• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

What Games are much better than their Critics' Reviews?

For me:

Zone of the Enders games(second one got fairly good reviews though).

Some of the Dragon Ball games.

Way of the Samurai 2.

Assassin's Creed 3.
 
Hmmm I'm biased because of my love for the franchise, but I very much enjoyed Megaman Legends 1 and 2, considerably more than what it was scored for at the time, not that I let that taint my enjoyment or purchasing decision, but for some reason it did stick in my mind.

On one hand I can understand that it can look very bland, specially in the dungeons and the gameplay, particularly on the first game, had a rough controlling scheme, but no so much unlike other action games of the time like Tomb Raider. In my mind it was a bit easier, combat-focused action RPG set in a Megaman Universe and I loved their aesthetic and characters, most of which were very memorable and charming.
 
The Last Remnant for sure with its ridiculous 66 metascore.
Also, Lords of the Fallen. All DS fans gonna roar, but for regular people its just good fun.

e: i m talking about pc versions here, since i've got those.
 
Lost Planet 2. Probably one of the best co-op games I've ever played, with fantastic set pieces, a hilarious story, great multiplayer deathmatching and enough content to unlock to keep me interested long after the campaign was over. The Japanese players were beasts as well, even if a huge number of them cheated with exploits.

It's not without its flaws but was still unjustly raked over the coals on release. I just took it as a sign that for all of their camaraderie, reviewers don't really have any friends.
 
lots of JRPGs, especially whose who have plot/theme shifts or that unfold mechanics throughout the game, reviewers simply arent going to be putting in the 100+ hours to see everything they have to offer
 
An awful lot of my favourite handheld games seem like they got docked points for being on a handheld, rather than being judged against what was actually possible on a portable games console. Killzone Mercs springs to mind. As does Monster Hunter 3G on 3DS, currently sitting on a 79 on metacritic. Both of them are amazing considering the hardware they are running on, although Monster Hunter is only recently starting to avoid running into reviewers who don't have a clue how to tackle it.
 
Alpha Protocol, Asura's Wrath, Dragon's Dogma, Demon's Souls, Dungeon Seige III, Beyond:Two Souls, Brutal Legend, DMC and Binary Domain.
 
The Last Remnant (PC).

One of Square Enix's best recent attempts, with many fixes from the 360 version but the same 66 metacritic.
 
Bulbasaur said:
Zombi U

I can't help but think that if the press had of pushed it more positively it could've changed things for the wii u's early days. It really is a fantastic game.
Click to expand...

Yep I agree. It's really underrated. It really shines as a survival horror and truely innovates. Game critics complain it was not beautiful enough and didn't like the novelty and the scare resources while I loved it... There is something special with this game a bit like Resident Evil when it first came out. Of course it's not as ground breaking as RE but I thought it really did some good to a genre that had since turned into Horror FPS in general...

I also think that some reviews were not appreciative enough of what The Wonderful 101 was and what it achieved. Some critics complained it was not easy to pick up and play, not enough explained etc or I don't know what bullshit. It's just a fantastic, fun game and innovative which I think is really important these days. It also a game with lots of replayability and the more you play the better you become and the better it becomes.
 
Rhazer Fusion said:
Most non AAA or mainstream games. If I listened to professional reviews, I probably would own 80% less games.
Click to expand...

Yeah, same goes for me. For anything that isn't surrounded by a multi-million pound advertising campaign, I usually use the 'add a point or two if you like/really like this kinda thing' rule when considering reviews.
 
Hot Shots Golf: World Invitational, easily the best golf game out there, and somehow the lowest score (76) in the series. Even lower than the Mario Golf: World Tour (78).
I decided to read IGN's review back in the day and that was just sad.

"Because advancement in the single-player campaign requires gold stars, getting anything less than the No. 1 spot in a tournament essentially means wasted time."
"Then, in the seconds before executing your shot, you miss the impact zone by a hair and somehow your ball ends up out-of-bounds, wracking your score with a penalty and plummeting your position in the tournament from 1st to 4th."
"Wasting 30 minutes of your time with no failsafe mechanic built-in seems harsh for a game that claims to make golf more palatable to non-golfers. And overcoming difficult courses provides much less reward than the time investment deserves."

Sorry, but just one OoB won't make you lose (and it won't be OoB if you miss the impact zone by a hair), the game is easy enough as it is. Learn to play instead of asking for training wheels.
One of the most satisfying thing in the series is to see your improvement. Seeing that -9 become a -10 or -11 feels damn good, way better than any artificial win I ever had in any game. There is no thing such as "wasted time" because you improved.

Yeah, I know this is just IGN's opinion so there must be more flaws that I don't see when I play it.
 
this thread

Unsure-Larry-David.gif
 
King_Moc said:
Wow, this then. That was a great game, how did it review so badly, especially in the era of 7/10 = awful.
Click to expand...

I've always assumed the modest budget alone was enough to doom the scores. In terms of presentation it was going in the opposite direction to the HD hype wave.
 
Krusenstern said:
Lords of Shadow 2
Click to expand...

When the reviews began rolling in, I wanted to believe they had got it wrong. I loved the first game, the reveal trailer was epic, the demo was good, and then I played the game and I couldn't even finish it. The game is awful and was scored pretty fairly.
 
Deadly Premonition.

Yes: the game is technically... poor. Very poor. But I Sweary I've seldom had so much fun with a game as with DP. The weirdness, the characters, the feelings it evokes... they are all pretty much spot on.
 
First page has all the best answers, mainly God Hand and Nier. So I have to try something different:

Wolfenstein The New Order.
Not that 79 isn't good, but it made a perfect mix of old and new gameplay sensibilities, with top notch level design and one of the best storytelling in video games ever. I felt most criticism was, like, "graphics aren't good enough", "I don't know where to go" and "I can't get this item from the floor mid fight" which are, somewhat, bullshit, and result of reviewers expecting "next gen" visuals (over rock solid frame rate), regenerating health and quest markers.
I stand by my opinion that the game is one of the best FPS ever made, and should have been considered among games of the year much more thoughouly than it was.
 
1. DRIVECLUB - Such an amazing game, the best racer in years.

2. Godhand - A funny, modern day Streets of Rage with outstanding combat mechanics.

3. The Order - Not reviewed for what it is... QTE vs gameplay time was greatly exaggerated, so was most "flaws"... And it's quite sad.

4. Dying Light - Surprisingly good game, one of a few open world / sandbox games that makes sense with great co-op play.

5. The adventures of Batman & Robin (Genesis) - I remember this game getting low scores all around, I guess it was "too hard" for most reviewers. A technical masterpiece and one of the best 2D shooters ever.

6. Knack - Again, another title that hasn't been reviewed for what it is.
 
Pretty much alot of games I've played

I sorta enjoyed resistance burning skies but the reviewers really shit on it, like 2-4/10. I probably would give it 7

Same goes with insomniacs FUSE ( honestly it had a solid gameplay and fun co' op, but people bashed it cause it changed from overstrike)

The order 1886 got bashed a lot, but it felt like they just wanted to bash it for QTE etc instead of reviewing it for what it was.
 
For me, Alpha Protocol is the biggest offender. Was it a shooter? No, it was an RPG with shooter elements. Worse, the shooting was handled by dice rolls. I feel like this one aspect is what forced everyone away. The problem is that Bioware did the exact same thing with Mass Effect, and critics loved that game.

Not saying that kinda shooting is for everyone (or even good), but fuck...

I love that game.
 
This gen: Wonderful 101: There are issues, but reviewers complaint about difficulty... Seriously? Gut Gud.

I didn't play enough to justify but they are well received by most players:

Kid Icarus: Uprising
Tropical Freeze (Did not played at all but I saw it every time when people talk about greatest platformer... which got a Metacritic 82.)
Drive Club
Sunset Overdrive
Alien Isolation
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

THPS is much better than skate
2
52
2K
CGNoire replied
  • Poll
Will Marathon Review Better Than ARC Raiders?
2
91
2K
Light_Crusader25 replied
A much better idea than PCs that mimic consoles.
2
98
1K
DeVeAn replied
Top 20 PS2 games that are better than modern games (by Watch Mojo)
Opinion Retro Platform 
4
197
Trilobit replied
Why are Gamecube games worth so much more than PS2 games
2
54
1K
blacktout replied
Top Bottom