There's the info from the article. Sounds amazing and exactly what I'd want from a sequel, as someone who didn't like the idea of an LBP 2 I can honestly say this is now one of my most hyped games.
So I was reading an article on Killzone earlier today and the first comment spoiled the game...to those who have beaten it...if I send you a pm can you confirm or deny whether or not what I saw is indeed a real spoiler? I'm pretty sure it is and if so then that's really upsetting as I'm not sure how much I'll be able to enjoy this game, I'm really really excited for Heavy Rain and hope to God that it was someone just spreading around fake spoilers...probably not though :(
"This. After beating the game last night...yes the reviews are wrong and no it's not a matter of "well it's their opinion". (Their cons are flat out wrong.) As has been stated the enemies CAN NOT hit you from an unlimited range. "
So you're accusing IGN of doctoring the footage they showed that proves that it does happen? "
As has been stated before, you must be up close to an enemy (about the same range as you need to be to initiate an attack) to be targeted for attack. From then you can try "running away" before you're attacked but having been locked on to already you do have a chance to still be hit. However, I've found that if you do run away like they did in the video that you have a lesser chace to actually be harmed. However they made it sound and made it appear that you could have never even approached the enemy in the first place and still be hit which IS false.
" That thing about monsters hitting you when you're not close to them is true. IGN's video shows it clear as day. "
Having finished the entire game, I can confidently say it is not true. Enemy attacks have limited range, and that range is quite logical. However once they "lock" onto you and begin an attack, you can't move back to a distance and doge the hit. You can call that poor design, but it is certainly not buggy. "
This.
After beating the game last night...yes the reviews are wrong and no it's not a matter of "well it's their opinion". (Their cons are flat out wrong.) As has been stated the enemies CAN NOT hit you from an unlimited range. You must be standing up close to the enemy to be able to attack them or for them to lock on to you. The enemies with ranged attacks can attack from a little bit farther but it's not nearly to the extent of what the reviews said. It feels fair.
The complaint about bad voice acting is almost hilarious. Lets be honest the voice acting for JRPG's this gen has been horrid and even in the past it has. Voice acting for WKC isn't the greatest but it gets the job done and really isn't that bad. There are a few characters that aren't great but for the most part the main cast which is really the only characters you hear talk consistently throughout the game are all done well.
Then there's this whole thing with the combat being shallow which I really really don't understand...and this is where I honestly feel like they didn't play a whole lot of this game or didn't even try looking into the combat mechanics. The call the combat shallow is doing the game an extreme injustice. Aside from the skill trees allowing you to assign different classes for each of your characters you'll learn dozens of abilities that you can use in combat. It's making the combos that's so great about the combat though. You can string together any skills or magic attacks that you want into 2 to sometimes 6 attack combos. Your attacks are completely customizable as is your bar at the bottom. Someone I know for example has light attacks on one bar, magic on the second and combos on the third. Perhaps they just didn't even look at some of the things you can do but the combat in no way is shallow. There's lots to do and customize with everyone of your party members and I found it to be more than enjoyable.
Though honestly my biggest complaint is something that goes oddly enough hand in hand with the early MAG reviews. If the game has an online portion that's a pretty integral part of the game (the online in WKC some would argue is more important than the single player even) then you need to play it more than just a few quests or even more than an hour or two. The reviews either went up on Feb. 1st or early in the day on the 2nd. The online servers DID NOT go up until the 2nd which means if the reviewers who posted the early reviews (and these seemed to be the most negative) did play the online then they could have only played maybe a quest or two at a press event or very early in the morning on the 2nd. No matter what the case is this is just the same as the reviewers who reviewed MAG from just that one press event. I'm sorry but I'm very picky about people playing enough of a game to be able to have a good opinion on it if they're going to write a review. If you're going to review a game with a key portion of it being Online then I expect you to play the same amount online as you did playing in the single player. I spent 27 hours beating the single player of WKC on my first playthrough. I will write up a review for my website when I spend either 27 hours online or when I've completed all 50 online quests that we've started out with.
I understand that yes a review is someone's opinion...but in this case there are too many things that are flat out wrong to even be considered a good review. I have issues with this game too and no it's not the greatest game ever, but I've seen way too many people who were on the fence decide to not get this game because of gamespots review. I think if you like Level 5 games. You'll love this. The story starts out rather cliche but in the end really comes into it's own and has me really excited for the sequel to be honest. But whatever, the fact that they couldn't have spent much time playing a key portion of the game ruins any chances of me believing most of those reviews.
Log in to comment