Support NeoGAF

[ProphessorX]

Those are some nice scores. The averages were higher for the first two really?

 

[Raven77]

Let us never forget when Eurogamer gave Uncharted 3 an 8.

A dark day, indeed.

Well uncharted 3 was easily the worst of the trilogy. Flew through the first two, can't even complete the third. To many bugs and just boring compared to the others.

 

[Zephyrus]

Shenmue was a graphic adventure with an extra layer of interaction.

so like every game now?

 

[Loudninja]

Canadian Online Gamers 10/10

I truly can’t say enough good things about inFAMOUS: Second Son. A winning combination of great gameplay, challenging combat, solid acting, gorgeous visuals and more makes it one of the PlayStation 4’s absolute must own titles. When you play games as a reviewer it is more than refreshing to actually come across a game that you can’t put down and such was the case with Second Son. In fact I can’t even come up with much that actually deserves criticism and that’s my job so that speaks volumes about what they’ve done with this game. I doubt this isn’t the last we’re going to see of the inFAMOUS series. After this joyride I am literally frothing at the mouth for the next installment.

http://canadianonlinegamers.com/review/infamous-second-son-ps4-review/

 

[TheRealTalker]

I expected some 8 ls and then 7s by certain big gaming outlets like GameSpot... Not because of the games quality but just because it is a open world infamous game staying tried and true to its series


From what I heard from fellow Gaffers who got the game early, inFamous fans will really love this game and that is what I am excited about

 

[Majestad]

Canadian Online Gamers 10/10

http://canadianonlinegamers.com/review/infamous-second-son-ps4-review/

Literally frothing at the mouth. Literally.

 

[EventHorizon]

Obligatory

To the people who want to give 5s to average games, I ask you if you consider a 50% on a test an average score?

 

[majik13]

They did?

Wierd. I seem to remember that Halo just being the first FPS on consoles to actually play great. Probably because of it's controller.

What else did it have that was so revolutionary? Auto regen HP? Because as I remember it, it's gameplay was "point and shoot". Exactly what I already had in Doom.

So we rule out Halo.

Let's move on to COD4. Now where was this one revolutionary? At all?
It was very satisfying to play. But I seem to remember it having the same gameplay as halo. Point and shoot. Same thing.

sigh...

I know its cool to deride popular games but you cant just glaze over their finer details and then call it a day. Nor can you blame your lack of capacity or memory to understand a game, mean it is not considered revolutionary, or more apporiopratly innovative.

You could say the same about any shooter just being "point and shoot", and then incorrectly make the assumption no shooter is revolutionary just because you "point and shoot" in all of them.

Halo did a bunch of things right first with excellent execution, that pretty much every shooter has burrowed something from since.
- great DA control
-Accessible vehicles with innovative control/handling in a FPS
-Large scale open environments.
-Enemy and NPC AI that worked to make things feel like a large battle.
2 weapon limit strategy, each weapon having pros and cons(as opposed to say Doom, etc, where you carry every weapon and usually they just get more and more powerful)
-Health Regen
-Melee and Grenades each on their own dedicated buttons(opposed to weapon cycling to your fists, or grenades)
-Co-op, that allowed for eah have different roles in vehicles and situations
-MP and all the great modes and ideas that introduced alone.

Yes I am aware that Halo also stands on the shoulders of previous games too. But to call Halo just another "point and shoot" is suspiciously short-sighted.

Halo may seem old and tired now to many, myself included but the first few had many innovations, especially the first. Revolutionary may be too strong a word to use, for any game for that matter, but definitely innovative in many ways.

The same can be said about the MP portion of COD4 as well. (to a lesser extent IMO)

Wierd. I seem to remember that Halo just being the first FPS on consoles to actually play great. Probably because of it's controller.

Perhaps you are too young and just dont remember GoldenEye, Perfect Dark, TimeSplitters or even Quake 2 on the PS1 then, or you just have selective memomory.

 

[Glittering Crux]

81 average seems fair, maybe even a little higher than I expected. Infamous has always been a B-tier franchise and it sounds like this one is just the same gameplay with prettier graphics. The moment I saw the first gameplay video I knew it wasn't going to push the franchise forward in any way.

 

[Rogue_Ledr]

Canadian Online Gamers 10/10

http://canadianonlinegamers.com/review/infamous-second-son-ps4-review/

IS that site even counted in metacritic?

 

[AyaisMUsikWhore]

Sure, but clearly most reviewers are saying that Second Son doesn't improve it's core mechanics enough to take the series forward. The graphics are a huge leap, the presentation is a big step up, but the overall gameplay, from what the reviews say at least, is that it's basically more of the same, which for fans is fine because they know they'll like that already.

I do think Sucker Punch should make some major improvements to the next entry in the franchise in some way, but I'm sure feedback from the fans should help them decide what that should be.

And this is were the problem lies. Reviewers tend to make vague statements to what could of been changed but do not add what could of been changed. Sure it's not the reviewers job to design the game in full but we don't only play games where we lack the understanding of what could of been added to make the game better to fit our needs. I haven't read all the reviews but did anyone of them say what they would of added to make the experience different? Probably not. Saying stuff like "It's more of the same" instead of "I wish Sucker Punch could of added more customization to the powers such as an element table that would allow mixtures of different powers, giving different choices that wasn't locked down to good or evil, but maybe justice and criminal (about the same thing but you get what I'm saying) " is what im basically saying. Sometimes, I feel like if we have to question a specific thought, then it need to be explained more in depth.

 

[Loudninja]

IS that site even counted in metacritic?

It is.

 

[TrojanBlade]

Well it's a playstation first party exclusive... I expected nothing more. Unless it's a game from ND they are always nit picked and points deducted for flaws which other games get a pass. Anyways still some really good scores.

 

[Glorified G]

Me almost a month ago

It comes across like a reboot when it really isn't. The character change has a lot to do with it. A lot of recent titles the last few months have been dogged by reviewers for feeling too similar in previous entries. Forza 5, GT 6, DK Tropical freeze, etc. It's becoming a recent trend even when games have been doing this forever.

I expect a low 80's metacritic rating. A lot of reviewers won't care about the familiarity but others will. "It's a great game, but it's infamous....."

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=102315056&postcount=251

And noticed rev3 giving the same score to Knack and Infamous (probably different reviewers).

 

[Rogue_Ledr]

Well it's a playstation first party exclusive... I expected nothing more. Unless it's a game from ND they are always nit picked and points deducted for flaws which other games get a pass. Anyways still some really good scores.

Yeah, I've always noticed that. PS exclusive games get scrutizined in general FAR more than its competition's exclusives.

 

[NHale]

This thread is.... ennnn... grah

Yep. Right now this is hardly a Infamous: Second Son thread but a battleground for both sides to vent their clear frustrations.

At least the Uncharted 3 meltdown thread stayed on topic. This not so much...

 

[Acquiescence]

IS that site even counted in metacritic?

The review is on there already.

 

[oconnomiyaki]

To the people who want to give 5s to average games, I ask you if you consider a 50% on a test an average score?

When I sat my final exams at high school, you could pass with 46%. To graduate, you only had to do that three out of five courses. This 70% is average/a pass is a very American mentality.

 

[Owzers]

It is.

literally counted?

 

[Mass Effect]

~8 Metacritic score is pretty much what I expected.

And guys, why are we talking about Halo in an Infamous thread?

 

[Mononoke]

Well uncharted 3 was easily the worst of the trilogy. Flew through the first two, can't even complete the third. To many bugs and just boring compared to the others.

Was going to say, as someone that loves the Uncharted series a 7 or 8 sounds about right.

 

[BigDug13]

81 average seems fair, maybe even a little higher than I expected. Infamous has always been a B-tier franchise and it sounds like this one is just the same gameplay with prettier graphics. The moment I saw the first gameplay video I knew it wasn't going to push the franchise forward in any way.

Where does the franchise need to push exactly? Open world superhero games are already a genre that barely exists. We haven't had a good crackdown game since before Halo 3 released. Prototype is dead. Spider-Man 2 was the only good one and that was PS2 era. Saints Row IV was fun, but seemed to be only a sidetrack experience that won't exist in SRV

Infamous is one of the only quality game franchises in this entire genre. Where do you want it to push? It's already one of the best franchises in the entire genre.

I want more games to be exactly like inFamous, not inFamous to become something else entirely.

 

[The Lamp]

Well it's a playstation first party exclusive... I expected nothing more. Unless it's a game from ND they are always nit picked and points deducted for flaws which other games get a pass. Anyways still some really good scores.

I've noticed that as well.

Either way, reviews are useless to me most of the time. As long as a new game isn't getting a lot of scores below 60, i know what I'm getting and I'm okay with it.

 

[SwiftDeath]

This thread is something else.

I must say I was a bit surprised by the metacritic score as I thought it'd be higher than 2's at least considering it is most certainly a better game.

That being said it is still an infamous game so it was unlikely to be too highly lauded.

I love it but I loved the first 2

 

[TrojanBlade]

Yeah, I've always noticed that. PS exclusive games get scrutizined in general FAR more than its competition's exclusives.

Yeah its a fact if you look at the history. Especially if it is something hyped up. The worst is metacritic gives more weight to the sites that gave it lower score and thus we see metacritic dropped down to low 80s. I don't care about it getting low scores, my only gripe is that the reviewers should be more fair. If you ding one game for some stupid reason, well you better ding your favorite game too for that flaw e.g GTA, Halo, Mario etc but they are overlooked for some reason.

 

[majik13]

are you meaning to imply Operation: Winback didnt nail it?

loved that game, even though it was super corney and felt low budget. Obviously the mechanic had tons of room for fleshing out and expanding the mechanic.

 

[hodgy100]

To the people who want to give 5s to average games, I ask you if you consider a 50% on a test an average score?

well Uk Uni grading goes like this:

40% pass (3rd)
50% 2:2
60% 2:1
70%+ 1st

 

[Loudninja]

So game spot really enjoy the gameplay

Second Son has top-notch combat that expertly melds substance with style.

Second Son focuses on pure enjoyment. It communicates that through the excellent combat that forces you to concoct crazy tactics to overthrow the invading forces. It draws you in further through its incredible visuals that not only hint at the PlayStation 4's impressive power, but employ a sensible artistic touch that makes Seattle a place you want to explore. It uses a complementary score to underline dramatic moments, and the sound effects pop with flair. And yet, for all of the elements in which Second Son excels, the narrative fails to carry its share of the weight. Still, don't become mired in the negativity as Delsin so often does. Instead, just laugh at the cheesy dialogue and chortle at how extreme the morality system is. Second Son is a great game that knows exactly what it is, and sucks you in with its unfiltered fun.

http://www.gamespot.com/reviews/infamous-second-son-review/1900-6415705/

 

[PBY]

Yeah its a fact if you look at the history. Especially if it is something hyped up. The worst is metacritic gives more weight to the sites that gave it lower score and thus we see metacritic dropped down to low 80s. I don't care about it getting low scores, my only gripe is that the reviewers should be more fair. If you ding one game for some stupid reason, well you better ding your favorite game too for that flaw e.g GTA, Halo, Mario etc but they are overlooked for some reason.

This is absurd

 

[Dante316]

People need to relax. Infamous is not a universal praised franchise. It has its following. 8.0 to 9.0 was expected and that's what's its getting. If your a fan , you will enjoy it. If you are new, you will experience something fun. If you not a fan and not open to it, then keep waiting

 

[Vylsith]

Halo felt crazy fresh back then. Jumping in a Warthog with a friend in the gunners seat and ripping around that planet was golden.

Fresh? Yes. Innovative? Not overly. First person shooters haven't added much other than vehicles in the past 20 years. Duke Nukem 3D set the control mechanic structure, and ever since then we've had clones with better graphics, different scenarios, and a more realistic hit box. It's one of the main reasons I just can't play most first person shooters anymore. Add some RPG mechanics like Fallout, Bioshock, or Borderlands I'll play it and have a ton of fun. Point and shoot ad nauseum with a short, uninvolved story and tack on a by the book multiplayer experience? Yeah, no thanks. I played that to death 20 years ago. I've always assumed that first person shooters were more popular among either younger gamers or gamers who got into the hobby more recently. I just can't imagine how people who have been around since the Doom and Quake days are still playing FPS without feeling completely uninspired by how little the genre has evolved. Then again, I still love JRPGs, so maybe I'm not one to talk. Different strokes I guess.

 

[Glittering Crux]

Where does the franchise need to push exactly? Open world superhero games are already a genre that barely exists. We haven't had a good crackdown game since before Halo 3 released. Prototype is dead. Spider-Man 2 was the only good one and that was PS2 era. Saints Row IV was fun, but seemed to be only a sidetrack experience that won't exist in SRV

Infamous is one of the only quality game franchises in this entire genre. Where do you want it to push? It's already one of the best franchises in the entire genre.

I want more games to be exactly like inFamous, not inFamous to become something else entirely.

Well, it would help if the next entry had good gameplay and wasn't just a mediocre third person shooter disguised as a superhero game.

 

[AyaisMUsikWhore]

Where does the franchise need to push exactly? Open world superhero games are already a genre that barely exists. We haven't had a good crackdown game since before Halo 3 released. Prototype is dead. Spider-Man 2 was the only good one and that was PS2 era. Saints Row IV was fun, but seemed to be only a sidetrack experience that won't exist in SRV

Infamous is one of the only quality game franchises in this entire genre. Where do you want it to push? It's already one of the best franchises in the entire genre.

I want more games to be exactly like inFamous, not inFamous to become something else entirely.

Thank you. This same argument can be said about AC however that is looked as A-tier despite not being all the different after 7+ games. A new one is coming out and I bet you any money, that will also be the same exact thing. If anything the story carries the franchise and gameplay barely ever does.

 

[ConradCervantes]

Knew it was going to suck. Sony has all them pretty graphics but couldn't afford next-gen gameplay? I'm plugging my Ouya back in, she treats me right.

 

[EventHorizon]

When I sat my final exams at high school, you could pass with 46%. To graduate, you only had to do that three out of five courses. This 70% is average/a pass is a very American mentality.

So you'd be ok with going to a doctor who only passed his exams with a 46% rating? After all that'd be about average to you.

 

[Resident_UA]

Two things:

1) Games like GTA and Uncharted are doing some exceptional things. GTA does open world cities like no other game. It does incredible characters, and crazy vast gameplay possibilities, with all the vehicles it offers, etc. Uncharted does cut scenes, voice acting, and story telling on an exceptional level. It also has incredible graphics and very good gameplay IMO. So you can do more of the same when the entire package is exceptional, even still, quite a few people complained after Uncharted 3 that the formula was wearing a little thin. Now we've got a third Infamous game, and that's from a franchise that hasn't really hit the high points that Uncharted has.

2) There are rarely true "revolutions" in gaming. But sometimes you do see games like Titanfall doing something really new in a genre. That game does FPS player movement, mech movement, and game design exceptionally well.

I REALLY liked GTA, but disagree with many things that you are saying. I also played Titanfall beta and really liked it, but didn't feel like it was revolutionary.

It's more about game PREFERENCE rather than about a game being revolutionary. There are plenty of people that didn't enjoy new GTA as much as they enjoyed older ones. There isn't a clear answer there, but I think waiting for a revolutionary game is not the same thing for everyone.

 

[BigSpleenAttack]

So you'd be ok with going to a doctor who only passed his exams with a 46% rating? After all that'd be about average to you.

LOL, his example was pretty bad.

 

[Rogue_Ledr]

Yeah its a fact if you look at the history. Especially if it is something hyped up. The worst is metacritic gives more weight to the sites that gave it lower score and thus we see metacritic dropped down to low 80s. I don't care about it getting low scores, my only gripe is that the reviewers should be more fair. If you ding one game for some stupid reason, well you better ding your favorite game too for that flaw e.g GTA, Halo, Mario etc but they are overlooked for some reason.

ITs a real pirty that Sony doesn't promote/promulgate/hype their games like the competition does.

I don't believe for a second Titanfall's average score would be so high if MS hadn't vaunted it so much over the last number of months.

Look at Battlefield 4! If that game had come out from Sony with all the flaws it had present when it launched, it would've been castigated.

 

[Mr. Luchador]

Halo felt crazy fresh back then. Jumping in a Warthog with a friend in the gunners seat and ripping around that planet was golden.

Yup.

Halo was visually appealing. Had a very good story element to it. Mystery, and refreshing enemy/team mate AI. The supporting characters felt alive too. I know Halo gets a lot of hate now, but there was a time when it was OK to like Halo.

 

[hodgy100]

So you'd be ok with going to a doctor who only passed his exams with a 46% rating? After all that'd be about average to you.

well if they pass that means they are qualified so.. yes.

 

[Mondy]

Yup.

Halo was visually appealing. Had a very good story element to it. Mystery, and refreshing enemy/team mate AI. The supporting characters felt alive too. I know Halo gets a lot of hate now, but there was a time when it was OK to like Halo.

Combat Evolved? That game NEVER gets hated on, because everyone knows it's a masterpiece.

 

[BigSpleenAttack]

Well, it would help if the next entry had good gameplay and wasn't just a mediocre third person shooter disguised as a superhero game.

It does have great gameplay already, your opinion is not the one universal truth. Moth reviews even state as such,

 

[simplythebest]

So judging from the posted review scores is the game good or bad?

 

[hohoXD123]

So judging from the posted review scores is the game good or bad?

It's good.

So you'd be ok with going to a doctor who only passed his exams with a 46% rating? After all that'd be about average to you.

Yes, because how good they are as a doctor has little to do with how highly they score in tests. Irrelevant anyway.

 

[Violater]

Literally frothing at the mouth. Literally.

Lol man you are on a roll.

 

[Mondy]

So judging from the posted review scores is the game good or bad?

Consensus is it's a decent game that didn't live up to the monumental hype surrounding it as the first true next gen Sony exclusive.

 

[Zephyrus]

sigh...

I know its cool to deride popular games but you cant just glaze over their finer details and then call it a day. Nor can you blame your lack of capacity or memory to understand a game, mean it is not considered revolutionary, or more apporiopratly innovative.

You could say the same about any shooter just being "point and shoot", and then incorrectly make the assumption no shooter is revolutionary just because you "point and shoot" in all of them.

Halo did a bunch of things right first with excellent execution, that pretty much every shooter has burrowed something from since.
- great DA control
-Accessible vehicles with innovative control/handling in a FPS
-Large scale open environments.
-Enemy and NPC AI that worked to make things feel like a large battle.
2 weapon limit strategy, each weapon having pros and cons(as opposed to say Doom, etc, where you carry every weapon and usually they just get more and more powerful)
-Health Regen
-Melee and Grenades each on their own dedicated buttons(opposed to weapon cycling to your fists, or grenades)
-Co-op, that allowed for eah have different roles in vehicles and situations
-MP and all the great modes and ideas that introduced alone.

Yes I am aware that Halo also stands on the shoulders of previous games too. But to call Halo just another "point and shoot" is suspiciously short-sighted.

Halo may seem old and tired now to many, myself included but the first few had many innovations, especially the first. Revolutionary may be too strong a word to use, for any game for that matter, but definitely innovative in many ways.

The same can be said about the MP portion of COD4 as well. (to a lesser extent IMO)



Perhaps you are too young and just dont remember GoldenEye, Perfect Dark, TimeSplitters or even Quake 2 on the PS1 then, or you just have selective memomory.

24 years isn't young.

Like I said, Halo was the first that played great. The others were passable.

Innovative I agree. Halo was innovative. It made an existing genre, better.

Revolutionary? No. Doom was revolutionary. Not Halo.

 

[Moosichu]

So judging from the posted review scores is the game good or bad?

Play it for yourself and find out. A lot of people have enjoyed it a lot.

 

[quest]

So judging from the posted review scores is the game good or bad?

If you love infamous great game. If you don't love infamous it is a pretty game with repetitive game play and missions. So like the first 2 either you love it or hate it kind of thing.

 

[sobaka770]

People need to chill. Sessler is just a guy on Youtube, one of many, and his opinion is not more important than yours unless you trust him. I, personally, don't.

I just got the game today and it is so far the best Infamous game. By a wide margin. The graphics are amazing and gameplay is smooth with nary a visual glitch. If you like Infamous, you should get it.

As for those who never played Infamous, this is still an incredible game. Most reviewers lower the score for lack of innovation, but just from my time with the game, the city traversal, the combat fluidity feel very new. There are things that I don't want to spoil which would be impossible to perform on last-gen console, and I'm not even talking about hero powers.

For me, the polish, the graphics, fluidity, city destruction and the whole experience taken together, make this game next gen. If you were to put this on PS3, you'd need to sacrifice gameplay and I don't understand how that is escaping certain reviewers.