I would agree with almost all the points, but great writing? nah!
sure, the dialog is mostly well written, but the story as a whole was a huge disappointment for me. it just feels so dumb and empty when you reach the end and just think about it for a second. i can even say it was far worse than IV, and after red dead redemption, L.A. noir and max payne 3, i expected a lot more from rockstar in the narrative department.
but Mark, what about the combat?? I can't believe you would leave such a big part of this franchise out of your review (except for a cursory mention)!
other than that, I'm really surprised by the score. I think the negative points about the characters and the story or the overall feeling feeling of it could be mostly mostly personal, and I and many others would probably not feel the same. granted, I haven't played it but from what I've seen I think it has enough good points that at least warrants it a try, not to mention a beautifully rendered 18th century paris! I'm a sucker for French revolution and French culture and history in general, so I can't wait to first get a nice next-gen system and then the game!
pretty weak and rushed review if you ask me. it didn't talk about how realistic player movement is, how realistic the ball movement and dribbling is (a major problem I have with FIFA) and how that feels, how good AI is on attacks and creating chances, how good the goalies are, are there any changes to passing and shooting? are there any changes/additions to the modes? what is the online functionality? how do the graphics look (next-gen vs past gen)?
Seems like the reviewer was either lazy or didn't care, or maybe both! Gamespot should either demand more from their Interns or just get better dedicated reviewers.
Btw, this looks very interesting, and there are very few games that actually pull this type of concept right, so I certainly have to check it out! I hope we see more games like this and than just the same old stuff.
what i'm surprised that this and most other critics and people don't actually criticize is the story. GTA V had the most shallow story i have seen in a rockstar game. period. it didn't really have a lot of progression; the characters didn't have any meaningful development. the only character who might feel to have developed a bit by the end of the game is franklin, and that was in a shallow and tired sort of two-bit aspiring criminal becomes a gangster development that we've seen in most gtas. at least nico belic felt like he had a real dream at the outset of gta iv, and was affected by what happened to him or around him and witnessing how the reality is different from his "dream", even though your actions in the game somewhat diminished that feeling.
but the worst part about the story was the ending. it was one of the most weightless and pointless endings i've ever seen in a game. the characters simply walk away like nothing ever happened between them or any event had any meaning or purpose. GTA IV, red dead redemption and even L.A noir had far better and more memorable endings. the game mocked the contemporary u.s society well enough, but the story had no true message or meaning to it. it just felt some plot points were sticked together in the service of gameplay. while i had fun with the game and applaud rockstar for creating such a vast and believable world brimming with things to do, i was totally disappointed by the story, especially after the improvement rock* had in this area in their last few games.
I thought it hadn't changed much until I played the demo. it feels A WHOLE LOT different compared to the last game. players run and dribble much more smoothly and naturally, the physics just feel more realistic and the interface looks more beautiful and functional, though the AI (especially on attacks) and the graphics hasn't improved much and there aren't more tactical options available (like pes's combination plays), which i think is long overdue for this franchise. I was a bit disappointed with the AI and tactical options but overall I think it's a much better, more fun game than 13 and I felt 13 hadn't changed much over 12.
this is from the rating policy page of this website:
"Our reviews are written with the prospective customer in mind--someone who's naturally interested in playing a new game and has a limited amount of time and money to spend. Our editors approach each review strictly from that perspective. In turn, our reviews are not intended to validate or support the beliefs of hardcore fans, nor are they intended to provide feedback to developers or publishers about how a given game could have been improved. Our reviews are only designed to tell you, the game player, to what extent a game is worth your while."
this is why we can call this review unprofessional. if you do not follow your own policies, then why the hell have any??
19Gam3NErD91's comments