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

Infamous: Second Son Review Thread

So I wonder what game is going to be the first highly reviewed AAA next gen exclusive.

3D World?

Don't know what people were expecting. I still think it'll settle down in the mid 80s. Seems to be consistent with the first two, so at least they didn't regress. The facial animations look gorgeous.
 
BS statement? I´m sorry, i´m not impressed by just a leap in resolution and particle systems, that´s just that, a leap in graphics expected with new hardware.

Gameplay evolves over time? Infamous 2 came out in 2011, if you take a look at I SS the gameplay is the same with just that bump in graphics. They could have focus a lot more on physics systems to offer a better immersion on the whole sandbox the game is, destructabilty is another one.
The game feels and plays exactly as the previous one in a new generation of hardware, it´s not bad but it´s not a step forward and it´s mostly dissapointing.

Yep, also it's the third game in a series. Not exactly uncommon in reviews for complaints then if the gameplay feels same old same old.

This thread is crazy, my favorite part are the people entering the review thread to talk about how much they don't care about reviews...

Personally I got infamous 2 for free with the whole hacking sony debacle but couldn't bring myself finishing the game before getting bored. So this type of complaints make want to skip the title. Not completely unexpected but still disappointing.
 
I don't really care about review scores but it just seems odd that this series' Metascores keep going down when, if GAF impressions about SS are correct, each game has been a big improvement over the last.

Inflection point.

Year after year of Assassin's Creed/other open-world games with the same old mission structure has dulled reviewers on stuff they used to accept as 'okay.' Now if they don't innovate on mission design, they're not fun.

GTAV effect. The reality is that every open-world game will be inadvertently compared to GTAV, whether they do it consciously or not. Unless there's differentiation, the pervasive notion of 'a smaller GTA' will probably make it a minus point.

And this is tales-from-my-ass, but Titanfall effect. I think that there's a slight shift to focus on what is called 'next-gen gameplay', especially after it's been touted as something special in Titanfall.
 
Ha Sessler getting grilled and now we love Polygon!!

Never change gaf!
They love Polygon here?
Links? Who?

Ha, I got the same feeling. GAF was always raving about Sessler and how good he was in his videos. Now they're shitting on him.

I don't get it and I don't really care. He's just 1 guy out of a dozen other reviewers.
Today is the first time they are "shitting" on him? GAF were raving about him the last months? Really?
 
Funny how the people and sites who are giving this marked down reviews because of the repetitive nature and no side missions are the same people who gave high marks/praise to titanfall despite it being CoD with wallrunning and mechs, no singleplayer and repetitive FPS action.

AAA post. Would read again.
 
I normally don't care about metacritic scores nor reviews both high and low (I normally look at the lower scoring reviews to see any faults in the game) but Tomb Raider has a higher metacritic score and several reviewers scored it much higher than this.

I'll let that sink for a minute.
 
Lol at people getting upset about "gameplay isn't next gen". TBH, from what I've seen, it doesn't. It a super safe game that is taking the gameplay elements of the previous games and adding very little. Basically the game isn't doing anything that feels fresh. There are a few things I was hoping to see from the franchise that would have made the gameplay feel fresh but they chose not to. The 7 and 8 reviews seems on point and I question anything above

I take it you have got the game then? Otherwise your tone is rather difinitive without having much substance...

Personally I think the game is an incremental improvement, but that is what I expected. To be honest, I haven't seen a single current gen game which has really pushed things forward from a gameplay perspective that couldnt be done last gen.

Anyway, I think it already seems a more 'next gen' effort than other open world games available on the systems, although I have yet to play DR3.
 
It's 79 on metacritic :'( Some sites I've never heard of popped up on there with low-ish scores.

Haha....well, if we're honest, I've not heard of nearly every other site that gets on Metacritic. No matter their scores.

There will be like 20-30 reviews and I've only heard of like 6-7 of the sites/publications.
 
Man, what the hell does that even mean?

"If it wasn't for all these fancy graphics, the graphics would look quite poor."

If the quote wasn't quite so removed from its context you'd see that they're referring to the gameplay/tutorial when they say it would seem like an early last-gen game, not the graphics.
 
I can't wait to control a game with my mind so that it plays like a next gen game..
Sucker Punch should have added a double jump option and jet packs... gliding and dashing up walls is so last gen.
 
i know that i shouldnt compare reviews, but what really makes me sad is reviewers giving Infamous a low score because "gameplay not next gen" "plays the same as infamous 1" 6/10 etc. and the you read their COD Ghost review and it gets 8/10. what the fuck is wrong with them???

It's a difference of perception. Perception is that the CoD games are reviewed highly every year, they're the complete package with tons of modes, AAA, hundreds of developers working on it, etc. This is an exclusive that is a sequel to games that reviewers have never really liked. The previous games have not been "system sellers" though they have sold very well and have a devoted fanbase.

Don't expect any of the above to change.
 
Are you ready for this?

I think

it is possible

that Sessler liked Titanfall more than inFamous: Second Son and just because that is his opinion does not mean he has an agenda, nor does it mean you have to agree or seemingly lose your mind because it disagrees with your worldview.
On a 5 pt scale, scoring 2 games 2pts apart is more than just simply saying you like one game more than another. You can give two games the exact same score and still like one game more than the other.

I think the issue has more to do with the size of the gulf rather than Sess's personal preference in games.
 
Still buying this, Metacritic score be damned.

tumblr_m4sw74QgB81r6h78wo1_500.gif
 
Most of the reviews don't include the day one patch that adds 5 extra hours right?

In that light... even the poor reviews don't seem so bad.
 
I normally don't care about metacritic scores nor reviews both high and low (I normally look at the lower scoring reviews to see any faults in the game) but Tomb Raider has a higher metacritic score and several reviewers scored it much higher than this.

I'll let that sink for a minute.


Tomb raider was a great game, with a crappy story.
 
Why are people having meltdowns over Infamous, of all things? It's always been a B-tier series.

I don't agree with your dismissal of inFamous' quality, but

It's an exclusive game for a Sony platform. Have you not been to any review threads for one of those before?
 
Every review thread, somebody, or some site, 'loses credibility' for not scoring a game as high as people were hoping.

Looks like most people are quite enjoying the game. That's usually a good sign, but obviously some people need universal praise before they can sleep sound at night.

I've read through about half a dozen reviews so far and something I've noticed is that they're all fairly short.
 
I can't help but laugh when games on a certain system (in this case playstation) get a 10/10 from a site called "Playstation Universe". The same when a MS game gets a 9/10 or 10/10 from "Xbox Nation" or something of the like. Even if the game is good and warrants the score it's still like...come on, lol.

Agree. I really wish those sites were excluded from Metacritic. On both sides they usually are at the top of the scoring list.
 
Funny how the people and sites who are giving this marked down reviews because of the repetitive nature and no side missions are the same people who gave high marks/praise to titanfall despite it being CoD with wallrunning and mechs, no singleplayer and repetitive FPS action.

don't be that guy, this is wall of shame material
 
These are pretty great reviews! I expected it to hit somewhere in the 80s. As long as it's fun and pretty to look at (that's a yes for both) I'm happy!
 
Thought this was meant to be a system seller and killer app, sounds more like infamous 2 (which was good anyway) with improved graphics right. I don't think ill be buying a PS4 til Destiny then.
 
Inflection point.

Year after year of Assassin's Creed/other open-world games with the same old mission structure has dulled reviewers on stuff they used to accept as 'okay.' Now if they don't innovate on mission design, they're not fun.

GTAV effect. The reality is that every open-world game will be inadvertently compared to GTAV, whether they do it consciously or not. Unless there's differentiation, the pervasive notion of 'a smaller GTA' will probably make it a minus point.

And this is tales-from-my-ass, but Titanfall effect. I think that there's a slight shift to focus on what is called 'next-gen gameplay', especially after it's been touted as something special in Titanfall.

The GTAV effect is weird for me because the less like GTA an open world game is, the more likely I am to like it. I hate that series.
 
Why are people having meltdowns over Infamous, of all things? It's always been a B-tier series.

I don't think anyone's having a meltdown. People are commenting on some of the criticisms of the game, and there are people who have played the game on GAF who say those criticisms aren't valid. Basically just disagreeing with them.

But sure you could call that a meltdown, like you could call Infamous a B-tier series. You'd be wrong on both counts.
 
inFAMOUS Second Son is a better game than inFAMOUS and inFAMOUS 2 and it may end with a lower metacritic. :(

I really don't understand how critics work.

They get shit for using 7-10 and get shit if they try and use the entire scale, they just can't win.
 
So no one is going to explain next gen gameplay to me? ;)

This is the 3rd inFamous game and it plays almost exactly like the first two.

Next-Gen Gameplay: Pushing the inFamous series forward through gameplay innovations.

Last-Gen Gameplay: Same old gameplay already experienced through two games.
 
You have still not explain what is next gen game play is and name 1 game that has it .
Also the game does have better destructibility compare to the old ones .

Already numbered 2 examples of leaps of "next gen" gameplay to another gaffer. Classic example? GTA IV, current example? MGS V.

You can´t speak about those 2 games without naming the major changes they went through gameplay wise hand in hand with the technical leaps they had.
 
So what is the actual length of a single play through? A lot of these reviews mention it being somewhat short, but I was told around 12 hours or so which to me isn't exactly short.
 
Most of the reviews don't include the day one patch that adds 5 extra hours right?

In that light... even the poor reviews don't seem so bad.

The biggest potential change for me are the bosses. The fights are pretty tiresome and repetitive pre-patch. Wondering what they're like now.
 
Reviews aside, I'm still getting it tomorrow. Thank you Sony for releasing on a Friday so I can have all weekend with Second Son.

I remember when I was in college games used to release on Fridays. "Mortal Monday" was the one exception, I think. I don't remember when it moved to Tuesdays.
 
Top Bottom