I just got around to playing this remake, and it's easy to see both why the review score came about, and why there is such a backlash. At first glance, this seems to be the perfect remake. WayForward knows what they are doing, for sure. They polished the absolute heck out of this game.
But I have to say, as someone that has extremely fond memories of the original, I found the remake wanting in many respects. The cutscenes were amusing but, in the end, they really only got in the way. The controls did feel a bit off. The original had a greater sense of exploration -- and I don't think it's just because of the map. I think it's largely because the original didn't have you hunting for a myriad of collectibles all the time. There was a wide open space and you had to find the perpetual needle in the haystack.
Where Tom really hit the nail on the head, though, is this: there is no difficulty other than in tedium. There is no challenge to anyone that is remotely schooled in platformers, because everything is so predictable. I died on every level I played, and I died exactly once. I died because I was bored, and because boredom turned into recklessness. Each time, on my second go around, I played careful under the fear of repeating levels that were already not very exciting to begin with, and each of those times I won.
It wasn't particularly gratifying. No more gratifying than, say, racing in Mario Kart with the sole level of never swerving out of your lane. Megaman manages to accomplish a similar death penalty without feeling like a battle of attrition -- at least then it is a battle of memorization. At least you feel like you accomplished something at the end of a level, instead of just feeling like you _endured_ it.
To site a sticky point I've been using a lot lately, it's like the bomb wall in Zelda. The first time you figure it out, it's exciting. The 27th time you act on that prior knowledge in the 4th iteration since you first saw it, it is less so. So it is with the platforming here.
I find it hard to fault the devs at WayForward because they really accomplished that which they set out to do. But I think a somewhat fresh take on level and encounter design would have been very welcome.
6.5/10, from someone who loved the original, loves "old-school" games, loves games with steep death penalties like Demon's Souls and Megaman, loves difficult games like Super Meat Boy, and who loves the expertise WayForward showed in making this game.
Love the game so far -- sunk about 7 hours into it and am getting all of the challenges along the way with friends.
That being said, I also love Gamespot's seemingly-new policy to use the entire 1-10 scale. And I also love that every review isn't trying to be the end-all-be-all for everyone. One man's opinion is that the game is "middle of the road" and this doesn't shock me in the slightest; there certainly are a slew of faults.
@thedorkknight74 @sw1000xg @jmeyer2039 I would rather play a mediocre, innovative game, than a good game I've already played. Most of the time. Repetition is itself hugely detrimental to the games industry, moreso even than in other media like books like or movies, regardless of the quality of the clone.
With a story, it is comparatively easy to redress the characters and setting and trick the mind into digesting "The Hero's Journey" again. Comparatively easy to redressing gameplay that is. This is because the mind knows when it is not challenged, and eventually you start to realize that you are just along for the ride. That's okay, even, for a story-based game like Beyond, but for a combat- and mechanic-heavy game like Batman, it becomes a chore to progress.
There is a class of gamer that is immune to this problem, which is obvious looking at some of the comments here. The most shocking to me so far is jmeyer's, on innovation in games:
"I mean, I can appreciate it, but I'm usually fine without it."
This stems, of course, from the different reasons we play games. All sorts of classifications have been made, but I think it's clear that challenge, mastery, exploration and accomplishment (in a word, learning) describes a large class of gamer, but only one class. There are plenty of others: social elements, escapism, narrative, and control, for example. You don't need innovation in gameplay to appreciate games for any of these qualities.
The problem, and the reason why I say repetition is hurtful to games, is that no gamer lies solely in any of these buckets, especially over the course of many years. Even if, today, you don't think you care about the experience of "learning" in a game, without innovation you would slowly begin to become disenchanted with games. I would guess that a large percentage of young gamers who move away from them as they age do so not because of other responsibilities and lack of time (after all, these generations still watch a ton of television) but because of a "been there, done that" feeling. I want our industry to grow so that we as gamers will grow, and not get bored.
I don't feel a sense of accomplishment from blowing up a bomb wall in Zelda anymore. Been there, done that.
"I hate nintendo for putting snaking in the game in the first place. Its flawed." They didn't "put it in the game." It's well documented that snaking is not how Nintendo envisioned power sliding - it's just an unfortunate side effect.
leapfrog91's comments