tucotuti said:
LMU Uncle Alfred said:
I think Jimquisition has it right at 8.5. For now when you first play U4 it feels anywhere from a 9 to a 10 (and I'll admit I'm enjoying it pretty well), but what about grading on quality of lasting appeal? I mean REAL lasting appeal. Even if a game is really good by itself, but copies a lot of what a lot of other games do, how can that be considered good lasting appeal? How will U4 feel 10 years from now? I think that's a question and criteria that needs to be put in all reviews. Reviewers do take into account lasting appeal or replay value, but they do an extremely poor job of it on the grand scale.
One of the most important qualities of replay value that is almost never taken into account in a review is how a game owns itself and separates itself from the rest. It's true that U4 is currently the most visually impressive game right now, but how long do you think that will last? The main gameplay, regardless of how smooth it is is still that same TPS cover shooter gameplay that so many other games have.
Why do people still enjoy Super Metroid, FF7, Super Mario World, Chrono Trigger, OoT and MGS1-3 today? I swear I just saw someone say they finally played through FF7 on youtube and they were extremely impressed. There are new players being introduced to these games today. It isn't nostalgia. It's because each of these games owned themselves and didn't try to appeal to anyone's taste or be like the other games. That's why they can be played again and again throughout the ages. They provide a very specific experience you can't get anywhere else and they do it very well.
*Reviews these days almost seem to punish the idea of separating yourself from the pack.* |
Best comment.
|
The comment is not the best at anything, its nonsensical. A review score and the quality of a game is not based on its lasting appeal, you are reviewing and playing the game now, if its the best experience on the market now it deserves a 10, even if in 15 years time it'll feel like trash that has no bearing on the quality of the game whatsoever because its not releasing 15 years in the future, its releasing now. Also no one can predict the future so to say X game will stand the test of time better than Y makes no sense, we will only know after time has passed, so thats not an aspect anyone should consider on their evaluation of a game at its release first because the game isn't releasing in the future and second because no one can see the future to be sure a game will or will not be apreciated after time passes. Also Uncharted has never been about just the gameplay (even tough the games detractors try to make it seen like it is), the series best quality is how it integrates and balances a dynamic storytelling experience with gameplay, and more than any other game in the series Uncharted 4 does that masterfully, so saying Uncharted gameplay "is just a cover based shooter" makes 0 sense.
Also ppl still play Uncharted 2 today and find it amazing, heck ppl even like Uncharted 1 wich has a super clunky gameplay, as I said Uncharted is not about just the gameplay, its how the game integrates that with the storytelling so fluidly and how it imerse you in its world. Theres a lot more to a game than the basic gameplay mechanics in it and we are way past time ppl understood that already.
