I don't think it's particularly required to complete a game to be able to give an analysis of it - especially if more than 40 hours in you didn't enjoy it. It could even be a review "in-progress" but this blocks that
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Death Stranding - Review Thread (see staff post for discussion guidelines)
- Thread starter vestan
- Start date
So weird, folks had like 2 weeks to play and review this. If that feeds into his review that is petty AF.
okay
can we stop with these bullshit claims.
looking at the spreading of the scores this is clearly not what is happening.
Just wanted to chime in and say that your comments about this game tingling your classic sense of wonder, from the days when games would regularly shock and surprise, are making me more excited to jump into this experience than any of the reviews I skimmed (I'm quite scared of spoilers for this experience heh).
Maybe he didn't want to play for 45 hours in two weeks because he didn't like it (or wanted to take more time with it!)
The reviews are as expected. But I for sure didn't expect a 95% from 4players.de - I think it's their highest rated game ever and they are known for rather strict scores. On the other hand they often love "special" games. Can't wait for next week to find out for myself.
Maybe their review copy landed later? Stop reading into that with a level of confirmation bias
A bit of a self reflection on his part might go a long way. Like he is claiming conspiracy but not looking at his own confirmation bias.
I'm getting flashes to how the original Shenmue was received. A unique work by a visionary madman that will not be everyone's cup of tea. I look forward to it.
Afraid? If it was so then the game would be 90+ rn. Its a divisive game hence so many perfect scores and still 84 which counters what you wrote. The people you quoted have cherry picked lines off those reviews which are pages long and have content and reasons for their scores.
GQ in particular doesn't give a number in their analyses, so nothing will change the average if it's up to them. In total, there should be another 40 reviews or so to be published and counted.
That's true, and yet I feel it's what Darkx was saying: that something happening is another mission, another fight, but not the act of traversing the space itself. It's a format where you move as a means to get to the next mark, so secondary that you could activate a line and follow it to that next point of interest.
For better or worse, the focus here is about how you get from A to B, instead of what new content you get to unlock while wandering around.
I like that its divisive. Shows that individual expectations and tastes really make or break this game, it does not seem to have many universal good or bad mechanics, the mechanics are there and they are amazing or terrible depending on your individual disposition.
He needs to work on an anime. He prolly would enjoy it like crazy
Reviews are, at least partly, designed to tell readers what they want to hear. High profile games from developers with a large and outspoken fanbase will typically receive reviews that skew to the upside to keep fans happy.
Remedy and Obsidian don't have the sheer number of unstable fans to dissuade poor reviews. They live and die on the genuine quality of their games.
Whereas Kojima has released an unfinished game that received a score in the 90s.
MGS1-3 are generally regarded as his best games, while MGSV was divisive, and this probably will be too, so... I guess linear?
I don't think it has to be that binary. There are good and bad approaches to both.
Read into that what you will = "He didn't and doesn't intend to finish it."
It'll be a review about a game that is too long and isn't worth finishing.
The comments about the game becoming linear towards the end are kind of baffling; how could it not?
I was going to say The Outer Worlds has a higher "recommends" rating on OpenCritic, but it doesn't by much. Something tells me this is getting the Kojima-effect from folks in the thread, in that they expected more, more than say Obsidian (which is odd given their latest output).
As to the talks of divisive, there are a handful of "middling" scores and then two unequivocally bad ones. Then you look at Luigi's Mansion, which has the exact same score, but it's top heavy.
TLDR: If you love this type of game (and I certainly do) you are probably going to get your moneys worth.
According to who? That game is almost universally recommended.
I was going to say The Outer Worlds has a higher "recommends" rating on OpenCritic, but it doesn't by much. Something tells me this is getting the Kojima-effect from folks in the thread, in that they expected more, more than say Obsidian (which is odd given their latest output).
As to the talks of divisive, there are a handful of "middling" scores and then two unequivocally bad ones. Then you look at Luigi's Mansion, which has the exact same score, but it's top heavy.
TLDR: If you love this type of game (and I certainly do) you are probably going to get your moneys worth.
According to who? That game is almost universally recommended.
Polarizing is correct, jeez.
Predicted 75-79, glad to see it doing better than my pessimistic prediction. We need Kojima, like it or not.
Predicted 75-79, glad to see it doing better than my pessimistic prediction. We need Kojima, like it or not.
Is it though? It may be civil but this thread is still dripping with cynical hot takes.
F it. I took the day off. I'm going in on day 1. All I want is something special, and this seems to be it.
Might be offset by people not willing to finish it...
Ah yes, Hideo Kojima, the universally beloved video game dev. /s
It's always fascinating how people pick and choose the reviews that align with their perception/hopes/dreams/cynicism while ignoring those that don't line up.
Or just make up conspiracies.
I've been avoising reading/watching reviews but i have a question: did the reviewers have all the online functionalities?
Yep, exactly the Easy Allies review says something like "the game presents some elements but rarely adds depth to them" or something like this with another phrasing, which is kind of worrying for me. It seems that the combat is pretty bad overall (too easy and too basic) and that even if traversal has some good depth to it, it's a long game with a lot of samey missions. I'll play the game as I have some interest, but if RDR II was heavily criticized after launch because of the bad level design and combat (which I agree), I can't imagine how this forum will be in 10 days.
OP
OP
I will buy the game. I did not preorder HZD but the day you said on the old site, the game is good. I preorder it and my favorite new IP.
This is why score aggregation for a small sample size of critics only is useless
Games can be rated "84-85", I don't give a shit, that is meaningless to me and my experience, and one the reasons I avoid using critic aggregators.
Eg, I hate Control in a ton of ways that are well justified for me.
It's considered divisive because the Kojima standard was incredibly well received games by the press, and this one clearly isn't. MGS2-V were amongst the highest rated games of their respective year, if not the highest, while here it won't even be top 20.
Let's not try to bury the lead, even if it is getting good scores ultimately.
Let's not try to bury the lead, even if it is getting good scores ultimately.
Can you actually evidence this thesis? In this case it has gotten lower grades by some of the most commerially driven sites (IGN, game informer, for instance). I would say your claim needs proof.