Watch Dogs PS4 first review: 8/10 from Gameblog.fr

[artur-fernand]

JWeinCom said:

veritaz said:

I hate reviews that give a game a lower score because it isn't revolutionary enough for their standards. A good game is a good game in my book. It doesn't have to change the whole formula to be great.

You can't evaluate games in a vacuum, like any other medium.  Doing something for the fourth, fifth, tenth, or twentieth time isn't going to have the same appeal as it did the first.  Surprising and innovating is a key part to making a game exceptional.

Perfecting an already existing formula is enough to create an excellent game, at the hands of a competent developer. What does GTA V and The Last of Us have when it comes to "surprises" or "innovations"? Or, hell, Mario Kart 8 got an 89. Multiple games on the series have 90+. The series isn't exactly known for innovating on every single instalment, but for what the game proposes to be, it probably has unmatched quality.

Sometimes, it just feels like a huge double standard really. I'm not saying Watch Dogs or Second Son are anywhere near The Last of Us or GTA V. But listing "lack of innovation" as one of the flaws is horrible, not everybody needs to reinvent the wheel.