-
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.
Marvel’s Avengers Review Thread
- Thread starter Equanimity
- Start date
Sounds likely since they are interested in selling microtransactions and almost every Square Enix game in the last 5 years has been added to the service.
70s. About what I guessed. Not a bad score.
Game still isn't for me though
Game still isn't for me though
Given the PS exclusive content and heavy PS marketing for this game, that seems a little doubtful.
Most people saw the 70s coming. Since people did praise the story I will pick it up used despite hating the beta.
OP
OP
Will play for campaign and when character comes in but hell no...for the grind ...
Prediction gets great initial sales but the reaction to MTX and the GaaS will put square under pressure to fix the game and a new update in the next year where they say they adjust the game...
Prediction gets great initial sales but the reaction to MTX and the GaaS will put square under pressure to fix the game and a new update in the next year where they say they adjust the game...
The same Square that sells FFXI (my favorite game ever btw) and still require a sub to play? Naah, they know what they're doing, this isn't their first rodeo. The game is a good foundation for the future.
People, they let you know from the start that this would be a game as a service. And so far so good.
I mean the GAAS part of the game is awful so far. Buggy as hell, no mission variety, challenge cards contain no desirable rewards for the effort needed to complete them. I hope it gets better soon but I can't see a large number of people sticking with it in the short term.
With any GaaS game I would tell people to wait at least a month to see if the base game is enough for them. Then wait half a year at most to see how support and new content is. Jumping in early especially for a cost or subscription is usually risky, thankfully the main story stuff is very solid, to me at least, so there's stuff to do while the inevitable patches, changes, and updates happen. The game seems well funded, and it has a lot of faith in it being successful (name, developers, publisher) so I don't see them dropping support or giving up on it. Maybe this is where that Sony and Verizon type of money will help them too. Now they just need to adjust to working from home, and become a well oiled machine again.
Yeah I agree. Putting it down now but I'll come back. It's still amazing to me though that Destiny 1 somehow did this better right out of the gate compared to any game since.
I remember Destiny having story mode complaints, having to look online or something to piece it together. Destiny 2 apparently had a more story driven approach.
Oh the Avengers campaign is miles better than Destiny 1/2. I more mean the endgame stuff.
Why are most of the positive reviews from publications with little to no gravitas? It's a bit suspicious.
Gamerheadquaters
GotGame
But Why Tho
Gamer Crate
etc.
I have nothing against new media btw, just weird that most positive scores also happen to be from obscure websites
Gamerheadquaters
GotGame
But Why Tho
Gamer Crate
etc.
I have nothing against new media btw, just weird that most positive scores also happen to be from obscure websites
Maybe there would be something to it if no big sites gave it a good score but several have (Game informer, ign Spain for example)so it's all good. Plenty of smaller sites with no "gravitas" gave it bad scores too. I think it's just mixed overall and generally comes out to a 7/10 which is fine imo. I don't think anyone is being paid off if that is what you are getting at.
What? This is absolutely a bad score compared to it's budget, developer, publisher and license expectations. I will bet you this was planned to be a 90+ title, emails to the bigger outlets are already out and heads will probably roll.
In no situation is "low 70's not a bad score" for a service game AAA Megabudget title.
Just checked Metacritic and I recognize half of the publications that gave it a score higher than 80 (Game Informer, Playstation Universe, Worth Playing) so it's not like it's just small publications giving it good scores. I imagine it's a combination of an Avengers game having mainstream appeal so a wider variety of publications are trying to cover it and a lot of the big publications are doing reviews-in-progress (due to its nature as a GaaS and due to them not getting a copy of the game until recently) and haven't given it an official score yet.
And well, it's a GaaS so launch reviews don't mean a whole lot. Path of Exile is a drastically different game now than it was in 2013-2014 (which is when all of the critic reviews on Metacritic for the game were posted).
I know it's been 10000 years, but I still can't believe Bioware put out a game like Anthem, which has such a legendarily disappointing reception that "pulling an Anthem" is used in OTHER reviews over a year later to express disappointment.
Game Informer's Andrew Reiner gave an 8.75. A lot of obscure websites are giving the game negative scores. It seems that the public was ready to hate on this game either because of Spider-Man's exclusive deal, fanboy wars, being a GaaS and what have you. Some of my favorite game critics loved game critics liked (Andrew Reiner, Greg Miller) and some websites that I never heard of gave negative scores. Not sure what you call publications with gravitas, but if anything, the Open Critic is unusually low compared with Metacritic. Almost like giving this a negative review would generate more traffic.
Square isn't exactly infallible when it comes to GaaS.
The literal sequel to the game you mentioned needed to be basically remade.
Every games as a service has a low score. 70s is good for a launch for GaaS
I don't know what to tell you then, outlets received emails for mid-80s on TLOU2, do you honestly think Squenix is happy with a 73 and it matched their expectations for the budget that went into this?
I'm sure they're fine with it. Most MP focused games get awful scores at launch.
There was such a massive hate boner for this game coming from so many sides. DC fanboys, people that hate Marvel or superheroes in general(there are so many of these people btw the Scorsese threads here illustrated that,) alt-right like the Quatering and his copycats angry at Kamala, people that hate GaaS and the rage over the Spiderman exclusivity. I'm shocked it's sitting where it's at.
it's the online bubble - this is tied with call of duty for most anticipated game of 2020 per neilson
And let's not even talk about the fact that one of the reviewers that most clearly gets the game isn't even listed on either Metacritic or Open Critic:
Gene Park writes for the Washington Post.
Gene Park writes for the Washington Post.
There's some cool stuff in this game, definitely. The problem for me is that this is just isolated training combo clips. So much of the game is trying to do that while the camera shakes, the frame rate struggles to stay above single digits, you're being shot from off screen, particle effects shower the screen, overlays from status effect obscure your vision, the camera zooms in to colonoscopy range even on wide combat camera, and allies knock enemies out of your combo leaving you swinging at nothing.
In practice, a lot of the game is just kind of a sloppy mess, even if it all feels ridiculously fucking cool when it clicks.
I train on the harm rooms a lot, and I am able to translate that into the field missions. And I'm not the only one. I'm pretty sure others have already chimed in around here saying the same.
I mean...
The Avengers Project Is Aiming To Be A "Game of the Year" Level Title
Back in January 2017, Square Enix announced a multi-game partnership with Marvel that would see it [...]
Yessh yeah that didn't age wellI mean...
The Avengers Project Is Aiming To Be A "Game of the Year" Level Title
Back in January 2017, Square Enix announced a multi-game partnership with Marvel that would see it [...]comicbook.com
I doubt they care as long as it sells. For GAAS it's clearly the longterm engagement they're looking for.
I like the game quite a bit, but no way did I ever expect coming into a 9/10 or 10/10 experience. Seems like it was released a bit early given all of the bugs, and there hasn't been a GAAS period to score that high out of the gate, so I doubt that was the expectation.
Cool and all, but this is basically impossible in the normal game. There's no way you're pulling off a combo like that without getting staggered out of it by another enemy so you're better off just going with the short light, light, heavy, heavy combos.
It's quite likely my GOTY. Or very close. And I can assure you that it will be on several GOTY lists as well.
To be fair, i would guess the game could have been much more different back then, and SE/Marvel probably hoped for CD to pull off Tomb Raider critical reception for the game 🤷🏻♂️I mean...
The Avengers Project Is Aiming To Be A "Game of the Year" Level Title
Back in January 2017, Square Enix announced a multi-game partnership with Marvel that would see it [...]
This game was/is never going to be a GOTY pick (popular one) the same year Animal Crossing, TLOU 2, Doom Eternal, Cyberpunk, (and hopefully) Demon's Souls, or Miles Morales, are all landing. I'm fine letting the game be it's own thing and grow over time 🤷🏻♂️
I can't see Crystal Dynamics and Square thinking about making Avengers not a GaaS multiplayer experience. The power fantasy of becoming an Avenger demands that the game should be a multiplayer game as a service experience, imho.
How many hours do you have to grind to unlock those moves though? And then apply them to the same robot enemies in the samey missions and environments.
This game is the most mediocre game I've seen this gen. It's just meh. It's fun and frustrating at the same time. There's a ton of potential that's wasted behind heavy GaaS practices, meaningless grinds, repetitive missions and lots and lots of bugs.
We will just have to agree to disagree then. I like the game we got, but there is nothing about grinding post campaign missions over and over again, trying to get invested in a fairly lack luster loot system, that makes me feel like i'm living my best Avengers power fantasy.
Marvel: Ultimate Alliance series does a better job at doing that.