Death Stranding

[mgoblue]

Re: Death Stranding

From reading the hit or miss reviews I can definitively say now that Kojima games are not for me. I'm not knocking him at all, but I just know that his brand of gaming just doesn't hook me whenever I try and play it. I know I "should" love his stuff, but just feels overrated whenever I end up playing.

[canes21]

Re: Death Stranding

Everything I'm seeing is the game is basically walk here, watch a cut scene, walk back, cut scene, walk to new location, cut scene, walk back, cut scene, and repeat. I saw EDGE isn't even giving it a score because after 40 hours the reviewer couldn't even stand to play the game anymore.

[mgoblue]

Re: Death Stranding

Everything I'm seeing is the game is basically walk here, watch a cut scene, walk back, cut scene, walk to new location, cut scene, walk back, cut scene, and repeat. I saw EDGE isn't even giving it a score because after 40 hours the reviewer couldn't even stand to play the game anymore.

In Kojima's defense it's pretty clear he loves long cutscenes....

I also agree though that I couldn't just take doing that personally.

[peter42O]

Re: Death Stranding

Gaming Bolt is a big Sony fanboy site

Days Gone, MediEvil Remake, Concrete Genie, Knack 1/2 and others would disagree. They also gave Spider Man an 8/10. Sure, God of War and Horizon were given a 10/10 but at worst, they should both be at least a 9.5/10. Overall, it's not as clear cut as some may think. They've also given a lot of Nintendo games 9's and 10's as well as The Witcher 3 and RDR 2 so I don't really see them as big Sony fanboy site because if they were, every game would get 9's and 10's. If anything, I would say they favor Nintendo way more than Sony.

[peter42O]

Re: Death Stranding

Everything I'm seeing is the game is basically walk here, watch a cut scene, walk back, cut scene, walk to new location, cut scene, walk back, cut scene, and repeat. I saw EDGE isn't even giving it a score because after 40 hours the reviewer couldn't even stand to play the game anymore.

In fairness to Death Stranding, the reviewer from Edge tweeted that he couldn't post a review because the embargo states that the reviewer must complete the game.

My issue with this is that if it wasn't stated in the embargo, does that mean that critic would have posted a review and score despite not completing the story campaign which in my opinion is the minimum requirement in order to review a game?

I believe a lot of critics don't even finish the game that they're reviewing and that's just as bad as the guy that got fired from IGN for plagiarism. The reason why it's just as bad - because it proves that person behind the review is a fake, fraud and phony.

The tweet by that guy from Edge just proved why I have never liked that magazine to begin with.

[canes21]

Re: Death Stranding

The guy put in over 40 hours into the game and couldn't find enough redeeming qualities to finish it. I think that is enough time and more impactful than any score he could have given the game.

[Picci]

Re: Death Stranding

Not agreeing with the "love it or hate it," label. The general consensus from the gaming critics is generally positive. However, you're looking at 70 hours plus for the end story.

Metacritic = 84

OpenCritic = 86

[canes21]

Re: Death Stranding

Well, considering EDGE is not the only publication that is refusing to release a review, the metacritic is not going to be entirely accurate for this game. Then again, it's not like metacritic is some holy site that needs to be followed religiously. It's no different than something like a Rotten Tomatoes that is basically all a bunch of BS anymore.

So far, I've seen more positive scores than not, but in the actual content of the reviews I've seen, the trend is definitely leaning towards the gameplay being very bland, repetitive, and simply not very fun, but that's just how the review industry works anymore. A review will sit here and describe the gameplay to you and you're thinking it is going to have a lower score, then you get to the end and they say something like it has that patented Kojima charm in the cut scenes, 9/10.

I'll just say, if you're actually making any gaming decisions based off of reviews, just stop. It's a terrible way to make a decision. Most reviews these days are paid for, and most review sites refuse to give games low enough scores to keep goodwill with publishers.

[peter42O]

Re: Death Stranding

The guy put in over 40 hours into the game and couldn't find enough redeeming qualities to finish it. I think that is enough time and more impactful than any score he could have given the game.

Simply disagree. In my opinion, if you don't at the very least complete the story campaign then you have no right to review the game and put a score on it because you didn't earn that right.

Hours played doesn't mean anything. I put 68 hours into MGS 5 but only went through the first 14 or so story missions before I quit the game. How could I review the story and in turn, the game itself when I missed out on 35 or so more story missions? Hours played doesn't mean anything.

Also, we've all quit games but critics have a job and responsibility to complete the game before reviewing it. If they can't complete the game regardless of the reason then they should never review or score it and if they do, they should be fired on the spot simply because how can anyone take that reviewer and in turn, the site or magazine that the reviewer works for serious?

Not only that but the guy from Edge didn't have to go on Twitter and post what he posted. He's been getting mostly negative responses and rightfully so. He shouldn't have said anything at all and just drop the game like a normal gamer would and move on. Let someone else who may be legitimately interested in playing it review it instead.

That guy could easily post impressions based on what he played but to review it, hell no because at the end of the day, it's simply the wrong thing to do especially when those subscribed to your magazine are obviously expecting that the reviewed games were completed as opposed to quit halfway or so through.

[canes21]

Re: Death Stranding

We'll agree to disagree then. If a guy has that many hours in the game, his opinion on the game is probably pretty set in stone. The only thing that is to change is his opinion on where the story will go from there, but looking at everything else, the actual gameplay, graphics, stability, etc. he had way more than enough time to get a feel for it and if he is saying all of that is so bad after that many hours that the story isn't worth finishing then I see no issue with it. Spare me with the "he has a responsibility to finish the story" BS. The guy is paid to write his impressions of a game and his impressions are the gameplay is so bad that after 40+ hours he can't stand to play it anymore. Sounds like to me he did exactly what his job was. He still wrote an article on the game and gave his impressions, the only thing lacking is a number next to the article.



There's no need for us to go in circles with this, though. You're on the side of the fence demanding he finish the game before releasing a review or impressions. I can see why, but I don't agree with you. I'm on the side of the fence that thinks if anyone logs enough hours into a game and can't bring themselves to finish it that they still have every right to give impressions or even a review. There are plenty of games I've played in my life that I've put significant hours into and never beat and I 100% feel qualified to give my opinions on them. You don't have to beat the story to give impressions on anything other than the story. 40 hours is way more than enough time ti see the quality of gameplay, graphics, depth of features, etc. in a game. That's even a good enough amount of time to get a handle on the writing for the story. Him finishing the story is irrelevant to what his impressions are at this point.

[peter42O]

Re: Death Stranding

Well, considering EDGE is not the only publication that is refusing to release a review, the metacritic is not going to be entirely accurate for this game. Then again, it's not like metacritic is some holy site that needs to be followed religiously. It's no different than something like a Rotten Tomatoes that is basically all a bunch of BS anymore.

So far, I've seen more positive scores than not, but in the actual content of the reviews I've seen, the trend is definitely leaning towards the gameplay being very bland, repetitive, and simply not very fun, but that's just how the review industry works anymore. A review will sit here and describe the gameplay to you and you're thinking it is going to have a lower score, then you get to the end and they say something like it has that patented Kojima charm in the cut scenes, 9/10.

I'll just say, if you're actually making any gaming decisions based off of reviews, just stop. It's a terrible way to make a decision. Most reviews these days are paid for, and most review sites refuse to give games low enough scores to keep goodwill with publishers.

And yet, those who have decided not to review the game still accepted the FREE review code. I can look at Death Stranding and know that it's not for me and thus, im not buying it but some of these critics are full of crap and majority of them don't deserve their job/career simply because they're not professional.

Metacritic is for reviews what N4G is for news and articles - it's basically a site where everything is so instead of going to every individual site, you can just go to that one site that has everything collected and listed. I personally prefer and like opencritic way more than metacritic.

I see Death Stranding as unique, original, innovative and Kojima being truly the only one in the industry that has the balls to develop a game like Death Stranding but gameplay wise, it looks bland, empty, clunky and boring.

I don't go based on review scores but I do use GamingBolt as my main source and reference simply because their tastes in games lines up with mine 85%+ of the time. My backup source and reference is ZTGD which is pretty good but less accurate than GamingBolt is for me. All the rest are just horrible for me.

Of course, the only review that should matter to anyone is their own but the problem is that millions of gamers do use reviews in regards to buying a game or not. Look at Ghost Recon Breakpoint which is 57 on opencritic. I can easily see a lot of gamers passing on the game because of low review scores.

If Ubisoft is paying off sites, I suggest they ask for their money back. LOL.

[peter42O]

Re: Death Stranding

We'll agree to disagree then. If a guy has that many hours in the game, his opinion on the game is probably pretty set in stone. The only thing that is to change is his opinion on where the story will go from there, but looking at everything else, the actual gameplay, graphics, stability, etc. he had way more than enough time to get a feel for it and if he is saying all of that is so bad after that many hours that the story isn't worth finishing then I see no issue with it. Spare me with the "he has a responsibility to finish the story" BS. The guy is paid to write his impressions of a game and his impressions are the gameplay is so bad that after 40+ hours he can't stand to play it anymore. Sounds like to me he did exactly what his job was. He still wrote an article on the game and gave his impressions, the only thing lacking is a number next to the article.



There's no need for us to go in circles with this, though. You're on the side of the fence demanding he finish the game before releasing a review or impressions. I can see why, but I don't agree with you. I'm on the side of the fence that thinks if anyone logs enough hours into a game and can't bring themselves to finish it that they still have every right to give impressions or even a review. There are plenty of games I've played in my life that I've put significant hours into and never beat and I 100% feel qualified to give my opinions on them. You don't have to beat the story to give impressions on anything other than the story. 40 hours is way more than enough time ti see the quality of gameplay, graphics, depth of features, etc. in a game. That's even a good enough amount of time to get a handle on the writing for the story. Him finishing the story is irrelevant to what his impressions are at this point.

All I will say is that guy can give impressions based on the 40 hours he played but not a final review with a score because a lot of games introduce a lot of elements later on in the game and if you don't get to it and thus experience it for yourself, you can't comment on it because you don't have knowledge or understanding of what it is or how it works in the game.

But fair enough, we'll definitely agree to disagree.

[canes21]

Re: Death Stranding

We'll just agree to disagree on it. I take zero issue with what Edge is doing. You do. Neither of us is right or wrong, it's just us seeing it differently.

[peter42O]

Re: Death Stranding

We'll just agree to disagree on it. I take zero issue with what Edge is doing. You do. Neither of us is right or wrong, it's just us seeing it differently.

Agreed.

[Scott]

Re: Death Stranding

I’m still up in the air on the one, my wife really wants it though.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk