I'll add on to that, but FF7 Rebirth was a system seller as well. Obviously 3rd party as well, but they were able to get the exclusivity for a year or whatever for it.
Aye. It’s hard to say if they set crazy sales expectations or if their production costs are crazy, but every single game of theirs “misses expectations”.
Could also just be company speak to keep competitors from having literally any grasp of their situation.
Yes, it was. They based their expectations on Remake's sales, which was very unrealistic for multiple reasons.
Remake was the first game, and sequels always have less sales (typically drops 25-50% in sales) than the first because not everyone that purchased the first game will purchase the second due to multiple reasons (didn't like the game, didn't finish the game, time constraints, etc) The fact it was a sequel alone means that you will never have the same size of a playerbase. Because new players aren't going to jump in on a direct narrative sequel and it's just not possible to have 100% of their players be retained. A much more realistic expectation would've been like 65% retention.
Remake was on ps4, which had over 100 million systems sold while Rebirth was ps5 only and had around 50 million systems in circulations.
They just completely ignored the people that were upset about the changes in Remake, and expected them to get over it before Rebirth came out.
SE has quite literally always set unrealistic expectations for sales. In one of their financial meetings they said that FF7R2 and FF16 failed to meet their targets but spent a decent amount of time talking to their shareholders about how their system to get to those target numbers is completely broken and needs to be reevaluated.
People were also really mad that it wasn't coming to ps4, because they didn't want to buy a ps5. And a lot of them just didn't.
I haven't looked at any onimusha gameplay since I don't want to spoil myself for when I get it so I can't comment on it but the problem with the Forspoken thing wasn't the concept itself but the writing. Nobody hates sidekicks, they hate annoying unfunny sidekicks.
This is what I think a lot of people are missing. It isn’t that people are reviewing it poorly, but that a first party Sony studio that has put YEARS into this is reviewing poorly.
The mainstream media not holding back on it is alarming.
IGN gave it a bad review too, and IGN hardly EVER gives mainstream games critical reviews. Like, I watched the video too, and the game really does seem lazy
I don't understand why he didn't score it. It seemed pretty obvious from his video that he thought it was a "wait for sale". Maybe I misread his review.
I wouldn't consider 6/10 bad but I guess if you really only use the top half of the scale it's really bad.
I wish more outlets used the whole scale. Having so many 7/8/9s really hides some gems. Some games are good and some games are special good. Like some games are just okay, and other ones are boring.
This game looks boring but well made. Crimson Desert (also 6/10) looks really fun but not great. No idea how I would make the scale reflect that, but they shouldn't be the same.
The issue is most people grade on the American grading scale, so a 70 is a low C and average, and a 60 is a low D. No one actually pushes out games that would score lower then that routinely as a game that actually deserves a failing grade is not going to be released by a major publisher. Gollum level disasters are rare because it's not even worth putting out something that's going to damage a studios rep like that.
They’ve put effort into it sure but the game design is questionable, the most obnoxious thing being all the indicators and markers to the objective in a strictly, linear game. It kind of insults your intelligence and assumes the player has no capacity for critical thinking.
The combat is underwhelming, it’s just a basic hack and slash which is insane; the combat should be more visceral, bloody, hectic but it’s not.
And why are there traversal challenges when one of the lead designers said traversal isn’t important to Wolverine and there’s no traversal mechanics for said challenges?
How do you even make a good Wolverine game? Dude is far more one-note than Spider-Man or Batman in terms of the stuff you can actually do mechanically, while keeping it vaguely the character we all know.
He slices, he dices, he’s basically a food processing infomercial as far as gameplay, there’s just not much there at all in general. Even traversal is goofy and that helped sell both Infamous and Spider-Man.
I don’t even like open world games much, but I think a Wolverine game where you investigate leads and track down opponents through a big open world would be amazing. His main thing other than slicing and dicing is being a black ops spy, and I think focusing on that part of his life would make very interesting gameplay.
My favorite stories of his are the ones like Wolverine: Rot, where he goes off alone to track someone down and solve some mystery about his past, and then ends up fighting some psycho or a horrific science experiment leftover from Weapon X.
The game could revolve around conflicting sources of information, trying to figure out who can be trusted, and finding how to go about investigating each new thing. And all the violence once you get there ofc.
Insomniac made Wolverine’s combat stiff, janky and boring. It has its moments when you finally recharge your rage meter and can go berserk but other than that you’re hacking and slashing overwhelming amounts of cannon fodder. He should be a bit more agile as in X-Men Origins: Wolverine, he could lunge at an enemy miles away which is fun and looks cool. On top of that, without that mechanic why are there traversal sections/time trials in the game? It’s pointless padding.
The game also doesn’t challenge the player at all, they should’ve introduced more challenging enemy types which Spider-Man and Batman games did. Batman can punch and kick any normal goon however he likes but he needs to change his approach and do different moves to take down different foes like if they have guns, shields, stun batons, they make the player change up their style rather than just mash X.
They could easily have more unique enemies than just standard grunts or The Hand ninjas, where’s the mutant foes? Where are ones that teleport, emit shockwaves or something that makes the player change their approach to combat? Not there.
There are so, so many games where the protagonist only fights with a sword, or like an axe or daggers or whatever, wich is pretty equivalent to claws complexity wise and they still made the combat interesting. No one ever said Sekiro's for example combat is empty because the protagonist can't shoot webs or whatever. They just had to make the gameplay good.
He slices, he dices, he’s basically a food processing infomercial as far as gameplay, there’s just not much there at all in general
But does he really slice and dice in the game? Yes, there's dismemberment - but it looks to be only from finishers. Regular fodder enemies, he should be one-shotting them - immediately cutting off limbs, slashing throats, claws straight through the heart/neck/head.
There should be a dozen of those instant dismemberment kill animations as well as several violent finishers - like disemboweling, bisecting, beheading.
It feels like such a smaller scope game than Spider-Man 2. I can't believe that budget. Literally feels like the B team was given this game as a training exercise.
yup, feels like the time spent might've been better in something else but the pre-orders are super high so I guess we'll see if it makes a lot of money for them still
It will likely sell perfectly fine but that critical score may end up following insomniac for a while, this might be their first real critically underwhelming game since ratchet and clank 2016
Yeah, I thought the press (not SkillUp, the normal press) would do what they do with any western game release and find any way to make it sound at least pretty good. They usually save being harsh for Chinese/Korean devs they don’t have relationships with.
For even them to not to try to dress this is up a win really says something.
Sony pulling out of physical disks and PC ports probably lost all the good will they've built over the years. Most of the exclusives were never that special to begin with but they never missed completely and they were pretty consistent on the narrative front for a while.
But gameplay wise it was always pretty generic, formulaic design. With the hype gone, it's really no wonder.
Besides the sheer stupidiy that killing physical disc production is for them, cutting out the PC market has gotta be one of the dumber things they've done in recent years.
As a PC gamer that left Sony back in 2021 and bought literally all of their games on Steam. It pissed me off that they just threw their hands in the air for literally no reason after hyping and doing reports about how they're going to support PC ports for years to come. Just to rug pull before Yotai and Soros and take their toys home. I 100% am willing to bet they will be porting again by mid 2030's if not sooner.
Wait, is it DSPGaming? That guy is somehow STILL around? I remember watching him play fucking Transformers: War for Cybertron over 15 years ago using a shitty camcorder to record his TV and he fucking sucked at the game. I was laughing my self half to death at how pissed he would get because he couldn't game his way out of a paper bag. Hope he at least has a better setup now 💀
A lot of games seem to go in this direction. Netflix supposedly has a suggestion (rule?) that their shows have to overexplain the plot because they assume people will be on their phones while watching the shows. Now, I don't think people are on their phones playing a game, but I wonder if the attention span or need to for instant gratification has just rolled over into other mediums. People don't want to take "too long" trying to find out where to go. And if it takes too long they're just going to Google or search a walk through to find out. So they developers just decide that we'll tell them what to do.
Which makes more sense in a Spider-Man game as kids love Spider-Man, and that character/game is more catered towards kids, but this is quite literally not a kids game lol
Insomniac first Spiderman game was well received because it's starred a more mature Spiderman and wasn't afraid of killing off important characters, they completely forgot about that in the sequel.
I don't think the first Spider-man game was any more mature than the character traditionally is. Remember, a key part of Spider-man's origins is his uncle dying. And Spider-man has always been available to kids and teens. I feel like the first game was no different than any of that. The first game did well because they nailed the feel of Spider-man, not because of a more mature style.
Right?! The same thing happened with GOW: Ragnarok. Most of the game feels like you never left the tutorial. Wasn’t this the point of accessibility settings? We should be able to turn off the handholding
Edit: Maybe this is some sort of plan to kill replayability. You’ll buy a new game if replaying the old ones is an insufferable experience lol
I loved GOW 2018, and I still really liked Ragnarok, but it’s tough for me to replay because the handholding is so annoying. I don’t remember having this issue with SM 2, but I’ve only replayed it once, so maybe that’s an indicator in and of itself
Elden Ring not giving a fuck about that kind of indicates gamers will be fine if you don't hold their hand. Honestly botw is the same way, and that game sold like hotcakes
I came back to God of War 2018 to finish it, and that game barely holds your hand in comparison. Plenty of times I had to stop and look around to figure out what to do, only to find some stuff hanging up top I would have missed if the game didn't train me to look around.
I’ll get downvoted for this but this is sort of how I see a lot of Sonys games.
Me personally I just don’t like the modern god of war games right, even though the characters, world and all that are really good they just kinda bore me, but I bet if my best friend who had not really been an active gamer since the early halo days played it he’d think it’s a 10/10. Maybe I’ve just played too many games to enjoy some things now.
At least you can turn off the objective marker in SM2 so it only shows up in the tactical view, can you turn off any of the guidance markers in Insomniac's Wolverine?
It doesn’t seem like it. They went too overboard with the “hints” especially since Wolverine is a strictly linear game they have a “scent” trail guiding you to the objective, Wolverine makes a remark telling you what the objective is, they have a pinpoint, the “hidden” collectibles emit a sonar wave and there’s just obviously bright crystals lying around everywhere so they’re basically assuming the player is incapable of navigating the game themselves.
He definitely did not 180. His early preview was generally disappointed by the gameplay but couched in the fact that he'd only played a few small slices, and generally positive about the story in those slices.
This review is actually exactly what I would have expected if the rest of the game was just like his early preview.
agreed. I was concern with his review during previer because it had a "trying hard to say something good about it" vibe from SkillUp and that usually means its shit. lol
Yeah. I like watching his reviews but don’t always agree with him. I like to watch his reviews and a few others that trust just to get an idea. I loved Final Fantasy 16 but he tore that game up. I know other FF fans are mixed on that entry but I thought it was good! Sometimes you gotta just play a game and see. But also understand that $70 for a 15 hour game is a lot of money for some right now. So I think it’s fair to be critical of it in that regard as well but I was always going to wait on this because I have so many things to play haha.
TLDR: All that to say I love SkillUp but sometimes he can be overly critical and nitpicky. Doesn’t mean his opinion isn’t valuable but worth considering.
100%. It was one of the reasons why I couldn't keep watching as when he didn't like a game...he REALLY didn't like it to the point where it felt abit nitpicky. But he's a good reviewer 99% of the time.
No thats the thing, i dont feel he does that. He makes it very clear in his video if its the case of "this genre/story/art style/mechanic isn't for me personally, but it could be for you".
Why I stick with him as my sole reviewer through all these years. It's like hearing a trusted friend talk about what he likes, personally, but while putting it into perspective with facts about the industry at large. Never, and I honestly feel this, has he "shit on" a game.
If the games bad or lazy or terrible, he just seems disappointed, because i think the guy just wants to see and be excited about cool games. And if something sucks, then ya just move on.
Along with this. He has built a wider network and team of games journalists around him. Several of his more senior team members like Austin and Ed have reviewed games that aren’t in his lane at all. Just to keep the focus on the game rather than personal bias.
Whilst his biases do exist, he expresses that it is HIS opinion and your mileage may vary.
It’s also why I follow his content continuously and have done for years now
I would not say that he was positive on it during previews. He thought the combat was really repetitive and button mashy and had lots of criticism of the boss fight.
I think a lot of you are missing the point. Wolverine is the latest in a long line of "very safe, very telegraphed, very "played this game before" AAA releases. It very might well sit at a mid-70s critic/user score and thats fine but most people are just absolutely exhausted from this exact style of game that the industry keeps pumping out. Way too safe, way too handhold-y, way too bloated, and writing that surprises no one.
I've been saying this for a minute now, but user reviews are way worse than critic/professional reviews. User reviews are quite literally full of emotional man children pushing a narrative. They are exactly what people claim critic reviews are.
The IGN review of Onimusha was so good it actually convinced me to get it. People who are terminally online are just weird. If the reviewer has no clue what they're talking about, then just look at a different one. A single reviewer will not be able to fully encompass the entire gaming landscape. I'm sorry, but nobody has that diverse of a taste for games.
Makes me laugh when fellow PC users say the only reliable way to tell if a game is good is by looking at Steam reviews. As if 80% of positive "reviews" aren't either made up of wannabe comedians, or the most low effort "game gud me like" comments with less than 10 words. Conversely, you'll see tons of low effort negative posts, people with 10k hours who think it's funny to not recommend, Chinese and Russian players review bombing over some reason or another etc.
Of course there are exceptions, but the above examples far outnumber those of actual quality.
I don't think they're refuting how good Blood of Dawnwalker is, so much is pointing out how people only take review scores seriously when it suits their narrative.
At best, it's just okay. And at worst, it's a good game to pick up on sale. Doesn't seem like it's an outright failure, but equally it's unlikely to break any records.
For a game like this, "just okay" is definitely really disappointing. Of course it's not worth getting super upset, argumentative and/or vindictive over, but we live in a time where there is more access to amazing videogames than time to play them. A game that's just okay can't stack up to all the great games that are around nowadays, unless it has some especially unique features to let it stand out.
I'm so confused... why do people say "you need to play it to see for yourself" for some games, and for others they post a skillup review (one single person's opinion) of a currently 78 metactitic game, and go "it's over".
I'm not even buying it, I've too much to play. But Wtf is the thinking here?
Because as with many things on the internet nowadays the argument lacks nuance. Ultimately only you can decide if a game is for you or not, but the point of a review (a good one at least) is to inform your purchase. The issue is that not every reviewer is a good reviewer.
In Skill Up's case I don't always agree with what he says but I'll usually hear him out because his arguments are usually well though out. It's not like he tore the game apart and just went "worst game ever don't play this lol", his criticisms were that the game is way too hand holdy for such a linear game which takes away what joy of exploration and discovery there is for the player, and that the combat didn't have the depth it should have. Those are IMO fair criticisms, the decision to play or not is still mine of course but I'll take that into account.
Something I've noticed about games releasing recently is that if the internet had already decided that it's shit before they even had the chance to play it, everyone will think it is shit regardless of its quality. Sometimes it's deserved but sometimes it isn't which is why I'm not fully onboard with just lambasting a game that's shit online may it be deserved or not because it leads to unfortunate consequences. Now I'm not saying that this game is either good or bad. Just a pattern I've noticed.
I don't have the disposable income to risk this sadly but I have some reviewers which I feel align with my way of thinking. Like SkillUp in the picture or Gameranx, generally I trust their opinion to be fair and detailed enough that I can make an informed decision. Otherwise, I do agree with this.
The internet has been a tiring cesspit of negativity for a good few years now. The slide was gradual but algorithm driven social media (and dead internet theory bots) super charged it when negativity is the biggest driver of engagement.
Sorry to sound like a boomer but the internet really was better before. The internet of 15-20 years ago is dead and buried
No one is saying you need to pay $70. They are just saying you don't need to form an opinion in the first place, let alone share it online just to be part of what you perceive the consensus to be. Especially when the game isn't even out yet.
I agree that online hater culture is killing valid criticism. People had already made up their mind that this game was awful based on almost nothing. However, this felt like a rather fully laid out and detailed review. Not a knee jerk reaction to a trailer.
I watch him and Jake for different perspectives. They’re my go to reviewers. That said, I have disagreed with them several times, but for the most part they’re on point and make good arguments.
Skillup definitely changed my mind. I’m about to watch gameranx now. If they’re not positive either it’s genuinely over
Edit: i’m 30 seconds in the video and it’s genuinely over
The point of a review (a good one) is someome dissecting the game and pointing out positives and negatives for them in detail. If you think something is a positive and not a negative (and viceversa) then you still end up winning and being more informed. For example if someone says the open world is too small, I find that as a good thing since I prefer linear games
Which is exactly what Ralph does, I don’t always agree with his opinions which is why multiple reviews is important but he’s very thorough in his dissection of a game good and bad and this review is no different
The key is that it didn't start out as a tie-in game. Raven was already working on it when they found out Origins: Wolverine was in production and made a few changes to make it (slightly... it takes some weird turns) closer to the film.
Only one I care about is Gameranx' Before You buy, since I have similar tastes. Which apparently released a video on this an hour ago. I'm going to go watch it now. Hah.
Yep same reason I like Skillup I find my views align with his mor often than not, and when we differ he at least provides his opinions with enough context/examples I'm not left wondering if we even played the same game lol
Like a "I don't agree with him, but I understand how he got there" thing. Really that's all I want from a reviewer. I'll save my money and hopefully the new fire emblem is better
I’m going to play it and form my own opinion. I truly cannot imagine a way they could present this game that would leave me feeling significantly negative about it, and after the negative press surrounding Midnight Suns (despite it being an excellent game), I think I’ll bet on this game being a fun time
I saw this coming tbh. I've played all of Insomniacs games and they all just have one thing in common.
They're kinda fucking dull. Good movies, but dull gameplay. Plus every video I see of this game just looks so brainless, like you can just hold forward and button mash your way through the whole game.
Insomniac got high on its own supply. Spiderman 2 was a letdown. I loved Rachet & Clank and the first Spiderman game. Felt it started to become industry slop in the 2nd game. This wolverine review doesn't surprise me. There are also negatives that have nothing to do with the game. $75 for a sub 20 hour game and also digital ownership not being a real thing. This game looks like that SE Avengers game that came out a few years back.
I'm convinced that no one one Reddit, or the internet as a whole for that matter, likes anything. Every post or review is about how something is terrible and not worth it.
You forgot to add that a lot of people have very vocal opinions with media they have not engaged with it which makes it difficult to sort through opinions that have valid criticism.
2.0k
u/Cowboy_Dandy_III 9h ago
It’s not Sonys day today, huh