• 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.
  • The Politics forum has been nuked. Please do not bring political discussion to the rest of the site, or you will be removed. Thanks.

Sonic Lost World Review Thread [Embargo Ends: Oct. 18th, 4:00 AM EDT]

Coffee Dog

Banned
Aug 23, 2012
14,435
1
0
I don't understand why the team can't get this right, I'm fucking tired of these hit and miss Sonic games.

Why can't we just scrap modern Sonic and just use Generation classic Sonic and do 2.5D downloadable games... Wait Sonic is all Sega has I guess.

Probably because Generations Classic Sonic was fucking garbage. His levels were designed like shit and his physics were terrible. anybody that likes his sections more than modern sonics is probably a bit too biased towards 2D gameplay.
 

RagnarokX

Member
Sep 16, 2006
22,546
3
1,195
Well, that's what happens when you get the two words, "Game Over" on your screen. Gotta start over again. :p

The level. You gotta start the level again. The point is that lives don't add any difficulty value to games. Game overs just reset you slightly further back than losing a life does and make you slog through the stuff that wasn't killing you. That's not difficulty, that's just inconvenience.

What you should do is make the levels themselves actually challenging and fair and reward players for making it through the level without dying.
 

Gunstar Ikari

Unconfirmed Member
Jan 21, 2013
5,565
0
0
I don't understand why the team can't get this right, I'm fucking tired of these hit and miss Sonic games.

Why can't we just scrap modern Sonic and just use Generation classic Sonic and do 2.5D downloadable games... Wait Sonic is all Sega has I guess.

Classic Sonic was the weaker half of Generations, as far as I'm concerned. The only standout Classic stages were Sky Sanctuary and Speed Highway, and the Modern versions were equally good.

The way that Sonic controls in the Classic stages was only a slight improvement over the dull 2D sections in the Modern stages. In some respects, even the Sonic 4 games felt better.
 

Hyperactivity

Banned
Sep 8, 2013
13,093
0
0
Houston, Tx
Between this and Beyond (and W101), we're getting a good streak of controversial game reviews.

What major game is out next?

Edit: Just realized Pokemon broke it up. Oh well
 

qq more

Member
Feb 5, 2010
16,331
0
0
32
qqqqqqqqqqqqqq
We must fight. It is our destiny to crush the other fans in order to establish the true idea of a Sonic game.

It is Fate.

It is our Destiny!

The true idea of a Sonic game is obviously a game where you play as Eggman and you capture animals and kill Sonic and his friends or something.

idk but I'm onto something!
 
Apr 20, 2013
5,400
0
0
Alabama
The true idea of a Sonic game is obviously a game where you play as Eggman and you capture animals and kill Sonic and his friends or something.

idk but I'm onto something!

The more I hear of ideas about an Eggman game the more interesting it gets. A game fully dedicated to the fastest character in Sonic.
 

Spinluck

Member
Mar 29, 2012
31,206
0
0
Nice try Evilore!
The true idea of a Sonic game is obviously a game where you play as Eggman and you capture animals and kill Sonic and his friends or something.

idk but I'm onto something!

The story mode would include flashbacks of Eggman's abusive childhood, where we'll find out why he hates animals and the environment so much.
 
Feb 8, 2012
18,901
0
0

I don't know whether the game is good or bad, but the video makes the gifs hilarious (the part of the video that is from the same area).



 

Lynd7

Member
Dec 8, 2012
2,564
12
515
Australia
I've played to the first level of the second world. The game is good so far, Sonic has some weight to him so he's not sliding all over the place. The game is a little slower paced, but the quality of the levels have been good.
 

Otherspacing

Member
Jul 8, 2013
230
86
565
Brazil
I had my preorder cancelled just because I thought since it looks it is going to bomb, I can get it cheaper later. But now I'm looking at this gifs and I think should play it right at launch. It really seems as reviewers don't know how to play plataformers. :lol
 

killer_clank

Member
Oct 29, 2009
5,376
0
0
You guys are aware that it was probably some intern who didn't give a shit that played the game for the footage, not the actual reviewer, right? Using that to discredit reviews is really tenuous.
 

Birathen

Member
Feb 10, 2013
1,122
0
0
Sweden
You guys are aware that it was probably some intern who didn't give a shit that played the game for the footage, not the actual reviewer, right? Using that to discredit reviews is really tenuous.

So it could quite possible be that the reviewer has not even played the game? That would certainly explain alot. :)
 

KingSnake

The Birthday Skeleton
Jan 9, 2013
26,118
2
0
They are professional game reviewers, not professional gamers.

When you talk about level design and cheap deaths you should at list be able to play the game at a decent level.
Don't be pretentious in your review if you are just a casual gamer. It's about common sense here.
 

Into

Member
Aug 20, 2012
8,458
1
0
When you talk about level design and cheap deaths you should at list be able to play the game at a decent level.
Don't be pretentious in your review if you are just a casual gamer. It's about common sense here.

So they arent allowed to die and mess up? If you expect that from reviewers in regards to every game, then that is a lack of common sense. How do you know they arent playing the game at a decent level? Because they died a few times? Who does not die a few times in a video game? Especially a new game that just came out?

Pretty sure you have to play games regularly to review them professionally.

Sure, but do you have to be a pro? Is it not allowed for reviewers to die in a game? Professional reviewer =/= professional gamer.

Reviewers in particular have deadlines they have to meet, and play tons of different games. They, unlike hardcore fans, do not have the luxury of picking what they want to play and for how long.
 
Sep 13, 2007
11,022
0
0
Sure, but do you have to be a pro? Is it not allowed for reviewers to die in a game? Professional reviewer =/= professional gamer.

Reviewers in particular have deadlines they have to meet, and play tons of different games. They, unlike hardcore fans, do not have the luxury of picking what they want to play and for how long.
When you put it that way I feel so, so bad for them. Reviewers having to play lots of games and not always getting to choose which ones? Boo-hoo. The implication is that they should at least be competent players if their job is to complete and critique games, and able to differentiate between untenable mechanics/design and their own shortcomings. That's a bare minimum requirement for me to take any reviewer seriously. No, they don't have to be gaming gods, and to suggest that's the standard people are judging them by is disingenuous. Of course everyone dies playing a game every now and them, but if a reviewer is referencing a particular section as an example of its flaws either in writing or visually during a review they deserve to be mocked if it's clear they're actually just fucking up.
 

DICKS AHOY

Banned
Nov 4, 2010
9,638
0
0
Reviewers in particular have deadlines they have to meet, and play tons of different games. They, unlike hardcore fans, do not have the luxury of picking what they want to play and for how long.
Not that I entirely disagree with you (though you have to admit, those GIF's made to illustrate the game's difficulty do look like really dumb mistakes), but I think this does call into question just how much time reviewers should be allotted to fully play a game before coming to a conclusion. It's not the open-and-shut case like movies usually are where it'll always be around three hours max, an hour or two to reflect and then come up with your piece.

I have no clue if Lost World is one of those games like 101 where the learning curve is so steep it literally does take a good while before everything finally 'clicks' or if it's truly just a lacklustre experience. Yet tight deadlines and sites trying to beat the competition to a review on day one is still something which I feel needs to be better handled with the press, whether the fault lies with them, the publishers not getting the game out to them early enough or the audience demanding their opinion as soon as possible under the threat of less hits.
 

KingSnake

The Birthday Skeleton
Jan 9, 2013
26,118
2
0
So they arent allowed to die and mess up? If you expect that from reviewers in regards to every game, then that is a lack of common sense. How do you know they arent playing the game at a decent level? Because they died a few times? Who does not die a few times in a video game? Especially a new game that just came out?

Edited, I kept the important part.

You are allowed to die and mess up. You can have no idea how to play a certain game. But be fair about it. Don't be pretentious. Don't blame everything on the game.

And it's about the way you die. Look at the gifs above. That part of the game is an easy one. Very easy. And all of those are beginner mistakes. To die like that means you don't play the game at a decent level. And when you do that maybe you should think twice before talking about level design, cheap deaths and compare it with the previous entries in the series. It's just not right. Because you can't be both experienced/knowledgeable and noob at the same time. This is my point.

Or here's another approach to this. Who doesn't mess up with controls when playing a new game? Who doesn't die when playing a new game? Exactly! So why punish the game for that?

Don't get me wrong. It's not a perfect game, it doesn't deserve 9's, but it's not as broken as a 4 or 5. I think Jim Sterling's review is spot on. And that's from a reviewer who doesn't favor Sonic games usually.
 

Into

Member
Aug 20, 2012
8,458
1
0
When you put it that way I feel so, so bad for them. Reviewers having to play lots of games and not always getting to choose which one? Boo-hoo. The implication is that they should at least be competent players if their job is to complete and critique games, and able to differentiate between untenable mechanics/design and their own shortcomings. That's a bare minimum requirement for me to take any reviewer seriously. No, they don't have to be gaming gods, and to suggest that's the level people are judging them at is disingenuous. Of course everyone dies playing a game every now and them, but if a reviewer is referencing a particular section as an example of its flaws either in writing or visually during a review they deserve to be mocked if it's clear they're actually just fucking up.

That sounds fair, my initial reply was to the person who put in quotations in regards to "professional game reviewers" as if that meant they were supposed to be great at every game, that is almost impossible.

Not that I entirely disagree with you (though you have to admit, those GIF's made to illustrate the game's difficulty do look like really dumb mistakes), but I think this does call into question just how much time reviewers should be allotted to fully play a game before coming to a conclusion. It's not the open-and-shut case like movies usually are where it'll always be around three hours max, an hour or two to reflect and then come up with your piece.

I have no clue if Lost World is one of those games like 101 where the learning curve is so steep it literally does take a good while before everything finally 'clicks' or if it's truly just a lacklustre experience. Yet tight deadlines and sites trying to beat the competition to a review on day one is still something which I feel needs to be better handled with the press, whether the fault lies with them, the publishers not getting the game out to them early enough or the audience demanding their opinion as soon as possible under the threat of less hits.

I agree with your 100%. Id rather read and listen to people who had a different opinion on this game, and tell us why its good (or even great) than posting gifs of them dying and pointing fingers "see!! they are bad and the review does not count!" type attitude.

I am pretty sure one could have a video of entire 10 min of all of us dying in all sorts of games in all sorts of stupid ways.
 

KingSnake

The Birthday Skeleton
Jan 9, 2013
26,118
2
0
Yet tight deadlines and sites trying to beat the competition to a review on day one is still something which I feel needs to be better handled with the press, whether the fault lies with them, the publishers not getting the game out to them early enough or the audience demanding their opinion as soon as possible under the threat of less hits.

The info in this thread is that the game was send to the reviewers three weeks before the embargo date. Of course there are a lot of other games to review, so it's difficult to judge.

As for what's good in this game, if you don't want to check the positive reviews there is the OT.
 

Into

Member
Aug 20, 2012
8,458
1
0
Edited, I kept the important part.

You are allowed to die and mess up. You can have no idea how to play a certain game. But be fair about it. Don't be pretentious. Don't blame everything on the game.

And it's about the way you die. Look at the gifs above. That part of the game is an easy one. Very easy. And all of those are beginner mistakes. To die like that means you don't play the game at a decent level. And when you do that maybe you should think twice before talking about level design, cheap deaths and compare it with the previous entries in the series. It's just not right. Because you can't be both experienced/knowledgeable and noob at the same time. This is my point.

Or here's another approach to this. Who doesn't mess up with controls when playing a new game? Who doesn't die when playing a new game? Exactly! So why punish the game for that?

Don't get me wrong. It's not a perfect game, it doesn't deserve 9's, but it's not as broken as a 4 or 5. I think Jim Sterling's review is spot on. And that's from a reviewer who doesn't favor Sonic games usually.


Fair enough. But who is to say that they did not die because of the controls, and not lack of "skill" or whatever amount of skill they need to have to be allowed to review this game?

Why would they include these clips of them dying, if it was not to show their frustration? When i looked at the videos i thought "actually that seems easy to avoid" but that is because i have this perfect control scheme in my head so it seems easy to avoid, right? I died in Galaxy games, but i never felt like i died because the controls fucked me, i died because i messed up. Maybe this is the opposite? At least that is what some of them are indicating

But what if the game's controls are not as good as we imagined them? Suddenly these rather easy scenarios become harder?


That is a picture of Dragons Lair from NES, maybe you know of it. But regardless that is a good example of a game with rather simple level design, it looks easy if one is unfamiliar with it. But if you actually play the game, it is a ball hard difficult, because the controls are terrible. If you watch someone play that game, you would laugh at them, because it looks so easy, but in practice is not.

Id rather read positive impressions of this Sonic game (or any kind of impressions) than just nit picking some gifs, that in reality can be found of anyone. You can find Fata1ty from Quake fame with gifs where he plays like shit. The best Starcraft players, LoL players, Mario speedrunners etc.

But regardless, you can do what you want. Criticizing them over some gifs seems petty to me.
 

KingSnake

The Birthday Skeleton
Jan 9, 2013
26,118
2
0
Fair enough. But who is to say that they did not die because of the controls, and not lack of "skill" or whatever amount of skill they need to have to be allowed to review this game?

Why would they include these clips of them dying, if it was not to show their frustration? When i looked at the videos i thought "actually that seems to avoid" but that is because i have this perfect control scheme in my head so it seems easy to avoid, right? I died in Galaxy games, but i never felt like i died because the controls fucked me, i died because i messed up. Maybe this is the opposite? At least that is what some of them are indicating

But what if the game's controls are not as good as we imagined them? Suddenly these rather easy scenarios become harder?

I'm playing the game now. I'm a noob when it's about Sonic, I haven't played any of the recent Sonic games. I didn't find yet anything broken with the controls. I passed through those sections (the first and the third gifs) and it is just about run and jump, nothing extreme, really. Maybe later in the game things get really fucked up, so I'm still keeping a little bit of doubt in my mind.
 

Spinluck

Member
Mar 29, 2012
31,206
0
0
Nice try Evilore!
Those gifs reminded me of this classic. TRIAL AND ERROR GAMEPLAY!

Holy shit, I forgot how gorgeous Unleashed is. Man. That was in 2008.

Also, lol at that review. I mean, those who call the game bad definitely have reasons to hate it or dislike the game. It has a bunch of problems. But that reviewer.. lol, talk about unprofessional.
 

Frodo

Member
Nov 6, 2012
10,033
1
635
Oh my! I wasn't going to comment on the reviews of a game I have not played, but after seeing those gifs and that video...

Reviews in this day and age are pretty much useless. It seems to me that apart from the big AAAA titles that get all the budget and marketing, some reviewers play the game only to find its flaws and give those flaws more attention than they actually deserve, and not to enjoy the game for what it is and what it is trying to be.
 
Sep 2, 2011
15,625
1
0
You guys are absoultely hilarious. Making GIFs of reviewers mistakes to discredit their abilty to play a game? Foreall?

Funnily enough, I was looking in the "Who had the best exit from GAF" thread and came across this tidbit from a certain Gaffer who was at the time very respected on the board

Yep, that's it. I've gone through various N+ games with nary a complaint, chew through Mega Man games like they're marshmallows, 1cc'd Metal Slug 3, beat Ghosts n Goblins games, Ninja Gaiden games, and Castlevania games with nary a cry of "that's unfair" to be heard, but the one afternoon it took me to beat DKC2 was such an utter hell on my weak gaming skills that I imagined a Rare game had bad collision like all their bloody games do.

See, it sounds to me like you like the game so instead of admitting it may have faults, you're pushing criticism back onto anyone who dares to complain. It also sounds to me that you like to dress in little pink ballerina outfits and listen to Raffi all day long.

For context, he pointed out legitimate critisms of Donkey kong country and was set on by a poster that was adamant that it was just that he was awful at games and wasnt fit to criticise.

Sorry, but you cannot call out anyones gaming credentials based on a few silly deaths. Its a fucking ridiculous notion.
 

Into

Member
Aug 20, 2012
8,458
1
0
I'm playing the game now. I'm a noob when it's about Sonic, I haven't played any of the recent Sonic games. I didn't find yet anything broken with the controls. I passed through those sections (the first and the third gifs) and it is just about run and jump, nothing extreme, really. Maybe later in the game things get really fucked up, so I'm still keeping a little bit of doubt in my mind.

That is much more interesting and reassuring to read, if people see your post they might be more interested in giving the game a chance. I dont think anyone is going to give the game a chance just by seeing people point at some 5 second gifs and conclude that the entire review is invalid. So kudos to you for writing some impressions of the game

You guys are absoultely hilarious. Making GIFs of reviewers mistakes to discredit their abilty to play a game? Foreall?

Funnily enough, I was looking in the "Who had the best exit from GAF" thread and came across this tidbit from a certain Gaffer who was at the time very respected on the board



For context, he pointed out legitimate critisms of Donkey kong country and was set on by a poster that was adamant that it was just that he was awful at games and wasnt fit to criticise.

Sorry, but you cannot call out anyones gaming credentials based on a few silly deaths. Its a fucking ridiculous notion.


Indeed, every negative review for any big game is put under a massive microscope. Every single detail is over analyzed, every single sentence is put under criticism. Nobody ever does that with a positive review, not seen that yet for any game, ever. Nobody is really looking at the glowing review that ONM and NintendoWorldReport did.

Yeah i know IGN is hardly the bastion of game reviewing but id still cast a far more critical eye at both ONM and NWR than IGN of all places, for far obvious reasons.

But whatever, if you enjoy the game, good for you. Your opinion is no less invalid than that of any reviewer. I enjoyed the shit out of Deadly Premonition despite it getting blasted from reviewers.
 

krumble

Member
Jan 5, 2010
855
0
555
London
Onto the second world of the 3ds version
Loving it so far
Sure the controls are taking a little to get used to, and it haven't quite clicked completely with the controls... Getting the hang of the wall run, the different actions etc, but this is a game that needs reactions and skills..
I don't think I remember a sonic game needing both of these for a long while...