By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Seece on 21 May 2010
Edit Thread
Cross-X said:
Seece said:

Whenever someone says "this game will have legs" it usually sounds like the same old tripe. In regards to most 360 games too.

But I truly believe Alan Wake will get good word of mouth, some games I have expected to be a solid 90+ this gen, Bioshock 2, Splinter Cell ect, after playing I realise .. no, they were never going to be 90+. This is the first game this gen, that's score I don't agree with. I can't fathom how a reviewer would give this 6/10 because it took five years. IT'S IRRELEVENT TO THE FINAL PRODUCT.

You might not like horrors, you might not like shooters, but play Alan Wake, and you'll see it deserves no less than 7.5/10. All these 7's and 6's are from reviewers who review from entirely their opinion. Which never makes for a good review.

From Edge:

"But while the plot moves with all the pace of a pulp paperback, the gameplay fails to keep pace. The solid combat struggles to develop beyond throwing more enemies at Wake, puzzles are rarely more than perfunctory, and the set-pieces only really set the pulse racing in the game’s final hours. Later in the adventure, for instance, the darkness diversifies by possessing inanimate objects. Combine harvesters, monster trucks and, heck, even demonic parade floats are fine, but car tyres and oil drums? Even the use of light begins to run out of juice once all of the light-emitting weapons have been introduced, which happens early on.

Ultimately, Alan Wake is every bit as compulsive and satisfying as the fiction on which it riffs, but it also runs the risk of being equally forgettable. It’s a game that delivers the requisite number of twists, turns and thrills, but the only real revelations take place on those scattered manuscript pages. As a franchise, Alan Wake’s future is assured – Remedy is already working on downloadable content and has plans for a sequel – but next time around the action will need to keep pace with the deft plotting."

7/10

So you reckon Edge's review is from a reviewer who's review is from entirely their opinion?

If you have read Edge's review, they'll compliment the game for clever story telling but what I posted above is one of the criticisim Edge mentions. Gameplay. Ultimately, gameplay is the most important thing for games. They're saying gameplay is boring and doesn't stand up to the same level of story telling. And in fact, most reviews criticize AW for repetitive gameplay.

And no one is gonna play games which are not their type of genre. If a person doesn't like a horror game, why should they play it? Just to prove that it doesn't deserve anything below a 7.5? That's like me saying "You might not like RTS games, but go play Starcraft and you'll see it deserves no less than 8/10." How is someone who doesn't like RTS games supposed to enjoy playing Starcraft?

Edg'es review isn't gospel, and I wasn't talking about them in the first place?