• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Infamous: Second Son Review Thread

Nymphae said:
From the polygon review:



This tired argument again. I don't get why people complain that there isn't more nuance in this franchise's "morality system".

This isn't an RPG, or a fucking character study. It's a superhero game where you can choose to be good, or bad. How is there room for a grey area in this type of game? What power set would you get for fence-sitting? It just annoys me when reviewers judge a game for not living up to their expectations of how the game should have been designed. If it's a legitimate game design beef that causes problems for the player, sure. But the hero/villain power set thing works completely as intended in these games.
Click to expand...

No one said it had to be a character study, but when a game only rewards you for being on extreme ends of the scale it severely limits your options as a player and the kind of character you're allowed to be. The only good reason it exists is to force the player into doing a second play through for a different ending. That's not exactly a compelling design choice, especially if you're committed to doing nothing but the morality you ascribed to in the beginning. It doesn't allow the player to experiment with what's there.

For that matter, it's clear that Infamous is trying to put forward a good narrative, so boiling it down to just being a super hero game isn't a convincing argument.
 
Bgamer90 said:
Is it? Seems pretty on target with what people expected... unless many expected less than 75 overall.
Click to expand...

Well at least scanning the list in the OP... the 9s and 8s seem to massively outnumber the 7s...

I expected 85 average or a solid 8 (4/5)

Funny how "next gen gameplay" never really comes up in PC games, where there are no gens.
 
xkramz said:
Is it fair that titanfall gets better review scores than infamous? Considering it has a very small story plot and MP only?

While infamous has great graphics and it a open world?




Not tryna be bias. As I only have a Xbox One right now.
Click to expand...

They are completely different games with different goals. Don't do this.
 
xkramz said:
Is it fair that titanfall gets better review scores than infamous? Considering it has a very small story plot and MP only?

While infamous has great graphics and it a open world?




Not tryna be bias. As I only have a Xbox One right now.
Click to expand...

It's fair because a review is really just an indicator of how much a person liked a particular game. There's really no reason to examine them further than that.

EDIT - I should say, it doesn't have to be fair.
 
Solid reviews. Pretty much in-line with what I was expecting. Hopefully Amazon comes through like in the past with the release day shipping.
 
dragonbane said:
Have these people beat the game yet? I saw some complains about repetition and the ending so it might be too early to judge the reviewers. Still seems like a good (Infamous) game overall, so it doesn't matter anyway.
Click to expand...
Yes several people beat the game already and said ti was fantastic.
 
dragonbane said:
Have these people beat the game yet? I saw some complains about repetition and the ending so it might be too early to judge the reviewers. Still seems like a good (Infamous) game overall, so it doesn't matter anyway.
Click to expand...

Yes, I'm one of them. I didn't have a problem with the ending, but some didn't like it. The only repetitiveness I found was in the side missions.
 
Interfectum said:
In a new generation of consoles perhaps people expected this game to bring a little more to the table than a prettier version of inFamous? I don't know why this is so hard to understand.
Click to expand...

Because you just can't have new and innovate gameplay without difference peripherals.

Gen after gen, all you got was the very same gameplay you always got before. Games play exactly the same as they did. They just look prettier now. They just have a narrative now. They just have a different perspective now. But they play the same.

So, when someone says "same gameplay from old gen" that person is a goddamn clown. Seriously. You review a game and knock points off it because... it plays the same?
Well that is quite wierd (especially when earlier you had no problem ignoring it on another game for a different system).
It basically reeks of an arbitrary system where you can make stuff up to justify your agenda.

I know that not all reviewers are the same... but when someone reviews a game based on their subjective view and not their objective view, they're worthless.

Saying that a game with old gen gameplay (oops forgot, not important in this game), frame rate drops, old gen graphics, lack of gameplay modes, lack of single player campaign, weapons that aren't balanced is the height of it's genre (5/5) just because you had more "fun" with it is ludicrous. Fun should count. After all what's the point of playing games if they're not fun? But it should never be enough to justify giving a game with glaring problems, a perfect score. At most, you give it a score based on what the game actually does and offers (7/10 or 8/10) and then end the review saying how fun you actually though it was and tell people if you think it's worth their time.
 
It's too bad that roughly 4 months into next gen, developers still haven't completely reinvented The Gameplay Mechanic.

What's taking so long?
 
Interfectum said:
In a new generation of consoles perhaps people expected this game to bring a little more to the table than a prettier version of inFamous? I don't know why this is so hard to understand.
Click to expand...

What's hard to understand is why people would think that. Most games are going to be more of the same most of the time. New consoles mostly means more power to have bigger levels, draw distance, etc. Apart from isolated cases I've never seen more power automatically mean different/new gameplay.

So far we've had more of the same FPS (CoD, Battlefielf, etc) one more of the same but with some new tweaks FPS (TitanFall) and in the case of of other genres its going to be the same thing.

The issue being raised is more about reviewers citing this in scores but then being inconsistent. If Second Son gets docked points for being "more of the same with a few tweaks and visual improvements" then so should CoD, BF4, etc. but in many cases the application of this concept is inconsistent.

The whole idea is moot IMHO anyway - unless the new console/tech is very specifically brining something new (a'la Wii Mote and Wii) then it's just not going to happen. New ideas will come with specific games and they could come on any tech and at any point in the gen : expecting it automatically is a fallacy.

I mean does the latest iPad mean all apps, etc. automatically deliver totally new stuff? Nope it does not. It's merely a revision of an existing form - and so are the new consoles.
 
I'm laughing my ass off at everyone complaining about the game not having "next gen gameplay" and yet no one seems to able to explain what "next gen gameplay" would actually be like.

Also, Gamecentral review is the lowest scoring yet it appears. Exactly as I predicted weeks ago.
 
0ptimusPayne said:
Ive came to the conclusion that Reviewers will be very hard on games this Gen, If they don't provide new Revolutionary mechanics and such. Infamous getting high 8's is not a bad thing at all. If I get 85-90 on an exam, I would go crazy with excitement. The real question at the end of the day is, is the game fun? Is its content/experience worth $60 of fun? Thats why I like Kotaku's scoring system the best.
Click to expand...
I think they just have to be fun and memorable, not just pretty yet ultimately monotonous. That seems to be the biggest criticism with games like knack, shadow fall and now ss. Serviceable. Pretty... But ultimately not especially memorable or explosively fun.
 
Honestly, I don't think there is a such thing as next gen gameplay. If a game is really fun, which the infamous games are, then that's all I really care about. Hell, I don't think a single game released on either of the two systems does anything new, but they don't need to.
 
Colonel Nasty said:
I think next gen only games are expected to do more than just look prettier. Cross gen games get a pass.
Click to expand...

Where has that expectation been for AAA PC games? If more powerful hardware means new gameplay mechanisms, we've been hosed by PC developers for years. Obviously this "last gen gameplay" sentiment is horseshit.
 
jet1911 said:
AC4 83
NBA2K4 85
Dead Rising 3 78
Madden 74
BF4 86
NFS Rivals 80
COD:Ghosts 78

Infamous is at 80 right now.
Click to expand...

One could even argue that one of the only games that actually has anything "next-gen"..."gameplay" wise is Dead Rising 3. If we completely ignore graphics/res/framerate....the zombie count does effect gameplay. They can be tricked or distracted in mass and such.



I think when these reviewers say "next-gen gameplay" they want to see places that feel alive due to AI (not talking DR3 here anymore). Do the enemies in Second Son just run at you and stand around a lot like in the demos leading up to release? Or do they run away to safety after seeing your powers? Flank you? Distract you?

If you blow up something to their right when they haven't spotted you...do they run to see what did it? Do they ignore it? Do they instantly turn to attack you?

If they ignore it or instantly turn to attack you....that's dumb AI (aka last gen). If they go check what was destroyed, then start searching for you...that probably falls into what reviewers expect gameplay wise.

Some here have played it. Does the AI fall for distractions and/or tricks...or do they all instantly key in on you, or is it a 3rd person shooter that just throws everything at you when you show up?
 
AyaisMUsikWhore said:
Now I'm confused to what Next Gen gameplay is..

AC4 has last gen gameplay
NBA2k14 has last gen gameplay
Dead Rising has last gen gameplay
Madden has last gen gameplay
Battlefield 4 has last gen gameplay
Need for speed Rivals has last gen gameplay
COD has last gen gameplay

So why exactly is a sequel getting docked scores for having the same gameplay as the original game. What difference does there need to be besides having different powers, which was never in previous games, a different story line different from the the last 2, a different set list of moves, other ways to navigate the city etc?
Click to expand...

Those are cross gen games.
The bar is way higher for exclusives.
 
MHWilliams said:
The presumption was because of the big GAF thread about the other powers. But again, Sony asked reviewers not to spoil the specifics of the latter powers or story, so you should be fine. But I understand avoiding them for story reasons. Only one reviewer needs to split up.
Click to expand...

Right, but just because there's a big Gaf thread about it doesn't mean we've all gone to that thread or have learned of them elsewhere. Glad you understand. Wish this wasn't the case but it is. It's why I look at a score first and read/watch a review after I beat the game.
 
I've seen far too many videos of how uncreative and awful most journalist are at playing this game. Good or bad professional reviews are worthless to me on this one.
 
This is why I don't take a review sites score seriously.

What someone else likes and what I like are completely different. So they could put a 10 on it, in their preference and in my preference it could end up a 4.

People get too worked up over scores.
 
AyaisMUsikWhore said:
No, where in there reviews were docked for being more of the same. Even considering NBA2k14 added DRM to their game, it still didn't get docked points so what really is the issue. Do reviewers pick and choose what is more important to them each different game that falls into their laps? Thursday it's gameplay, Friday it's Graphics, Saturday it's Multiplayer like what? This type of criticism should be universal if that's the case.
Click to expand...

I never really looked at reviews as if they were a checklist. It's all subjective. And it makes intuitive sense that any game a reviewer feels is little different from last gen would get a score that most games that released at the conclusion of the last generation got. The phrase itself intimates that the reviewer felt the game should be more than what it was, considering the much superior hardware it's running on.
 
I wonder how much a developer like SP would hate to put out a game close to launch from now on with all the time constraints and unrefined tech they have to deal with, it's kind of demoralizing with all the expectations of "next gen gameplay", most developers haven't even gotten their sea legs yet.
 
NotLiquid said:
No one said it had to be a character study, but when a game only rewards you for being on extreme ends of the scale it severely limits your options as a player and the kind of character you're allowed to be. The only good reason it exists is to force the player into doing a second play through for a different ending. That's not exactly a compelling design choice, especially if you're committed to doing nothing but the morality you ascribed to in the beginning. It doesn't allow the player to experiment with what's there.

For that matter, it's clear that Infamous is trying to put forward a good narrative, so boiling it down to just being a super hero game isn't a convincing argument.
Click to expand...

I don't get your point. They want to give you the option to be a hero or a villain. Which gives you 2 power sets. This is a decent design imo. Gives you a guaranteed two playthroughs if you like the mechanics, which I have for both the previous games.

How do you add nuance to the morality system in this game? I feel like it fundamentally would change what the game is trying to accomplish, in an effort to "do more" with the narrative, which I simpy don't give a shit about in this franchise. I want cool powers and a playground to use them in.
 
Mondy said:
For those of you looking to cancel your PSN pre orders, contacting Sony Support yielded success for me. They gave me the one line lecture about the terms of agreement stating all sales are final but they processed the refund for me anyway. I was playing with fire a bit because I purchased it with my US PSN account and I'm in Australia. I hope they don't do geo checks or even care :\

I will pick this game up eventually but not for 60 bucks. My backlog is too huge to justify spending that on a game where chances are I won't enjoy it that much.
Click to expand...


This...after reading the reviews? What of the reviews from fellow gaffers? or the ones that range from 100-80s which far outweigh the sparse 7s?

I'm really curious is all.
Obviously its your money and making a financially conscious decision is always wise, but im genuinely curious.
 
ShockingAlberto said:
You're trying to force an objective measurement in to numbers that represent a subjective sentiment.
Click to expand...
I'm not the one forcing anyone. If reviewers want to use a score on some standard scale to sum up their feelings of a game, they're the ones imposing the rigor of consistency on their subjective sentiment and expectations from readers will naturally follow.

He could give one game a 2 and one game a 20 and still feel the difference in quality is marginal. Who's to decide that isn't what the scale means to him? Moreover, why does it matter? Why is one point okay and two points the equivalent of razing homes and property?
Click to expand...
Then why use a scale at all? Again, the point of any scale is to standardize a spectrum of fluctuating readings and put them in context with each other. If Sess or any other reviewer wants to forego using a scale, more power to them. But, while they continue to use review scales, people can hardly be blamed for thinking that a 40% difference in rating between two games on a particular scale should be attributed to more than just an overly simplistic explanation that the reviewer liked one game more than the other.
 
Dragon said:
I wouldn't worry about scores. Worry about the content of the reviews.



Reviewers are human beings. But yeah they should be consistent if they can.
Click to expand...

So what's the point of being a reviewer if you're not consistent? How am I to trust your views if one day your saying this isn't okay to saying it is okay on something else. I'm human being too and I'd rather someone be consistent than flippy floppy with their views
 
KORNdoggy said:
so, essentially, if you like infamous, you're going to love it. if you don't it's not going to change your mind. thank god i'm the former
Click to expand...

That's what it seems like. I don't even have a PS4, but I think it's crazy how people are looking at the Metacritic score and letting that dictate whether they're interested or not.
 
Reviews are exactly as i feared.... same old infamous gameplay and story telling. oh well i'll still pick it up on friday because my little cousin and i have a blast playing these games, but i really hope SP do something different next.

It would be interesting if this actually sold huge numbers and sony wanted a sequel, i wonder what direction they would go in... "next gen" gameplay for me would be things like online co-op with seamless drop in/drop out, letting me create and customize my own character, significantly more depth in chosing abilities and play styles etc.
 
EGM1966 said:
The issue being raised is more about reviewers citing this in scores but then being inconsistent. If Second Son gets docked points for being "more of the same with a few tweaks and visual improvements" then so should CoD, BF4, etc. but in many cases the application of this concept is inconsistent.
Click to expand...

There will always be inconsistency because we are comparing completely different games to each other.

Perhaps Battlefield gameplay holds up better over multiple games than inFamous?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Saros | Review Thread
Review  8 9 10 11 12
586
3K
ByWatterson replied
Mina the Hollower | Review Thread
Review  2
94
920
Ceadeus replied
REPLACED | Review thread
Review 
23
991
AJBungah replied
Motorslice | Review Thread
Analysis Review  2
77
1K
Guilty_AI replied
Invincible VS | Review Thread
Analysis Review 
0
334
Draugoth replied
Top Bottom