By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sony Discussion - Death Stranding Review Thread - MC: 82 / OC: 83 / GR: 83.17%

Tagged games:

LudicrousSpeed on 01 November 2019
Mospeada21CA said:
DeusXmachina said:
Edge reviewer says there won't be a review in this or the next issue because he got bored and didn't finish it.

Well...That's just lazy writing. ~Deadpool

Really, they wrote that!?

Imagine a race car driver pulling into the pits and telling the owner he's bored cause the track only goes left or right.

I don’t know, I think I’d rather a reviewer be honest and say they didn’t review it because it was too boring to finish before the deadline than review it without finishing it. Which Edge would have done but the embargo prohibited it. 

To me it comes off a lot worse for DS than Edge.



Around the Network
DonFerrari on 01 November 2019
Chrkeller said:
DonFerrari said:

That is because you are giving a score for how much you liked the game, not how good the game is.

I don`t like Halo and would score it 3 on my like, but I know the game is 8 or 9 so I would avoid reviewing.

Not really though, which is the point.  I thought Sekiro was completely unbalanced and was **** as a result.  I thought overall design was awful as well.  Enemy placement was an issue for me.  Others thought it was perfection.  Which is exactly why some people love Death and others hate it.  There shouldn't be a shock when people rate games different.

Games are art, it can't be reviewed by a technical assessment.  Personal feelings drive how people think about art.  

Ultimately I don't see the point in the argument "only people who love the game should review it."  That makes no sense, other than inflating scores.  

Nope never said you need to love the game to review it. But you shouldn't review a game on a genre you hate it.

And yes if you want to give Sekiro, DS, or other games mentioned a under 6 you are just objectively wrong. And also the points you are picking are your personal enjoyment not really technical feats.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

LudicrousSpeed on 01 November 2019
StokedUp said:
"about 80% of your time spent with Deathstranding is walking over mountains delivering parcels"
.
.
.
.
.
.
What!?


Yikes. Which review is this from? Makes me wonder how it’s getting 84%? Maybe the story is that good. Sounds like the gameplay is not.



Chrkeller on 01 November 2019
DonFerrari said:
Chrkeller said:

Not really though, which is the point.  I thought Sekiro was completely unbalanced and was **** as a result.  I thought overall design was awful as well.  Enemy placement was an issue for me.  Others thought it was perfection.  Which is exactly why some people love Death and others hate it.  There shouldn't be a shock when people rate games different.

Games are art, it can't be reviewed by a technical assessment.  Personal feelings drive how people think about art.  

Ultimately I don't see the point in the argument "only people who love the game should review it."  That makes no sense, other than inflating scores.  

Nope never said you need to love the game to review it. But you shouldn't review a game on a genre you hate it.

And yes if you want to give Sekiro, DS, or other games mentioned a under 6 you are just objectively wrong. And also the points you are picking are your personal enjoyment not really technical feats.

There is no such thing as objectively wrong on a subjective topic. 



celador on 01 November 2019

if you blacked out the scores and just read peoples comments on forums you would think this was reviewing in the low 70s, not the mid 80s. it's always funny in these threads to see the people who shit on what is a very good score, and then when an exclusive on their system of choice receives the same score they speak of like it's a masterpiece.



Around the Network
Keybladewielder on 01 November 2019

This game does not seem like my cup of tea



TruckOSaurus on 01 November 2019
DonFerrari said:
Chrkeller said:

Not really though, which is the point.  I thought Sekiro was completely unbalanced and was **** as a result.  I thought overall design was awful as well.  Enemy placement was an issue for me.  Others thought it was perfection.  Which is exactly why some people love Death and others hate it.  There shouldn't be a shock when people rate games different.

Games are art, it can't be reviewed by a technical assessment.  Personal feelings drive how people think about art.  

Ultimately I don't see the point in the argument "only people who love the game should review it."  That makes no sense, other than inflating scores.  

Nope never said you need to love the game to review it. But you shouldn't review a game on a genre you hate it.

And yes if you want to give Sekiro, DS, or other games mentioned a under 6 you are just objectively wrong. And also the points you are picking are your personal enjoyment not really technical feats.

Personal enjoyment is the only way I rate games. If playing it is not enjoyable, no amount of technical feats is going to redeem it in my eyes. 

Your argument is comparable to saying critics who gave The Lion King (2019) a score lower than 6 were objectively wrong because the movie is visually stunning and top notch on a technical level.



Signature goes here!

Runa216 on 01 November 2019
Jpcc86 said:
Runa216 said:
I'm reading these reviews and it sounds to me like Death Stranding isn't for me. It sounds like it's an outstandingly well-written and well-made game with a tonne of value...but like FNAF or even The Last of Us/Uncharted, it sounds more like a STORY than a GAME. So even though some people are praising the game, that means little to me because the thing I like most in games appears to suffer. Doesn't make it a bad game, but does mean it doesn't sound like it's for me. No idea why this seems so hard to understand for so many people.

Im sorry, but have you played any of those games?
It just boggles the mind a bit, when people say "story/cinematic driven game" I think something more in the lines of Heavy Rain, Detroit or Until Dawn - Which are precisely that. TLOU or Uncharted are nothing of the sort, they are 97% gameplay, 3% story. They are as focused on their story as Final Fantasy, Mass Effect or any Rockstar game. Its just a plot device to kick things off or give them direction. 
Obviously I havent played Death Stranding (duh) but from the looks of it, its the same. It has a story -used as a simple device for the concept of the game (which is as ambiguos as they come) - that drives the gameplay - which seems to be the focus. 

Yes, and I didn't love any of them. I absolutely hated playing The Last of Us and Uncharted because the gameplay was boring and simplistic and unoriginal. It felt to me, with Naughty Dog's recent output, that they had this outstanding story idea with great character and plot and action set pieces but the gameplay was a last-minute 'oh right, we have to make this a game, don't we?' addition, while only giving the player minimal input during the setpieces and bland, generic, boring shooting/stealth the rest of the time. 

FNAF hardly qualifies as a game. The actual gameplay is just not fun, and while it's unique it's not interesting. the LORE, on the other hand, is some of the best I've ever seen in gaming alongside stuff like Dark Souls/Bloodborne. 



My Console Library:

PS5, Switch, XSX

PS4, PS3, PS2, PS1, WiiU, Wii, GCN, N64 SNES, XBO, 360

3DS, DS, GBA, Vita, PSP, Android

Jpcc86 on 01 November 2019
Runa216 said:
Jpcc86 said:

Im sorry, but have you played any of those games?
It just boggles the mind a bit, when people say "story/cinematic driven game" I think something more in the lines of Heavy Rain, Detroit or Until Dawn - Which are precisely that. TLOU or Uncharted are nothing of the sort, they are 97% gameplay, 3% story. They are as focused on their story as Final Fantasy, Mass Effect or any Rockstar game. Its just a plot device to kick things off or give them direction. 
Obviously I havent played Death Stranding (duh) but from the looks of it, its the same. It has a story -used as a simple device for the concept of the game (which is as ambiguos as they come) - that drives the gameplay - which seems to be the focus. 

Yes, and I didn't love any of them. I absolutely hated playing The Last of Us and Uncharted because the gameplay was boring and simplistic and unoriginal. It felt to me, with Naughty Dog's recent output, that they had this outstanding story idea with great character and plot and action set pieces but the gameplay was a last-minute 'oh right, we have to make this a game, don't we?' addition, while only giving the player minimal input during the setpieces and bland, generic, boring shooting/stealth the rest of the time. 

FNAF hardly qualifies as a game. The actual gameplay is just not fun, and while it's unique it's not interesting. the LORE, on the other hand, is some of the best I've ever seen in gaming alongside stuff like Dark Souls/Bloodborne. 

Guess we'll have to agree to disagree. I had a blast with ND's gameplay choices and the story elements only elevate the experience for me. But story is important for me in any game, since it always elevates said the game, I assume its not the same experience for you. 
FNAF is an entirely different thing, which is why I didnt even bring to discussion. I dont personally like it. 



Jpcc86 on 01 November 2019
TruckOSaurus said:
DonFerrari said:

Nope never said you need to love the game to review it. But you shouldn't review a game on a genre you hate it.

And yes if you want to give Sekiro, DS, or other games mentioned a under 6 you are just objectively wrong. And also the points you are picking are your personal enjoyment not really technical feats.

Personal enjoyment is the only way I rate games. If playing it is not enjoyable, no amount of technical feats is going to redeem it in my eyes. 

Your argument is comparable to saying critics who gave The Lion King (2019) a score lower than 6 were objectively wrong because the movie is visually stunning and top notch on a technical level.

Thats a fine and well position for someone who is just gonna take a game as a player/customer and wont have any sort of deep analysis of it other than his own personal experience/enjoyment with it, but someone who reviews games/movies/music/anyartform professionally - and its basically their job and get paid to do it -  cant have such a limited criteria. When it comes to film for example you take screenplay, visuals, editing, music, acting, directing and find the value (or lack thereof) in each individual part.