-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Death Stranding - Review Thread (see staff post for discussion guidelines)
- Thread starter vestan
- Start date
Oh...
Maybe at some point someone else at Edge could review it but that's really surprising.
It seems that the story may be the worst part of the game as well. People are saying it's all of the worst parts of past Kojima stories dialed to 11.
Don't use metacritic much, or haven't recently at least, so was interested to see how similar the scores and distribution are between Death Stranding and Control, my current pick for game of the year.
Really keen to see how this pans out and it's weird it's only a week until finding out. Control was barely on my radar until I saw the launch trailer the night before launch, whereas with Death Stranding the launch trailer is when I stopped watching anything including it. I'm excited to play but wouldn't really call it hype in the same way I am for a new Destiny release. Not really knowing what to expect beyond typical 'Kojima stuff' has helped temper everything down and it's always been a guaranteed day one just to experience what the guy comes up with next following on from MGS and beinto a big fan.
Seems for many the biggest challenge is that first chunk of hours commitment through some tedious shit. Knowing that going in and being there for the dumb Kojima highlights, interested to see if I can break the back on it to get to the parts that some found really enjoyable and rewarding.
I think the game is just going to be one of those where were you when [insert game name] was released.
As I have commented here earlier, I have this on pre-order (sinced it was announced) but some of the reviews have put me on the 50/50 fence, but this has pushed me back over to the more positive side.
Has there been anything mentioned on endgame content? Would be cool if there were reasons to keep exploring and playing after the story is done.
It's a shame they aren't able to give detail as to why they didn't like it, but we at least know it'd be a hella low score. If Edge is the publication your opinions most align with, just assume you'll hate the game and don't buy it.
I don't really have a publication I align with, but even if I did nothing i've seen so far has swayed me even slightly into cancelling my CE pre-order.
Sounds like a perfectly valid reason to me. Who wants to get lost in an already padded game?
They do have article for death stranding in the next issue, it will be quite a lot of pages too if I remember it right, it's just that there will be no score at the end of article and they label it as preview instead
Bit for all intent of purposes, it'll be their 'review' for Death Stranding
Just like every other game, not sure why this needs to be said, unless you're seriously implying it'll bomb.
I was on the fence about this even after reviews but Beat Buy sent me a 25% off coupon right before my Gamer Club Unlocked expires and it stacked with the 20% GCU discount. That got the price down to $32 with tax so I'm going to go ahead and jump in at that price.
I'm implying the opposite, I think it's going to sell gangbusters...Then a lot of copies will be traded in, just like no mans sky. I bought no mans sky for £9.95 used like a month after launch.
The Kotaku review sold me on the game.
Not sure if I am going to like it, but I love what the game attempts to do.
I'm also currently finishing up Red Dead 2 and since it sounds like these games have common traits when it comes to gameplay, I'm curious how they compare when it comes to the gameplay loop.
Without having played the game, I still think Death Stranding will be a frontrunner for GotYs. The game might not be up everbody's alley, but the reviews also show that many people think it's phenomenal. And GotYs are rather about how many people love it than about how much people like it on average.
Not sure if I am going to like it, but I love what the game attempts to do.
I'm also currently finishing up Red Dead 2 and since it sounds like these games have common traits when it comes to gameplay, I'm curious how they compare when it comes to the gameplay loop.
Without having played the game, I still think Death Stranding will be a frontrunner for GotYs. The game might not be up everbody's alley, but the reviews also show that many people think it's phenomenal. And GotYs are rather about how many people love it than about how much people like it on average.
Ok so $10 after a month and no legs, not long to find out.
That IGN clip, even though I don't condone any of the toxicity involved in the shit tweet, is actually really valuable as a gauge for the experience. What they are saying here is that familiarity is comfort and Death Stranding's new ideas plus constant decision making and gameplay ruined their enjoyment. It remains to be seen how qualitative the gameplay experience will end up for the individual and I truly believe that everyone's take is valid on that, but conceptually, trying to gameify all aspects of the game, not just to rely on audiovisual components to make a journey in an open world game rewarding, forcing the player to constantly plan, think and react... it's what ambitious designers should have to try. And I think the players enjoyment comes down to how they can handle that approach (Edit: not in terms of ability, but if the player can deal with the constant barrage of demands and frustrations).
Last edited:
I've only played MGS V lol... and I loved the little story there was. Wanted more. Had seen story recaps of the previous games on YouTube before V came out.
I like the wackiness, and think it's at least different from what I am used to (from most western games)
I'm pretty sure I'd hate the game. I found the BotW traversal frustrations almost game ruining until I unlocked the items, towers and stamina upgrades that made movement easier. This sounds like that issue x1000
That's not what they are saying at all. I'm not even sure they think it's a negative, because they bring up BotW that "did that well too, where you're suddenly in front of a mountain and go "Oh crap I'm too tired for this". They are just describing how planning and traversal play out, not once do they say it sucks or anything like that. Seems more like they just noted the different approach without really applying any sort of assessment.
Saying anyone who doesn't like the game doesn't because they can't handle it's systems is ridiculous, pretentious nonsense.
Based on that GiantBomb video it totally is. Game starts by shitting on you and making everything as tedious and cumbersome as possible. Then they slowly drip feed you upgrades to make those things bit easier and easier to manage.
You're putting words in my mouth. I said everyone's take to how they react to that gameplay is valid. Including everyone at that table, everyone who loves it and everyone who hates it.
Edit: I don't mean to say how they can handle it in terms of ability, I meant how they can handle the approach of constantly being "forced to work".
It's obviously a little more "nasty" but how is the general point here any different from the IGN editor that tweeted alluding to other reviews not being honest in their reviews and instead just "marketing" the game? Alluding to IGN seemingly being one of the few with "integrity". That's actually worse since it's someone shitting on his colleagues. If outlets can call one another out then it's pretty fair game for readers to do the same.
Me too! Love MGS4, which I think was the most Kojima game of them all.
Well first of all you already noted that the tweet in your post is toxic as all hell. But not only that, it tries to spin a narrative out of what was said that simply doesn't fit. Maybe it's because I'm tired, but even after watching it twice I have not seen any of these people in the clip say they didn't enjoy it because it was too different/complex/whatever.
And when you say "I think the players enjoyment comes down to how they can handle that approach.", that approach being
"constantly forcing people to plan, think and react", that means people who can't handle to constantly plan, think and react are the ones who won't be able to enjoy the game no?
I'm not sure where I'm putting words in your mouth here. It reads like only people who have seen the light of Kojima and other elite gamers™ are able to enjoy the game. I'd be glad to be wrong here though.
I edited my posts to clarify what meaning of the word handle I was going for. Get back to me if it's still causing an issue.
I never said it wouldn't have legs but I do think I would be able to pick it up for cheap used around xmas yeah.
I'm waiting for pc though. It's going to look drop dead gorgeous!
I like the sound of this. Now don't jump on me so quickly, do we know if there are game mode? (like you know easy or very easy??). I really enjoy exploration in video games and take my time to just relax (one of the reason I hike). My days of playing challenging games are way past behind me. But the exploration, climbing, etc... Doesn't bother me at all.
I guess I get the distinction, but it's still sounding like Souls elitism to me.
And your main takeaway being "What they are saying here is that familiarity is comfort and Death Stranding's new ideas plus constant decision making and gameplay ruined their enjoyment" still feels like you read a looot of subtext into what was being said that wasn't actually there.
Nothing strange about that.
Just like film, a game can be more than the sum of its parts. Bram Stoker's Dracula has some really lukewarm performances, some bloated pacing, wild tonal shifts, etc, but overall it's an unparalleled Gothic epic. Someone may be lukewarm on the mechanics of Death Stranding but find that the overall tapestry of gameplay, atmosphere, story, etc results in a cohesive and impressive experience.
Reviews and enjoyment aren't a mathematical equation or scientific formula
I'm sure the gears one was a shitshow. The Outer worlds one seemed super positive. Mid 80s was considered good a week ago.
You should actually read reviewers. Someone who has played the game for dozens of hours and decides to stop is more definitive and informative than a number on an aggregation site that tells you nothing about the game itself. If a reviewer loved the game but couldn't complete it in time, would you be saying that person couldn't give a definitive score? I am going to guess no.
I think the review are the good score ( even the 9/10 from gamekult in France). The target of a review is to say it the game is a quality game or a poor game and i think the quality ( technical, artistic direction ect ect) is different from the appreciation of the game itself. This game have a lot a work put inside, but the gamepay loop is divisive. For exemple gamekult give 9/10 with the note " It's a true masterpiece but very divisive and not for everybody ".
The people need to stop to bet their life on a score.
The people need to stop to bet their life on a score.
Control is a little different because it's "divisiveness" was mainly due to the framerate issues a lot of reviewers were experiencing on console. I'm sure it would have been a little closer to 90 if the performance was better.
A bit off-topic but I read it in this discussion again.
There is something that I don't understand when saying that "Ground Zero is better than MGS V".
Ground Zero is just a base and a mission taken from MGSV as a stand alone.
But in terms of design and scripting, interactions and collectibles, ennemis and environments, it's not more complex than the coastal oil factory, the metal gear base, the airport, the mine, the villa, any villages or large bases coming from the main game.
I can't find something that would be that different in it than in the rest of the game (outside minors stuff from the UI), but maybe I have missed something. 🧐
There is something that I don't understand when saying that "Ground Zero is better than MGS V".
Ground Zero is just a base and a mission taken from MGSV as a stand alone.
But in terms of design and scripting, interactions and collectibles, ennemis and environments, it's not more complex than the coastal oil factory, the metal gear base, the airport, the mine, the villa, any villages or large bases coming from the main game.
I can't find something that would be that different in it than in the rest of the game (outside minors stuff from the UI), but maybe I have missed something. 🧐
Strange they would so much higher for a brand new studio releasing their first game over an established one.
Plus they made their whole gameplay around Fedex quests and a largely empty open world. Yet we're to believe that there's some kind of gestalt phenomenon going on where if you combine several terrible failures of gameplay design together, you somehow get a 9/10 or 10/10.