darksnowman Posted March 4, 2009 Posted March 4, 2009 IGN's scoring of this is a bit off. How they can give it 3.9 is beyond me. It looks as though they've basically taken the Gameplay and lasting appeal scores into consideration and given a score close to those. If you're giving a game a score overall, based off of a set of scores for various features, then it should be averaged and in this case that would work out as 6.1 which ties in with Famitsu's 26/40. But IGN don't average the the individual scores out- it says that on every review of theirs. Whats wrong with marking a game down if the gameplay stinks? Thats exactly what they should be doing, imo!
Zechs Merquise Posted March 4, 2009 Posted March 4, 2009 IGN's scoring of this is a bit off. How they can give it 3.9 is beyond me. It looks as though they've basically taken the Gameplay and lasting appeal scores into consideration and given a score close to those. If you're giving a game a score overall, based off of a set of scores for various features, then it should be averaged and in this case that would work out as 6.1 which ties in with Famitsu's 26/40. Regardless though, I think everyone was skeptical about a new sonic game and while I'm still a bit skeptical over this, I'm going to pick it up at some point. How is their scoring abit off? They say it looks lovely, has great production values but is piss poor where s counts - in the gameplay department! And anyway, they say it's not an average at the bottom of the review.
mcj metroid Posted March 4, 2009 Posted March 4, 2009 Only for people who hate 3D Sonic game, like you. I still think this game will be a lot of fun. IGN say that it's almost as good as the 360 version of Sonic Unleashed, which was awesome. Edit: Also, Tomb Raider Legend and Underworld are the best games in the Tomb Raider franchise. here is one for you.. People hate 3d sonic games because they ARE BAD! With very very few exceptions.. I mean sonic adventure 1 was good and SATSR are ok(well ye liked it) The facts are there and People like you stood by sonic heroes.....one of the worst things i've ever played and was number 1 in the charts for weeks.(this got panned in reviews but fans sweared by it so I tried it....ugh) as I said before if you like sonic games you will like this... if you don't THEN you won't. But IGN don't average the the individual scores out- it says that on every review of theirs. Whats wrong with marking a game down if the gameplay stinks? Thats exactly what they should be doing, imo! no no NO.. don't make excuses for the love of god :) this happens everytime I swear . igns scores are reasonable most of the time. If anything they have a habit of overrating a game.
Ganepark32 Posted March 4, 2009 Posted March 4, 2009 What I'm meaning is that the number 3.9 seems to have been plucked from thin air on this one from IGN. Yes, they say it doesn't hold up on the gameplay front and the last appeal is low but it just seems a strange thing to do to give it a low number like that when it does have pluses in other areas. Never read/use IGN anyway other than for movie news and even then I use Empire.
mcj metroid Posted March 4, 2009 Posted March 4, 2009 IGN's scoring of this is a bit off. How they can give it 3.9 is beyond me. It looks as though they've basically taken the Gameplay and lasting appeal scores into consideration and given a score close to those. If you're giving a game a score overall, based off of a set of scores for various features, then it should be averaged and in this case that would work out as 6.1 which ties in with Famitsu's 26/40. Regardless though, I think everyone was skeptical about a new sonic game and while I'm still a bit skeptical over this, I'm going to pick it up at some point. it really shouln't be averaged.. Then you would end up with a scoring system like gamespot.. averaging out a score suggests that for example GAMEPLAY and SOUND are equals..no What I'm meaning is that the number 3.9 seems to have been plucked from thin air on this one from IGN. Yes, they say it doesn't hold up on the gameplay front and the last appeal is low but it just seems a strange thing to do to give it a low number like that when it does have pluses in other areas. Never read/use IGN anyway other than for movie news and even then I use Empire. Not a debate on ign..really. they wern't alone when they gave the horrible wii music review so they won't be alone on this.
darksnowman Posted March 4, 2009 Posted March 4, 2009 no no NO.. don't make excuses for the love of god :) this happens everytime I swear . igns scores are reasonable most of the time. If anything they have a habit of overrating a game. What was I making excuses for?
mcj metroid Posted March 4, 2009 Posted March 4, 2009 What was I making excuses for? oops I thought you were making excuses for the ign score system. Instead you agree with it.. that's cool sorry
Dante Posted March 4, 2009 Posted March 4, 2009 Gamer Impressions. The opening is pretty cool and shows a lot of Sonic's attitude. I fact, he's really arrogant in this game, which is great. " I'm used to stuff like this." The way he calmly and eats the first chili dog while everyone else is waiting for a response and then spins the other one while staring down King Arthur is great. Like Secret Rings, the beginning is slow going. Tutorial levels abound, but not in the great amount that was in Rings. It keeps the story going while giving you these tutorial levels. But the story's part of the problem at the beginning. There's too dang much of it! Cinema, short level, cinema, cinema again, short level. Waaay too many cutscenes. Fortunately, this starts to ease off and the levels get longer and deeper after defeating Lancelot. (Shadow) Using the sword is ......different. It doesn't really stop you from moving forward when you're slicing the weaker enemies and jumping while swinging keeps you going pretty fast. The power surge move however, makes for a huge combo attack and more points, but stops Sonic and slows the pace to use it. It does get more fun in later levels. Sonic - "I wish I didn't have to use this dang sword!" Tails blacksmith shop works like when you equipped Sonic's ring. You can upgrade the sword, or equip yourself with items. Some items can give you more points for new treasure items, (that I'm still not sure what the hell they're useful for) or more rings when dying and starting over. One of the cooler items you can equip is your own "custom soundtrack" of sorts. For instance, when I defeated Lancelot, I got the "All hail Shadow" track. You can play this instead of the regular music in levels if you want. Cool if you're a Shadow fan. (I'm not.) There's no hub world. If you want to talk to a villager you have to do so in a level you're playing. Although so far, "talking" only consists of playing a QTE with a villager, giving them rings and they may give you a prize. I hope you don't have to do this too often, as stopping completely to talk to someone when a level is designed for running and slicing is very off-putting. Fan art in the gallery is a very cool thing for Sonic fans. A nice touch. Also, the graphics are quite well done. Overall, I can't really score it yet, as I'm not that far along to judge it. It's a decent game. No 3.9, but no 8 either. I still like Unleashed a lot better. In fact, I think Secret Rings might be better as well. So far, it's pushing a 7. Which is about what I expected.
khilafah Posted March 4, 2009 Posted March 4, 2009 I knew this would suck! when it was first announced I wasnt keen as Sonic should not be about fighting enemies with a damn sword. It was a stupid idea and I hope the game bombs. Until Sonic on all 3 consoles starts bombing in sales nothing is ever gonna really change. It is one poor/average game after another at the moment. Sega are so lucky that sonic has such a loyal fanbase.
killer kirby Posted March 4, 2009 Posted March 4, 2009 Sega are so lucky that sonic has such a loyal fanbase. I know, it's amazing with the huge amount of people that will defend any of the sonic games (I have even seen people defending Sonic 360/PS3, even declaring it as a good game) So no matter what happens Sonic will always be defended, no matter what crap Sega do to it next, shit I bet they could make sonic use a sword and...oh wait....
Zechs Merquise Posted March 5, 2009 Posted March 5, 2009 I knew this would suck! when it was first announced I wasnt keen as Sonic should not be about fighting enemies with a damn sword. It was a stupid idea and I hope the game bombs. Until Sonic on all 3 consoles starts bombing in sales nothing is ever gonna really change. It is one poor/average game after another at the moment. Sega are so lucky that sonic has such a loyal fanbase. I second that! The sad thing is with every one of these titles there are moments where you see brilliance shinning through - but it's always ruined by some piss poor design choice.
S.C.G Posted March 5, 2009 Posted March 5, 2009 Not this shit again...>> *sigh* if they'd only take the positive aspects of Sonic Unleashed (the Sonic levels) and the positive aspects of this now ruined title (the graphics etc) and made a better story then they would maybe just maybe have had a decent Sonic game. Christ I know people bitched about Sonic and the Secret Rings and while flawed in places it was still playable at least but this? *sigh* this is just even more evidence that Sega needs to go back to 2D with Sonic, both Sonic Rush titles were excellent Imo, so they should just make a 2D game with 3D graphics mapped over the top, couple that with the gameplay from the old (and still good) Sonic games with a few throwaway elements from the portable games and they would have a decent title. But they won't, they will make a whole series of these "storybook" titles and drag Sonic's allready tarnished name even further through the shit. [/RANT]
Fierce_LiNk Posted March 5, 2009 Posted March 5, 2009 Although I haven't played this game, I'm going to give an outsider's perspective. Sega took a slightly different route with this, and so they at least they are trying to do something decent with the series, especially on the Wii. However, once the games are out, the same issues just keep cropping up. You could probably choose 3 things, and they would be evident in each 3D Sonic game. But, here's a question I'd like to ask Sega: Do you play your own games? If they played, and ironed out, they would probably release far, far better games than they're doing now. Is this playable? Is this fun? Do they even ask themselves this?
Goron_3 Posted March 5, 2009 Posted March 5, 2009 Holy cow i've just seen IGN's review...what on Earth! Seriously Sonic Team, there's this thing called XBLA, you should try it with a 2d Sonic game.
Emasher Posted March 5, 2009 Posted March 5, 2009 I don't think I'll pick this up now unless I see it at some point for under 20$. Though, there's so much else coming out now, I'm almost glad I can save my money now and not be missing out on anything special.
killer kirby Posted March 5, 2009 Posted March 5, 2009 Though, there's so much else coming out now, I'm almost glad I can save my money now and not be missing out on anything special. Yeah, better for people to save their money for upcoming games, House of the dead overkill and Madworld are the games you want to give money to sega for, not this crap.
Guest Captain Falcon Posted March 5, 2009 Posted March 5, 2009 That's a pretty scathing review and call me a sucker, but I was really looking forward to this. "Imagine the trademark intense speed, loop-de-loops, corkscrews, jumps and pinball mechanics that have helped define the Sonic name over the years. Good. Now throw all of that tried-and-true stuff out the window, slow down the action to a relative crawl, give the blue hedgehog a big sword, and throw enemy after enemy in his path." Now I know trailers are hardly representative of the actual game itself, but to call it slow based on what we've seen so far does raise my eyebrow somewhat. I can't really comment on the other points since I've not seen any full levels but I'm fairly sure SatSR only had one true loop-de-loop (all the others being corkscrews) and it wasn't big on throwing you around the level either, like Unleashed was. I'll still end up getting it, it's just a question of whether I can be bothered to wait until it's come down in price - though if Sonic Unleashed is any indication, it shouldn't take very long.
Emerald Emblem Posted March 6, 2009 Posted March 6, 2009 Funny how the Reviewers hate these games yet the users seem to get real enjoyment from it. A few low scores are just because the person thinks the game isn't deserving. I'll wait for a price drop and save my money for Star Ocean.
Tellyn Posted March 6, 2009 Posted March 6, 2009 Seriously Sonic Team, there's this thing called XBLA, you should try it with a 2d Sonic game. Xbox Live is the only platform capable of hosting a 2D Sonic game?
Emasher Posted March 6, 2009 Posted March 6, 2009 Funny how the Reviewers hate these games yet the users seem to get real enjoyment from it. A few low scores are just because the person thinks the game isn't deserving. I'll wait for a price drop and save my money for Star Ocean. Most of the people I know who enjoy recent sonic games only play games with a similar lack of production values. They also tend to ignore people recommending them stuff like Mario Galaxy or SSBB.
James McGeachie Posted March 6, 2009 Posted March 6, 2009 This same conversation pattern comes up with every remotely hyped game that gets bad scores ever. "Grr the reviewer is clearly wrong, there are people buying and enjoying the game don't trust the reviews, grah!!" Most of the time reviews like this give a general idea of what most of the population would think. With games like this the hardcore crowd who're extremely tolerant and willing to forgive massive flaws to get enjoyment from a game may end up liking it but most people probably wouldn't. For example, Secret Rings. I took a very tolerant approach to that game, had patience and got into it eventually once I was earning good upgrades and really getting into the concept. Most people however weren't quite as tolerant or patient and got very turned off by some of the bad mechanics early on. This game seems to have even bigger flaws at its core than Rings had, so I fully understand why it'd be gathering bad reviews and expect most people would not be as tolerant with it as a hardcore Sonic fan.
Retro_Link Posted March 6, 2009 Posted March 6, 2009 Gameplay: http://www.gametrailers.com/player/46369.html http://www.gametrailers.com/player/46367.html
Teppo Holmqvist Posted March 6, 2009 Posted March 6, 2009 Holy cow i've just seen IGN's review...what on Earth! Hilarious sidenote: Matt only played until first credits. Game continues for 4-6 hours after that with other knights. Very, very unprofessional.
pedrocasilva Posted March 6, 2009 Posted March 6, 2009 Seriously Sonic Team, there's this thing called Wiiware, you should try it with a 2d Sonic game.FIXED for great justice. (this is still a Nintendo forum, after all)
James McGeachie Posted March 6, 2009 Posted March 6, 2009 Hilarious sidenote: Matt only played until first credits. Game continues for 4-6 hours after that with other knights. Very, very unprofessional. Yeah because virtually the same gameplay with other characters will magically redeem the game. For the record you'll find very few reviewers on any professional sites who do much more than the bare minimum of "beat the game" (aka complete the main story mode) before writing any review, especially with games that they consider flat out bad. If your problem with a game is that the core gameplay is completely flawed then how much is additional content going to change your mind? If you've played through enough of the game to at least see a credits roll and the gameplay STILL feels horrible obviously you have a major issue.
Recommended Posts