I knew reading this thread wouldn't disappoint. Some of the salt towards lower review scores because *gasp* they didn't like the game is hilarious.
-
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
Nah, let him create more unique experiences.
Most AAA games are executed really well but are so generic and something we have seen hundreds of times already but this one seems to be something special.
Btw Tim Rogers' review is absolutely fantastic.
Yeah and now I am wondering which camp I'll belong to once I get my copy.
I'm just thinking that with him he kinda expects a blank check but I don't think it's worth it, and that money is better spent elsewhere
Fantastic scores. What I've read sounds exactly like what I wanted the game to be. It came in a bit lower than I thought, but it's uncompromising in its vision much like The Last Guardian, so it not being everyone's cup of tea is understandable.
I am talking about a story heavy game. Like this is. And if you do not its fine at least say so in your review though (which a lot of people do not).
Jeff Gerstmann said as much in the video on the site. The lo-fi sound that comes out of the controller is apparently almost exactly how a baby monitor sounds. Harrowing I imagine, having to balance these two things :')
Honestly as an outsider this is the best outcome for me. A game this divisive must be taking a lot of chances and doing things in a unique way to polarize people so much. It will move the medium forward in meaningful ways.
The food analogies to reviews are just gonna get weirder and weirder huh? Lol
A reviewer shouldn't have to finish the game! I don't have to eat a cheesesteak from Philly to know that Philly has a great variety of affordable locally sourced meat pal!
I have a really hard time believing a Kojima game will play as bad as RDR2. If DS plays anywhere close to as bad as RDR2 I'll be legit bummed out.
(And I like a lot of things about RDR2)
A reviewer shouldn't have to finish the game! I don't have to eat a cheesesteak from Philly to know that Philly has a great variety of affordable locally sourced meat pal!
I have a really hard time believing a Kojima game will play as bad as RDR2. If DS plays anywhere close to as bad as RDR2 I'll be legit bummed out.
(And I like a lot of things about RDR2)
The more I watch it, the more I think that GB's deliberate trolling, by overly-elaborate sticking to the NDA terms, is the best thing about their coverage.
Watching the 20 minute timer tick down, and live production of cutting to/from game, is really quite intriguing.
Watching the 20 minute timer tick down, and live production of cutting to/from game, is really quite intriguing.
Is the game going to prioritize my friends' objects in the game? I hope so.
I mean there last game of the year was a bit of a joke..
They were critizing many others for no new gameplay advances, and then Tetris wins???
I don't dislike the guys, just realised over the years we have obviously wildly no comparable tastes.
It happens. All fine. Will move on to another podcast.
Oh shit. I just looked it up. One hour. NOICE. This is a prime Tim Rogers game too.
1. Time is always a factor. Typically, there's never enough.
2. The reviewer's schedule. Almost every reviewer is covering more than one game at a time. Even a big game like Death Stranding is just one of many.
3. It's entirely possible that the reviewer simply didn't like the game that much.
4. The pay-per-hour for reviews is horrendously low. Imagine spending 40+ hours on a task and getting paid $50 for it. Seems shitty, doesn't it?
Sounds fantastic, but I expected people to also really hate it for what it is and isn't.
I'm glad there's games out there trying something completely new, even if they fall short according to some.
I'm glad there's games out there trying something completely new, even if they fall short according to some.
I'm watching the DF video, my god such a beauty. Decima engine is so awesome. I can't even imagine what Horizon 2 will look like on PS5.
Loving the reviews that gave it a 3/10, especially the complaint about a point in the game where they had to wait for a 3 minute timer. Some people just don't have any patience =P This game was always going to be divisive, and a lot of people had made up their minds during previews that a game without a big combat system that looks like a "walking simulator" could not possibly be classed as a game, and must be pretentious artsy nonsense.
Luckily, most reviewers get it, even if the game isn't clicking for them to the point they score it a 9 or 10 (and that's fine of course). I'm just really glad to see a AAA game finally strive to move the industry forwards and away from combat being the core gameplay mechanic as a crutch, like Indie games have been doing for well over a decade now. And I'm especially glad that most reviewers are scoring a game like this appropriately, whether they love it or not. Looking forward to the PC release =)
Luckily, most reviewers get it, even if the game isn't clicking for them to the point they score it a 9 or 10 (and that's fine of course). I'm just really glad to see a AAA game finally strive to move the industry forwards and away from combat being the core gameplay mechanic as a crutch, like Indie games have been doing for well over a decade now. And I'm especially glad that most reviewers are scoring a game like this appropriately, whether they love it or not. Looking forward to the PC release =)
I think the whole 'you can only review a game if you've completed it' discussion is really complicated topic that could easily fill a thread on its own, and it's also something that would be interesting to hear thoughts on from game reviewers themselves. For me, it's a weird gray area, as there's an interactive skill component with gaming that isn't at all present in any other medium, and completing a game is potentially a much, much longer time sink than it is for reading a book or reviewing a film/television series. (I also think it's bizarre to romanticize reviews from other mediums over game reviews, as the quality level overall is generally identical.)
Regarding the skill/time sink component with gaming, I adore Hollow Knight, and I'd say it's an easily a 9/10 game if I was reviewing it from the time I've spent with it, but... I still haven't finished it, because I'm not very good at it! I hope to finish it someday, but it's taking some time. I really love Persona 5, but considering the length of the game and the pacing issues towards the back end, I'm still not convinced that many reviewers actually finished the game before posting their reviews, which is understandable considering the length of the game.
My personal preference is that ideally, it would be great if game reviewers were able to complete the games they were reviewing, but gaming can be an insanely time intensive medium. Considering there is a steady stream of games continually coming out, and gaming publications can only have so many reviewers on staff, the situation is what it is. For me, the best compromise is that a review can at least state the amount of hours that were played, and whether the game was finished or not.
To be on topic re: Death Stranding, I'm fascinated by the social component, but I'm still wondering if other aspects of the game will drive me crazy. It won't be Day 1 for me, but I'm really looking forward to reading the impressions of ERA members when the game is out.
This!
Also seconding this! As you said, 'finished' when it comes to games is a bit murkier - is it just the main story? Is it all the side quests? It all becomes a lot more complicated.
Regarding the skill/time sink component with gaming, I adore Hollow Knight, and I'd say it's an easily a 9/10 game if I was reviewing it from the time I've spent with it, but... I still haven't finished it, because I'm not very good at it! I hope to finish it someday, but it's taking some time. I really love Persona 5, but considering the length of the game and the pacing issues towards the back end, I'm still not convinced that many reviewers actually finished the game before posting their reviews, which is understandable considering the length of the game.
My personal preference is that ideally, it would be great if game reviewers were able to complete the games they were reviewing, but gaming can be an insanely time intensive medium. Considering there is a steady stream of games continually coming out, and gaming publications can only have so many reviewers on staff, the situation is what it is. For me, the best compromise is that a review can at least state the amount of hours that were played, and whether the game was finished or not.
To be on topic re: Death Stranding, I'm fascinated by the social component, but I'm still wondering if other aspects of the game will drive me crazy. It won't be Day 1 for me, but I'm really looking forward to reading the impressions of ERA members when the game is out.
This!
Also seconding this! As you said, 'finished' when it comes to games is a bit murkier - is it just the main story? Is it all the side quests? It all becomes a lot more complicated.
Maybe it's just because I'm getting old, but I'd rather have something that's good and maybe not so unique over something that's unique but not so good.
I'm just inviting avatar quotes, aren't I?
3.something out of 10...
Like a user metacritic score at this point.
The game may not be perfect, but a score like that. I don't know what to say honestly. Especially since Im reading every review out there.
Like a user metacritic score at this point.
The game may not be perfect, but a score like that. I don't know what to say honestly. Especially since Im reading every review out there.
Base Tetris by a lot of people is considered the best game of all time. A Tetris that adds visual depth to the already addicting gameplay doesnt seem like a perplexing GOTY.
No way in hell, the brand name "kojima" gets so much attention automatically that it's worth just giving him a truckload of money and seeing what crazy nonsense comes out of his brain.If anything we need more bizzare shit that.
an "abstract game".
We get those 'good and maybe not so unique' experiences monthly.
Super excited to play this, primarily because I have no idea how I'll react to it. I love that it's divisive. I love that it's something NEW. That it's challenging what we think of when we think of games. I love that I might HATE it lol. I'm so down for this. I mean I'm a huge Kojima fan, so I'll probably like it. Holy shit there are going to be a lot of people who hate it, though, and that's cool. God, I'm interested just for the discussion this is going to generate.
Moz La Punk alright, I get the idea lol.
I changed my mind then. I'm not quoting you as it will reveal the spoiler tag. Thanks.
I changed my mind then. I'm not quoting you as it will reveal the spoiler tag. Thanks.
Absolutely. I expect topics with all sorts of different opinions on this game for years to come.
Seems like it, though it's also the #18 Best PS4 Game of 2019 so... people who don't think it's divisive puzzle me a bit.
Nah credit to Sony for putting in AAA money into experimental games like this and Last Guardian.