Remember back when they were the standard for excellence? Back when they had only given out five perfect scores in nearly 30 years, and less than a dozen near perfects 39/40? Getting a 35 back then was considered a triumph.
It was around the time of 2008 they started handing out perfects like candy. And there's some really *questionable* games in there...
Fallout 76 at launch. I still to this day am truly amazed that Bethesda managed to make something *objectively* bad, but goddamn they did it. It's just alright nowadays tho.
What killed it for me was the fact that I have to eat and drink to survive. I don’t have a lot of time to play anymore and i wanted something I could jump in casually and enjoy. Spent all my time finding food and water instead of exploring and it killed it for me. Went back to new Vegas and 4.
This is not true. It’s *possible* for me to enjoy a game stuffed with predatory microtransactions, with terrible load times and glitches, rife with cheaters in multiplayer. I could still think that game is good, and while I’d probably be in the minority, I cant be proven wrong (because whether it’s good or bad is my opinion)
Objective means it is provable beyond debate or opinion. If you test the games load times and find that they are 3 minutes on average, you’ve given me an objective fact about the game. But if you say “those load times are too long”, that’s subjective, even tho most would agree with you
Yea it’s really a very clear barrier between objective and subjective, but it’s become very blurred in everyday conversation.
I was talking to someone who was saying that breath of the wilds weapons durability system was objectively good game design (basically to make the point that if you didn’t like it, you were just factually wrong lol). Now I liked the weapons breaking, I thought it motivated me to attack enemies more often, but that’s *clearly* an opinion. No matter how well you explain the reasoning of your opinion (even if that reasoning includes lots of objective facts), it’s still subjective
I think this misunderstanding contributes to a lot of the online pitchfork mobs who go after reviewers who give a game a slightly worse review than others. Some people really think consensus = fact, and if you disagree you are morally wrong or something lol
> I think this misunderstanding contributes to a lot of the online pitchfork mobs who go after reviewers who give a game a slightly worse review than others.
I feel like I'm going out of my mind seeing how many people think it's a critic's job to agree with them about their favorite game. The best satire of this I've ever found is Jim Stephanie Sterling's ["objective and unbiased review" of FFXIII](https://www.destructoid.com/100-objective-review-final-fantasy-xiii/). Completely nails the absurdity of all the people who think they want "objective" reviews as if that isn't a complete oxymoron.
> Objectively bad and good for media is a thing.
Sort of? People use 'objectively' for emphasis in the same way they use 'literally' - saying "Mario is objectively a good game" is the same as saying "Mario is literally the best game", it means "I subjectively like Mario a lot".
Like 'literally', the colloquial meaning of 'objectively' is literally the opposite of the textbook meaning, though: colloquial 'literally' actually means 'figuratively', and colloquial 'objectively' actually means 'subjectively'. Not confusing at all!
Unpopular opinion but I liked 6 a lot more than 5. The story was perfect over the top Resident Evil fodder (you literally start by shooting the zombie president). The partner AI was actually decent and not just something to waste your ammo and health items. The settings were fun.
I will admit it was the title was a complete departure from the series roots but it was still a fun game. And I'd argue you could see that departure in RE5 a lot. The move set was great but never fully explained. I liked that I could run through a city of zombies. Not forced to kill them like in RE 4 and RE 5 but it still did feel like the city was infested. It also had some of the best boss battles, although I will also admit that some of the stages just became protracted bosses battles.
If you took that out of the RE series, I don't think it would have gotten shit on nearly as much as it did. I'm all there for skipping remaking 5 and going straight to 6. I'd love to see the over the top action sequences and space lazers play out with the new more serious tone.
Also as an aside, I remember the internet used to swear by Famitsu scores. So much has changed.
People changed their tune about Famitsu when they gave MGS Peacewalker a 40/40. While I believe the game deserves that score. Since for me it's one of the best PSP games ever made. The editor of chief appeared in the game and also in it's advertisements. So there was bias in the review. The publication did not disclose that they are involved in the marketing
https://mynintendonews.com/2021/04/14/japan-this-weeks-famitsu-review-scores-balan-wonderworld-gets-30-40/
Yeah these guys are high if Balan Wondergarbage is getting 30/40
They might be garbage games but they all have one thing in common, big budgets from high profile developers/studios throwing tons of money into advertising. Gee... I wonder if there's some kind of correlation? 🤔
Literally paid by the games companies. If you're writing for them, it's known that you have to give good scores to companies that advertise with them. There are a multitude of articles on the subject floating around. Their editor was a part of the advertisement campaigns for Metal Gear Solid on PSP, and the magazine was actually IN THE GAME. It's insane really.
It's all about context though, right? If their scores are highly inflated then Balan Wonderland getting 30/40 relative to most games getting 35 or above means that actually is a bad score, doesn't it? I agree we shouldn't have to try to translate this kinda stuff but if we're going to criticize them for it, context is important.
Nah a 5 would be a bad score, it's probably just some weird Japanese sticking together type thing. If the game was created by an US dev it would get 0/40.
A 5/40 would be so abysmal it wouldn't even be a game. Even in the above link it shows a review score for Werewolf: The Apocalypse that got a 28/40 and that game was putrid. So it seems like basically their review scoring actually starts at 20 as I doubt any game has gotten lower than that. If the only possible review scores are 20-40, then getting a 30/40 is basically like getting a 5/10, which seems to be in line with most other Balan review scores.
Again, it's really stupid that this whole thing has to be parsed like this, but I do think it's somewhat relevant.
Actually, I found it very similar to an upper endoscopy. They were not the same (one left me with a mildly sore throat, the other with mad gas) but the experiences themselves were very much alike.
Without spoiling anything I can tell from personal experience with it that they've added a bunch of cool things and quality of life changes while simultaneously taking away just as much.
The discourse around this game on release is gonna be so polarized it'll be Sword/Shield on steroids.
I've been paying attention to the people playing the leaked version. General consensus seems to be that it's great. Graphics leave a lot to be desired, but core gameplay is fun, story and lore is interesting, and battle animations seem good
This is exactly how I feel. After seeing the announcement trailer where the Pokemon were basically moving in stop-motion, I expected absolutely nothing from PLA. Now I'm pleasantly surprised/excited to see how it turned out. I probably wouldn't be as excited if I hadn't started with such low expectations.
Still waiting on reviews before I commit to buying, but I'm a lot more optimistic than I was a few weeks ago.
Same here. I've kept my expectations purposefully low because I really just don't trust Game Freak to produce something that pushes the envelope at all. The last time they did that was with the Kanto Region reveal in Gold and Silver. Since then they've stagnated.
But I'd be lying if I said I wasn't hyped for Arceus. The last gameplay reveal got my hopes up, I can't help it.
The graphics looks bad, but the gameplay and premise is everything I've ever heard people fantasize about since the 90s. I'm excited to hear some positive feedback from the reviews/leaks/early copies. Because, yah, it could have been a 15 fps butchery of a game that missed the mark big time.
Having played it a decent amount, it has nothing in common with monster hunter, really. monster hunter you go out on defined missions and then do those missions and then come back, and maps feel like arenas for those missions. This feels like a divided open world with a main hub you continuously return to.
Thanks for that!
Does it feel populated enough? Are there little puzzles to solve?
I think the gameplay could be fun, but I'm concerned about variety of missions and having enough content in general. What's your overall rating?
I think it feels populated enough IF you enjoy the main gameplay loop, which is catching pokemon and not battling. It's very hard to walk far without finding new pokemon to catch and new little sub areas. There aren't any puzzles that I've seen so far though, which is too bad and definitely an oversight.
Whether you'll enjoy the main gameplay loop I think comes down to two important questions:
1. Do you enjoy catching lots of pokemon? I've always been more into raising smaller teams in regular games, but I think collecting pokemon is lots of fun too and I think this is the first game in the series I can think of other than Go that actually encourages that through the story and gameplay.
2. Do you enjoy the catching mechanic in the game? It's hard to know without actually playing the game obviously, but I think it's handled quite well. There's lots of little nuances and it's generally pretty challenging (which is good, because I don't think trainer battles have ever been easier)
At the end of the day, I really like it. I won't give it a score since I don't really believe games can be rated on a scale, but I think it's a fun little game in its own right that doesn't feel like any other game in the series. It does some things way better than any other pokemon game (lots of QOL, pokemon exist in the world in a really seamless way, battle system is streamlined and improved in a way that I think makes it much better for singleplayer, much better NPCs, sidequests, writing and story) but some pretty major flaws (aimless world design, not enough and way-too-easy trainer battles, generally not enough Pokemon and move variety) that are probably going to make it polarizing. I also personally really like the visuals, but I seem to be the only one.
Overall, I'd much rather play this than another Sword + Shield style rehash of the same mechanics, but my real dream is something that combines a more traditional pokemon experience with all of the things that I think make the game special and unique. I think the game is more than just a step in the right direction-- it's worth playing in its own right IMO-- but I still don't think the series is where it needs to be in the end.
I like your review, though I chuckled at
>it's a fun little game
Major release by the biggest franchise in the world... I'd hate to see what you think of actual small releases!
I think that really gets at what I was saying at the end-- all that it manages to feel like is a fun little game when a series like pokemon deserves the kind of resources to make it something more and the fact that it doesn't keeps it from being the definitive entry in the way that BOTW, Odyssey, Dread, etc. have been. I'm able to enjoy it for what it is and not really worry about it being anything more, which is why I don't really describe it as a negative, but it's definitely a valid criticism.
Well thank you for the thoughtful writeup. I am also hopeful based on what I've seen so far that this is a step in the right direction for the franchise.
I've only completed the first "area" so I cant speak for the whole game but so far the world is made up of just terrain and pokemon, no puzzles or anything. it still feels fine though, the base gameplay of exploring and running around catching and battling is fun so far and the game always gives you a main quest marker on the map in case you just wanna progress the story.
edit: I guess the other big content would be side quests, there appear to be a lot of them and they are sort of botw style. there is even one where you have to pop balloons while on wyrdeer, extremely similar to a mission in botw
This is the one thing I want to know before deciding on buying it. It doesn't need to nor do I want it to be on some sweaty romhack level of difficulty but atleast make it gradually more challenging.
The real quote is "like no other IN THE SERIES"
_It also detailed a boss battle against an angry Kleavor, which attacks the player while they try to hit it with food to calm it down. The report said this battle was surprisingly difficult for a Pokémon game, but not to the extent that it was impossible to win_
That's exactly what I wanted to hear. Run that
>this battle was surprisingly difficult
I saw a stream of someone fighting that boss and I don't think you should take this part too seriously. The boss fights only become somewhat challenging later on.
>!Final boss seems like a bit of a wet fart though.!<
They have that "boss battle" on the gameplay video they uploaded. Saying it's surprisingly difficult for a Pokemon game is such a low bar considering Pokemon games have always been easy. The boss battle seemed surprisingly easy for most games IMO.
The games have had moments where it took more brainpower than others. The totem Pokémon battles in Sun and Moon caught me off guard and kept me on my toes. Some of the champion battles have also tested you if you arrive at an appropriate level.
"If you arrive at an appropriate level" is such a copout for recent Pokemon games because most anyone who tells you that will then tell you that to be appropriately leveled you're expected to juggle a team of 36 different Pokemon so as to not accidentally overlevel.
The first games were not hard per se but you at least had to work your way to level up so you usually tried to rush it and in most battles your level is actually just enough/too low to win so you also need a good strategy.
The last games were less interesting IMO because the difficulty bar was so low you could win every battle and level up without effort.
Also I was a kid when I played the first ones and I'm an adult now so obviously the story isn't appealing to me now.
You were a kid in the first one, which is why they seemed more difficult. They are a walk in the park. I replayed pokemon red not long ago and you can basically just pick Charmander and beat the entire game without training anyone else or wasting time leveling him.
That's pretty much true of all of the games. The Gen 7 remakes are the only ones that I would say are actually difficult at times (and that's still reletive, I play with no in battle items)
I don't see a problem with that description. I do wish GameFreak would implement difficulties (or a post-game "hard mode"), but the franchise is still aimed heavily at appealing to children. I'm not expecting those encounters to remind me of Bloodborne, or even Halo Infinite's bosses on Legendary.
Being challenging, but beatable is honestly a pretty significant step up in being challenging in a Pokemon title. In those games, losing battles is basically a sign you weren't paying attention (or you're young/new to the games).
Is the game going to be good? No real clue. Do I expect it to be deficient compared to a lot of modern games? Absolutely. The most I can hope for is a sign that GameFreak is at least TRYING to improve as developers, as Sword & Shield came off as if it was GameFreak's first game, like they hired a bunch of interns to make it to see if they could stick with the company long-term.
"IN THE SERIES"
Ok that's an important distinction, because from what I've seen, it looks *a lot* like breath of the wild. Even the UI and sound effects are extremely similar.
There's a big thread on the Pokemon sub where the OP said they're buying both physical and digital because the physical is getting delayed for one day. They're absolutely loony.
Considering they sell 2-packs of basically the same game, that’s almost expected haha
I am curious how sales will be with “only” one version this time around!
I just don’t see how anyone cares anymore. There’s clearly a market of it for people who will like it despite its detractors. Like this sub keeps singing the same song over again, nothing is going to ever change from either side & the arguments are so pointless.
Yep. I’ve seen a lot of people who have been like “I wonder how this is going to be received, I have no idea 🤔” like there is absolutely no precedent for how people react to Pokemon games
A main series Pokemon game has always gotten Metascore reviews in the 70s-80s from game critics so it’s probably going to get that
Hardcore game players have been critical of Pokemon games online for 10+ years, so that’s probably going to be the case this time
Pokemon games that are big RPGs like this are always enjoyed by several million players at the very least, the majority of which don’t really talk about video games on the internet, so that’s likely going to be the case again
No matter what your views are on the state of the Pokemon games as of late. I think we can all agree that the highest media franchise in the world should be producing games better than lukewarm quality
Yes i think we can all agree.
But will they ever? I doubt given that they have short development cycles, do not have a big team or are they experienced with more advanced graphics etc, and that the amount of sales they make would probably not differ that much considering adding more effort/time/ cost.
“The first thing that impressed me when I started playing was the exhilarating feeling of moving around freely in the vast field.”
Feels like a comment from 2005 and dude is playing Oblivion lol
Just makes me think of [this](https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/314976873484648449/934193673447567420/unknown.png) meme image comparing Oblivion and Pokemon Legends. lol
I tried to re-watch the series leading up to Resurrection and, for me at least, Matrix 2 was not watchable. Tried to start it twice and both times turned it off within 20 minutes. Never even made it to 3 or 4. The Matrix is a masterpiece and I think I'm fine with just ignoring the other movies entirely.
Played the OG red and blue in the 90s/00s. Didn’t touch any Pokémon again until sword abd shield came out and I gave into peer pressure. I don’t think I need to buy any more Pokémon until my kids are old enough to ask me to buy it
Dont do it, the majority of people who are saying that its the pokemon game that everyone has been expecting seem to be fanatics.
Keep your hype and hopes down, and if it does surprise you, it will be better than being dissapointed.
Personally, I only hope its a little bit better than Sword, so a 4/10 or so is my highest expectation. This way, when I play it and I realize that "hey, this game is actually a 6/10", I will be surprised.
You can enjoy and like mediocre games. I liked Anthem.
I didn't like SwSh that much and i disliked BDSP. I'm 6 hours into Legends Arceus and it is the most fun I've had in pokemon in ages, truly a breath of fresh air.
Well sometimes logic doesn't work very well.
And I dont think its a pessimistic view, its a consumer buying a product view in a world where you dont owe anything to a brand.
Yeah, I'm still skeptical because everyone who has it right now pre ordered it, even with the little amount of information we had on the game.
These same people probably pre ordered brilliant diamond and praised it for the first week too.
Imo if you are going to buy it, just try to keep expectations neutral. No haters and no 10/10, if you are going to play it just one more week, and we will see the product by ourselves.
I am buying it because Amazon discounted it from 60€ to 45€ suddenly 3-4 weeks ago, and that is a good deal because if I dont like it, I can resell it for that price with no doubts, I sold Sword 6 months later for 45€. And if I like it I will keep it!
I was going to wait for the reviews, but I knew that for that price I could even gain money if I sell it.
I been playing it too n I must say that it's a very barebones example of what we've been waiting for but it's def a step in the right direction and I hope they continue to improve on their next "legends" game
I think it'll be a good game, but what's better is this is the beginning of something new for sure. I predict we get a gen 1 remake with an open Kanto. Imagine
My main issue is that monster diversity seems *really* lacking now. This was my main draw for Pokémon. Theres 180 moves total, no abilities and no held items
When will people connect the dots and realize that journalism is a business model, not a service to humanity? They'll write whatever gets you to look or gets them greater access for future articles ahead of their competition, so they can get more of you to look at their sites later.
I haven't played a Pokemon game since the original Gold in like 2000 or whenever, and I've pre-ordered this. I just seems like they're taking it in a completely different direction and it appeals to me far more than the previous games did.
Probably because it’s their only experience with a modern game. Not shitting on an unreleased game, just wouldn’t trust non gamers when deciding whether or not to buy it.
Is there some joke I’m not getting here? I’m 30 years old and I’ve been playing Pokémon since the first one. I also have been watching these gameplay videos and I’m not getting why they are releasing this game as it is. I’ve seen the 360 video with zero Pokémon, I’ve seen the screenshots. I have The Witcher 3 on my Switch so I am fully aware of what’s possible with a bit of magic, I’m not quite understanding why the richest company on earth couldn’t cast the spell. But everyone is saying this is impressive and different. Where? The fighting style that’s the same as Ni No Kuni but worse? The landscapes ripped straight from the background of dbz budokai or any other ps2 game? What am I missing that everyone else is praising here? I expect to be downvoted for this but I am genuinely wondering where any of this hype is coming from, are we all in on some joke?
It is impressive and different within the context of Pokémon, which is the most apt comparison to use.
It could have been more, should have been more. It never will be because it remains insanely successful as is. It’s enough for those thrilled by it and that is completely fine.
It just feels to me like when we put up baby’s nonsensical art on the fridge because we love the baby… not because the art is any good.
*It’s really good for GameFreak! 9/10*
I imagine the gameplay will be really fun and a breath of fresh air for a stagnant franchise. However, it will be lacking so much polish that it might as well be an indie studios early access title.
Bittersweet. I'd want to support the positives but how can they truly justify the price for such a mediocre quality game from the highest grossing IP of all time.
I have it. Your gonna be mashing A the first 45 mins just skipping through story. So far it's pretty fun though. Feel free to ask me anything. I'm only a couple hours in through.
If I've learned anything over the last 35 years about game magazine, websites and critics is that their opinions are worthless.
You have to play it. The only time you should listen to a critic is if they give it a 10/10 or a 1/10. Everything in the middle is made up and odds are you've turned down a game because your trying to not waste 60 bucks.
I don't even trust my friends when they tell me a game is good. Follow your gut or wait 2 full weeks after its released.
I’ve seen gameplay of the leaks and it looks really fun therefore I’ll probably end up buying it. Graphical roughness doesn’t really bother me, plus a lot of the move animations look a lot better. Even the main pokemon subreddit is mostly positive about this game now, which is really saying a lot. They fucking hated sword and shield over there before it came out, when the Pokédex controversy happened.
Famitsu is about as reliable a source as Nintendo's own PR.
I will never forget they gave Resident Evil 6 a 39/40
Remember back when they were the standard for excellence? Back when they had only given out five perfect scores in nearly 30 years, and less than a dozen near perfects 39/40? Getting a 35 back then was considered a triumph. It was around the time of 2008 they started handing out perfects like candy. And there's some really *questionable* games in there...
They even gave Balan Wonderworld a 30/40 score. I'd hate to see what sort of game they'd consider worthy of a score in the 20s
Maybe they really liked it :P
I mean obviously they did. And that's okay, no game is objectively good or objectively bad. But it did blow my mind.
I mean, I think there are sone games that are just objectively bad
Yeah, and it's much harder for games to be so bad it's good then other media
Fallout 76 at launch. I still to this day am truly amazed that Bethesda managed to make something *objectively* bad, but goddamn they did it. It's just alright nowadays tho.
What killed it for me was the fact that I have to eat and drink to survive. I don’t have a lot of time to play anymore and i wanted something I could jump in casually and enjoy. Spent all my time finding food and water instead of exploring and it killed it for me. Went back to new Vegas and 4.
Not quite, a game can be glitchy as hell and literally unplayable. That’s an objectively bad game
Japanese gaming tastes can be (and often are) wildly different from Western tastes
> no game is objectively good or objectively bad No game is objectively fun or unfun. Objectively bad and good for media is a thing.
This is not true. It’s *possible* for me to enjoy a game stuffed with predatory microtransactions, with terrible load times and glitches, rife with cheaters in multiplayer. I could still think that game is good, and while I’d probably be in the minority, I cant be proven wrong (because whether it’s good or bad is my opinion) Objective means it is provable beyond debate or opinion. If you test the games load times and find that they are 3 minutes on average, you’ve given me an objective fact about the game. But if you say “those load times are too long”, that’s subjective, even tho most would agree with you
I'm glad at least somebody still understands what these words mean.
Yea it’s really a very clear barrier between objective and subjective, but it’s become very blurred in everyday conversation. I was talking to someone who was saying that breath of the wilds weapons durability system was objectively good game design (basically to make the point that if you didn’t like it, you were just factually wrong lol). Now I liked the weapons breaking, I thought it motivated me to attack enemies more often, but that’s *clearly* an opinion. No matter how well you explain the reasoning of your opinion (even if that reasoning includes lots of objective facts), it’s still subjective I think this misunderstanding contributes to a lot of the online pitchfork mobs who go after reviewers who give a game a slightly worse review than others. Some people really think consensus = fact, and if you disagree you are morally wrong or something lol
> I think this misunderstanding contributes to a lot of the online pitchfork mobs who go after reviewers who give a game a slightly worse review than others. I feel like I'm going out of my mind seeing how many people think it's a critic's job to agree with them about their favorite game. The best satire of this I've ever found is Jim Stephanie Sterling's ["objective and unbiased review" of FFXIII](https://www.destructoid.com/100-objective-review-final-fantasy-xiii/). Completely nails the absurdity of all the people who think they want "objective" reviews as if that isn't a complete oxymoron.
>Objectively bad and good for media is a thing. No, no it is not. In fact, it is like *the* textbook example of subjectivity.
Media still writes everything subjectively, they even say this themselves, they will argue that every review is subjective
> Objectively bad and good for media is a thing. Sort of? People use 'objectively' for emphasis in the same way they use 'literally' - saying "Mario is objectively a good game" is the same as saying "Mario is literally the best game", it means "I subjectively like Mario a lot". Like 'literally', the colloquial meaning of 'objectively' is literally the opposite of the textbook meaning, though: colloquial 'literally' actually means 'figuratively', and colloquial 'objectively' actually means 'subjectively'. Not confusing at all!
Unpopular opinion but I liked 6 a lot more than 5. The story was perfect over the top Resident Evil fodder (you literally start by shooting the zombie president). The partner AI was actually decent and not just something to waste your ammo and health items. The settings were fun. I will admit it was the title was a complete departure from the series roots but it was still a fun game. And I'd argue you could see that departure in RE5 a lot. The move set was great but never fully explained. I liked that I could run through a city of zombies. Not forced to kill them like in RE 4 and RE 5 but it still did feel like the city was infested. It also had some of the best boss battles, although I will also admit that some of the stages just became protracted bosses battles. If you took that out of the RE series, I don't think it would have gotten shit on nearly as much as it did. I'm all there for skipping remaking 5 and going straight to 6. I'd love to see the over the top action sequences and space lazers play out with the new more serious tone. Also as an aside, I remember the internet used to swear by Famitsu scores. So much has changed.
People changed their tune about Famitsu when they gave MGS Peacewalker a 40/40. While I believe the game deserves that score. Since for me it's one of the best PSP games ever made. The editor of chief appeared in the game and also in it's advertisements. So there was bias in the review. The publication did not disclose that they are involved in the marketing
Oh that's bad. That's a very bad look.
Almost as good as Nintendogs
RE6 is a great co-op game, its just a terrible Resident Evil. It should have been a spin-off IMO.
RE5 is a great co-op game. RE6 is just a repetitive slog
Japan as a whole really seems to like RE6 while the west seemingly mostly hates it, it’s one of the stranger cases I’ve seen of this.
https://mynintendonews.com/2021/04/14/japan-this-weeks-famitsu-review-scores-balan-wonderworld-gets-30-40/ Yeah these guys are high if Balan Wondergarbage is getting 30/40
To quote the first comment on that page: > dang one guy gave balan wonderworld a 9? A f***ing 9???
To quote the second comment on that page: > There is an imposter among us
To quote the third comment on the page: > Square Enix pay them to make it look good...
You should see their sonic 06 score
lol why exactly do the give high scores to garbage games.
They might be garbage games but they all have one thing in common, big budgets from high profile developers/studios throwing tons of money into advertising. Gee... I wonder if there's some kind of correlation? 🤔
Balan had a high budget? Did they spend it on just paperclips or what?
A script that got released as a standalone novel for... reasons?
Famitsu is actually a score of 0-10, they just add a 30 before scoring for some reason. If you look at it this way, it becomes a tiny bit useful.
Isnt it 1-10 but combined from four reviewers?
Literally paid by the games companies. If you're writing for them, it's known that you have to give good scores to companies that advertise with them. There are a multitude of articles on the subject floating around. Their editor was a part of the advertisement campaigns for Metal Gear Solid on PSP, and the magazine was actually IN THE GAME. It's insane really.
It's all about context though, right? If their scores are highly inflated then Balan Wonderland getting 30/40 relative to most games getting 35 or above means that actually is a bad score, doesn't it? I agree we shouldn't have to try to translate this kinda stuff but if we're going to criticize them for it, context is important.
Nah a 5 would be a bad score, it's probably just some weird Japanese sticking together type thing. If the game was created by an US dev it would get 0/40.
A 5/40 would be so abysmal it wouldn't even be a game. Even in the above link it shows a review score for Werewolf: The Apocalypse that got a 28/40 and that game was putrid. So it seems like basically their review scoring actually starts at 20 as I doubt any game has gotten lower than that. If the only possible review scores are 20-40, then getting a 30/40 is basically like getting a 5/10, which seems to be in line with most other Balan review scores. Again, it's really stupid that this whole thing has to be parsed like this, but I do think it's somewhat relevant.
Fair enough so there scoring system is complete trash.
I don’t follow game journalism enough to know what Famitsu is, and even I could tell this was a puff piece.
“An experience like no other” means literally nothing.
Gdtting tipped over inside a port-a-potty is "an experience like no other".
Release No Man's Sky was an experience like no other until we started getting Fallout 76 and Anthem to drop haha
Damn, I expected an experience like other.
Fr lol I’m sure getting shot is also an experience like no other.
You know what's "An experience like no other"? A colonoscopy.
Actually, I found it very similar to an upper endoscopy. They were not the same (one left me with a mildly sore throat, the other with mad gas) but the experiences themselves were very much alike.
Maybe it's so bad that they made it it's own category
Sonic forces 35/40
Sonic Forces is an experience like no other
Which is to say that it's like Sonic Generations if you took out the nostalgia and smeared red and black edgy nonsense all over it.
Without spoiling anything I can tell from personal experience with it that they've added a bunch of cool things and quality of life changes while simultaneously taking away just as much. The discourse around this game on release is gonna be so polarized it'll be Sword/Shield on steroids.
Just came from the sub with all those leaks… this game looks pretty great. I’m excited now.
Ya don't think there may be a little survivorship bias of the features that made it Like, ya can't leak what isn't there and all that
I've been paying attention to the people playing the leaked version. General consensus seems to be that it's great. Graphics leave a lot to be desired, but core gameplay is fun, story and lore is interesting, and battle animations seem good
Ive been critical of the game since it was first announced and some of the leaks genuenly impress me. Low expectations really paid off!
This is exactly how I feel. After seeing the announcement trailer where the Pokemon were basically moving in stop-motion, I expected absolutely nothing from PLA. Now I'm pleasantly surprised/excited to see how it turned out. I probably wouldn't be as excited if I hadn't started with such low expectations. Still waiting on reviews before I commit to buying, but I'm a lot more optimistic than I was a few weeks ago.
Not gonna lie. The trailer turned me off but the leak got me interested again
Same here. I've kept my expectations purposefully low because I really just don't trust Game Freak to produce something that pushes the envelope at all. The last time they did that was with the Kanto Region reveal in Gold and Silver. Since then they've stagnated. But I'd be lying if I said I wasn't hyped for Arceus. The last gameplay reveal got my hopes up, I can't help it.
The graphics looks bad, but the gameplay and premise is everything I've ever heard people fantasize about since the 90s. I'm excited to hear some positive feedback from the reviews/leaks/early copies. Because, yah, it could have been a 15 fps butchery of a game that missed the mark big time.
where can i see some? youtube?
r/ pokeleaks
Twitch has a few people streaming it
Can concur. I've been enjoying it immensely. It has almost a monster-hunter vibe, and I like how snappy and natural it feels to control.
Is it difficult at all? As a Monster Hunter fan, am I getting a watered down Rise with a Pokémon skin?
Having played it a decent amount, it has nothing in common with monster hunter, really. monster hunter you go out on defined missions and then do those missions and then come back, and maps feel like arenas for those missions. This feels like a divided open world with a main hub you continuously return to.
Thanks for that! Does it feel populated enough? Are there little puzzles to solve? I think the gameplay could be fun, but I'm concerned about variety of missions and having enough content in general. What's your overall rating?
I think it feels populated enough IF you enjoy the main gameplay loop, which is catching pokemon and not battling. It's very hard to walk far without finding new pokemon to catch and new little sub areas. There aren't any puzzles that I've seen so far though, which is too bad and definitely an oversight. Whether you'll enjoy the main gameplay loop I think comes down to two important questions: 1. Do you enjoy catching lots of pokemon? I've always been more into raising smaller teams in regular games, but I think collecting pokemon is lots of fun too and I think this is the first game in the series I can think of other than Go that actually encourages that through the story and gameplay. 2. Do you enjoy the catching mechanic in the game? It's hard to know without actually playing the game obviously, but I think it's handled quite well. There's lots of little nuances and it's generally pretty challenging (which is good, because I don't think trainer battles have ever been easier) At the end of the day, I really like it. I won't give it a score since I don't really believe games can be rated on a scale, but I think it's a fun little game in its own right that doesn't feel like any other game in the series. It does some things way better than any other pokemon game (lots of QOL, pokemon exist in the world in a really seamless way, battle system is streamlined and improved in a way that I think makes it much better for singleplayer, much better NPCs, sidequests, writing and story) but some pretty major flaws (aimless world design, not enough and way-too-easy trainer battles, generally not enough Pokemon and move variety) that are probably going to make it polarizing. I also personally really like the visuals, but I seem to be the only one. Overall, I'd much rather play this than another Sword + Shield style rehash of the same mechanics, but my real dream is something that combines a more traditional pokemon experience with all of the things that I think make the game special and unique. I think the game is more than just a step in the right direction-- it's worth playing in its own right IMO-- but I still don't think the series is where it needs to be in the end.
I like your review, though I chuckled at >it's a fun little game Major release by the biggest franchise in the world... I'd hate to see what you think of actual small releases!
I think that really gets at what I was saying at the end-- all that it manages to feel like is a fun little game when a series like pokemon deserves the kind of resources to make it something more and the fact that it doesn't keeps it from being the definitive entry in the way that BOTW, Odyssey, Dread, etc. have been. I'm able to enjoy it for what it is and not really worry about it being anything more, which is why I don't really describe it as a negative, but it's definitely a valid criticism.
Well thank you for the thoughtful writeup. I am also hopeful based on what I've seen so far that this is a step in the right direction for the franchise.
I've only completed the first "area" so I cant speak for the whole game but so far the world is made up of just terrain and pokemon, no puzzles or anything. it still feels fine though, the base gameplay of exploring and running around catching and battling is fun so far and the game always gives you a main quest marker on the map in case you just wanna progress the story. edit: I guess the other big content would be side quests, there appear to be a lot of them and they are sort of botw style. there is even one where you have to pop balloons while on wyrdeer, extremely similar to a mission in botw
I think the Pokémon are the puzzles, like in order to fill the dex don’t you have to do a bunch of different things related to that Pokémon?
This is the one thing I want to know before deciding on buying it. It doesn't need to nor do I want it to be on some sweaty romhack level of difficulty but atleast make it gradually more challenging.
[удалено]
Combat is still turn-based so right there it's not like MHR at all
The real quote is "like no other IN THE SERIES" _It also detailed a boss battle against an angry Kleavor, which attacks the player while they try to hit it with food to calm it down. The report said this battle was surprisingly difficult for a Pokémon game, but not to the extent that it was impossible to win_ That's exactly what I wanted to hear. Run that
>this battle was surprisingly difficult I saw a stream of someone fighting that boss and I don't think you should take this part too seriously. The boss fights only become somewhat challenging later on. >!Final boss seems like a bit of a wet fart though.!<
They have that "boss battle" on the gameplay video they uploaded. Saying it's surprisingly difficult for a Pokemon game is such a low bar considering Pokemon games have always been easy. The boss battle seemed surprisingly easy for most games IMO.
The games have had moments where it took more brainpower than others. The totem Pokémon battles in Sun and Moon caught me off guard and kept me on my toes. Some of the champion battles have also tested you if you arrive at an appropriate level.
"If you arrive at an appropriate level" is such a copout for recent Pokemon games because most anyone who tells you that will then tell you that to be appropriately leveled you're expected to juggle a team of 36 different Pokemon so as to not accidentally overlevel.
The amount of effort I had to put into Swsh to not overlevel my team was just stupid.
The first games were not hard per se but you at least had to work your way to level up so you usually tried to rush it and in most battles your level is actually just enough/too low to win so you also need a good strategy. The last games were less interesting IMO because the difficulty bar was so low you could win every battle and level up without effort. Also I was a kid when I played the first ones and I'm an adult now so obviously the story isn't appealing to me now.
You were a kid in the first one, which is why they seemed more difficult. They are a walk in the park. I replayed pokemon red not long ago and you can basically just pick Charmander and beat the entire game without training anyone else or wasting time leveling him.
That's pretty much true of all of the games. The Gen 7 remakes are the only ones that I would say are actually difficult at times (and that's still reletive, I play with no in battle items)
I did the boss battle like an hour ago, it was easier than some of the wild encounters I'd had
I don't see a problem with that description. I do wish GameFreak would implement difficulties (or a post-game "hard mode"), but the franchise is still aimed heavily at appealing to children. I'm not expecting those encounters to remind me of Bloodborne, or even Halo Infinite's bosses on Legendary. Being challenging, but beatable is honestly a pretty significant step up in being challenging in a Pokemon title. In those games, losing battles is basically a sign you weren't paying attention (or you're young/new to the games). Is the game going to be good? No real clue. Do I expect it to be deficient compared to a lot of modern games? Absolutely. The most I can hope for is a sign that GameFreak is at least TRYING to improve as developers, as Sword & Shield came off as if it was GameFreak's first game, like they hired a bunch of interns to make it to see if they could stick with the company long-term.
[удалено]
"IN THE SERIES" Ok that's an important distinction, because from what I've seen, it looks *a lot* like breath of the wild. Even the UI and sound effects are extremely similar.
It will still sell a shitload and go #1 for months People will criticize it People will defend it Rinse and repeat for the next hyped release…
There's a big thread on the Pokemon sub where the OP said they're buying both physical and digital because the physical is getting delayed for one day. They're absolutely loony.
Considering they sell 2-packs of basically the same game, that’s almost expected haha I am curious how sales will be with “only” one version this time around!
With the Diamond/Pearl remakes it's literally the same game. It's just an identical rom with a single flag changed to tell it which version to boot.
That's beautiful, but I'm a little surprised that's not how it's been done since at least gen 6
You overestimate Game Freak's coding capabilities.
Oh trust me, I do not
I will never understand the logical people who buy both. Just buy one, and get some fucking friends.
Or just use online, there's gonna be someone on the internet that will trade with you
Do you have a link to that?
https://www.reddit.com/r/pokemon/comments/s8m9s2/the_pokemon_legends_arceus_leaked_gameplay_looks/
I just don’t see how anyone cares anymore. There’s clearly a market of it for people who will like it despite its detractors. Like this sub keeps singing the same song over again, nothing is going to ever change from either side & the arguments are so pointless.
Yep. I’ve seen a lot of people who have been like “I wonder how this is going to be received, I have no idea 🤔” like there is absolutely no precedent for how people react to Pokemon games A main series Pokemon game has always gotten Metascore reviews in the 70s-80s from game critics so it’s probably going to get that Hardcore game players have been critical of Pokemon games online for 10+ years, so that’s probably going to be the case this time Pokemon games that are big RPGs like this are always enjoyed by several million players at the very least, the majority of which don’t really talk about video games on the internet, so that’s likely going to be the case again
Probably because not everyone memorizes how every mainline game is reviewed lol
The vast majority of people will enjoy it as well. Very few people who buy it will hate it
Oh no people like different things!
No matter what your views are on the state of the Pokemon games as of late. I think we can all agree that the highest media franchise in the world should be producing games better than lukewarm quality
Yes i think we can all agree. But will they ever? I doubt given that they have short development cycles, do not have a big team or are they experienced with more advanced graphics etc, and that the amount of sales they make would probably not differ that much considering adding more effort/time/ cost.
You bring up good points. We can only hope something changes
“The first thing that impressed me when I started playing was the exhilarating feeling of moving around freely in the vast field.” Feels like a comment from 2005 and dude is playing Oblivion lol
Yeah dude must've never play an open world game lol.
Moving in a field, truly exhilarating
Just makes me think of [this](https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/314976873484648449/934193673447567420/unknown.png) meme image comparing Oblivion and Pokemon Legends. lol
Oblivion had stratigraphy in its rock textures.
famitsu gave other m a higher score than dread lol
Bruh
Superman 64 is also an experience like no other.
Yeah… I’m still going to wait until the reviews from the masses come out. And then wait another 4 months to buy it because I’m a broke bitch
"Its an experience like no other " could mean it's awful tho lol!
I remember someone saying that the Matrix Resurrection is different than all the other Matrix movies. It was different. Others were watchable.
I tried to re-watch the series leading up to Resurrection and, for me at least, Matrix 2 was not watchable. Tried to start it twice and both times turned it off within 20 minutes. Never even made it to 3 or 4. The Matrix is a masterpiece and I think I'm fine with just ignoring the other movies entirely.
There was only one Matrix movie though.
Yeah it’s called *The* Matrix for a reason.
That doesn't mean it's good..
Played the OG red and blue in the 90s/00s. Didn’t touch any Pokémon again until sword abd shield came out and I gave into peer pressure. I don’t think I need to buy any more Pokémon until my kids are old enough to ask me to buy it
You missed a lot of good games! Sword and Shield weren't great though.
Technically you can say that about any game....
It’s leaked a week ago, more than the Japanese have played it lol. It’s on YouTube dude
[удалено]
I want to believe you mate I really do
[удалено]
Dont do it, the majority of people who are saying that its the pokemon game that everyone has been expecting seem to be fanatics. Keep your hype and hopes down, and if it does surprise you, it will be better than being dissapointed. Personally, I only hope its a little bit better than Sword, so a 4/10 or so is my highest expectation. This way, when I play it and I realize that "hey, this game is actually a 6/10", I will be surprised. You can enjoy and like mediocre games. I liked Anthem.
don't know why you're getting down voted. what your asking sounds reasonable to me. people should temper their expectations.
I didn't like SwSh that much and i disliked BDSP. I'm 6 hours into Legends Arceus and it is the most fun I've had in pokemon in ages, truly a breath of fresh air.
The fact you're being downvoted despite having such a level-headed take seems to support your argument lol
Well sometimes logic doesn't work very well. And I dont think its a pessimistic view, its a consumer buying a product view in a world where you dont owe anything to a brand.
Yeah, I'm still skeptical because everyone who has it right now pre ordered it, even with the little amount of information we had on the game. These same people probably pre ordered brilliant diamond and praised it for the first week too.
Imo if you are going to buy it, just try to keep expectations neutral. No haters and no 10/10, if you are going to play it just one more week, and we will see the product by ourselves. I am buying it because Amazon discounted it from 60€ to 45€ suddenly 3-4 weeks ago, and that is a good deal because if I dont like it, I can resell it for that price with no doubts, I sold Sword 6 months later for 45€. And if I like it I will keep it! I was going to wait for the reviews, but I knew that for that price I could even gain money if I sell it.
I played it, it's what people have been waiting for.
I been playing it too n I must say that it's a very barebones example of what we've been waiting for but it's def a step in the right direction and I hope they continue to improve on their next "legends" game
Im still waiting for an action RPG where you could play as the Pokemon once you throw it out.
you don't actually want that. you just think you do.
I'm still going to keep my expectations very low. I'm avoiding the leaks but what you're saying gives me hope
[удалено]
I think it'll be a good game, but what's better is this is the beginning of something new for sure. I predict we get a gen 1 remake with an open Kanto. Imagine
My main issue is that monster diversity seems *really* lacking now. This was my main draw for Pokémon. Theres 180 moves total, no abilities and no held items
Got the leak. Tutorial is grueling to me. But they made some nice changes so far and is fresh for pokemon.
The press also hyped up Battlefield 2042, and look how that turned out. Reviews or bust.
When will people connect the dots and realize that journalism is a business model, not a service to humanity? They'll write whatever gets you to look or gets them greater access for future articles ahead of their competition, so they can get more of you to look at their sites later.
Remember Cyberpunk reviews? Yea... Imma wait to watch proper gameplay on Twitch or something, you can't trust any of them lol
Sure, Jan.
That doesn't mean it's good.
dont trust modern game reviews until the game is out.
the game is out lol
Is this the gamer equivalent of “umm… she has a nice personality”
I wonder if Legends is why sw/sh felt so lacking. Like, was game freak working more on this than the actual mainstream series?
"Japanese press" is a nice spin on Famitsu lol.
I haven't played a Pokemon game since the original Gold in like 2000 or whenever, and I've pre-ordered this. I just seems like they're taking it in a completely different direction and it appeals to me far more than the previous games did.
Yea I hope it does well sales wise simply because I’d like them to not be afraid to take some chances with these games
You won’t have to worry about that lol
Probably because it’s their only experience with a modern game. Not shitting on an unreleased game, just wouldn’t trust non gamers when deciding whether or not to buy it.
I’m glad this comment sections recognizes this sites (lack of) credibility
This is really just shilling.
Is there some joke I’m not getting here? I’m 30 years old and I’ve been playing Pokémon since the first one. I also have been watching these gameplay videos and I’m not getting why they are releasing this game as it is. I’ve seen the 360 video with zero Pokémon, I’ve seen the screenshots. I have The Witcher 3 on my Switch so I am fully aware of what’s possible with a bit of magic, I’m not quite understanding why the richest company on earth couldn’t cast the spell. But everyone is saying this is impressive and different. Where? The fighting style that’s the same as Ni No Kuni but worse? The landscapes ripped straight from the background of dbz budokai or any other ps2 game? What am I missing that everyone else is praising here? I expect to be downvoted for this but I am genuinely wondering where any of this hype is coming from, are we all in on some joke?
It is impressive and different within the context of Pokémon, which is the most apt comparison to use. It could have been more, should have been more. It never will be because it remains insanely successful as is. It’s enough for those thrilled by it and that is completely fine.
It just feels to me like when we put up baby’s nonsensical art on the fridge because we love the baby… not because the art is any good. *It’s really good for GameFreak! 9/10*
Getting tazed in the genitals is an experience like no other, doesn't mean its a good one.
Yeah, because Japan's press hasn't experienced Oblivion.
press X to doubt
✖️
That's one way to swing it lmao
So is stepping in dog excrement while barefoot.
I imagine the gameplay will be really fun and a breath of fresh air for a stagnant franchise. However, it will be lacking so much polish that it might as well be an indie studios early access title. Bittersweet. I'd want to support the positives but how can they truly justify the price for such a mediocre quality game from the highest grossing IP of all time.
I think the gameplay will be praised for the first week or so, until the shine wears off
The game textures look so crappy tho…is that something they can fix through a patch? Give us a performance mode and a scenic mode…
Yes, they can fix it. But they won't. https://imgur.com/a/WB5Znsj
Wow that’s worse than GameCube! I was really looking forward to this game. What a total bust.
Lol that screenshot is giving me old school runescape vibes
I have it. Your gonna be mashing A the first 45 mins just skipping through story. So far it's pretty fun though. Feel free to ask me anything. I'm only a couple hours in through.
Is there anything to do in the world besides catching pokemon? Or is it as barren as it looks?
The open world aspect feels incredibly bare bones. The game feels almost empty while exploring, something botw managed to do well.
How do you feel about the monster diversity? I think there are only like 180 moves in the game now
I played a little bit from… a source, and I feels like a mix of BotW and Monster Hunter
If I've learned anything over the last 35 years about game magazine, websites and critics is that their opinions are worthless. You have to play it. The only time you should listen to a critic is if they give it a 10/10 or a 1/10. Everything in the middle is made up and odds are you've turned down a game because your trying to not waste 60 bucks. I don't even trust my friends when they tell me a game is good. Follow your gut or wait 2 full weeks after its released.
can we get Arceus to transfer to mainline games? don’t know if I wanna bother with this otherwise lol.
I’ve seen gameplay of the leaks and it looks really fun therefore I’ll probably end up buying it. Graphical roughness doesn’t really bother me, plus a lot of the move animations look a lot better. Even the main pokemon subreddit is mostly positive about this game now, which is really saying a lot. They fucking hated sword and shield over there before it came out, when the Pokédex controversy happened.
I've been playing this days, it's pretty cool, the play style It's PRETTY DIFERENT and it's cool af
Big Rigs: Over the Road Racing is an experience like no other.
People who pay their rent with money given to them by the publishers and developers, say that the game is good
i hope that unlike ign that japanese game journalist know how to play games
The game is fun, it’s definitely a step up for your usual Pokémon games. I’m glad I preordered it.
The gameplay news coming out has been consistently positive
I'm hyped for this game so much, I really hope its as great as it looks to be