Log in or sign up to comment
71 Comments
  • 71 results
  • 1
  • 2
Posted by dropabombonit

Great review. I have it on my rental list because it sounds like it's only worth playing for the story

Posted by Spiritof

This game seems like perfect Steam Sale fodder to me.

Edited by AngriGhandi

I'm more than willing to put up with some tired mechanics if the storytelling is taking some risks. I'm more conflicted about risking sixty dollars for the opportunity, though.

...Which definitely highlights the problem with creating this kind of game in the "$60, $15, or it's free" video game market.

Still, the fact that it was made at all bodes well for the continuing expansion of the breadth of the industry-- at the very least. So good on them!

Online
Edited by Kanuuna

I managed to pick up the game for PC for 33€. I haven't touched the multiplayer yet, but I did plow through the singleplayer in just a bit over six hours on Hard. The setting really sold the game to me back when I saw the first trailer and Dubai looks nice in the game, although some of the environments just don't look right (all the indoors are fairly wide, and there isn't too much attention to detail. Most of it just doesn't look very believable, but rather set-up).

Spec Ops's actual gameplay was probably it's weakest point for me: too much like Gears, and the sand that could've been ended up being little more than a substitute for exploding barrels The combat scenarios also a bit uninspired with no verticality speak of (which Uncharted 2 handles perfectly. I might be a bit biased there, though).

I won't comment too much on the story, but I'll say it was alright - It started out exciting, but things just escalated a bit too quickly. It was hard to care for much of the cast, because you were never quite explained your squad's background. Most of it is left to your imagination and should you lack it, you'll soon realise you're accompanied by your typical white-knight and wise-ass side kicks. Playable flashbacks (spoiler: which the game doesn't feature) could've given the characters more meaning. I will also say that I (personally) missed some of the eeriness hinted at in the game's debut trailer.

I might go for a second playthrough, but probably on an easier difficulty. The very end-game combat sequences were quite awful with enemies constantly throwing grenades at your feet, when you're stuck with a piece of sheet metal as your cover whilst being surrounded by an orchestra of foes.

Posted by Humanity

Sounds like Spec Ops is one big lantern run.

Posted by mars188

Beat the Game lastnight its ok nothing great- Good rent game not worth 60 bucks.

Posted by Undeadpool

Having not played through the entirety of the game, I really appreciate how out of it's way the game goes to make the beginning part feel SO much like a rote, HOOAH!, bro-fistbump-fest. It LITERALLY begins with a helicopter turret sequence and leads into your squadmates cavalierly joking while they kill people. It's one of the best misdirections I've ever seen in a game since the last quarter of Earthbound.

Posted by AhmadMetallic
@Metalhead980 said:

Personally I've played through the campaign three times. 

Are..you..serious? I mean, jesus. I'm currently in chapter 7 and while I'm pushing forward out of curiosity for the story, I'm literally burnt OUT on that shitty shallow gameplay and badly designed controls.. And you've actually beaten the game three times? All of those cover-based shootouts where NOTHING happens other than hiding and shooting spawning enemies, over and over and over for hours, you've done all of that three whole times? 
 
I honestly admire you. You are a stone cold motherfucker. 
Posted by bybeach

@Humanity said:

Sounds like Spec Ops is one big lantern run.

Now that.....I'm still getting this game though!!!!!

Posted by Alorithin

People complaining about sub standard gameplay are out of their minds. It plays like mass effect and uncharted but with less bullet sponging on both sides of the cover.

People are going to miss the subtlety of this game (graffiti changing with your actions, intelligence narration worth listening to, "situations" having more than 2 outcomes, stories coming from the environment rather than verbose dialogue) and bang on about shitty controls and how their choices are limited.

Posted by artgarcrunkle

@Alorithin: Both of those games had mediocre to bad gameplay.

Posted by tourgen

it sounds like the story might be worth playing thru at some point.

Posted by i8246i

@Alorithin said:

People complaining about sub standard gameplay are out of their minds. It plays like mass effect and uncharted but with less bullet sponging on both sides of the cover.

People are going to miss the subtlety of this game (graffiti changing with your actions, intelligence narration worth listening to, "situations" having more than 2 outcomes, stories coming from the environment rather than verbose dialogue) and bang on about shitty controls and how their choices are limited.

This is not a movie. This is not an art piece. This is not some thing you go to a cinema, or a gallery, or a museum to watch idly or to observe from a distance.

This is a game. You are meant to interact with it. And the main purpose of this thing is how well you can interact with this thing, and how good it feels to you to interact with it...

If a game has bad gameplay, it deserves a low score on a game reviewing website, and it does not deserve to have people coming in droves to put lots of money towards it.

And I think I'll trust the words of someone who's been playing and reviewing games as a career for most of his life, and who has even lost a good playing job because he stuck to his guns instead of bowing to the call of greed. I think I can call this person more sane than someone who believes that we should all drop $60 (or more) towards a product that does not deliver what it advertises.

Posted by Alorithin

@artgarcrunkle

Yet both ran the 9-10/10 gauntlet because people were willing to overlook it for the more interesting parts of the game.

@i8246i said:

This is not a movie. This is not an art piece. This is not some thing you go to a cinema, or a gallery, or a museum to watch idly or to observe from a distance.

This is a game. You are meant to interact with it. And the main purpose of this thing is how well you can interact with this thing, and how good it feels to you to interact with it...

If a game has bad gameplay, it deserves a low score on a game reviewing website, and it does not deserve to have people coming in droves to put lots of money towards it.

And I think I'll trust the words of someone who's been playing and reviewing games as a career for most of his life, and who has even lost a good playing job because he stuck to his guns instead of bowing to the call of greed. I think I can call this person more sane than someone who believes that we should all drop $60 (or more) towards a product that does not deliver what it advertises.

Right, because journey had fantastic gameplay and we should expect no less.

Gerstmann himself downplays his martyrdom. Don't try to put him on a pedestal when he gives games like syndicate an outlier 5 stars because he was willing to overlook so much.

People can cry bad gameplay all they want. But when, for example, it takes 2 weeks and a news story from naughty dog for people to start complaining about the differences between uncharted 3's scheme and 2s, all the 5 star and tens are already up because people are blinded by Naughty Dogs usual outstanding art direction and scripted sequences.

And trust on the internet is an outdated concept. Learn to think for yourself.

Posted by Napalm

@i8246i said:

This is not a movie. This is not an art piece. This is not some thing you go to a cinema, or a gallery, or a museum to watch idly or to observe from a distance.

This is a game. You are meant to interact with it. And the main purpose of this thing is how well you can interact with this thing, and how good it feels to you to interact with it...

...and story is a part of interacting, you dolt.

Posted by mrpandaman

@Alorithin said:

People complaining about sub standard gameplay are out of their minds. It plays like mass effect and uncharted but with less bullet sponging on both sides of the cover.

People are going to miss the subtlety of this game (graffiti changing with your actions, intelligence narration worth listening to, "situations" having more than 2 outcomes, stories coming from the environment rather than verbose dialogue) and bang on about shitty controls and how their choices are limited.

Well... Mass Effect does have a lot more to do than just stick in cover and shoot.. You have your tech powers and biotic powers without those its just a generic third person shooter with slight rpg elements. Uncharted adds the verticality, as someone else has said, and the climbing aspect. I just wanted to say that.

Also keep in mind that this may have been a four-star game had multi-player not existed and the focus was just on single-player campaign.

Posted by Ujio

Expecting this from GameFly in a couple of days. It looks OK, not $60 worth, but then that's why I have GF =)

Posted by chilipeppersman

Just finished it, its a very dark and depressing game. The ending isnt very satisfying imho and the overall game was subpar, with intermittent spikes of diffuculty. Good review jeff.

Posted by Elyk247

Great story stuff from the demo, it has some personality. Cool that not all military shooters, have to be of the same mold.

Posted by squidster_99

THis game was amazing and extremely underrated in my opinion

Edited by Ropn

Playing this game after everything that's happened in the middle east recently gives it a lot more weight. This isn't just shock for the sake of shock, it shares parallels with reality.

Also, giving a game like this 3 stars when COD gets 4 stars for doing nothing interesting is why we as gamers can't have nice things. Yes, review scores matter in the grand scheme of who buys what in general.