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

Infamous: Second Son Review Thread

Zephyrus said:
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.
Click to expand...
yes let's rule out incredibly intuitive controls relative to the rest of the genre at the time, and gameplay systems like auto regen, both of which lent themselves well to infantry combat as well as land and air vehicular combat alike. Handwave away the significance and novelty of Halo's extensive multiplayer functionality (which back then wasn't as dime a dozen, certainly not as fleshed out anywhere on consoles), the forward thinking and well designed campaign sandbox featuring AI that was balls out incredible for the time, brilliant multiplayer balancing alongside (mostly) quality maps - featuring a handful of nifty non-hitscan weapon concepts alongside shooter staples - that came together for a gameplay loop that felt distinctly fresh and different, etc. and certainly do not consider the documented impact Halo had on the genre in the console space as a result of all these things

There's reasons why Halo was one of the first FPSes on consoles to 'play great.' That in and of itself is revolutionary, and it's for all the reasons I just detailed, as far as I can discern via my understanding of the term 'revolutionary'. Would you hesitate to call Super Mario Brothers a revolutionary platformer because there were competent enough platformers made beforehand? Would that they exist in a similar fashion on paper ("point and shoot like doom", jump and run leik pitfall) diminish SMB's scrolling levels, subtle gameplay hints and cues, perfect control over the character, etc. and the impact that SMB had on the appeal, marketability and playability of the genre moving forward?
 
My goodness, while every other reviewer seems to have gone out of their way to not spoil the extent of Delsin's powers, it seems that IGN review basically could give a fuck. I didn't mind the first reveal like 10 seconds into the video (since we've seen that power before), but jesus basically spoiling the whole kit and kaboodle - dirty pool and kind of not needed given the tenor of the review.
 
ANDS said:
My goodness, while every other reviewer seems to have gone out of their way to not spoil the extent of Delsin's powers, it seems that IGN review basically could give a fuck. I didn't mind the first reveal like 10 seconds into the video (since we've seen that power before), but jesus basically spoiling the whole kit and kaboodle - dirty pool and kind of not needed given the tenor of the review.
Click to expand...

Gametrailers has a knack for doing this as well. As if the game wasn't reviewed with the reader in mind and more the actual developer.
 
Vylsith said:
I obviously wasn't implying that reviews exist to compare Infamous 2 to Infamous Second Son. No, reviews exist to compare video games against each other, just like food critics compare food dishes to each other. The idea is that 10 is the best food you've ever eaten, and 1 is the worst food you've ever eaten. You judge other foods based on those experiences. The same way with video games. If you're not comparing against other products, there's no reason to have a scale. It would be meaningless. That's the point of a scale. To compare objects.

It's a naive criticism. Gameplay is more about innovation than power. Obviously there are power bottlenecks to certain gameplay elements (moving from 2D to 3D, fluid animation, mobiles on screen, etc.), but we've already overcome most of those. Games will change over time, just like they always have. You can't expect games to instantly be amazingly better than last generation in the gameplay department simply because new hardware has released. It's just naive. Sorry, but that's reality.
Click to expand...

Videogame reviews should not be compared in anyway. You can't even compare the same game on the same website across platforms most of the time. Polygon giving Titanfall a 9 and Infamous an 8.5 means nothing, other than the people that reviewed those games really enjoyed them. Again, you should not be trying to get any more out of a score than that. In order for a comparison to have any validity these reviews would need to be objective. Considering Infamous has a score ranging from 60 to 100, I'd say that personal bias is clearly a factor.

I think its naive to think that developers can't do more. Gameplay is a function of innovation and power. We constantly hear about developers that had to cut this or that due to hardware limitations. Memory has been a common complaint throughout the entity of last gen. Dark Souls had to strip out a key mechanic because they couldn't get acceptable performance out of last gen hardware. ND had to cut content with scavengers and infected because of memory limitations. From the sound of it, SP didn't even improve two of the biggest beefs people had with the previous games.

The reality is that different people have different perspectives about different things at different times. This obsession that GAF has with comparing game scores across genres, reviewers, sites, platforms, and years is ridiculous.
 
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?
 
I read one review ( Eurogamer) and was told what the song at the end credits was. And the powers. I understand the point the writer was trying to make by sharing this piece of information but c'mon. Are there reviews that don't actually spoil details anymore so I can check those out instead?
 
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...

To be honest, I have only played Arkham Asylum Arkham City of the Batman games, and definitely prefer this to either from the little I have played. The powers are just more fun to me and the presentation is a big step up.
 
So Delsin was a likable character and wasnt a one dimensional douche....WHO WOULD HAVE THOUGHT......neogaf....sometimes you guys shit on games wayyy too early
 
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...

Yeah this is what bothers me a bit. Every single Infamous review knocks it down a bit for being like the previous games in the series.

Yet you can read about a ton of other titles that do the exact same thing yet still get away with it unscathed.

But, this whole thing is a bit frustrating because the reviews for Infamous are VERY positive. I have read about 9 reviews now and the only complaint is the game is too much like the others or one guy didn't like the story. That is it. But one thing you will always read is how much fun the game is and how beautiful the game is.

My hype is through the roof for tomorrow. GET IN MY LED!
 
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...

That's all you need.
 
sn00zer said:
So Delsin was a likable character and wasnt a one dimensional douche....WHO WOULD HAVE THOUGHT......neogaf....sometimes you guys shit on games wayyy too early
Click to expand...

At least inFamous is still a graphics horse or I would have had to express my disapproval at the entire game and my intent to wait until it's ten dollars or less to buy it
 
if you don't want spoilers don't watch Jim sterling video review, unreal how this reviewers cant do a fucking video review without talking about what sucker punch has been hiding for players to discover on their own for so long
 
Better scores than expected, I won't read much as I already ordered the game and don't want any spoilers.

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...

Well, a 5 star system is not the same as "60" although that is what metacritic will label it as.

Also, Sessler wants reactions I guess. I noticed more and more but I didn't want to say it. A 3/5 is not bad but people will call him out on it, and some will troll, and that is eternity.

lmbotiva said:
if you don't want spoilers don't watch Jim sterling video review, unreal how this reviewers cant do a fucking video review without talking about what sucker punch has been hiding for players to discover on their own for so long
Click to expand...

Thanks for warning.
 
sn00zer said:
So Delsin was a likable character and wasnt a one dimensional douche....WHO WOULD HAVE THOUGHT......neogaf....sometimes you guys shit on games wayyy too early
Click to expand...

Eh I am only starting to warm up to Delsin and I'm probably 2/3's of the way through the game. Might just be me though
 
IAmRandom31 said:
In the end a review is simply

One person's detailed opinion of a product after playing it

That is all. The problem comes in when the people reading the review actually don't read the review. Here are some example lines from the supposed " bad " 8/80 reviews.

" Not only is this the best infamous game yet, it is one of the best PS4 games you can get right now "

" Second Son delivers an experience that oozes quality of design and execution "

" Second Son gets me excited to experience every new new power set and makes me happy to shoot thugs into the night "

" Infamous Second Son is the game the Playstation 4 needed. The expectations have been met. At this point it is the best exclusive title you can buy "

" Infamous empowers you with the tools for fun and a gorgeous sandbox environment to unleash them "

" this the most beautiful and impressive game on PS4, and it's also a very nice open world game. The revolution is more on the visuals than in the gameplay, as it is quite classical, but this is still the next-gen game PS4 owners were waiting for. "

Looking at the words inside the reviews. You would almost think the game was going to metacritic in the 90's with all the praise. But nope, these were still low/mid 80's reviews.

Yet some people think 80's is a bad thing.
Click to expand...

I think people are complaining about the 60s and 70s reviews that criticize the game for not being "next gen enough". I have no problem with the reviews in the 80s. I expected the game to hit about a 85-87 metacritic rating. Every review below an 80 I read complained that it doesn't feel next gen. What does next gen feel like exactly? How should a developer create that "next gen" feeling? It's a ridiculous complaint about the game, and I do honestly believe that the game would've scored better if they had downgraded the graphics and put it on the PS3 instead. That makes no sense.
 
erawsd said:
Videogame reviews should not be compared in anyway. You can't even compare the same game on the same website across platforms most of the time. Polygon giving Titanfall a 9 and Infamous an 8.5 means nothing, other than the people that reviewed those games really enjoyed them. Again, you should not be trying to get any more out of a score than that. In order for a comparison to have any validity these reviews would need to be objective. Considering Infamous has a score ranging from 60 to 100, I'd say that personal bias is clearly a factor.
Click to expand...

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.

erawsd said:
I think its naive to think that developers can't do more. Gameplay is a function of innovation and power. We constantly hear about developers that had to cut this or that due to hardware limitations. Memory has been a common complaint throughout the entity of last gen. Dark Souls had to strip out a key mechanic because they couldn't get acceptable performance out of last gen hardware. ND had to cut content with scavengers and infected because of memory limitations. From the sound of it, SP didn't even improve two of the biggest beefs people had with the previous games.
Click to expand...

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.


erawsd said:
The reality is that different people have different perspectives about different things at different times. This obsession that GAF has with comparing game scores across genres, reviewers, sites, platforms, and years is ridiculous.
Click to expand...

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.
 
Can someone please tell me which play through has the better story/experience. Should I go evil or good first? I was burned in infamous 2 because I played good first and then got the evil ending spoiled for me which I thought was ways better of a story line.
 
I'm amazed that people are actually bothered that the most of the game's reviews put it between 8-9. I bought W101 right away and that game had more mixed reviews than this one. If you trust the devs behind a game and it looks good the numbers don't matter. Just read the review and compare its negative comments with other reviews to get a god picture of the game.

wowlace said:
WOW did not expect those metrics. Was expect 7-8/10 mostly.
Click to expand...

I'm the opposite. Game seemed to have a lot of hype around it.
 
XtaLarge said:
yes let's rule out incredibly intuitive controls relative to the rest of the genre at the time, and gameplay systems like auto regen, both of which lent themselves well to infantry combat as well as land and air vehicular combat alike. Handwave away the significance and novelty of Halo's extensive multiplayer functionality (which back then wasn't as dime a dozen, certainly not as fleshed out anywhere on consoles), the forward thinking and well designed campaign sandbox featuring AI that was balls out incredible for the time, brilliant multiplayer balancing alongside (mostly) quality maps - featuring a handful of nifty non-hitscan weapon concepts alongside shooter staples - that came together for a gameplay loop that felt distinctly fresh and different, etc. and certainly do not consider the documented impact Halo had on the genre in the console space as a result of all these things

There's reasons why Halo was one of the first FPSes on consoles to 'play great.' That in and of itself is revolutionary, and it's for all the reasons I just detailed, as far as I can discern via my understanding of the term 'revolutionary'. Would you hesitate to call Super Mario Brothers a revolutionary platformer because there were competent enough platformers made beforehand? Would that they exist in a similar fashion on paper ("point and shoot like doom", jump and run leik pitfall) diminish SMB's scrolling levels, subtle gameplay hints and cues, perfect control over the character, etc. and the impact that SMB had on the appeal, marketability and playability of the genre moving forward?
Click to expand...

might wanna check your facts. halo didn't have auto health regen. it had shield regen and health packs. the first health regen fps was done in 1992, Faceball 2000.

Its just not a revolution unless it does things different from its predecessors. if it does them better or all the best things together, then its an evolution. Halo was the evolution of the FPS genre. Mario was not revolutionary either, most of the best games aren't. They are the evolution of the ideas that worked in the genre.

most revolutionary titles are not that great of games. due to the ideas either not being fleshed out enough or not being balanced enough to be fun and engaging. games like brink were not that great in bringing parkour and online story mode to light but they paved the way for better games and incorporation of story into online modes.
 
moneal2001 said:
might wanna check your facts. halo didn't have auto health regen. it had shield regen and health packs. the first health regen fps was done in 1992, Faceball 2000.

Its just not a revolution unless it does things different from its predecessors. if it does them better or all the best things together, then its an evolution. Halo was the evolution of the FPS genre. Mario was not revolutionary either, most of the best games aren't. They are the evolution of the ideas that worked in the genre.

most revolutionary titles are not that great of games. due to the ideas either not being fleshed out enough or not being balanced enough to be fun and engaging. games like brink were not that great in bringing parkour and online story mode to light but they paved the way for better games and incorporation of story into online modes.
Click to expand...

a revolution doesn't need to be markedly different to my understanding. I always viewed it as meaning to set new standards or offer up fresh experiences in gaming, to which SMB and Halo both fit even if they're not reinventing their particular genres, but I'd just be splitting hairs if I argued on that basis so fuck it. It is worth noting that Halo did do a large number of things differently in the console FPS space from even its most similar predecessors and that sort of context is important.

And as long as we're talking about 'paving the way' I can't think of a better example in regards to console multiplayer this side of the millennium
 
Tossing out the 2 clickbait 60's in Metacritic and this gets a nice healthy score. I'm buying this no matter the reviews though because inFamous was the only PS3 game I platinumed and I'd like to try it on this one as well. The day one patch is adding more to the game as well.

Glad Sucker Punch delivered, can't wait to play this weekend!
 
XtaLarge said:
a revolution doesn't need to be markedly different to my understanding. I always viewed it as meaning to set new standards or offer up fresh experiences in gaming, to which SMB and Halo both fit even if they're not reinventing their particular genres, but I'd just be splitting hairs if I argued on that basis so fuck it. It is worth noting that Halo did do a large number of things differently in the console FPS space from even its most similar predecessors and that sort of context is important.
Click to expand...

that would be describing an evolution. being evolved from previous entities.

rev·o·lu·tion
[rev-uh-loo-shuhn] Show IPA
noun
1. an overthrow or repudiation and the thorough replacement of an established government or political system by the people governed.
2. Sociology . a radical and pervasive change in society and the social structure, especially one made suddenly and often accompanied by violence. Compare social evolution.
3. a sudden, complete or marked change in something: the present revolution in church architecture.
4. a procedure or course, as if in a circuit, back to a starting point.
5. a single turn of this kind.
 
Like I said in other review threads reviewers place a lot of weight on new experiences. Infamous is beautiful to look at. Gameplay wise it's not anything different than previous Infamous games. Hence why it's only rated in the 8 range. For me the only thing I was looking for in reviews was if Infamous lost gameplay from previous games. I was afraid of Forza scale down.
 
Bloodworth said:
Hey now, I think I did pretty good about keeping the spoilers out of this one.
Click to expand...

Bloodworth, you're rad! Loving the GT staff of late, but I do miss Shane & Marcus.

I'm just getting back, going to dive into the reviews soon.

Things look good, but I'm hyped to finally play this- was definitely what I was excited about when the system launched, but I've been so caught up in MGS that I haven't really processed the beanie spirit. Tomorrow!
 
Immaculate said:
why the hell are so many people getting banned in here?
Click to expand...
If you say stuff like "Look at Sessler's other reviews xyz. These 3 random reviews definitely show that he is biased and the only possible explanation for the Infamous SS score is that he doesn't like PS exclusives" in a rather aggressive manner than you probably get banned. Deservedly so, shit is stupid.
 
moneal2001 said:
that would be describing an evolution. being evolved from previous entities.

rev·o·lu·tion
[rev-uh-loo-shuhn] Show IPA
noun
1. an overthrow or repudiation and the thorough replacement of an established government or political system by the people governed.
2. Sociology . a radical and pervasive change in society and the social structure, especially one made suddenly and often accompanied by violence. Compare social evolution.
3. a sudden, complete or marked change in something: the present revolution in church architecture.
4. a procedure or course, as if in a circuit, back to a starting point.
5. a single turn of this kind.
Click to expand...

Fair enough but in that sense it could be argued that Halo had enough of an impact on the appeal of the genre in the console space, and its viability/playability/popularity from there, to constitute a revolution of sorts. I mean before Halo consoles were absolutely not the place to get a competent shooter fix nor anywhere even close to being as desirable a place for developers to put their shooters.
 
DryvBy said:
I still play BF4 and it's (mostly) fixed. The issues are audio from certain giant maps taking a minute to load. There's also an issue for me where I can't ever see anyone on. I have to load the Battlelog and find a friend then Triangle join them.

Recently though, there's been so much lag I haven't even desired to play.
Click to expand...

so what you're saying is, I am making the right decision by exchanging it for second son.
 
dragonbane said:
If you say stuff like "Look at Sessler's other reviews xyz. These 3 random reviews definitely show that he is biased and the only possible explanation for the Infamous SS score is that he doesn't like PS exclusives" in a rather aggressive manner than you probably get banned. Deservedly so, shit is stupid.
Click to expand...

i dunno about that. seems a little too harsh. cant mods just give out verbal warnings via pm?
 
PeregrinSe7en said:
i dunno about that. seems a little too harsh. cant mods just give out verbal warnings via pm?
Click to expand...
Mods usually jump in a thread when saying the same thing gets out of hand. Mostly it is just common sense. I just asked because this is a huge thread and I haven't read every single thing that some posters who were banned said. Just read the ToS and don't troll that is how I survived my Junior status although M0dus was nice enough to warn me my second time posting on Neogaf so cheers to him for his mercy.
 
vxXJordanXxv said:
Mods usually jump in a thread when saying the same thing gets out of hand. Mostly it is just common sense. I just asked because this is a huge thread and I haven't read every single thing that some posters who were banned said. Just read the ToS and don't troll that is how I survived my Junior status.
Click to expand...

ok

man when am i gonna be a full on member?
 
Vylsith said:
I think people are complaining about the 60s and 70s reviews that criticize the game for not being "next gen enough". I have no problem with the reviews in the 80s. I expected the game to hit about a 85-87 metacritic rating. Every review below an 80 I read complained that it doesn't feel next gen. What does next gen feel like exactly? How should a developer create that "next gen" feeling? It's a ridiculous complaint about the game, and I do honestly believe that the game would've scored better if they had downgraded the graphics and put it on the PS3 instead. That makes no sense.
Click to expand...

Indeed.

Games(tm)

This is a marked improvement on its predecessors, both narratively and gameplay-wise, and it’s a huge amount of fun to play from start to finish. However, without trying to sound like a dick, it’s a game much like its protagonist: absorbing until you come into contact with something more appealing.
Click to expand...

WTF does that even mean? lmao. The game is a HUGE amount of fun ... until you come into contact with something more appealing? LOL.
 
PeregrinSe7en said:
i dunno about that. seems a little too harsh. cant mods just give out verbal warnings via pm?
Click to expand...

It isn't too harsh. Some people are just way too invested into what other people think instead of using their own brain. Why put so much effort in trying to discredit someone because you didn't like what they had to say? It's pointless and a waste. Sessler is a human with an opinion, he isn't perfect. The more people understand that, then bannings wouldn't have to happen.
 
The streams and previous games sold me on this game a while ago. I think I'm better off watching streams, analyzing what I see and deciding whether a game is something I'd enjoy.
 
Neuromancer said:
To be fair to my fellow GAFfers (but not to excuse bad behavior of course), how much discussion can there really be about reviews and review scores when most people don't have the game yet?

It would be an interesting experiment to have a 'one month after' review thread where people who played the game could compare and contrast their experiences with those of professional reviewers.
Click to expand...

I think that's an argument that these threads should be much shorter than they are, at least pre-release.
 
XtaLarge said:
Fair enough but in that sense it could be argued that Halo had enough of an impact on the appeal of the genre in the console space, and its viability/playability/popularity from there, to constitute a revolution of sorts. I mean before Halo consoles were absolutely not the place to get a competent shooter fix nor anywhere even close to being as desirable a place for developers to put their shooters.
Click to expand...

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.
 
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...
Definitely. It's not exactly surprising to find out that for a lot of games, after more people actually played and beat the game, the user review scale is largely as far spread as those of the professional reviewers, if not much farther.
 
I think it's worth keeping in mind that, if I remember right, we're just now getting to the point in the PS4's launch that things like GRAW would be coming out in the 360's lifecycle. an average 8/10 score seems pretty good, all things considered. The gameplay hasn't evolved much but it's at least solid. The next Infamous game is where we'd hopefully see some true massive leaps.

Omnistalgic said:
Great reviews...
Click to expand...

Omnistalgic said:
don't let reviewers justify ur purchases,
Click to expand...

Omnistalgic said:
plenty of people on gaf has reviewed the game, it's awesome!
Click to expand...

Omnistalgic said:
But it doesn't break enough new ground to wow People that review games for a living. For gamers this is why you bought a ps4! It is absolutely a showpiece of a game! And had a great story worth telling...
Click to expand...

This post is a roller coaster.
 
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.
 
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
919
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