The Game That Should Have Been Terrible

  • 186 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
#151 Posted by gesi1223 (218 posts) -

@GrantHeaslip said:

@druv said:

@GrantHeaslip said:

Yeah, this is another example of Patrick stating his opinion as fact. Yes, I know Metacritic has its issues, but about 550 games (minus multiform duplicates) scored better than ZombiU last year (it’s sitting at 77). Other games within 1-2 points include The Darkness II, Shank 2, Soulcalibur V, Nintendo Land, New Super Mario Bros. 2, Skylanders Giants, Transformers: Fall of Cybertron and Twisted “Dog Shit” Metal.

If Patrick wants to say it was one of his best experiences of the year, that’s great, but calling a game sitting at 77 “one of 2012's best experiences” betrays a weird lack of distinction between personal opinion and critical consensus.

There is no "fact" in regards to measuring experiences. If you want a site that either only reports other people's opinions ("which rated so-and-so on Metacritic" or "which game site x called one of the best experiences of the year") or hedges by constantly writing "according to me" you are certainly free to do so. I'm happy that GiantBomb is not one of those sites, but rather a site where the staff has opinions and writes their reviews and articles based on that. If you don't like a particular staff member's opinions, you are free to not read it. If that staff member brings the entire site down in quality, you are free not to visit or subscribe.

Sure, but there is objective truth regarding how a game was received, and words and phrases do have implied meanings. Saying something in an authoritative voice communicates to the reader a different message than “according to me.”

I realize it looks like I’m splitting hairs at this point, but I very genuinely see a broad, meaningful distinction here.

The “if you don’t like it, leave” stuff is tiresome. I do like the site, I just don’t like the way they sometimes express their opinions in an exclusive way, especially since it’s been happening more lately (and it’s by no means just Patrick). If I didn’t think the site was great (and I didn’t think these problems were addressable), I wouldn’t be bothering to bring up complaints.

If you disagree with Patrick so often, why do you continue to take his opinions seriously any more? It's like you're trying too hard to make sure everyone knows GiantBomb does not make your opinions for you.

#152 Edited by 00 (116 posts) -

@MEATBALL said:

I really can't stand this headline. It bugs me every time I load up the homepage.

I concur.

I also dislike this attitude that Patrick seems to have where a game like this should be bad, based on its name alone. Or other games being “better than it had any right to be”.

Better than it had any right to be‽ That’s just insulting to the entire team of people that worked on the game.

Perhaps what he means to say is something along the lines of “I had low expectations for this game, and was pleasantly surprised after giving it a chance” but the way he expresses that comes across as immature and unprofessional.

And for what it’s worth, I’m sick of this anti-Patrick sentiment that gets posted to the comments of every piece of content he in involved with. You may not agree with his opinions, but I think he has helped diversify the type of content we’re seeing on the site, and hopefully we will see even more of that if he ever builds that PC he’s been talking about.

#153 Posted by GrantHeaslip (1539 posts) -

@gesi1223 said:

If you disagree with Patrick so often, why do you continue to take his opinions seriously any more? It's like you're trying too hard to make sure everyone knows GiantBomb does not make your opinions for you.

That’s not the reason at all. I know I took it a bit far yesterday, and it’s because hyperbole drives me nuts.

I’m fairly invested in this site — I’ve been following some of these guys since the early GameSpot days — and I think they’ve been setting bad examples for the community with respect to criticism lately (not really talking about this article). I think, on some level, you can draw a line between the staff’s often-hyperbolic opinions and the way the community carries itself. Should it really be a surprise that community members thought shitting on DmC and anyone who likes it was kosher when the staff present similarly antagonistic opinions so regularly? There’s stuff said on the Bombcast and live shows that, if transcribed and posted to these forums, would be rightfully torn apart for being mean-spirited, closed-minded and badly supported.

I’ve got no problem disagreeing with someone’s opinion, but they’ve got to present it in an open-minded and nuanced way. That means not writing off genres, series, and critically-lauded games as “boring” or “shitty” because they’re not up your alley. That’s what this is really about, not any one example.

#154 Edited by OllyOxenFree (4970 posts) -

@Sooty said:

@MEATBALL said:

I really can't stand this headline. It bugs me every time I load up the homepage. Also, ZombiU is super great.

Yeah I don't like it either, it seems a tad insulting.

Obviously not intended but that's just how it reads.

If I was the developer and read the article title then I would have felt pretty insulted.

#155 Posted by Breadfan (6589 posts) -
#156 Posted by MindChamber (345 posts) -

You guys need to leave Paddy alone, hes trying...

#157 Posted by prestonhedges (1965 posts) -

@druv said:

@GrantHeaslip said:

Yeah, this is another example of Patrick stating his opinion as fact. Yes, I know Metacritic has its issues, but about 550 games (minus multiform duplicates) scored better than ZombiU last year (it’s sitting at 77). Other games within 1-2 points include The Darkness II, Shank 2, Soulcalibur V, Nintendo Land, New Super Mario Bros. 2, Skylanders Giants, Transformers: Fall of Cybertron and Twisted “Dog Shit” Metal.

If Patrick wants to say it was one of his best experiences of the year, that’s great, but calling a game sitting at 77 “one of 2012's best experiences” betrays a weird lack of distinction between personal opinion and critical consensus.

There is no "fact" in regards to measuring experiences.

Yes, there is. Some things are objectively bad. Some things are objectively good. Deal with it.

#158 Posted by gesi1223 (218 posts) -

@GrantHeaslip said:

@gesi1223 said:

If you disagree with Patrick so often, why do you continue to take his opinions seriously any more? It's like you're trying too hard to make sure everyone knows GiantBomb does not make your opinions for you.

That’s not the reason at all. I know I took it a bit far yesterday, and it’s because hyperbole drives me nuts.

I’m fairly invested in this site — I’ve been following some of these guys since the early GameSpot days — and I think they’ve been setting bad examples for the community with respect to criticism lately (not really talking about this article). I think, on some level, you can draw a line between the staff’s often-hyperbolic opinions and the way the community carries itself. Should it really be a surprise that community members thought shitting on DmC and anyone who likes it was kosher when the staff present similarly antagonistic opinions so regularly? There’s stuff said on the Bombcast and live shows that, if transcribed and posted to these forums, would be rightfully torn apart for being mean-spirited, closed-minded and badly supported.

I’ve got no problem disagreeing with someone’s opinion, but they’ve got to present it in an open-minded and nuanced way. That means not writing off genres, series, and critically-lauded games as “boring” or “shitty” because they’re not up your alley. That’s what this is really about, not any one example.

I understand and I agree that it would be nicer if they were less biased when it comes to games they do not much care for. However I don't feel it has been much different lately, and I am not expecting the editors to change any time soon. I am not letting it spoil my enjoyment of this site.

#159 Edited by GrantHeaslip (1539 posts) -

@gesi1223 said:

@GrantHeaslip said:

@gesi1223 said:

If you disagree with Patrick so often, why do you continue to take his opinions seriously any more? It's like you're trying too hard to make sure everyone knows GiantBomb does not make your opinions for you.

That’s not the reason at all. I know I took it a bit far yesterday, and it’s because hyperbole drives me nuts.

I’m fairly invested in this site — I’ve been following some of these guys since the early GameSpot days — and I think they’ve been setting bad examples for the community with respect to criticism lately (not really talking about this article). I think, on some level, you can draw a line between the staff’s often-hyperbolic opinions and the way the community carries itself. Should it really be a surprise that community members thought shitting on DmC and anyone who likes it was kosher when the staff present similarly antagonistic opinions so regularly? There’s stuff said on the Bombcast and live shows that, if transcribed and posted to these forums, would be rightfully torn apart for being mean-spirited, closed-minded and badly supported.

I’ve got no problem disagreeing with someone’s opinion, but they’ve got to present it in an open-minded and nuanced way. That means not writing off genres, series, and critically-lauded games as “boring” or “shitty” because they’re not up your alley. That’s what this is really about, not any one example.

I understand and I agree that it would be nicer if they were less biased when it comes to games they do not much care for. However I don't feel it has been much different lately, and I am not expecting the editors to change any time soon. I am not letting it spoil my enjoyment of this site.

For what it’s worth, I’m slowly making my way through the podcast archive (I’m at June 2009), and I notice the tone was way less negative than it is now. I can’t speak to when it changed, but I think it has. Maybe it’s just end-of-cycle fatigue, maybe it’s cynicism about the way the industry’s changed, maybe it’s just a hardening of the soul, but the tone has gotten generally shittier and less enthusiastic. Jeff would always occasionally dump on a well-liked game, but in a way that was half-joking. These days, the dumping tends to have a nasty and/or dismissive edge that doesn’t sit well with me, and it’s unfortunately usually Patrick who initiates and escalates it (though, again, it’s not just him).

It doesn’t spoil my enjoyment of the site, I just don’t like it, and would rather put it out there than (mildly) resent it.

#160 Posted by jasondesante (602 posts) -

zombi was the original name for dawn of the dead if im not mistaken, so i donno how it would be "influenced" because i'm pretty sure its a film to game adaptation

#161 Posted by oasisbeyond (213 posts) -

Waits for ZombiU2 lmao. Terrible name. GO BONO!

#162 Posted by TwoArmed (110 posts) -

I find it somewhat amusing that this was posted to the Zombi forum and not the ZombiU one.

#163 Posted by Agraba (16 posts) -

Animations for some reason always seem to land on the side line when the game is not developed by a Japanese company. I remember playing bouncer and although it's not a good game it was the first game I remember where if a character is running and turn the character within the game would not only turn but also lean into that direction much like a real human would. I loved that detail, even if small it looked really good. And still to this very day that's not a common thing (I'm not saying no one does it, just that it's uncommon).

#164 Posted by AssInAss (2549 posts) -

When I get a Wii U, I will get this game just because of this article. That bit about the opening section, the nursery, and how it's like Dark Souls has me very intrigued.

#165 Posted by gel (16 posts) -

At least I know I can totally disagree with whatever Patrick writes for sure now. ZombiU was not very good. Nice ideas, mediocre execution at best. Keep Patrick on news, please.

#166 Edited by leebmx (2227 posts) -

@GrantHeaslip said:

@TheSouthernDandy said:

99% percent of the people reading this are well aware this is Patricks opinion and he's not saying it is objectively one of the best experiences of the year. I guess you're the 1% who needs it laid out in writing for him.

We do, but I doubt anywhere close to a majority of the readers of this article know that.

@patrickklepek said:

As an opinion-based website, it should be a given that we aren't going to put "in our opinion" in front of everything.

Totally true, and I’d never ask for that, but the way that was phrased was particularly definitive, and it’s a game that many more regard as fairly average. I know there’s no good way to distinguish between news and opinion articles right now, but this article mostly read as a straight feature piece, not one with a strong opinionated voice. Maybe I’m expecting a level of distinction between reporting and opinion that’s antithetical to the way GB operates, but given the shitstorm around your past couple of pieces, I’m clearly not the only one.

Other GB staff members state opinions all the time, and people understand that — I think it might be worth thinking about what it is about the way you state yours that bugs people so much more. Nobody has it out for you on principle (well, most don’t anyway) — we just find your propensity to act as there’s a broad consensus around your often-minority opinions grating.

In case it’s not clear, I think you’re fine. You largely know your stuff when it comes to the games industry (way more than I’ll ever know!) and I respect the way you’re reporting on stuff you’re personally interested in rather than trying to write what you think people want. The most frustrating part is that the stuff you do that bugs me (and most other reasonable but critical community members) could be curbed fairly easily if you just approached things with a little more empathy (in the looking at things from others’ perspectives sense) and humility. Essentially, it’s the difference between saying “that game fucking sucked” and “I didn’t like that game.” The first thing comes off like talk radio shock trolling, and the second comes off like an adult who respects others’ opinions.

Also, thanks for replying!

Edit: Also, for what it’s worth, thanks for changing the wording. At least, I hope you did and I’m not just losing my mind.

Mate, that's not true. Think about the way Ryan expresses his opinons on things - it is generally way more offensive and forceful than Partick ever is.

Also you talk about Patrick giving his opinon as if it were fact and then go on to say 'The most frustrating part is that the stuff you do that bugs me (and most other reasonable but critical community members) could be curbed fairly easily if you just approached things with a little more empathy (in the looking at things from others’ perspectives sense) and humility.

Talk about speaking for everyone. Most people think Patrick is just fine, they might not agree with everything but have no problem generally. Don't try and make it sound like you are part of some moral, outraged majority because you are not.

Did you ever think that the reason Patrick gets all this stick is because he expresses himself in writing whereas the rest of the group really give their viewpoints verbally? As he is providing most of the written opinon and news on this site (although now Alex has pitched in thankfully) his viewpoint naturally stands out more. However I think you are completely wrong about the way he expresses himself, I would say Jeff and Ryan have no problem stating their views as fact and saying 'fuck you' to anyone who doesn't agree. But somehow Patrick is the worse. Again.

EDIT: Having read through some of your later posts I can see you making the same point as me in the last paragraph. If everyone was writting pieces I think it would ease the pressure on Patrick and add some persepctive both to his writing and for the continual snipers in the comments.

Also I did the same thing as you and listened to all the podcasts from the beggining through to the present and I would agree with you that the tone has definitely changed to be more cynical about things generally.

I don't know whether that is good or bad, but it has certainly happened. I suppose I always want them to give their true views on games so if they are feeling cynical then I want to hear it. I would agree with you though that this has lead to a few instances recently where I haven't really cared for the tone when discussing certain games.

I suppose working in games as a job some of the magic and excitement is going to wear of, along with the fact that at the start of Giant Bomb I expect they were very enthusiastic about starting their own business and now they are safely back under the corporate umbrella.

On the other hand last year was a slightly lacklustre one, especially as far as AAA games go and I imagine it can be hard to keep up enthusiasm for an industry that can be incredibly shallow, tacky and uninventive at its worst.

The point is that there is a lot more going here than anything that can be laid at Patrick's door/pen/opinions and I wish some of the knuckleheads in the comments would realise that.

#167 Posted by Jonny_Anonymous (918 posts) -

Zombi or ZombiU for Spookin With Scoops?

#168 Posted by GrantHeaslip (1539 posts) -

@leebmx said:

Mate, that's not true. Think about the way Ryan expresses his opinons on things - it is generally way more offensive and forceful than Partick ever is.

Also you talk about Patrick giving his opinon as if it were fact and then go on to say 'The most frustrating part is that the stuff you do that bugs me (and most other reasonable but critical community members) could be curbed fairly easily if you just approached things with a little more empathy (in the looking at things from others’ perspectives sense) and humility.

Talk about speaking for everyone. Most people think Patrick is just fine, they might not agree with everything but have no problem generally. Don't try and make it sound like you are part of some moral, outraged majority because you are not.

Did you ever think that the reason Patrick gets all this stick is because he expresses himself in writing whereas the rest of the group really give their viewpoints verbally? As he is providing most of the written opinon and news on this site (although now Alex has pitched in thankfully) his viewpoint naturally stands out more. However I think you are completely wrong about the way he expresses himself, I would say Jeff and Ryan have no problem stating their views as fact and saying 'fuck you' to anyone who doesn't agree. But somehow Patrick is the worse. Again.

EDIT: Having read through some of your later posts I can see you making the same point as me in the last paragraph. If everyone was writting pieces I think it would ease the pressure on Patrick and add some persepctive both to his writing and for the continual snipers in the comments.

Also I did the same thing as you and listened to all the podcasts from the beggining through to the present and I would agree with you that the tone has definitely changed to be more cynical about things generally.

I don't know whether that is good or bad, but it has certainly happened. I suppose I always want them to give their true views on games so if they are feeling cynical then I want to hear it. I would agree with you though that this has lead to a few instances recently where I haven't really cared for the tone when discussing certain games.

I suppose working in games as a job some of the magic and excitement is going to wear of, along with the fact that at the start of Giant Bomb I expect they were very enthusiastic about starting their own business and now they are safely back under the corporate umbrella.

On the other hand last year was a slightly lacklustre one, especially as far as AAA games go and I imagine it can be hard to keep up enthusiasm for an industry that can be incredibly shallow, tacky and uninventive at its worst.

The point is that there is a lot more going here than anything that can be laid at Patrick's door/pen/opinions and I wish some of the knuckleheads in the comments would realise that.

By “and most other reasonable but critical community members,” I more specifically meant “and most other reasonable but critical [of you] community members.” I meant critical in the disapproving sense, not critical in the analytical sense — I was only talking about the small subset that are critical of Patrick, not some silent majority. I remember rewriting that sentence to try to communicate that, but I screwed up because I can see how you read it that way.

It’s definitely not just Patrick, and I think there is a contingent that’s just looking to play “gotcha” with him because they resent his writing, but I still think he’s the worst offender when it comes to the aforementioned tone issue. It’s hard to express, but when Ryan or Jeff (not so much Brad) are negative, it’s usually got more of an “this is all in good fun” tone (see NiGHTS or Red Dead). I have a hard time feeling too sorry for Patrick (or the staff at large) when he invites this stuff (and by “this”, I mean criticism, not personal attacks) by constantly going overboard on opinions for no good reason. Hell, the title of this article is an example of that — saying a game “should have been terrible” is kind of shitty.

I said in another post that a staff culture of hyperbole (both negative and positive) sets a terrible example for the community, and that’s really at the heart of my problem. If you’re a public personality who regularly takes opinions too far — and goes out of your way to shit on well-regarded games you personally didn’t like — you probably shouldn’t act too shocked or disappointed by what it reaps, especially when a large contingent of your audience are impressionable teenagers.

Thanks for taking the time to reply. I did go a bit overboard with the posts you quoted, and it was totally fair game to call me on it.

#169 Posted by gizmo88 (96 posts) -

I wonder how well this would of reviewed if Patrick was familiar with DayZ.

#170 Posted by Zaelers (7 posts) -

@GrantHeaslip said:

By “and most other reasonable but critical community members,” I more specifically meant “and most other reasonable but critical [of you] community members.” I meant critical in the disapproving sense, not critical in the analytical sense — I was only talking about the small subset that are critical of Patrick, not some silent majority. I remember rewriting that sentence to try to communicate that, but I screwed up because I can see how you read it that way.

It’s definitely not just Patrick, and I think there is a contingent that’s just looking to play “gotcha” with him because they resent his writing, but I still think he’s the worst offender when it comes to the aforementioned tone issue. It’s hard to express, but when Ryan or Jeff (not so much Brad) are negative, it’s usually got more of an “this is all in good fun” tone (see NiGHTS or Red Dead). I have a hard time feeling too sorry for Patrick (or the staff at large) when he invites this stuff (and by “this”, I mean criticism, not personal attacks) by constantly going overboard on opinions for no good reason. Hell, the title of this article is an example of that — saying a game “should have been terrible” is kind of shitty.

I said in another post that a staff culture of hyperbole (both negative and positive) sets a terrible example for the community, and that’s really at the heart of my problem. If you’re a public personality who regularly takes opinions too far — and goes out of your way to shit on well-regarded games you personally didn’t like — you probably shouldn’t act too shocked or disappointed by what it reaps, especially when a large contingent of your audience are impressionable teenagers.

Thanks for taking the time to reply. I did go a bit overboard with the posts you quoted, and it was totally fair game to call me on it.

You can't really expect to go to any news or review site thinking that what you're about to read is absolute fact. I've been following this site in one way or another since the beginning, and their objectiveness and strong opinions on things is what keeps me coming back. Do I agree with everything they say ALL the time? Of course not. Do I value their opinions anyway, and try to see why they think that way, or what I'm not getting that they are or vice versa? All the time. Do I let it get to me on a personal level? Never.

Quite frankly, I'm tired of seeing passive aggressive statements like yours. No matter how much prose or fluff, or however good you think your argument is, will change how anything works on this site. This website was created for the purpose of letting the reviewers/staff members voice their opinions openly without having to be chastised because someone doesn't agree with them (ie; you and every other person trying to burn him at the stake).

Instead of trying to jam your inane perspective on how the site should work down his and others throats, take a moment to realize what this site is. It's an opinion site, where the opinion of the writers is to be shown. Is there still factual coverage/reviews/articles? Yes, in droves. However tired you may be of the "don't like it, get out" statements, it certainly does apply. You aren't doing anything but creating a negative atmosphere in these articles when you bring this up, and a lot of people (like me) would much prefer you say nothing if this is how you're going to respond when someone has a differing opinion than your own.

Assuming that Patrick is trying to push his personal agenda on us is completely insane. Anytime any one of them posts an article like this, it is inviting discussion of the topic or topics that are similar to it. In NO way is anyone trying to say "agree with me or you're wrong" (much like yourself, I should add). I feel you are certainly more than welcome to disagree with whatever he said, but a simple "I didn't like the game as much for 'x' and 'y', and a lot of others didn't either" would more than suffice, and invite others to implore you to elaborate in a manner that doesn't come off as being a jerk for the sake of being a jerk.

TL;DR - Quit trying. I suggest you start to realize what type of site this is, or move on to Metacritic where people like you can safely state all the "facts" they want about whatever game happens to insult their superior taste and intellect. Also, you tend to contradict yourself a lot or go back and forth on your opinions. Pick something and stick to it, for crying out loud. But whatever you do, stop trying to spread this bile, it's just sickening. If you have a problem with anyone, send them messages on their pages, or start emailing them... literally anything else than what it is you're doing. And you accuse him of going overboard with his opinions... sheesh...

Good day, sir.

#171 Posted by GrantHeaslip (1539 posts) -

@Zaelers said:

@GrantHeaslip said:

By “and most other reasonable but critical community members,” I more specifically meant “and most other reasonable but critical [of you] community members.” I meant critical in the disapproving sense, not critical in the analytical sense — I was only talking about the small subset that are critical of Patrick, not some silent majority. I remember rewriting that sentence to try to communicate that, but I screwed up because I can see how you read it that way.

It’s definitely not just Patrick, and I think there is a contingent that’s just looking to play “gotcha” with him because they resent his writing, but I still think he’s the worst offender when it comes to the aforementioned tone issue. It’s hard to express, but when Ryan or Jeff (not so much Brad) are negative, it’s usually got more of an “this is all in good fun” tone (see NiGHTS or Red Dead). I have a hard time feeling too sorry for Patrick (or the staff at large) when he invites this stuff (and by “this”, I mean criticism, not personal attacks) by constantly going overboard on opinions for no good reason. Hell, the title of this article is an example of that — saying a game “should have been terrible” is kind of shitty.

I said in another post that a staff culture of hyperbole (both negative and positive) sets a terrible example for the community, and that’s really at the heart of my problem. If you’re a public personality who regularly takes opinions too far — and goes out of your way to shit on well-regarded games you personally didn’t like — you probably shouldn’t act too shocked or disappointed by what it reaps, especially when a large contingent of your audience are impressionable teenagers.

Thanks for taking the time to reply. I did go a bit overboard with the posts you quoted, and it was totally fair game to call me on it.

You can't really expect to go to any news or review site thinking that what you're about to read is absolute fact. I've been following this site in one way or another since the beginning, and their objectiveness and strong opinions on things is what keeps me coming back. Do I agree with everything they say ALL the time? Of course not. Do I value their opinions anyway, and try to see why they think that way, or what I'm not getting that they are or vice versa? All the time. Do I let it get to me on a personal level? Never.

Quite frankly, I'm tired of seeing passive aggressive statements like yours. No matter how much prose or fluff, or however good you think your argument is, will change how anything works on this site. This website was created for the purpose of letting the reviewers/staff members voice their opinions openly without having to be chastised because someone doesn't agree with them (ie; you and every other person trying to burn him at the stake).

Instead of trying to jam your inane perspective on how the site should work down his and others throats, take a moment to realize what this site is. It's an opinion site, where the opinion of the writers is to be shown. Is there still factual coverage/reviews/articles? Yes, in droves. However tired you may be of the "don't like it, get out" statements, it certainly does apply. You aren't doing anything but creating a negative atmosphere in these articles when you bring this up, and a lot of people (like me) would much prefer you say nothing if this is how you're going to respond when someone has a differing opinion than your own.

Assuming that Patrick is trying to push his personal agenda on us is completely insane. Anytime any one of them posts an article like this, it is inviting discussion of the topic or topics that are similar to it. In NO way is anyone trying to say "agree with me or you're wrong" (much like yourself, I should add). I feel you are certainly more than welcome to disagree with whatever he said, but a simple "I didn't like the game as much for 'x' and 'y', and a lot of others didn't either" would more than suffice, and invite others to implore you to elaborate in a manner that doesn't come off as being a jerk for the sake of being a jerk.

TL;DR - Quit trying. I suggest you start to realize what type of site this is, or move on to Metacritic where people like you can safely state all the "facts" they want about whatever game happens to insult their superior taste and intellect. Also, you tend to contradict yourself a lot or go back and forth on your opinions. Pick something and stick to it, for crying out loud. But whatever you do, stop trying to spread this bile, it's just sickening. If you have a problem with anyone, send them messages on their pages, or start emailing them... literally anything else than what it is you're doing. And you accuse him of going overboard with his opinions... sheesh...

Good day, sir.

While some of the emotions and motivations you’re attributing to me are straight-up wrong (“burn him at the stake”? Metacritic worship? “Superior taste and intellect?”), I get it, you’ve made your point, and I’ve made mine.

(If you want to reply, please send me a PM, I don’t want to keep filling up the comment section with something that I’ve managed to entirely divorce from the actual topic!)

#172 Posted by PandaBear (1310 posts) -

@DarkbeatDK said:

Proper games always focus on animation priority.

I think it's part of the reason why I generally prefer Japanese games.

Except for truly great Japanese games like Bayonetta that let you cancel attacks to start another which screws the animation in favour of being playable.

#173 Posted by golguin (3849 posts) -

@Jonny_Anonymous said:

Zombi or ZombiU for Spookin With Scoops?

Dark Souls. There is no tension like Dark Souls tension.

#174 Posted by lord_python (96 posts) -

"The Game That Should Have Been Terrible". No game should be terrible!

#175 Posted by Jared (552 posts) -

Great article Patrick. ZombiU has easily been one of my favorite games of the past few years. The game truly shows off the potential of the Wii U.

#176 Posted by Pierre42 (82 posts) -

@PandaBear:

Animation priority like ZombiU/Monster hunter in games tends to add an element of realism/risk reward to it. It takes effort and energy to attack so you need to make every hit count. You run around the foe, positioning yourself waiting for a safe moment to strike because you know you can't swing your weapon a million times a minute without consequence. Even in monster hunter the weapon that does let you do that (Dual blades) lodges you in place while you slice and locks you into a 'frenzied' flurry of attacks as if you've lost control in the heat of battle which is a good theme for the dual blades.

Bayonetta is a far different game not adhering to any kind of realistic combat and so there's no real need for it plus she needs to be capable of wiping out massive groups of foes with ease and evasion so added length to attacks with vulnerability wouldn't be efficient.

I guess Animation priority works in games with small groups of people or really big encounters and it makes them really meaningful fights.

Whereas in games with numerous foes that need to get killed quickly and en masse is where Bayonetta-style rapid cancelling every attack is viable.

I've not played Bayonetta but I'm going to hazard a guess it's combat plays similar to Devil May Cry's combat which I enjoyed fine, its just a very different pleasure to animation priority combat but both are excellent styles of combat if implicated well, it's just Animation priority makes more sense in realistic settings like ZombiU, where you play basically civilians untrained and unused to conflict.

#177 Posted by Gaston (31 posts) -

Got a Wii U and I agree. Nicely done to put this on peoples agenda.

#178 Posted by Richardpie (15 posts) -

I'm not really sure after having played through ZombieU if I can appreciate it on the level that Patrick has seemed too. I LOVED Dark Souls, I like horror and I was also intruiged by what the game did to use the WiiU controller.



The game does a lot right but the execution of some of it's concepts falls for me and the comparison to Dark Souls aside from the death system is not especially justified here. I don't know, even if this is only my thoughts, I still feel that the end product was decisive if anything

#179 Posted by PandaBear (1310 posts) -

@Pierre42 said:

@PandaBear:

Animation priority like ZombiU/Monster hunter in games tends to add an element of realism/risk reward to it. It takes effort and energy to attack so you need to make every hit count. You run around the foe, positioning yourself waiting for a safe moment to strike because you know you can't swing your weapon a million times a minute without consequence. Even in monster hunter the weapon that does let you do that (Dual blades) lodges you in place while you slice and locks you into a 'frenzied' flurry of attacks as if you've lost control in the heat of battle which is a good theme for the dual blades.

Bayonetta is a far different game not adhering to any kind of realistic combat and so there's no real need for it plus she needs to be capable of wiping out massive groups of foes with ease and evasion so added length to attacks with vulnerability wouldn't be efficient.

I guess Animation priority works in games with small groups of people or really big encounters and it makes them really meaningful fights.

Whereas in games with numerous foes that need to get killed quickly and en masse is where Bayonetta-style rapid cancelling every attack is viable.

I've not played Bayonetta but I'm going to hazard a guess it's combat plays similar to Devil May Cry's combat which I enjoyed fine, its just a very different pleasure to animation priority combat but both are excellent styles of combat if implicated well, it's just Animation priority makes more sense in realistic settings like ZombiU, where you play basically civilians untrained and unused to conflict.

I have no problem with animation priority in a game is served by it, including Monster Hunter or ZombiU, as I think it's a justified way of adding tension. I just think people lump too many Japanese games into that category and forget they've given us a ton of games that don't rely on it. For every Resident Evil or Dark Souls there's a DmC or Street Fighter 4.

#180 Posted by gesi1223 (218 posts) -

@GrantHeaslip said:

While some of the emotions and motivations you’re attributing to me are straight-up wrong (“burn him at the stake”? Metacritic worship? “Superior taste and intellect?”), I get it, you’ve made your point, and I’ve made mine.

(If you want to reply, please send me a PM, I don’t want to keep filling up the comment section with something that I’ve managed to entirely divorce from the actual topic!)

This particular comment is what's giving him those "passive aggressive" vibes he was talking about. You're not letting it go, and it's a really bad thing. Just do yourself a really big favor and don't reply to this. I'll try to help you by not replying if you do.

#181 Posted by Elfen (41 posts) -

Make the sequel better.

#182 Posted by Snakepond (96 posts) -

Just finished the game last week and it's amazing. I totally agree with it getting in on the top 10 giant bomb games of 2012.

If you have a WiiU this is a great game to play. The use of the WiiU game pad is so essential I can't see it on any other system.

I just hope other developers look at the game as a WiiU benchmark to follow.

#183 Edited by mancopter (71 posts) -

Great writeup, , and thank you so much for the info on the original Zombi. Game's intrigued me since you first brought it up.

#184 Posted by interasteral7 (2 posts) -

@Eribuster: In my opinion, ZombiU was a major disappointment for the Wii U just like when Red Steel was a major disappointment for the Wii. The ironic part is that they were develop by Ubisoft and released on the launch date of both Nintendo home consoles.

#185 Posted by Eribuster (484 posts) -

@interasteral7: The seems more poetic than ironic.

#186 Posted by Lukos (76 posts) -

So far this is the only game that is making me want a WiiU.

#187 Edited by yienwae (1 posts) -

ZombiU was the 1st game I purchased when my family bought the U back in December. This game was the primary reason why I wanted the U at launch.

In my opinion, it is a wonderful 1st launch title. Thankfully, I did not experience any of the bugs or glitches in the game and I was able to complete it without any hitches (I died 14 times though). What I found amusing was that in areas that I thought I would be okay and survive, those were the areas that I actually died in. And some areas were places where everyone has died a number of times (i. e. the Arena/Gauntlet). I really believed that I would not survive the final sequence because I had seen a number of survivors just run and shoot through the hordes that were chasing them only to become overwhelmed and perish (I took a different approach and it paid off).

I strongly recommend this game to anyone who purchases the U. Especially since the patch has been developed to address the serious bugs in the game. I would welcome a sequel and/or DLC for this game. It's the best survival horror game that I have seen in the genre in a very long time.

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.