Yeah
For most of the reviews its: "I dont like how this game does this, but the game is still good overall."
For others, mainly Kotaku its: "I dont like how this game does this, which makes it bad overall."
Octopath Traveler Review Thread
- Thread starter Wise
- Start date
For most of the reviews its: "I dont like how this game does this, but the game is still good overall."
For others, mainly Kotaku its: "I dont like how this game does this, which makes it bad overall."
You know, I really loved the demo and the simplicity of the story and old school feel that warmed my heart as i played. "It also helped that the soundtrack was amazing" It transferred me back to a simpler time when rpg's had lots of heart to make up for the simple visuals. Some of these reviews have made me upset and I was thinking about passing on the game. However I feel a lot of these reviews might be comparing this game to modern rpg's, which it is not trying to emulate at all.
Do they get counted on MC? Cause this is the lowest one yet.
What are you talking about? The game isn't even out yet.
I'm not talking review opinions, I'm talking consumer opinions.
They don't since they tend to use the full scale instead of the 7-10 scale of US reviewers.
Hence, 6/10 is considered as good.
I really wanted to like their post but it's far worse than most other posts.
I would posit the following counter-argument... that just maybe Jason has played more JRPGs than the folks heaping praise upon Xenoblade Chronicles 2 and Octopath Traveler... and we might as well mention critical anomaly Ni no Kuni II in this discussion as well... and thus has more of a frame of reference to lean on when it comes to this genre and is thus not willing to be as dismissive of their flaws in light of their impressive aesthetics as his contemporaries might be.
Platform-exclusive JRPGs get more reviews from casual, ill-informed, non-enriched reviewers because they have a much higher profile and mainstream reach. That's the correlating theme here... not that these just happen to be titles on a Nintendo platform.
Ohh, that's why metacritic says 95% of their scores are less than average.
Jason LOVES Nintendo Switch, I wouldn't worry about bias.
I don't love Jason's reviews because they tend to be too extreme, a tad hyperbolic. Often games are either 'trash' or 'masterpiece', when in reality they're good, mediocre or sub par. He's a great journalist but I've never found his reviews useful to help inform my purchase. At the end of the day he doesn't like this game, and that's fine.
Does the game even run in 60fps?
Based on the demos I'm not sure honestly.
Here's what I gleaned
+ Game is beautiful
+ The battle system is solid
+ Some stories are interesting
- Some aren't and never seems to start on the narrative side
- The structure of the game is so repetitive that it becomes tiring doing the same thing 30 times in a row (Go to city, interrogate NPCs, beat the boss in the dungeon)
The repetitive structure really kills the game for them, they make it clear that the battle system is what makes it worth it to continue through the game even when you keep doing the same thing for each chapter. The rest is really hampered by that formulaic structure.
I'm not sure why the idea of preferring Ni No Kuni 2 to Xenoblade 2 is even controversial when it has a higher metacritic score (on PS4 at least)
Jason literally says in his review, "It may sound at this point like I hated Octopath Traveler, but in fact, I enjoyed most of my time with it." Taking time to explicate what he sees as flaws is not dislike.
From the article - "It may sound at this point like I hated Octopath Traveler, but in fact, I enjoyed most of my time with it, for a simple reason: The moment-to-moment gameplay is actually pretty great. That's all because of this game's strongest element—the combat system"
Way to parse nuance.
If the combat can still be engaging or challenging after all that time, sure, but from most review i've read my feeling here is these seem to have grind wall / stat check. I could be wrong, too bad i don't have a switch i really want to tried it...
This.
Being disappointed by something and hating it are two different things.
Y'all do realize gamekult is like the strictest review group out all of them right? Getting a 6 from them means it's good. They don't just hand out 8-10 like most reviews. Unless it's an event-like-game(think Breath of the Wild or Last of Us). It's not getting higher than a 7.
Thats the most LOL part of it all. They essentially have identical scores. So i guess everyone in this thread saying NNK2 is terribad is hyperbolic as well.
If some people say it's repetitive aren't they kind of doing that to themselves? Why don't just do 1 character then go explore some before you start the next character? Isn't the game open to do what you want?
If there's a way to make it repetitive and you do it then it will be, just play 4 characters instead of all 8 if 8 is too repetitive for you
If there's a way to make it repetitive and you do it then it will be, just play 4 characters instead of all 8 if 8 is too repetitive for you
Jeremy Parish loves all those games and he loves it and has been raving about it on Twitter.
I don't know who they are but i prefer a more realistic scoring system like that. I sick of 10s and 100s being thrown around for every hyped game now.
Yep. They stopped being part of Metacritic because of that. MC essentially excludes anyone that isn't part of the US norm.
Look, I am not a fan of Schreier - it's pretty obvious we don't see eye to eye, especially since he liked FFXV, yet considers Xenoblade trash ... However, his opinion is still a valid one. I'm just glad to see it is definitely in the minority here
He actually liked FFVI, so he can't be all bad ;)
He actually liked FFVI, so he can't be all bad ;)
It's almost like obsessing over scores, particularly in aggregate, is a misguided endeavor when there is no shared rubric (which would be ridiculous) and unscored reviews also matter.
Pointing to the metacritic score like it makes any game legitimately good or not is silly. All it says is that, of the reviews that gave a score, whatever they individually prioritized ended up being high, even if the they all just happened to prioritize parts they liked and they thought the parts others liked were actually bad. The people looking at reviews and deciding the game isn't for them aren't wrong for doing so even if the reviews are "85/100", because they can decide what aspects they prioritize and who they're likely to align with, which is what anyone who actually cares about reviews and not just the numbers attached to them should do. You could even look at a negative review and think "oh, I'd actually like that" (which... some people are doing to Jason's, but maybe without actual nuance).
And then there's that I'm someone who tends to enjoy janky games as long as I appreciate enough of what the game is. It's unfortunate that a lot of the problems here seem to be in areas I do care about more, but in general, there are lot of games that I'm fond of that people would call bad. So a lower metacritic score on those games also means nothing to me.
And this all won't matter years later anyway. There's lots of games whose names get tossed around like everyone agreed they were trash when they reviewed highly, which is always a bit funny. And there's lots of games that I think are pretty terrible that got good reviews, and maybe even others still speak of them fondly regardless. And like I said, there's games that reviewed terribly that I love.
It's all down to finding out what you care about in games, and who you agree (or disagree) with that is able to convey that in a way that's clear enough that you can think through and judge what your own enjoyment and feelings might be.
I think they could've borrowed from Canterbury Tales even more and give us the narrative set-up of these characters sitting together at a tavern tellling each other their stories.
The presence of the listeners in their flashbacks would have been contextualized as them imagining themselves in one another's tale.
They are probably talking about places like Amazon who seem to struggle with launch day delivery so people have been cancelling their preorders so they can buy it on the day or digitally.
I think people should take Metacritic with a grain of salt. You've got different sites, with different scoring scales.
4/5 becomes 8/10...
What's the difference between an 84, 85, 86? Next to nothing in reality.
As we all know, it's the content of the review that is important, not the score.
4/5 becomes 8/10...
What's the difference between an 84, 85, 86? Next to nothing in reality.
As we all know, it's the content of the review that is important, not the score.
this. y'all should listen to this. the more i read about this game, including what people dislike, the more I think it's for me
Not all the scores are in but places like USGamer and Game Ibformer sound like they love it. USGamer called it a summer gem and gameinformwr person sounds like it's the best thing that has happen to them.
I think it'll end with an 85 which is very good.
Now are the flaws in this game sad? Yes it stinks. However, we are probably in the minority to begin with. The majority audience will probably see the 84 and be like, "hey that sounds great".
Anyway what I'm saying is the game is making this year better.
We had a
Great Mario Tennis Game(with some more content makes it top 2 in series).
Good Kirby Game
And a Great JRPG from Square Enix
It's been a good year so far exclusive wise imo
I think it'll end with an 85 which is very good.
Now are the flaws in this game sad? Yes it stinks. However, we are probably in the minority to begin with. The majority audience will probably see the 84 and be like, "hey that sounds great".
Anyway what I'm saying is the game is making this year better.
We had a
Great Mario Tennis Game(with some more content makes it top 2 in series).
Good Kirby Game
And a Great JRPG from Square Enix
It's been a good year so far exclusive wise imo
The first bit, telling tales at the tavern, is apparently what the story chapters more or less are, actually. So it's just unfortunate that it seemingly doesn't really go for the second part here at all.
Hmm, gamespot review says boss battles can take 30 minutes. Kotaku review says if you make one mistake on a turn in a boss battle you will probably loose? That sounds extremely difficult. Like... more than I was expecting to at least clear the main story. I'll have to think about this.
I don't mind a challenge, but I don't want to loose nearly an hours worth of time if I fuck up...
I don't mind a challenge, but I don't want to loose nearly an hours worth of time if I fuck up...
That's still a fairly big disconnect that can be described by nothing less than "weird", which is also what it can be described by now.
Bravely default was quite grindy, it took me 4/5 years to come close to the end with my portable play rythm (portable classic style JRPGs are for summer hollidays ! and i have not yet finished it... but i am very close i can feel it).
I'll buy Octopath though, even though it may again take years to complete, at least some of the paths will have their closure met gradually if i understood well the thing that paths are independent xD
I'll buy Octopath though, even though it may again take years to complete, at least some of the paths will have their closure met gradually if i understood well the thing that paths are independent xD
