The reason this game got slammed so hard is because it's Ninja Gaiden - a series know all too well for being hard and challenging. If you're to compare it to other games in the genre, it's actually a pretty decent game, and no where near as bad as this review makes it out to be (5.5). If you're capable of getting over the fact that it's an easy Ninja Gaiden game, you'll probably find something to like here, but I can understand how some fans of the series would be upset enough to not like this at all. If it bothers you that this isn't very challenging, you will probably not like this. Anyway, maybe the Wii U version will bring back the difficulty.
Ninja Gaiden 3 Review
All flash and no substance: Ninja Gaiden 3 is a shallow action game with little of the series' challenge and depth.
Ninja Gaiden 3 doesn't just strip away Ryu's choices--it also strips away his mask from time to time. The game focuses on its story a great deal. We watch as a little girl implores him to be her new daddy, and cringe as he grasps his veined arm, which becomes increasingly diseased by the blood of those he has slain. We're meant to take it all seriously: Ninja Gaiden 3 possesses none of the tongue-in-cheek ridiculousness of Devil May Cry, Bayonetta, or even Ninja Blade. But it's hard to buy into a story when you can easily sense who will betray you; it's hard to care about a little girl you spend almost no time with, and who speaks only near the end of the game.
And yet the story is always there, intruding at the worst possible moments. Ryu holds his fingers to his ear to get a mission update like a Gears of War refugee. A cutscene ends, you walk for three seconds, and the next cutscene begins; why even have the player walking at all? Other times, story and gameplay merge: the action slows to a crawl, and Ryu clutches his arm, slicing through his enemies in slow motion. Used sparingly, these sequences could have given the game emotional heft, but instead, they are so frequent--and last so long--that they're just a pain. You slowly pan the difficult camera around looking for the next ninja you must murder, lurch toward him, and perform yet another hyperbolic execution before stumbling toward the next victim. It feels like those dreams where you try so hard to move but are almost paralyzed.
For an extra challenge, you could up the difficulty to hard (which is about as challenging as previous games' normal difficulties, but hardly as deep), or go online, where you can take part in cooperative challenges and (gasp) competitive matches. If you played Ninja Gaiden Sigma's co-op, you have an idea of what to expect here: servings of slashes and dashes for two. The sense of progression absent in the single-player campaign reappears: as you play, you level up and learn new techniques, along with costume pieces, costume colors, and so forth.
The co-op is fun, in part because it jettisons superfluous mechanics and quick-time events in favor of the core action. This is in spite of the hyperactive camera, which is jarring enough to get you temporarily lost as you try to figure out just which of the blade-flailing figures is you. The team deathmatch-type mode also suffers from the game's incessant need to be a movie instead of a game. More importantly, there's a sense that you aren't quite in control. The auto-targeting is fickle enough in the single-player game, but it can be frustrating to have the game send you slashing toward one opponent when you meant to focus on another.
Ultimately, the competitive play is a curiosity and nothing more, though at least you have to earn your victories: there is no bow-spamming here. In the campaign, on the other hand, you can leap into the air and fire flaming arrows everywhere, the snappy auto-targeting doing all the work for you. And that's Ninja Gaiden 3 for you: it does all the hard labor so that you don't have to. This forgettable action game may feed your bloodthirst, but the series' sharp edge has been dulled by Team Ninja's attempt to bring the master to the masses.
All of you trolls hating on Kevin for the review you can bark all you want but in the end nobody cares what you think.This guy got a job as a reviewer because he has the skills to do so if you think his review is unjust why don't you do a better job yourself?I've played the game and its trash compared to NG1and NG2 was a bit bogged down too but it was still pretty decent this game pushed me away from the series and I was extremely disappointed.This game deserves a 5.5 score with all the criticism because maybe if by any chance Team Ninja/Tecmo saw this review or any other review like this one then they might realize their mistake and correct it in NG4 (Hopefully).
I don't think people are getting the point of the review, he's not saying the difficulty change is necessarily bad (even though the previous games were known for the there challenging difficulty). He's saying that the depth of the other games were lost, you can have an easy game without it becoming borring
It looks like firing that lead designer over at Techmo was a big mistake (the guy that always wore the sun glasses).
@VolcanoMan001 you know what , this isn't necessarily the case.I do also believe that Itakagi ia an amazing games developer but it wasn't all about him. In fact if he still was around today DOA wouldn't have progressed to 5 and probably to 6 because he had stated that DOA 4 was "the definitive fighting experience" and that he had no plans of making another DOA game which basically sucked as an idea. I love NG series and certainly i love DOA series so i think that Hayashi will find his pace and on a next attempt he will get it perfectly right.For one thing DOA 5 was an awesome fighting game and they are certainly on the right track there.
I don't particularly like bosses so if they require "too little skill" it's rather a good point than a bad point as you state. I play for pleasure and fun and not particularly for challenge.
And I'm not alone, as all the players I know are not particularly fond of bosses (or not at all).
So Kevin and Gamespot, please do a survey on that topic.
I think that game reviewers are biased toward difficulty, so game designers make difficult games to receive good reviews, and that situation is bad for the average gamer who gets frustrating experiences.
Now, I agree that games have become easier lately and it's a good thing but I wonder why it took so long ?
@tevic What!!!!? Most games these days are almost too bloody easy!
in some of them you can put the controller down in middle of a boss fight for a minute and get yourself a drink, you'll surely be left with some health to finish the boss fight!
@tevic Easy games do have their place, but I think they should be a much rarer exception. What is the point of playing a game without the challenge? Games that are too easy become boring because there is no challenge. If you could instant kill every enemy in an entire campaign then the game would be boring because you wouldn't have a sense of power, skill, or challenge.
Boss battles are also important to video games because they change the pacing. There is nothing worse than an easy boss battle (ok there are some worse things) but having an easy boss battle is just terrible! There is no sense of accomplishment after you win. There is nothing fun in playing a game that is a cake walk.
@tevic If you don't like challenge, go to the movies. If you are gamer, I highly recommend Nocturne or Ogre Battle March of the Black Queen right now.
@wiserat4 Very strange proposition since I never go to the movies nor watch TV. I don't like fiction actually I find the stories often childish or black-and-white. And I hate being passive.
There's nothing like interactivity.
But not punishingly difficult interactivity.
@tevic If you don?t play games for the challenge, I struggle to figure out what you play games for at all. The fun aspect of games is being skilled enough to beat that difficult boss ? it?s not fun to need no skill to beat a boss, that would make the ?game? aspect of it boring.
Now, now - if you like easy games, the market is surely saturated.
Difficult games are actually not the norm, and today are more often than not aimed at niche consumers.
I don't believe the solution is to make all games easy - that's a grotesquely egoistic path.
Some might suggest genuinely differentiating difficulty settings, but IMO some games should simply be easy, others hard. This should be clarified from the get-go.
Simplest of all: if certain players only wish to win effortlessly in every event, indulge their narcissism and incompetence with a full suite of cheats and exploits.
@fastheinz I would not speak of narcissism or incompetence but rather of "fun" If you're blocked at one point in a game that you otherwise like (by an annoying boss with too little feed-back for example) cheats in all games would be a good idea to allow people to continue enjoying the game. I work all day and play in the evening so I don't want games being more difficult than the problems I'm having to deal with at work.
There should also be advices for puzzles because usually even in games with difficulty settings there's no help when you're blocked on a puzzle.
Also: I'm shocked at the stupid "convention" of campaign where the only opportunity to select difficulty at the beginning. So if you're blocked at 50% of the game there's no way to lower temporarily the difficulty level and put it back up after. You're forced to begin the game again from scratch which is I think one of the most stupid conventions of gaming.
Maybe Gears of War was the first game to do away with it by asking for difficulty each time you begin to play but why was it necessary to wait until 2006 for such an obvious thing ?
Okay. So with the next Call of Duty...hell any FPS game give it a 3 please. As it gives you little depth and challenge and is all flash and no substance.
@iamllamapie I?m a bit of a veteran gamer who loves a challenge and don?t see why people have a huge problem with the Call of Duty games. Have you ever played them through on Veteran? It?s extremely challenging. Admittedly I didn?t enjoy it as much as when I was playing Dark Souls, but it?s a different dynamic.
@lordjustify Exactly , i agree with you my friend. This K.VanOrd.... sigh i'm not even going to start , gamespot reviews were way better some years ago , this guys have no clue how to review a game. I'm 100% sure he didn't finish the game neither replayed it. Some users here review games WAY better than 90% of lame gamespot staff.
I simply can't believe how online websites can give outstanding games reviews ranging from 3.0 to 6.0 ... I've just played through the game and the first thing I got to mention is that it's just different - different in almost everything. But different doesn't necessarily mean worse, doesn't it? The main thing these so-called professional reviewers don't seem to get that not every game needs to be exactly the same way its predecessors were. Ninja Gaiden 3 is a thrill - just because it is different and everybody who says that the game lacks challenge is ... well, leave it that way. I finished NG 2 on Master Ninja Difficulty and the extreme difficulty steemed from the fact that you had to cleverly manage your item inventory and fight multiple bosses in a row. Ninja Gaiden 3 is different. Now, the difficulty mainly steems from normal enemy encounters. While playing through the campaign I actually thought that those encounters were more difficult than those in NG 2 - and not because the lack of weapons. Actually, you can play through NG 2 on the higher difficultys with just abusing Flying Swallow and Izuna Drops; works fine. Go and play NG 3 for yourself and see if you like it or not but with the attitude that difference is not always a step backwards.
I never thought these games were that fun to play. For whatever reason, GS reviews tend to be biased towards games with a relatively high difficulty. Ninja Gaiden probably had some of the best graphics of last gen consoles, but aside from that it was boring and repetitive forcing you to fight the same enemies whenever you backtrack. The story and characters were also completely uninteresting. When I played the second game in the series it was obvious how these concepts had aged so poorly. Looks like GS finally got the memo.
I don't understand how they could've gone wrong with this franchise. The first two "remakes" from the last decade were golden. Guess I won't know until I play it myself.
@darkdude2k12 Just a scream from Trip was enough to get you running crazy to save her. because the setting is so lovely, so honest, and so developed that you can't feel otherwise. you "Care" for that defenseless woman! that is story development. that's the reason the game deserves at least a 9 in the story category. and the animation and facials were unbelievable! something only achieved in games like Rachet and Clank series. even uncharted cant match up to that. while NG3 sucks at that too. frame rate is more stable than before, but it's mostly due to the lesser enemies present on the screen. voice actors don't do a bad job. but story doesn't let them make an impact. and the voice for Hayabusa doesn't match a bit. and unmasking him has the same impact unmasking Ray Mysterio will have on WWE Fans! his ego will vanish! even repetition can condemn a game to lower scores. but taking a HUGE step backwards deserves a much more lower score. I myself, gave the NG3's review a 6. but really, there's not much difference between a half and a one. when a game is below 8.0, it means that it isn't an elite game. remember that scoring the game must not involve pity. cause it's still a struggling industry. and a game like this can oil it up for faster drowning. so pity on a game like this, is like pity for Uwe boll's awful line of video game adoptions.
@darkdude2k12 but what does NG3 offer? it gets much better towards the ending, but still it can't keep up with the series greatness. before, gameplay was the greatest thing keeping the game high. not the mediocre story. story is still mediocre (even more) and gameplay is mediocre. if a game doesn't have much content, it must at least offer some special creativity to get above 6.0. IMO the underrated game "Raw Danger" which I can swear UBI got the idea of "I Am Alive" straight form that, was a great experience. it deserved a 6.0. cause it had many many many technical issues. but it was a worthwhile experience. but NG3 has no soul. it's like Jennifer Lopez's Acting career. she has a great body, sure! she has a nice singing voice, still admitted. but she is at her best a mediocre actress. the same for NG3. the cute army woman is there, the tiny girl is there, the evil genius is there, the game has settings around the world, and the violence is there too. but they fail at using that potential. you won't care about the child, won't care about the woman, won't care about the setting, just won't care about it! but look at "Enslaved". it was a masterpiece. there was no hardcore fighting system as NG, but it suffices. and it's a new IP, while all NG3 has, is taken from the last edition. and the story of the Enslaved was the exact thing I am talking about.
@darkdude2k12 yeah. a fantastic debate indeed. for a moment think about annual sports game, or the masterpiece which is called Assassin's Creed. if a sports game has perfected its formula, but the next year comes out like the last year's edition, it will get panned by critics. that's what happened to WWE series. year after year the same enjoyable gameplay. but it wear out after some time. even I who spent about 800 hours on the game since PS1 onto WWE VS. Raw games, got tired of the same formula and don't care about the franchise anymore. the 2012 version got better, but still... and about assassin's creed. its gameplay system and story (specially story) is much more vast and developed. AC2 got a 9.0 from gamespot, but revelations got an 8.0. (which I think it deserves less. about 7.0 or 7.5) the reason is even though it had some new additions, it still was the same experience. and AC: Revelations had some new additions Plus all that great and full of content gameplay.
@unbentonslaught :lol: you so funny dude :lol: Mr VanOrd got to play the game for free - he did not like it. I went and paid for it - played/playing it and am enjoying it - addmitedly its not perfect - neither was NG2. Tell you what, when you have actually played the game you can then comment about it and the review to me - knowledge is power - so until then go take a chill pill and have a long nap under your bridge - goodbye :D
@staring_death Fantastic debate between yourself and I; though I must say it is now which I've understood your point of view in it's entirety. But what's made me jolt down the ivory staircase would be the fact that this title's moreso the same as it's previous installment. You see, after playing this game a bit last night and today, I've gotten the feeling of NG3 at least being along the lines of "an arcade bruiser lacking the elements of secrecy and posh as it's alpha 3D creation". So, Kevin may be a tad spot on with the exception of the score and perhaps his quote of it being all flash with no substance. In essence, I'd say NG3 at least deserves a 6.5 or 7.0 rather than it's terrible score of 5.5. Afterall, only games like Viking for the 360 should be given such.
@darkdude2k12 it doesn't matter how much you love something. technicality is still there and a critic must stick to it. there are standards for quality. being stereotyped and stripped down doesn't get you far. no matter how much I've enjoyed the movie "Resident Evil: Afterlife". I loved the action sequences. but still it is no "Hero" (Jet Li's Movie). so there's a standard man. you can't just play a game and then rate it based on how coll I felt it was! I had so much fun with Asura's Wrath. but it's no video game. it deserves that low score. because it lacks the basic video game components. so it's not Kevin's fault that the game isn't there. and I don't even know Kevin. but I know his words are true. both about RE:ORC and NG3. and please don't try to be a gentleman about everything sir. sometimes you need to cut the weed out of a garden so the flowers can grow. there's nothing gentle about it. but good and bad can never be overlapped. everything must be judged as deserved. people must learn from mistakes.
@darkdude2k12 I didn't say anything about being selfish man, everyone tends to do that sometimes. and I think that's mostly based on defending something else out of pity. but it's out of unconsciousness so even we can't really profess it. I live this genre, and I'm mostly an action adventure lover. I've played games ranging from God of War to Prince of Persia to Enslaved and else... I think it' okay to say that after all this time I know the difference between a good Hack&slash and the amazing action adventure NG1 was. I'm a video game critic myself. and I've worked (and still working) with different magazines and newsletters. I think the situation here, is just like the argument over Twilight series. no matter how much the critics say it sucked, there are still people who are amazed by that thing Kevin described as "all flash and no substance!". but people won't agree with that cause they love that movie! think about it man. what is the difference between a genius student and an idiot if the teacher gives both of them an A+? only cause he feels more compassion towards the idiots personality!
@digi-demon I'm arguing with you about this because VanOrd is mostly spot on with his reviews, and you're claiming he's somehow biased because he likes another genre. Now get over yourself and stop being so butt-hurt over a review that's probably correct.
@staring_death How dare you accuse me of being selfish. The obvious truth is that I'm a gentleman who's enjoyed fine gaming and feel that this Kevin fellow has conspired against a title which possesses the greatest potential in spectacular fashion. Yes, I've paid out the knickers for this game as have yourself, but it's obvious that Kevin and yourself are in agreement about previous NG titles providing a "better experience" to which I respond "ng3 provides an even more smashing experience to the series". Good sir, you are bonkers!
@darkdude2k12 come on man! I think you are just defending this lousy game because you have paid money for it! I did too! and I'm saying it sucks! for all I care it could have had no cinematic feel, and still keep the awesome gameplay as before, that was enough for me! They could've made a new IP. but TECMO decided to sacrifice this franchise to make some more money. a cinematic experience is really good. that's what MGS series is known for. but NG3 doesn't even get close to that! it's graphic isn't designed for that kind of experience. Just play God of War to see what NG3 is trying to be, and fails big time at it!
@unbentonslaught I play and enjoy most types of video games, ask Mr VanOrd the question as I didn't put 'RPG lover' in my sig ;) - now plz go away :lol:
@staring_death I've not played NG3 since yesterday, but I don't think you understand where the team was coming from with the angle in this game. It's not meant to pick up where it left off; it's meant to deliver the most cinematic experience possible. I'm not gonna change my mind because of "Kev" writing a hateful review on this game with his GS sheep scampering behind him full steam. The first time I tossed a shuriken at a guy knocking him off the building I was climbing blew me away. I mean, the wow moments in this game are second to none. The boss battles are the best in NG series; period. And the last boss of NG2 was way too easy. And in fairness, all you have to do is boost the difficulty in NG3. I also noticed you tossing in other franchises, specifically by Capcom in that of Bayonetta and DMC. Well, hate to pop your proverbial bubble of joy but Bayonetta was a spotfest built off DMC with "lots of flash and no substance" whilst DMC was good...in no way are those titles better than NG3. No way. This game is so badass. DMC/Bayonetta were button mashers. So, it's not about defending NG3, it's the fact that you're comparing a game where you have to be skilled (NG3) to a game where you can mash away and win. (Bayonetta/DMC) I'd personally like to meet Kevin and squeeze a lemon in his eye. It's reviewers like him that bury games and he probably was paid to make this game sound like the worst. (Wouldn't surprise me, it's happened here before)
@digi-demon How does someone who has a lack of experience playing one kind of game get a job as a video game reviewer? RPG fans don't ONLY play RPG's bud.
@darkdude2k12 if you are a gamer who plays most of the titles out there and knows what makes a game be considered good, why defend the NG3? and if you are one of those guys who tries to take bullet for the weak every time something gets criticized, stop that. this whole "making accessible" thing is the sole reason for this generation to suck in comparison with the last! any company that wants to cash in big bucks with this lame excuse deserves all the pummeling that is given. cause I'll repeat: it's good that the game is more simple (cause there are higher difficulties) but that doesn't justify the low production value and stripped down gameplay elements! and by the way... if the developers wanted to add some sense to violence with all those epic magical crap in the story, why the hell would they make the player kill a pleading soldier manually?! it could've been a simple cutscene. but no... when it comes to making a cinematic experience, and impact for making noobs buy the game, all is forgotten! I can just imagine how many gamers would consider that scene "COOL"! which is just another cheap, cheap, cheap imitation from God of War series that is obvious all around the game.
@darkdude2k12 I played the game for about 6 hours today. I have it and I don't just talk. as Kevin says, it's not a bad thing that game is easier. hell... I don't have time like before to dedicate to any game, it's a lot more efficient for me this way. and I gotta say NG3 deserves about 6.0 or 6.5. cause it is somehow a good game in it's own rights. but I understand how Kevin feels. and it's not about bragging or things like that. it's about ruining one of the best franchises. sure. the story always sucked with NG. but this game wasn't about story, it was all pure gameplay. when you look at it from the eyes of a fan, NG3 should not exist! it's like watching the Lord of the Rings 1 and 2, and then get Eragon for the third! TECMO has stripped down 80% of what made the first two titles great. and put in some genuine crap that's supposed to make game look cinematic! I mean the third time that pain in the arm thing happens, you want to kill yourself from boredom! those radio talk sequences are all unnecessary and meaningless. the village scene is completely uncalled for. just forget about ninja gaiden franchise, and compare NG3 with like of DMC or Bayonetta, if you're fare, you will admit that NG3 is not good enough to be compared with them, and by the way, the last remaining combos are mostly copied from last Ninja Gaiden! so practically, the game has nothing to be proud of! just like the milking Capcom has going on with RE series. in my opinion, it's a 90% fair review.
Glad to see a game from this series get trashed. It's always been overrated. Good combat but the story is totally lame. People just jump on it's bandwagon to sound like they are badass for playing a hard game. Got news for ya: no matter how hard the game is, playing video games is still inherently geeky. It's not a macho thing to be bragging about.
@staring_death First, I didn't take a crap on NG series because of it's difficulty, because it's a satisfyingly brutal game that can be extremely difficult, however, it's also one that amps your skill level beyond it's threshold. What I'm saying is, why not accept the game for what it's worth rather than take this "virgin web geek" Kevin serious with this horrible review. I mean, for christ's sake, he's saying the game's all about flash with "no substance". When in reality, it has the same moveset as the previous NG titles with a few exceptions...obviously, you ninpo geeks are crying about now because a "ninja doesn't have enough magic"...well guess what? Ninja's don't do magic. They're fighters with uncanny agility...which is exactly what this game showcases. Thus far, this game's pretty good. I like the changes...sure, it's not exactly "classic NG" BUT WHO CARES!!!? It's obvious that most the whiners on this forum are the people who don't own this game. To be fair, I give Kevin the Virgin some credit for noting how this game spams QTE's but that's all. But don't listen to this guy, buy the game and enjoy it. It's a good title. Like an unofficial Ninja Blade 2.
@darkdude2k12 come on buddy! let's not care about the difficulty for a moment. can you forgive that the NG2 had about 10 weapons and 600 combos, and all that has been thrown over to trash?! this game is way too shallow in comparison with NG2!
I gotta admit that video actually looked kind of cool. Looks fun, but clearly not incredibly original. Maybe when it's cheaper I'll look into it, after all, GSP does want us to play their 6/10 games. Ha...
@unbentonslaught Nothing wrong with my analogy. Bias is one thing - but a lack of knowledge or less than average experience on subject matter that someone is reviewing is another thing entirely. NG1 was an action adventure style game - NG2 was more arcade action - NG3 is pure arcade action. This review shows a lack of experience and understanding of what comprises of an arcade 'action' style video game - end.
I will get it a few months from now when it's $20 on Amazon and all the weapon packs are out. It's just plain retarded to not release your game finished. Sadly that is today's trend.
The graphics look just awful. What was team ninja thinking? I played the game for 10 mins and was feeling like i was playing a wii game. The graphics on the ps3 and 360 are just too dated, and blurry. I hope this comes on on pc.
Kevin's an idiot. This game's pretty good; although it hops away from the brutally difficult NG titles of the past with a more casual experience. I'm not finished with it yet, but I found some parts of it to be fantastic in the sense of a wow moment.
@digi-demon Well the movie thing is obviously irrelevant. I don't judge movies or games by their genre, I judge them by how good they are. I don't really have a bias towards any genre, and I assume that VanOrd doesen't either.
I own all versions of reboot NG (inc NG3 - but not NGSigma Vita). Original NG reboot on Xbox1 and DOA2 were Itagaki's masterpiece games. DOA3, DOA4, NG2 etc. whilst very good never lived up to the standards of these two former releases. The Black and Sigma NG titles are just remixes - nice additions but not the originals - thats all. I will admit was a bit disappointed with NG2 when it was released, but after a little perseverence and in its new HD visual splendor it rocked. QTE is something that should have been left out - Shenmue Yes :D - but message to others - no more copying thanks :P. Back to NG3, I admit I enjoyed the more free-form combat of the previous title and the small puzzle / exploration element or the original. NG3 is still a pretty hot game from what i've played though - imo its a try before you buy. @unbentonslaught Well if I want to get a review of an action film I wouldn't ask a classic movie or comedy movie critic for advice - so yes, the answer to your question is a resounding is YES - genres reviewed by fans of the genre - and they can safely stick to what they have experience with and comment on a topic they have knowledge of. :D
- Player Reviews: 25
- Game Universe:
- Ninja Gaiden (ARC, GG, LYNX, NES, SMS, TG16, GEN),
- Ninja Gaiden II: The Dark Sword of Chaos (NES),
- Ninja Gaiden III: The Ancient Ship of Doom (LYNX, NES),
- Ninja Gaiden 3 (PS3, X360),
- Ninja Gaiden Sigma Plus (PS3, VITA),
- Ninja Gaiden Sigma 2 Plus (PS3, VITA),
- Ninja Gaiden II (X360),
- Ninja Gaiden: Dragon Sword (DS),
- Ninja Gaiden Black (XBOX),
- Ninja Gaiden Trilogy (SNES)
- Number of Players:
- Number of Online Players:
8 Players Online