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

Infamous: Second Son Review Thread

Jarlaxle said:
While I liked the original Infamous, I'd had enough by the end of it. I didn't play the sequel and this sounds like more of the same so I think I'm going to pass.
Click to expand...

That's pretty much how I felt until a couple of days ago when I finally heard Jamie Griesmer was the lead game play designer on this. No idea if you give a shit about him, but that was when I knew I had to have it on day 1.
 
Jarlaxle said:
While I liked the original Infamous, I'd had enough by the end of it. I didn't play the sequel and this sounds like more of the same so I think I'm going to pass.
Click to expand...

For me Infamous 1 was pretty great, but I pretty much hated everything about part 2. Looking forward to the new characters and powers of Second Son.
 
moneal2001 said:
there were decent fps games before Halo, even some on previous consoles. PS2 with Unreal Tournament, even quake 2 and Goldeneye on the ps1 and n64. those games were good but were not released at the right time for fps to blow up like halo did. ps1 was the height of the jrpg. unreal and others like rainbow six, and half-life were the lead into the fps explosion of halo and COD.
Click to expand...

I don't think it's even remotely fair to attribute Halo's success nor the market's reaction to it and other console shooters solely to timing what with how much buzz the game generated even when it was a Mac exclusive, not to mention the price and relative niche status of the box it shipped on. No offense but that almost seems like a deliberate attempt to deny Halo any sort of credit or distinguishing factors whatsoever. I understand that there were arguably good FPS shooters before Halo but not one of them had quite the same impact on people's perceptions of console shooters, much less garner the same massive following as an exclusive for an expensive new box.
 
Opiate said:
I think that's an argument that these threads should be much shorter than they are, at least pre-release.
Click to expand...

I without a doubt agree with you in 99% of cases. However, SO MANY retailers have broken street date that we have enough people who actually have played/completed the game for decent discussion. However, as we can see from the thread a decent discussion is far from what some people want.
 
XtaLarge said:
I don't think it's even remotely fair to attribute Halo's success nor the market's reaction to it and other console shooters solely to timing what with how much buzz the game generated even when it was a Mac exclusive, not to mention the price and relative niche status of the box it shipped on. No offense but that almost seems like a deliberate attempt to deny Halo any sort of credit or distinguishing factors whatsoever. I understand that there were arguably good FPS shooters before Halo but not one of them had quite the same impact on people's perceptions of console shooters, much less garner the same massive following as an exclusive for an expensive new box.
Click to expand...

but a game's popularity or success is not a requirement for being revolutionary. halo didn't break the fps mold. it just mixed the best ingredients of the genre into a great game. I am not taking away from halo by acknowledging previous good fps game on console. I am saying they did have something to do with its blown up success.

Console fps games befor, the ps2/xbox era were usually not done very well or were done on systems that had little to no online capabilities. If i could have played goldeneye on n64 over the internet when it came out I would have been all over that and I believe the console fps blow up would have been earlier. It had to do with a multitude of factors with the greatest being how great of a game halo was. but it again didn't break the mold of the fps genre.
 
Dr. Kitty Muffins said:
I'm really curious to see if Sucker Punch will continue this series or go with a new IP.
Click to expand...

I am a big fan of series that only last one generation, but I don't think publishers/console manufacturers are willing to let go of ips so easily. It's also difficult to gauge opinion of a series because there's so much white noise about it being good/bad, you could even be led to believe a game like MGS should be ended from internet opinion.
 
It seems like inFamous: Second Son retains the thing I disliked the MOST about inFamous 2, the way the powers are set.

For inFamous 1 you started out with some base powers and you would build upon them throughout the course of the story. For example, take the following power - good karma side:

Shockwave:
Electric shockwave that can be used to push people / objects out of the way
Upgrade 1: Reverse Magnetism - People caught in the core of the blast temporarily float in the air.
Upgrade 2: Increased blast force.
Upgrade 3: Increased blast range.

By the end of the game, your Shockwave power was awesome. This is the way all of the powers worked, you would build upon them, culminating in one super bad-ass Cole McGrath.

Then came inFamous 2 with the garbage pick-a-power system. Now I had several different powers, with attributes added only to a specific type. Instead of one bad-ass shockwave, I get 3 different wimp waves. You basically end up with a weaker final power and 2 useless variations you will never use.

I was hoping inFamous: Second Son would go back to the original set-up, or at least do something to remedy the issue. Seems like the inFamous 2 system was retained unfortunately. I don't think I will be hopping on for this ride :-(
 
Sometimes I hate how math works, one low score brings the score down a wopping whole point, but it takes multiple 100 to get it back up one point!
 
I put little to no stock in reviews anymore, but I do like to listen to people impressions on gaf. It just seems weird to me how pretty much everyone who got the game early on here said it was the best one in the series, yet it has the lowest metacritic score.
 
TropicanaTwista said:
I put little to no stock in reviews anymore, but I do like to listen to people impressions on gaf. It just seems weird to me how pretty much everyone who got the game early on here said it was the best one in the series, yet it has the lowest metacritic score.
Click to expand...

Happens sometime

LBP2 is an arguably better game that is an improvement on all points to LBP1, yet it scored lower.
Same with Resistance 2>3
Or GT5>GT6
 
TropicanaTwista said:
I put little to no stock in reviews anymore, but I do like to listen to people impressions on gaf. It just seems weird to me how pretty much everyone who got the game early on here said it was the best one in the series, yet it has the lowest metacritic score.
Click to expand...

Looking at a Metacritic score as an absolute is the wrong way to look at a Metacritic score.
 
Snuggles said:
It probably all depends on sales but they're due for something new. I can see Uncharted going on with or without ND but I don't think Infamous has that kinda pull.
Click to expand...

inFamous doesn't have enough of a draw to be handed to an outside developer but Sly Cooper does? I didn't realize Sly Cooper was that popular of a franchise as it was handed to someone else for the last installment.
 
Can't speak for the paper trail missions but the Cole missions aren't very exciting and wouldn't have changed anyone's minds. At least you get a cool jacket out of the deal.
 
TropicanaTwista said:
I put little to no stock in reviews anymore, but I do like to listen to people impressions on gaf. It just seems weird to me how pretty much everyone who got the game early on here said it was the best one in the series, yet it has the lowest metacritic score.
Click to expand...
GAF has me considering a few games I'd never otherwise. That reminds me, I still need to pick up Nier....
 
leng jai said:
Just got my copy. Ravaged the plastic so hard I nearly snapped the case in half.
Click to expand...


.
image.php


Can't wait to play it. Just got MGS:GZ in and once I'm done with that, I'll get SS.
 
frizby said:
On Sessler's review, I like the guy, and I want to file his review as opinion and not unprofessional bias, but then I look at his reviews for similar (at face value) games.


So why is Infamous held to a different standard and given a "60", other than it being a PS exclusive?
Click to expand...

PS games are reviewed differently. Fact of life, and has been since the early PS3 days.
 
Love seeing the great review scores. As a fan of the first two games, I can tell I'm going to dig this one. More of the same, yet a little more refined, is just fine by me in this case. I think it's a shame some reviewers are dinging it for not being one of those open world games where you have tons of fiddly and extraneous shit to distract you. I hate that. I love how streamlined the mission/story structure is in Infamous games compared to, say, GTA or Elder Scrolls. Ain't nobody got time for that.
 
Adam Sessler said:
Instead of crafting more distinct and deliberately designed sequences with complex AI that force the player to better comprehend their abilities, I found myself attacking and running with such frequency that it devolved into autopilot
Click to expand...

Adam Sessler said:
No mention of bots, player counts, or AI for Titanfall
Click to expand...

Adam Sessler said:
You bolt away, figure out how you position yourself against enemies, and hope you don't take too much damage, as you swing the camera behind you. It became easier to just dash far from combat, stop, and head back in. Depriving the action of any satisfying rhythm or drama.
Click to expand...


Adam Sessler said:
Titanfall allows and compels you to be constantly on the move, avoiding fire from other soldiers or more importantly Titans.
Click to expand...


Adam Sessler said:
This lack of variety extends to the side missions which are equally indistinct
Click to expand...


Adam Sessler said:
The inequity of the modes is an overall testament to what Titanfall has accomplished. Being something new.
Click to expand...

tumblr_n0xgl7RMOw1r94e9jo1_400.gif


Don't take much faith in Adam's reviews. For games he's immensely hyped about (which you can tell..he talks about these games for months on end prior to his review), he omits genuine issues with certain games. Doesn't even mention those critical aspects, while talking up what he enjoys about the title.

Meanwhile, if it's a game he's simply not very interested in or hyped about going into the review, he basically places a massive emphasis on negatives that may not even be much of a big deal overall, and hardly even mentions the positives that the game may have that could be a major component of the game.

I also don't appreciate it when he takes so much time in his reviews/rants to complain about restrictions. It's almost as if he's making a statement about the titles which is negatively impacting his review, rather than actually discussing the game itself. I don't care, and frankly, am quite glad he can't show massive spoilers.
 
Yanikins111 said:
PS games are reviewed differently. Fact of life, and has been since the early PS3 days.
Click to expand...

Honestly I think that the conspiracy that PS games are reviewed differently is total bullshit. It could just be that, you know, the reviewer didn't enjoy this game as much as other games he reviewed.

That whole theory reeks of an inferiority complex.
 
Poimandres said:
Honestly I think that the conspiracy that PS games are reviewed differently is total bullshit. It could just be that, you know, the reviewer didn't enjoy this game as much as other games he reviewed.

That whole theory reeks of an inferiority complex.
Click to expand...

It's a pretty self-fulfilling, defeatist attitude that some fanboys seem to have. That's the great thing about conspiracies, a narrative can be made out of whatever disparate elements.
 
I've watched hours of gameplay of this game throughout the month.

Game graphics / design / animation / lighting / effects all look top notch and radically next-gen.

Actual gameplay looks repetitive, unimaginative, rote, definitely last-gen. Not terrible or anything, but most definitely does not rise up to the game visuals.

It's sitting at 81 right now on Metacritic, which is pretty generous in my opinion. It should probably be in the high 70s, but 81 is close enough, really.

I won't be buying it. I'll give it a shot if it ever shows up on PS+.
 
Vylsith said:
Once again, ALL reviews compare similar products. That's the only reason they exist. Your argument makes no logical sense. Titanfall and Infamous are not similar products. I never brought up Titanfall. You compare online shooters to online shooters. You compare open world games to open world games. You can do a generic comparison of two games from different genres, but then you have to use subjective qualifications like how much fun you had playing the game (which is still a very useful metric obviously). I'm not complaining about any particular review score either. My complaint is the fact that reviewers are criticizing the game for not feeling "next gen enough". That's a stupid complaint. Personal bias will obviously always be a factor. However, if you don't like a particular genre you need to either put yourself in someone else's shoes and rate accordingly or just stay away from that genre. I don't like racing games. I obviously wouldn't try to review one. I understand my bias prevents me from giving the game a fair review. That's something you need to be able to say as a critic or you're doing the public a disservice.
Click to expand...

Of course reviews will compare similar products in some regard. However, they do not "exists to compare products" -- which was your original statement. The lack of improvement over Infamous 2 is exactly why some reviews are dinging SS on its lazy design. If a game doesn't make any attempt to push gameplay forward then I think that is a perfectly valid critique. You don't, and that's fine.. that's your opinion. As a reader, your responsibility is decide what is/isn't valuable criticism for you. Some of the South Park reviews dinged that game because they were uncomfortable with some of the humor, it doesn't bother me but I'm glad that viewpoint is out there for people that may feel the same.

Vylsith said:
Obviously developers CAN do more. Obviously they WILL do more in the future. That has no place in a review. You don't review a game based on what you expected the game to be, you review a game based on what it is. The rating system is a direct comparison to other similar games. You can argue that reviews aren't supposed to be comparisons, but that's why a scale exists. To give a measurement capable of comparing one product to another. That's the only reason a scale exists. I'm not sure why you're arguing otherwise. You're arguing that a game should be rated based on what you want the game to be rather than what the game actually is. That makes no sense. Does the game compare well to others in its genre? Yes? Then it should get a good score. Common sense.
Click to expand...

What I'm saying is that reviews are nothing more than opinions and an arbitrary review scale does not change that. Someone's personal expectations and preferences are going to be factor. That review score can swing in either direction depending on who reviews a game, which is why its folly to try comparing scores of games in anyway.

Vylsith said:
This paragraph has nothing to do with the discussion. Criticizing a game for failing to include gameplay elements that don't exist yet is ridiculously illogical. I have no idea why people continue to defend that line of reasoning.
Click to expand...

No one is expecting SP to introduce some mindblowing new mechanic that turns the industry upside down. Instead, the game is being picked at because it sounds like it, literally, does nothing new except look prettier than anything else. It even sounds like side content might be worst than Inf2. Quite honestly, its fine if they want to keep pumping out the videogame version of comfort food but they should be criticized for a lack of ambition just like everyone else has so far.
 
Dr. Kaos said:
I've watched hours of gameplay of this game throughout the month.

Game graphics / design / animation / lighting / effects all look top notch and radically next-gen.

Actual gameplay looks repetitive, unimaginative, rote, definitely last-gen. Not terrible or anything, but most definitely does not rise up to the game visuals.

It's sitting at 81 right now on Metacritic, which is pretty generous in my opinion. It should probably be in the high 70s, but 81 is close enough, really.

I won't be buying it. I'll give it a shot if it ever shows up on PS+.
Click to expand...

"Last-gen gameplay" is not a thing. It doesn't exist. Now, can you explain what specifically about the gameplay looks repetitive and unimaginative instead of just using the adjectives with no clarification whatsoever?
 
frizby said:
On Sessler's review, I like the guy, and I want to file his review as opinion and not unprofessional bias, but then I look at his reviews for similar (at face value) games.


So why is Infamous held to a different standard and given a "60", other than it being a PS exclusive?
Click to expand...


I would hope this isn't the reason, but he seemed pretty cheesed about not being able to show the footage he wanted to. And to be honest, I was happy they weren't able to show more than the early game stuff. Seems there has been a couple of cases were embargo's have been bothering him with the PS4 launch being another time that comes to mind.
 
VanWinkle said:
"Last-gen gameplay" is not a thing. It doesn't exist. Now, can you explain what specifically about the gameplay looks repetitive and unimaginative instead of just using the adjectives with no clarification whatsoever?
Click to expand...

Just read Eurogamer's review or Sessler's for clarification. I pretty much agree with what they say.

Last-gen gameplay is just shorthand for game experiences I've had before. You're right that it wasn't the best choice of words, but I wanted to contrast gameplay with visuals and it sounded good.

And let me turn the question back on you: can you tell me what about the gameplay looks fresh and original? :)
 
VanWinkle said:
"Last-gen gameplay" is not a thing. It doesn't exist. Now, can you explain what specifically about the gameplay looks repetitive and unimaginative instead of just using the adjectives with no clarification whatsoever?
Click to expand...

Think of the "PS4/XBO gen is an extension of PS3/360 gen" statement I've seen pop up. It's the same types of games, but refined.

Counter examples:

Mario 64 -> Sunshine -> Galaxy -> 3D World

As you can see, in each console cycle the fundamental level design direction and gameplay mechanics have been changed. The feeling of "yeah, this feels new and shiny" is lacking from the PS4 lineup. They're are direct sequels in other words. Indies are the ones who cook up brand new experiences, whether it's the unique combat system in Transistor (try describing it to someone) or the abstract puzzles of The Witness. These are games that makes us think in new ways, makes us approach the obstacles from different angles.
 
Dr. Kaos said:
I've watched hours of gameplay of this game throughout the month.

Game graphics / design / animation / lighting / effects all look top notch and radically next-gen.

Actual gameplay looks repetitive, unimaginative, rote, definitely last-gen. Not terrible or anything, but most definitely does not rise up to the game visuals.

It's sitting at 81 right now on Metacritic, which is pretty generous in my opinion. It should probably be in the high 70s, but 81 is close enough, really.

I won't be buying it. I'll give it a shot if it ever shows up on PS+.
Click to expand...

You haven't played the game :|
 
I really liked the first inFamous, which in my opinion is easily one of the best games released on ps3. I was day 1 for inFamous 2 and for me it was a big downgrade from the first one, and is the reason I have a love/hate relationship with this franchise. Festival of blood was amazing though and I still play it from time to time. From the footage Second Son appeared leagues better than 2, but the Sessler review has me worried.

Most of the time Sessler is spot on my likes and dislikes of games. This has me really worried since I just bought a ps4 to play this game, and if I end up disliking it there is no other game that I actually want to play for ps4. My copy arrives Saturday, I'm really hoping I'm going to like it. For the people that had played it, is it better than 2?
it has to be please please
 
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
911
Ceadeus replied
REPLACED | Review thread
Review 
23
990
AJBungah replied
Motorslice | Review Thread
Analysis Review  2
77
1K
Guilty_AI replied
Invincible VS | Review Thread
Analysis Review 
0
333
Draugoth replied
Top Bottom