyone is entitled):
8.0 Lasting Appeal
There are six different endings, three main ideologies to choose from, and several bonus dungeons, characters, and goodies to uncover. Not bad by RPG standards at all.
Not bad by RPG standards...? This is more than most console RPGs even
attempt to offer. I really feel it got the shaft in that category, especially considering the decisions made along the course of the game that affect the progression it takes.
I really feel that more time could have been spent with this game. It doesn't even ship till October 5th now. Was a review this early necessary? Now when it does come out, IGN's review will be old news and no one who frequents that site will notice that it's in shops a full two weeks later. Other than the lame concept of having the "first review", I think this was a poor choice for many reasons.
It doesn't look good in my eyes, particularly because the updates on this game on IGNPS2 have been absolutely awful. I can't forget the "We forgot about it at E3 entirely, so here's a video Atlus begged us to put up!!" article. I just don't feel they've even tried to give this game anywhere near the coverage that it really should have gotten. If I'm coming off as an idiotic fanboy by that comment, then so be it.
And with that, I'm done. It's late, so excuse the rambling and anything right out dumb I might have said lol.
