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

Forums - Gaming - Surprised The Evil Within doesn't get more love, it's awesome

Barozi said:
curl-6 said:

I'm replaying it at the moment and I'm struck once again by how excellent it is.

I put off buying it when it came out cos a lot of people said it was frustrating and just not that good. I'm really glad I finally decided to give it a chance though; it strikes a really great balance between impactful action and unsettling horror, and to me feels like a better successor to RE4 than RE5 or 6.

Sure its not perfect; the story's nothing special, but I really feel like outside of RE4 its one of the best examples of how to blend action and horror effectively.

With a metacritic in the 60s-70s, it's also a prime example of why I stopped listening so much to reviewers when choosing my purchases.

Anyone else really enjoy this one?

The Evil Within has a 75 Metscore (version with most reviews) that's just short of great.

In the gaming media, a 75 is generally used to denote "okay-ish". It's just 1 percentage point above a yellow or "mixed" tag.



Around the Network
Jpcc86 said:
Didnt play 2, but EW1 had really good scenario design, but the pacing and story really brings it down A LOT. I didnt even felt tense, Its just not scary at all, its weird.
Gameplay was alright I guess.

Try 2. It's secretly one of the best sequels that improved on a first game. It really goes places.



Bite my shiny metal cockpit!

curl-6 said:
Barozi said:

The Evil Within has a 75 Metscore (version with most reviews) that's just short of great.

In the gaming media, a 75 is generally used to denote "okay-ish". It's just 1 percentage point above a yellow or "mixed" tag.

You have to draw the line somewhere. Metacritic does it between 74 and 75 but that doesn't mean that there's a world of difference between these scores. It also doesn't mean that the "gaming media" (incredibly generalizing) shares the same views.

Also, you seem to forget that this is an (weighted) average score. Just because your personal score is a bit higher doesn't make it wrong. There were plenty of reviews in the 80s or higher but at the same time just as many in the 70s or lower.



Barozi said:
curl-6 said:

In the gaming media, a 75 is generally used to denote "okay-ish". It's just 1 percentage point above a yellow or "mixed" tag.

You have to draw the line somewhere. Metacritic does it between 74 and 75 but that doesn't mean that there's a world of difference between these scores. It also doesn't mean that the "gaming media" (incredibly generalizing) shares the same views.

Also, you seem to forget that this is an (weighted) average score. Just because your personal score is a bit higher doesn't make it wrong. There were plenty of reviews in the 80s or higher but at the same time just as many in the 70s or lower.

I'm just saying, gamers and the gaming media generally don't treat a 75 as particularly good.



curl-6 said:
Barozi said:

You have to draw the line somewhere. Metacritic does it between 74 and 75 but that doesn't mean that there's a world of difference between these scores. It also doesn't mean that the "gaming media" (incredibly generalizing) shares the same views.

Also, you seem to forget that this is an (weighted) average score. Just because your personal score is a bit higher doesn't make it wrong. There were plenty of reviews in the 80s or higher but at the same time just as many in the 70s or lower.

I'm just saying, gamers and the gaming media generally don't treat a 75 as particularly good.

There is some truth to this. Some outlets, and by extension many fans, treat 5/10 as the baseline when it should denote a game of average quality. I can say that the writing team at VGChartz is committed to a more balanced scale where a 7/10 represents a worthwhile game just short of greatness.

But back to the OP: I'm glad you like TEW! I also enjoy it. I love that each chapter focuses on a different horror motif or trope, although my favorites are the ones that emulate RE4.

I'd be interested in your take on the sequel. I found it inferior. It felt as if the folks at Bethesda saw the premier game's lukewarm reaction and niche appeal and decided to make the follow-up more attractive to a larger fan base--thus diluting what made it special in the first place.



Around the Network

I really liked the first one, but it dragged on too long. the second one, I didn't liked too much, I think it was because of those open world segments.



I really like this game, sets up great atmosphere. First playthrough was very hard, beat it like 4 times. But it has some technical issues with base PS4 like framerate drops and clunky controls.



Bought the first one. It was pretty hard. Moved on to something else. Always wanted to buy the second and give the first another try.



My big mistake was thinking it could be another RE4. Played through it and it sure wasn't...



BraLoD said:
curl-6 said:

I thought the execution was fine; combat felt good with enemies feeling genuinely threatening and satisfying to kill, there was variety in encounters and setpieces with new baddies and mechanics introduced at a steady pace, resource management was well balanced in that I had to be careful but was never left empty-handed or under-equipped.

I'd really love it if the sequel got a Switch port, I'd buy that day 1.

I can't put into words how unballanced that game and how broken it feels, even the camera.

Maybe when you play a second time and know better its ok, but for a first playthrough it was pure frustation.

I rarely drop a game and I thought several times about dropping this while playing.

I actually put off buying it for a while because folks said it was frustrating, and I am easily frustrated, but honestly I don't have a problem with it.

It certainly never felt broken to me. I played though it on easy though, so maybe that helps.