Unsurprisingly, Kojima’s latest creation is polarizing. I count myself among those who are thoroughly unimpressed with it for a variety of reasons, which I’ll get into in a bit. To the point of this thread here, if I’m being honest, I’m somewhat enjoying the staff’s largely negative reaction to it. I’m not here to just parrot their reactions after-the-fact, as I expressed many similar concerns a few weeks ago in this thread. For the record, I didn’t approach Death Stranding from a mindset of wanting the game to be bad; in fact, quite the opposite. I would generally much rather a thing make a bunch of people happy than upset, and there was certainly a part of me rooting for post-Konami Kojima to prove he was every bit the genius he and his fanbase seem to think he is and win me over. However, the more the game was shown, the less likely that scenario appeared to be in the cards.

Yet, last week, reviews started dropping, and a significant portion of the initial reviews of Death Stranding heaped praise upon it, largely because it’s merely “different”. In an age of formulaic video games (especially AAA products), there is indeed something refreshing to this game literally being one dude's vision. That said, different <> good, and this is an important distinction that many seemingly failed to make. The 9/10 and 10/10 reviews of this are bewildering. Not that people aren’t allowed to like the game or think it’s amazing (they are), but even reviews scoring this as a perfect or near-perfect game are littered with major qualms with much of it and go out of their way to excuse obviously lacking elements. There’s just seemingly this massive gulf between what this game actually is and what some people want to pretend it is, and it’s evident in scores that don’t remotely jive with what you’d expect after reading even the “positive” reviews. I’ve never seen anything like it.

I don’t think the glowing reviews will age well at all. There’s an argument that they already aren’t. GB’s coverage of Death Stranding has been well-reasoned, whereas many other outlets failed to have their thoughts align with their conclusions. I’m certain there are folks willing to die on the hill in touting this game who will never admit it’s anything but incredible. I’m just personally struggling mightily to understand the rationale there. I’m admittedly not going to buy or play this because it’s super not for me, but it clearly does appeal to some, and that’s rad. I’d be legitimately interested to hear reasons why and am genuinely curious if I’m just missing something here. For those on the other side of this thing who may well be wondering why people aren’t into this, I’ll go through what I’m currently struggling with.

I expected a certain level of self-indulgence from Kojima. At this point, expecting different is a fool’s errand. However, it’s way more offputting here than usual. That “everyone cries here” shit from the TGS show was eye roll-inducing. Sam Porter works for Bridges, at the behest of Bridget America Strand. This shit is maddeningly overt. It straight-up disrespects the intelligence of the audience and unintentionally exemplifies how there is little to no depth here. Moreover, the video game annoyingly goes out of its way to make references to video games. I guess Kojima thinks this is all some brilliant meta shit? Kojima’s brand of “storytelling” is basically nonexistent. Having “characters” who are literally there to live up to their trait/descriptor of a name isn’t an arc. It’s “x is x”, which says nothing and means nothing. They might as well be cardboard cut-outs.

Worse yet, the characters in this are pretty much just his buddies, or more accurately, people Kojima wanted to hang out with. Most of the people in this game are at least actors, but del Toro, Refn, Keighly, Conan, etc. are just random cameos there for Kojima amusement. Having to dub over several of them should have maybe been a sign, but fuck it, Kojima don’t care as long as he can fancy himself among the Hollywood crowd. Ironically, he lampoons the need for likes within this game while very clearly basking in fame, and this game’s setting of “America” is hilariously off-base geographically, but Kojima is clearly too busy living his IRL American dream to notice. The auteur thing at this point isn’t helping; Kojima just seems like a guy who’s fairly out of touch and doesn’t really concern himself with anything beyond what he thinks/wants.

Further amusing is how the game initially seemed to be going for this loosely anti-capitalist bit, yet has brazen product placement of Monster Energy drinks and ads for RIDE with Norman Reedus on AMC. From what I can gather, the narrative does the Far Cry 5 thing of not really committing to being bold enough to say anything that would potentially alienate a portion of the target audience, and even that is arguably a bit of a failure to read the room. Let’s also acknowledge that the things being advertised can’t even really exist in the Death Stranding universe. I could enjoy Kojima’s attempt to explain the “strand” that ties back to a present-day AMC TV show or to feature the rogue Monster energy drink factory that survived the apocalypse. That’s the kind of dumb shit that actually might have helped this game, but it’s instead just kind of nonsensically there.

I’m trying to put my finger on why this game bothers me as much as it does, and I think it’s because this thing had some potential. I would have respected if it had totally played it straight and really committed to the walking sim bit. However, that requires some variance in visuals, music that goes beyond scripted moments, and immersion not being constantly broken by meter maintenance survival mechanics and off-screen characters interrupting you all the time to tell you shit you probably already know. This game never really gives itself a chance to achieve a No Man’s Sky-esque atmospheric thing due to its design. Nor is it wacky/dumb enough to pull off an MGS3 thing where it breaks up the seriousness with some moments of levity/absurdity. It seems that Kojima tried to mostly play it straight, but simply doesn’t have the chops to pull that off.

Ultimately, the product we got features an apparently aimless narrative and gameplay that it might be being kind to label tedious. After hearing a bunch of generally smug “this is art” crap from Kojima himself and some early reviews and then seeing what this game actually turned out to be along with the GB staff’s experiences with it, it is a little satisfying from a standpoint of helping me feel like I’m not the only crazy person who doesn’t see the appeal of this thing. Still, it’s worth noting that there are more positive than negative reviews of this game, so it would seem I’m in the minority here. Truthfully, I wish I felt differently about Death Stranding and I’m glad others like it, but I’m disappointed that unfettered Kojima isn’t better than I hoped he was, so I’m left to derive some small joy in hearing others express frustrations with it and call it out for what it is and isn’t in my mind.

All of that said, it has been more interesting to follow and discuss this game than just about anything in recent memory, so I don’t want to brush that aside as if that’s nothing. This will be talked about and remembered far beyond most video games, and that’s a credit to Kojima. I just can’t shake this feeling that the guy exists now in this Apple-esque space where people are so enraptured when he makes something that it doesn’t even really matter what it is or if it’s even good, and that’s fairly annoying. Based on everything I’ve seen, I don’t think Death Stranding in and of itself is a good game, by any metric. I firmly believe that if someone who isn’t Kojima put out this game, it would be near-universally panned for its myriad flaws. I’m honestly willing to listen to praise of this game that delves into territory beyond the trite, vague “it’s Kojima/it’s different/it’s art” lauding in most of the reviews, because right now I’m falling very much in line with the GB sentiments. Regardless, thanks for reading and thanks in advance for any comments.

I think this game really puts in to perspective how useless a review score is. How do you give a number to something you love despite having major flaws? I haven’t played the game yet, but I expect that I’ll like some things about. What if, let’s just say for example, the long arduous mundane journey speaks to me in a way no other game ever has. And because of that I love it. But then I think the writing is bad. It could be my favorite game of all time, and still have flaws.

Many of my favorite media has major flaws. Things I really love are never good all around, neither are the people I love. What score would you give your child out of five stars? Is that absurd to compare? I don’t think so. The rating system is basically school grades, where your grade tops out. In creative things, that’s not how it works. In school you can make a project that is above and beyond everything anyone else made, but you still can only get an A+, and you will be docked points for a spelling error. Scores don’t account for people enjoying some elements way beyond they dislike their flaws.

I think gamers think of scores too much like grades.

@notnert427:

As always, a great read.

I think I had some hope that Kojima would have matured as a writer. He seems to have actually regressed.

Regarding some of the positive reviews not aging well, I am getting that succinct impression from Gamespot's coverage. After the review hit, they have had a couple of articles/videos that seem to be trying to justify the score. Maybe I am reading too much into it, but it seems like they lack confidence in the review.

good read, but do you mind me asking have you played the game for yourself of is this just based of the coverage of the game?

Anyway like i said a great read and i understand your point of view.

I've played about 5 hours so far and i'm really liking the game so far. I've been listening to the beast/bombcast this past few weeks and i was worried a bit but wanted to give it it's fair shake and play it for myself. I get where the crew is coming from on this game for sure. (except for Dan, who just seems very upset Kojima made a game he doesn't like, but to fair i don't think Dan will ever like anything that Kojima makes if it isn't metal gear.)

The game is for sure a flawed thing, the cameo's are stupid as fuck imo, i don't mind using actors in a game and using their likeness, but someone using like Conan o'brian or fucking geoff keighly in this universe has no place imo. It reminds me alot of the time they put jessica chobot in ME3, it just doesn't work. Actors on the other hand just work better for me, cause it's what they do. The product placement is just as idiotic, i mean what the actual fuck is monster energy drink actually doing in this game. :')

The story so far (from what i've seen) is super weird but very straight forward in a weird way, you can see the twists coming a mile away (but i hope i'm wrong). And yeah they explain everything and Kojima doesn't seem to respect your intelligence as a player. But frankly i don't mind that much, i'm still engaged so far and want to see this trough. And yes, this landscape doesn't resemble America at all, but does it have to? I'm sure Kojima is wel aware that America doesn't look this way, for some reason this was his version of it for this game/universer however.

The thing is i'm really enjoying the gameplay for some weird reason, i mean i absolutely hate encumbrance mechanics, managing meters and walking simulator type gameplay. But god knows why i can't get enough of this. It does this weird thing when i just go in this zen state i guess, it calmes me down in a weird way. I just love plotting out a path through this landscape. It almost gives me the same feeling i got when i was trekking through Scotland's highlands or last summer when i was in Sweden and taking hikes in the mountains. It pushes those buttons hard, and i'm can't be more gratefull because of it. I like engaging with the cargo systems, and making sure i take the best route i can take, hoping to find usefull structures or put them down myself. I get this will be a very boring form of gameplay for a lot of people, but for some reason it all just clicks for me.

This game is proof that scored reviews are useless, i mean this game won't be for everyone that's for sure. But it isn't a bad game at all, sure the story may be kind of shitty in the long run but again, that doens't make it a bad game in my opinion. Aliens: colonial marines is a bad game, Duke Nukem Forever is a bad game, Fallout 76 is a bad game but Death Stranding is not a bad game.

I still don't know if Kojima unleashed is a good thing, but i am of the opinion that the triple A gaming space needs these kinds of people and it needs big publishers willing to take risks on batshit crazy ideas like Death Stranding. I mean i rather play this game and perhaps be dissapointed than play the next Call of Duty / Gears of war / Halo. Don't get me wrong there is nothing wrong with those games, but they play it safe and don't mix up the formula, i want to see new ideas in this industry and frankly i don't mind to be disspointed if those ideas don't end up working. Atleast someone is trying.

Sorry for this rant and english is not my native language so forgive any grammatical errors or weird sentences :)

You make a solid point here in regards to how to score things one loves in spite of their flaws. It's somewhat of a subjectivity vs. objectivity question. I, too, love a lot of flawed media, but I don't flat-out ignore the flaws because objectively those still exist, no matter how much I might have a subjective affinity for it overall.

With Death Stranding and its reviews, my issue is that if something is flawed, it simply shouldn't get perfect or near-perfect scores. While I personally wouldn't give Death Stranding anywhere near a 7/10 or 8/10 score, I don't have a problem with people who both recognize its flaws and like it anyway giving it that sort of score, because I feel like that reasonably accounts for both its imperfection and merits. 9/10 or 10/10, though? That's questionable as hell when the tone/content of the reviews don't suggest such a score at all.

Moreover, isn't the point of a review to recommend or not recommend something? Even the most effusive Death Stranding reviews seem understandably terrified to recommend it to gamers on the whole; most rather chose the "I liked it, but many won't" route. That's...kinda shitty. I get that there's an eye of the beholder element inherent to reviews, but the Death Stranding "masterpiece" reviews have leaned heavily towards subjective and not-overly-substantiated praise. Reviews of this mostly seem to be wildly unhelpful, perhaps intentionally so.

I'm wondering if a thing is only able to be enjoyed by a select few, is it actually that good? Gaming in general has certainly had its share of games designed for "mass appeal", often to their own detriment, and to its credit, Death Stranding surely is not that. Except I get the sense that many reviewers seem to be conflating their love for DS simply not being a "designed by a corporation for the masses" thing with their love of the actual game.

It's a hipster-y sort of thing where I think people feel like they're supposed to like it, or want to be perceived to like it. This game has been framed from the outset as art, and I think there's an underlying pressure with that for some to claim to "get it" in ways others can't or won't. It's similar to how many film critics tend to fawn over painfully slow foreign films, not because they actually enjoy them, but because they may feel like they need to keep up an appearance of being "cultured" or whatever.

I digress. You make a great point that translating a creative work into a rigid score isn't easily a 1:1 thing. However, while not always an entirely accurate measure, scores are how things are measured. "I'm not a good test taker" doesn't fly as an excuse in school, and the same goes for elements of much of DS that don't really hold up to much scrutiny. (I'd also question how creative DS actually is, but that would send me on another tangent entirely.) I think I can buy into a "better than the sum of its parts" endorsement of DS from those willing to make it, but few reviews have really even dared to delve into that because it necessitates highlighting significant issues that few seem willing to.

(As an aside, the concept of parents reviewing their children on a five-star scale is completely hilarious to me, but I understand the point that's being made there, and I very much appreciate the discussion.)

@notnert427:

“ However, while not always an entirely accurate measure, scores are how things are measured. "I'm not a good test taker" doesn't fly as an excuse in school, and the same goes for elements of much of DS that don't really hold up to much scrutiny. ”

My favorite album ever is an album with four 20 minute tracks. I love this album, but am incredibly cautious to recommend it to anyone. You can’t really listen to it in the car because the dynamic range is wide. You can’t put the tracks on your shuffle library. You can’t play it at a party or around other people. There’s nothing upbeat about it. It has no immediacy. It’s slow, many people would say it boring. But to me, it’s a 5 star album. That’s kind of the sense I’ve been getting from some of the high scores I’ve been listening to, but I haven’t really checked out any of the big reviewers. When people ask me about my favorite album, I’ll give them all the caveats so they won’t waste their time. It’s easier to recommend great things that also have obvious wide appeal, like a David Bowie album or God of War.

I wouldn’t use the “not a good test taker” excuse for this. Success can be defined in different ways for this. Ultimately it’s the profitability. But as for public opinion, some creators enjoy having a variety of opinions on their work, because the people who hate your work are just as relevant as the people who are meh about your work, and the people who love your work love it even more. I’d be very surprised if Kojima didn’t expect divisive reactions to this, I think creators have a very good feel about the variety of ways people will approach their work.

Or maybe there is a chance that people genuinely like it and it's difficult to discuss the travelling elements without the full knowledge that someone somewhere is rolling their eyes at walking and luggage mechanics. I think the core issue here is that high scores like 10/10 or 5/5 should not be taken as something that is a perfect thing devoid of flaws. I don't think Giant Bomb even claims that a 5/5 score means it's a completely perfect product. Are there people out there calling it that? I'm pretty sure there are a few. But ultimately scores are arbitrary and if you want to give any significance to them it's best to either decide that to the writer the articles has outlined pros that outweighs the negatives... or you can go the route that others commentators on this site have gone and deduce that those games writers on those sites are dishonest, paid shill.

Thanks!

Kojima's writing has never been "good" in the traditional sense, and definitely not mature. Even at his best, his narratives have felt like a collection of cool-sounding ideas that bounced out of his dome and were scrawled down on a notepad, very loosely strung together by "nanomachines" or some other b.s., if at all. The guy is yet to achieve coherence.

As an idea man, though, he's top-notch. It's why he's great at making trailers, because there's typically enough of interest to make everyone wonder what's going on or where this could go. Unfortunately, when it comes down to fleshing out his ideas into something of substance, Kojima tends to massively whiff. It's consistently disappointing to discover that there's nothing really there.

People have long forgiven or ignored his glaring issues as a writer as if it were some necessary component of his eccentricity that allows for the other batshit stuff people enjoy, but it's sadly clear at this point that Kojima is never going to grow into a good writer or grow out of being a manchild with highly questionable views of women.

It's particularly evident in Death Stranding because there's no Konami there for his fans to blame and it seems clear that Sony actually let him do exactly what he wanted and gave him the time and resources to do it. Everyone was understandably excited to see what that would produce. Well, here it is. Obviously, opinions vary on this thing, but it looks to be pretty much what I'd feared it would be.

Death Stranding feels like it was written by a teenager in just about every respect. It's painfully insecure. It demands that you hear about the most recent random information it absorbed, appropriate of and relative to nothing, because it needs you to think it's smart. It features some offputting elements because it needs you to think it's edgy. It belabors any substance it may have had into oblivion, and in the end, it unintentionally demonstrates that it has nothing original or of real value to say.

First off, your English is fine, so no need for apologies there. I have not played the game for myself, so that's worth acknowledging. I'm not typically big on pseudo-reviewing things I haven't played or questioning the opinions of others who have, but I've been following this thing closely enough to where I'm pretty sure I have a solid grasp on what DS is and isn't. I've watched hours upon hours of the gameplay of it, read countless positive and negative reviews of it, etc. If I felt like getting behind the controls of digiReedus for 60 hours would make a difference, I wouldn't be opening my mouth before doing exactly that.

I am taking some the GB crew's word on portions of the game. The staff happened to echo many of the concerns I had with it from before the game came out. I do think it might be a little reductive to say Dan doesn't like this because it's Kojima doing something that's not Metal Gear. The before/after video they put up very much shows how initially excited he was for it. If anything, he was probably the most predisposed of the crew to like it. My litmus test is Vinny, though, because Vinny activelytries to like everything and to not be too harsh on games even when they're bad, but when even he eventually couldn't help but go on a rant about it, that was tough to ignore.

Still, half the reason I made this thread is because I do want to hear what people like about it. It's good to hear that it evokes some zen from you. That wasthe part that looked the most appealing to me, as I enjoy exploring environments in games like No Man's Sky, Assassin's Creed, et al. However, I suspect I'd have the same issue with this that I had with RDR2 in that it wouldn't allow me to immerse myself in it due to video game-y depleting meter b.s., and as an American, it's a little insulting to have my country's geography depicted so wildly inaccurately. I like IRL hiking as well, but this game's environment is more evocative of countries like Scotland and Sweden as you mentioned.

I certainly agree that most reviews of this game have been weird and unhelpful. I'm not sure how anyone is supposed to derive anything from the "you may or may not like it; it has multiple issues,10/10" stance that most reviews have taken. It's why I'm glad to know the GB staff personalities well enough to have a good idea of who tends to share my perspectives and why, but I'm interested to hear from fellow duders as well to try and make sure I'm not missing something.

We also agree that it's good to see someone taking chances in a space that's becoming increasingly by -the-numbers. I just don't want to get too caught up in excitement over that to where I stop concerning myself with the product itself as many reviewers seemingly did. I'm glad Kojima is doing his thing, but I truly hoped it would produce something more appealing to me than it did. It is nice to hear that maybe I could find something there in the walking sim element, so thanks for reading this and sharing that.

"...to prove he was every bit the genius he and his fanbase seem to think he is..."

His detractors always seem to make this point but I rarely see his fans or ppl that like his games saying this. Like I greatly enjoy his games but I have never said this in my life. For every fan saying he's a genius, I can show you 1000 others suggesting this tired take. It's a straw man argument that constantly gets thrown around that's always puzzled me.

Also, there was a thread about watching vs. playing games recently and the takeaway was that it's simply not the same. You haven't played the game. Whatever you think you know, don't be so sure of yourself. Over and over, it's been repeated that this game is at the least very unique. You had your mind made up already, connected dots you wanted to connect, and somehow concluded that Death Stranding isn't good. To what end? Opinions aren't the end goal of this medium, just the byproduct. It's about the experience of playing. If you're not gonna do that, who gives a shit.

@notnert427: glad you respect where i'm coming from. I do hope you give the game a chance somewhere down the line, it's a special experience, good or bad.

And i see the comparison with RDR2 but there the systems put me off of the game real fast. They actively got in the way of me having fun, in Death Stranding the systems are the fun, for me anyway. How weird that may sound.

I will agree with @liquiddragon on the whole "Kojima is a genius" thing being kinda weird. The only person I think I have ever seen talk about Kojima's games that way is Dan. And, even prior to this game, I'm unsure if he genuinely believed that.

I thought all the MGS games were great. For reasons unique to each one and elements that span all the titles. MGS3 was great. MGS4 was great for different reasons. And then MGS5 was again totally different and also amazing. I like his unique approach to story telling and characters, and then completely isolated from that, I like the gameplay. The depth of mechanics. A stealth action game.

Now, do I think he is a genius? Of course not. He's just like.. another "David Cage" sort've developer. Somehow the person has become synonymous with their unique games. Of course Kojima has an entire team behind him. To what degree that does or does not shape the final product, we still don't know. But I think people just use Kojima's name as a short-hand. Like SWERY or Sid Meier.

Not sure why people get worked up about his games (not necessarily in this thread, but journalists and coverage in general.) Ever since Death Stranding was first announced I thought.. "Uhh okay.. whatever." All of the trailers and the resulting hype coverage was useless. We won't know what it is until it's released. That in itself, particularly in the modern internet age, is incredible and refreshing. No point in getting excited or cynical before you play it. I didn't put my order in until I read, saw, and listened to a bunch of discussion about it this past week. Even now (as I sit here, it's installing) I don't know if I'll like the whole thing in general, but there is only one proper way to find out. Play it myself.

[Sorry if this was a bit irrelevant. Didn't read the original post. Just the responses. Took just enough time to write this that it's done installing and I'm hungry. /thumbsup]

Reviews are in this weird state the last decades. It's sort of 50% an recommendation for the public at large and 50% a documentation of the very personal experience of the reviewer. Back in the day, a game would get scored on all it's aspects and if one or two aspects straight up didn't work out well, that would not be a high scoring game. Nowadays, we have games with the most low budget graphics and soundwork still be able to get extremely high scores because the reviewers generally tend to stick to how they felt about their own journey through the game. Graphics are so upfront that it immediatly tells the player if they are on board for that or not, but other aspects of the game requires the reader to figure out what kind of reviewers are out there and who's experiences they find themselves agreeing to.

Like i just went through Inside, and while that game has a nice atmosphere to it, i'd struggle to call the music (or.. atmospheric sounds i guess) or graphics anything but serviceable. If reviewers still have to adhere to the idea that all parts of the game have to be very good to attain a very good score, it would harken back to that style of review that has mostly been left behind. Personally i feel like a holistic approach to reviews is preferential to analyzing all it's parts, and recognize that a game can be amazing even if it has some lackluster elements to it.

To be fair, with Death Stranding aspects that seems to fall within the focus of the game, the story, the characters, the gameplay & the UI, are among the parts that get complained about. This is not the case of a reviewer not liking a pixelart because he prefers AAA-graphics, these are key aspects of the game that are dissapointing to some. And stuff that Kojima used to be good at, like figuring out ways to make each boss encounter distinct and interesting, now have been reduced to throwing grenades over & over. Where MGS-games didn't feel like they were speaking down to the audience, the constant explanation of the most overt storybeats and character names sounds tiresome and insulting. There are plenty of grievances to find to realize why people would come away from the game with a 2/5 score like Alex did.

But if no other game puts a smile on your face like Death Stranding and it does something you always wanted from games, but no other game has done as well, who am i to say that a 10/10 score is not honest? If a bunch of flaws were mentioned in the text, i would assume that they're not trying to pull a fast one on the reader, and staying blissfully ignorant themselves by not acknowledging it. They are just making a case for the experience as a whole being among the best they ever had, despite those glaring faults. Luckily, we live in a time where we can easily get a ton of information about the game to figure out if we might be into it or not. For some the flaws will be dealbreakers, for others it's a small price to pay when they're being able to have one of the best game experiences of the generation.

Also, count me in as one of the people that loves MG1,2 MGS1,2,3,4,5 & Peace Walker, yet never calling Kojima as being among the great philosophical minds of our times. Granted, MGS2's ending raised questions about technology and society that i had never considered. But it's pretty obvious that he was not the first person to bring those ideas forwards. Just the first guy to do it in a videogame that was highly popular in front of an audience that mostly consisted out kids & young adults that probably didn't have their bookcases filled with philosophy books. I do however think he has made one of the most entertaining game series ever full of characters i want to have around in a series like that. Constantly coming up with new innovative ways to change the series, while writing a story that is thought provoking , well directed and intriguing all the way through. Even MGS5's tapes & cutscenes prompted me to write down notes on the side and really get into the nitty gritty with the story. But i'm not out here applauding his Sam Bridge , Bridget, Porter , Bridges , Diehardman, Heartman stuff because i'm all in on Kojima or something. I just like generally like his games and would've liked the story in this one to be entertaining as well.

Last thing i'll say it's just frustrating to see this back & forth between 'Kojima Zealots & The Ones That Have Always Seen Right Through The BS' when the Kojima Zealots hardly seem to exist around these parts. Like the Death Stranding video with Brad & Jeff had one dude show up that was telling Alex that he needed to read Kafka & Abe before being able to comprehend the genius of Death Stranding, and that made me giggle & shake my head. But naturally that was a metacritic warrior that's crazy enough to go around the internet making accounts to spread their silliness around. I bet you would find similar folk if the new Final Fantasy, Dark Souls or Nier got a bad review. I get that Kojima invites mockery by saying shit like 'You'll be ashamed of your words & deeds' and 'This part makes everyone cry'. But the narrative that he's this inscrutable genius philosopher (who also believes this himself), who finally gets exposed in front of everyone and that this is a good thing, just doesn't make much sense to me. The walls of his games are not adorned with Citizen Cage posters after all.

If you reached this point, thank you for reading and my apologies. It was late and i kinda just kept writing words down. :D

After watching the 2 Tokyo Game Show Death Stranding Japanese voice cast meet up, I would not put up with Hideo Kojima’s out put anymore. Twice had he viewed the infamous vigana bomb scene from Groud Zeroes just as an intensely dramatic scene as intended rather than went too far. Seriously, fuck this guy.

There's a rockstar arrogance to Kojima that leads to complacency. Heck, the stunt he pulled with PT put his team on lockdown and cost MGSV budget and time. And yet he got out. Someone put down the offer and, in return, he delivers something not even full-blooded.

@shindig: What are you even talking about? You mean the stunt where Konami cancelled the game for which he made a demo that was ubiquitously praised by everyone? What did this man do to you and your family?

You don't find the idea of Kojima working something under a pseudonym suspicious? Something that showed up on a Sony stage rather than Konami's booth? Something that used Konami's tech?

There's been theories to suggest Konami weren't in on it. At all.

Interesting read @notnert427. The ad for the Norman Reedus show is only ever displayed when you're taking a shit, and even then you can avoid seeing it by skipping the cut scene as he enters the toilet.

The Monster energy placement was a bit strange, I'll admit. But I chalk it up to Coca-Cola's massive economic moat and being able to sustain itself post-apocalypse. There might even be Coke folks wrapped up with Bridges and/or Fragile gearing up for their post-Death Standing marketing campaign for all we know. But you're right, I wish they would have at least developed it further in-game instead of dropping it in like that.

All of that said, it has been more interesting to follow and discuss this game than just about anything in recent memory

You're right about that! It's immensely satisfying reading all the different opinions of this game because as someone who loves it, I'm perplexed by some of the criticisms. Many make sense, and basically there are so many things that make it unappealing to some gamers that it makes me further appreciate it. It's like what another user said about obscure bands, books, or films that simply aren't for everyone and can easily be blasted for its perceived flaws when that really just means somebody who doesn't like it is basically articulating the subjective Why.

Death Stranding feels like it was written by a teenager in just about every respect. It's painfully insecure. It demands that you hear about the most recent random information it absorbed, appropriate of and relative to nothing, because it needs you to think it's smart. It features some offputting elements because it needs you to think it's edgy. It belabors any substance it may have had into oblivion, and in the end, it unintentionally demonstrates that it has nothing original or of real value to say.

I've actually thought about this quite a bit. You get a fair amount of mail messages in the game and I read them all. Some of them left me thinking: "Why did you even send me this? Are you that bored?" My partner suggested it was sent out of loneliness, perhaps. Messages expressing gratitude, excitement, success and mild sadness. I understand where your criticisms are coming from, but they're unfair. I sense the community within DS is extremely traumatized in several ways. It becomes more and more obvious the more you play and deliveries you make based on how the terminal workers talk to Sam. There's nothing edgy about them wanting to unite and revive the country, really. I do agree with the insecurity element, which makes perfect sense given the circumstances. I'm interested in your ideas of "real value" as Death Stranding has plenty of elements of real value to me. I can understand that the writing leaves a lot to be desired (flaw). However, the objectives and mechanics of the game illuminate a measure of value not as poetically conveyed in the game's dialogues/written text.

@onemanarmyyIt just sounds like your expectations formed from the MG series fell short when applied to Death Stranding. I can understand how people who have played MG and know Kojima's work better would be disappointed based purely on what I've read, which is frequent comparisons to his earlier work. However, being a Kojima-virgin, DS plays perfectly fine. It has annoyances, I'm not sure I'd call them flaws. Like what you mentioned about chucking grenades at bosses. I'm completely fine with that because Sam is not a warrior, he's a porter. And I am uninterested in being a warrior. The game also seems to encourage being a porter with the ability to defend or evade attack. Criticisms leveraged against these mechanics also seem to be based on earlier expectations from the MG games. But when you consider who Sam is by trade, it makes sense that he'll be limited in his combat abilities.

@notnert427 said:

As an idea man, though, he's top-notch. It's why he's great at making trailers, because there's typically enough of interest to make everyone wonder what's going on or where this could go. Unfortunately, when it comes down to fleshing out his ideas into something of substance, Kojima tends to massively whiff. It's consistently disappointing to discover that there's nothing really there.

This is exactly how I feel. When the Game Awards 2017 trailer came out, I was really excited to see what the game would be. The opening sequence specifically really stuck out to me. It had so many interesting elements. There was so much mystery behind it and even though I had no idea how it would ever be a game, I was excited to watch it (I'm not into playing horror games, which this clearly seemed to be at the time). That exact sequence is in the game, it's in one of the two videos Giant Bomb did of the game. However, immediately before it, the guy who stabs himself spends way too long telling you everything you never wanted to learn from an NPC about why the world is how it is.

I haven't played this and I probably never will. The delivery aspect is interesting to me, but every other system they shove on top of that is a turn off. I don't want to hold down two trigger buttons the entire game so I can walk straight. Not to mention I am disgusted by Kojima's treatment of women and asexuality in his storytelling. I really shouldn't be surprised, but I guess it just hit too close to home.

Whatever the quality of the game in actual play, I think I'm just glad we have someone like Kojima who can command a triple A budget to make something that's way outside the traditional "What are the genre combinations that get triple A profits" A lot of our industry can feel very much the same on the high end. 3rd person action/military shooter/fantasy RPG. This thing feels different, and especially different for the budget it seems to have. If a chef told me he made a new fireball whisky escargot combination. I might not say it's good, but it's certainly interesting.

That being said, between the building of infrastructure and physically moving large amounts of collected resources... is this game most related to a survival game like Subnautica?

@shingro: It pulls aspects of gameplay from all over really...its a weird mixture(which I absolutely am enjoying) Its related to Sub. but I would not say its *most* related. All I can give you is a shrug if I were to pin down what kind of game it is most related to. What it feels like to me...MGS Survive was made from initial ideas floated by Kojima and/or his team, those ideas have since morphed and coalesced into what Death Stranding has become.

Don't get me wrong; I would have never called Kojima's previous writing "mature". He reminds of George Lucas. I am a huge Star Wars fan, however I would never claim the original trilogy had anything close to Oscar caliber writing. Similar to Kojima, his later writing (see the Star Wars prequels) is consider less mature than his previous work. Also, like Kojima, I think George Lucas is great at ideas. I would say they both need to let someone else handle the work of putting those ideas into a coherent story.

@notnert427: I'm super confused, why are you writing this much about a game you haven't played yourself? You seem to be taking enjoyment in the staff being down on it.

My opinion is its very good so far, about 40-50% in. It's got groundbreaking social features, enjoyable backtracking because you constantly feel like you're setting your future self up for success by using climbing ropes, ladders, bridges, etc. Participating in public works is rewarding. The story is debatable, but as someone who has sometimes struggled with occasional worries of social isolation myself, I'm sympathetic to the effort, if nothing else.

Maybe just put the pen down and give it a shot.

@raleighen: Ok I'll bite, in what way is Kojima treating women or asexual people poorly in Death Stranding? I haven't gotten the impression of any of this, and I'm halfway through the game.

Mostly there's just a ... lack of people, asexual or otherwise. That's my primary complaint, the world feels more dead than I think he intended. The people you do meet are mostly via codec.

I'm honestly not opposed to the walking sim aspect of this game. For me, that's actually what sounded the most appealing of anything in this game, so I actually would have appreciated some reviews going into greater detail there than they did. Ultimately, only GB's vids really showed and described that stuff, which I appreciated. For me personally, the survival mechanic crap kinda spoils the whole atmospheric potential. (FWIW, I had the same issue with RDR2, and I realize that's kind of a personal preference thing.) I do believe that a game needs to be perfect or near-perfect to get 5/5 or 10/10 scores. Death Stranding seems far from perfect in multiple ways. I believe many reviewers highly overrated DS based on the concept of it and the source of it, and I get why. It's a different thing in a staid medium, and I think lots of folks need a Kojima to exist out there so games don't all follow, say, an Ubisoft route where five franchises become the same game. My issue, though, is those who took exceptions with major components of DS like "the gameplay is dull", "the story is bad" and then awarded a "perfect" score anyway. It's just confusing to see that.

It's not a straw man. There were multiple fanboys taking selfies in the TGS crowd for merely being vaguely in the presence of Kojima. The comments sections on the GB coverage have kept the mods working overtime zapping first-time posters who showed up saying all kinds of awful shit because GB dared not to like DS. People were going after Alex on social media. Etc., etc. There are plenty of folks who think of Kojima as a genius, including Kojima himself. I get that it's somewhat a part of the auteur thing, but it's not like I just made this up. The often offputting pretentiousness surrounding all things Kojima is well-earned.

I'm not as close-minded as you're assuming, either. I don't have any real investment in this either way; I've just been watching this game out of curiosity, because to its credit, it has been very interesting to follow. I get that my thoughts on it as someone who hasn't played it don't carry as much weight as someone who has and outright admitted as much, but I'm happy to listen to people describe what they do enjoy of the game beyond what I'm gleaning on a surface level of this thing. It's half the reason I made this thread. The other half is because DS is simply fun to discuss and I think merits discussion because it's something we simply don't get from the gaming world that often, for better and worse.

That's really good to hear that the survival stuff managed to not be as obtrusive here for you. Perhaps it could strike a chord similarly with me one day. However, I'm wary of dropping $60 and 60 hours as of right now to find out. I'm not ruling out beholding DS for myself sometime down the road, though. Thanks for sharing your insights here, duder!

The David Cage comparison is fair. Honestly, Kojima is a bit of a victim of his own hype, and I'm guilty of holding him perhaps too harshly to that. I mentioned this earlier, but the man can make a damn intriguing trailer. There's some alternate universe where Kojima is the world's foremost short-film director and I'm his biggest fan. In this reality, he's making games instead of movies and often struggles mightily to arrange his cutscenes into a coherent narrative over the course of a game and to translate some neat features into an gaming experience that can be fully enjoyed by others.

I'd love to hear your thoughts on DS now that you've gotten your hands on it.

Thanks for the comments: I enjoyed reading them. Your description of the holistic review approach was excellent, and I may be stealing that phrase. I don't think I prefer that approach in general, though, because it somewhat requires the reader to know the reviewer well. I find it far more helpful personally to see a breakdown of "here's what's good and bad about this" than to see that a guy I'm not that familiar with thought it was good overall. With GB, I feel like I actually do know the staff well enough to where I could get a fair bit out of simply knowing which staffers did/didn't like it, but what I really appreciated about the coverage and review here relative to much of what I've seen elsewhere is that they delved into specifics as to why they didn't like aspects of it.

I will concede that this was a harder game to review than most. From everything I can tell, it's highs are high and lows are low, and I can totally buy this as a "better than the sum of its parts" thing where the things people like about it aren't all that tangible in the traditional sense. That translating to 10/10 scores is hard for me to buy into, though. I'm not claiming those scores are necessarily "dishonest", as I'm sure some people legitimately had a 10/10 time with it themselves, but the majority of even those people seem to have a qualifier of liking it in spite of some serious flaws that may well spoil the entire experience for others. Obviously a review is going to deal in opinions and can't apply to every reader, but the overall coverage of DS has leaned heavily towards subjective, which hasn't been overly helpful and is maybe a case of reviewers finding ways to avoid putting more scrutiny on the game than they might want to. However, that also means there's something to DS in the minds of many, and that shouldn't be ignored.

Much of that TGS show was rough, especially Sam's Private Room. Toilet humor of that whole thing aside, Kojima zooming in on digiReedus' junk and talking repeatedly about how you can't actually see his junk in the game or other people bathing was creepy as hell. It was like he wanted people to congratulate him for not making DS completely pervy, yet in the process, fully illuminated his pervy mindset in some really offputting ways, and it was all just so damn unnecessary to highlight. The whole thing just felt gross, and it makes it to where it's hard to view Kojima as much more than a horny teenager zooming in on Lara Croft naughty bits instead of playing the game. I don't even want to know what he's done on his own time with the B&B Corps mo-cap session footage. That stuff does cheapen Kojima's status for me a fair bit.

Yes and no? I think this game absolutely warrants discussion, and I honestly wasn't fatigued by the overall coverage of it. This is straight-up the most interesting thing that's happened in video games in a long-ass time, so I'm not really prepared to make a case that the hype for DS was undeserved. The substance and reception of the product itself is where it gets murky for me. I was definitely a bit confused by some of the scores relative to their reviews, and I can't shake the feeling that several 10/10s were issued based on simply that this Kojima game was made, not what it is.

You articulated my frustrations very well with your last two paragraphs. Kojima is carrying the auteur torch in a lot of ways, and there's probably some visionary out there somewhere who can actually write and doesn't have Kojima's creepy juvenile tendencies, but Kojima is the one we get. I lament what DS could have been. People (myself included) were understandably thrilled to see what unrestrained Kojima would create, but it just kinda feels like he was too busy basking in his stardom to knock it out of the park here and make something really special. It just kinda bums me out that he had every opportunity here and didn't fully capitalize on it.

I don't know what all went down at Konami and I'm not really going to speculate too much, but there is plenty out there to suggest that Kojima is likely a nightmare to work with. As you said, he's fairly arrogant at this point, and I can't imagine employing the guy in any way other than Sony's hands-off "here's money; do your thing" works. I will say that I find it a bit amusing that Kojima's fanbase trashed the shit out of Metal Gear Survive as proof Konami is the worst, and now that game, uh....doesn't seem that far off of Kojima's "vision" anymore.

Regardless of how often the Monster Energy drinks and AMC TV show ads appear, there's zero in-narrative reason for them to exist. In fact, neither can exist in the Death Stranding universe. Except fuck it, they're there anyway because kojimagetpaid.biz. It wouldn't bother me as much if the tone of this thing wasn't generally anti-US/anti-capitalism. That's fine in and of itself and I don't really have a problem with it, but Kojima going full Hollywood IRL and shoving ads in everyone's face given the rest of the narrative is hypocritical as fuck. As an American, this type of shit gets tiresome to me. Like, I wholly agree that we have done and do a ton of awful shit and the current regime is a special kind of terrible, but it's pretty goddamn annoying when people criticize all things America while drinking a Coke and listening to Maroon 5 on their iPhone before watching NCIS, which is basically what Kojima is doing here. Not to go too far down that rabbit hole, but just wanted to briefly vent on why the ads annoy me here.

From what I've heard of the late-game story, the characters within DS basically just info dump their backstory directly to you, and those backstories are pretty much exactly as one-note and thin as you fear their names outright suggest they will be. It seems fairly clear that Kojima just created characters explicitly designed around embodying traits he wanted to explore. This is the laziest form of writing possible, because the characters don't develop or have any sort of arc, they're just there until Kojima decides to "reveal" their raison d'etre, which seems to be an infuriatingly meaningless "exposition". This character is traumatized because (insert past trauma) occurred. This character is evil because (demonstrate over-the-top evil behavior). Fuck that. Fuck that so much. If DS' narrative says more than that, please by all means share it with spoiler tags, but this has historically been the limit of Kojima's depth as a writer and it bugs me to no end. That's the value I'm looking for and usually struggle to find in his work.

I am as well, to a point. You hit on what I'm getting at with the fireball escargot analogy. Is that a new idea? Yep. Do I want to eat it? Negative. However, if I'm reading a review of said dish written as if it were many of the DS reviews, it would be something along the lines of "This fireball escargot is a stunning creation that could only have come from the brilliant vision of this chef, who is creating a new category in the food world. In an age where few dare to venture outside the confines of pork belly, it is refreshing to see this chef challenge our traditional food trappings with this immensely creative dish. It is worth noting that Fireball is a trash-tier whiskey that will destroy you with a hangover, and the escargot I had here was burnt to a crisp and it made me vomit a little. It's certainly not for everyone, but it's incredible that it exists. 10/10."

The Lucas point is spot-on. God, I remember the excitement for the prequels. It was similarly a case of "holy shit, George Lucas has had time and a massive budget; this is going to be incredible." Then we get a trade dispute, an amazingly terrible "romance", and some bafflingly racist caricatures no one asked for. It might be unfairly cruel to compare DS to The Phantom Menace, but it's not that far off in terms of hope vs. reality for me.

It's fun to talk about games, and I generally enjoy writing. The schadenfreude I'm getting out of the staff's dislike of DS is based on three things: 1) There were many other reviews that scored the game far higher than the content of said reviews would suggest. 2) Kojima's TGS demo in particular was brutally self-indulgent, creepy, and weird to where it positioned DS as something that needed to be pretty goddamn incredible to justify itself. 3) I genuinely wanted Kojima unleashed to produce an awesome result. So, yeah, I enjoyed seeing coverage and a review that aligned with itself. As I see it, GB called Kojima on his bullshit and reviewed this game for what it is, while others were largely lining up to praise the savior auteur and ignore myriad issues with what DS actually turned out to be as a product.

I'm honestly glad to hear that you like it, and thank you for describing specifically why. That's more than a lot of the 10/10 reviews did. I think I could like the social/public works elements of DS, but it being so ephemeral makes it less appealing. I get why it is so the game world isn't littered with everyone's shit (or your own); but it's also a shortcoming inherent to the feature that makes it not be some game-changer for me when your efforts ultimately just create another meter to maintain or have it go to waste. DS' narrative seems to deal more in melodrama than anything, and I don't find the "we need to reconnect" theme to be meaningful or original in the slightest. It's rad if you were able to personally derive something from that, but that seems like a thing entirely dependent upon the player to be more introspective than Kojima will ever be.

I may well give this a shot someday, though; if out of nothing but sheer curiosity.

@notnert427:

“There were multiple fanboys taking selfies in the TGS crowd for merely being vaguely in the presence of Kojima.”

Sorry, what is this supposed to prove? You mean some ppl that would go to a video game convention wanted a selfie with one of the most prominent public figures in the industry? You want me to believe you’re not some closed minded person when you’re bringing up some petty BS like some ppl wanting a selfie w/ a celebrity?

“The comments sections on the GB coverage have kept the mods working overtime zapping first-time posters who showed up saying all kinds of awful shit because GB dared not to like DS.”

Ok, where are you getting this? Couple of the mods had a charity stream this weekend and I literally asked about this. I said “maybe I don’t go to the comment section enough but have they been extra toxic w/ Death Stranding”

No ifs, ands, or buts, they straight up said “no, you don’t go to the comment sections enough.”

“People were going after Alex on social media.”

Is this another assumption you’re making or did someone credible mention he was getting it worse than usual? I actually checked some of his tweets when he posted his review and the replies to them were more civilized than at GB. But let’s say ppl were going after him, does that really represent his fanbase or are they the few bad apples.

“There are plenty of folks who think of Kojima as a genius, including Kojima himself.”

What is plenty to you? Is it more than ppl like you who’s just shitting on him and haven’t play the game? Cuz I’ve been coming across ppl like you a lot more than ppl you’ve described. And are those ppl really that different than you? Seems to me you’re the same person, just on the opposite end.

You already have a few ppl here in the thread saying we like his games, never said he was genius. No one yet coming out to call him a genius. Also, did he ever actually say he was genius? Seriously, it’d be a hilarious to hear someone say that about themself and I’d love to find it but I haven’t been able to.

“I'm not as close-minded as you're assuming, either. I don't have any real investment in this either way”

You start this thread with an overly long post declaring a game you have played a disappointment. No real investment huh? Have you played any of his games? Reading your post, it just doesn't sound like you have. Maybe I'm wrong on that.

I do hate when 10/10's or positive reviews can't explain fully why they're into something. "I haven't been able to put it down." doesn't quite cut it. I did have a moment like that when I was reviewing DRIVECLUB and saw Playstation Universe gave it a 9.5. To the guy's credit, he owns his opinion fully and seems to like the feel of the driving. But I still can't fathom why this got such a push.

Maybe the shock of the new carries some extra weight. Death Stranding might review well with some outlets but, would they go back to it with hindsight?

Here's a Kojima quote on his own genius:“I don’t think that I’m a genius, but if everybody calls me like that, I’ll probably become one someday.” Reedus called him a "genius' genius" in the promotion for this game. Here's an article titled "The mad genius of Hideo Kojima and why Death Standing may be the weirdest triple-A game ever made" Here's another: "Hideo Kojima Might be Overhyped (But He's Still a Genius)" You can even buy a goddamn shirt that says he's a genius.

I don't know how much I need to cite here to convince you that people saying this stuff isn't just some random fabrication of mine, but hopefully that's enough. As for the TGS thing, they weren't taking selfies with Kojima, they were taking selfies featuring Kojima sort-of in the background. I think it's plenty fair to assume they're Kojima superfans at minimum if they're that excited about merely occupying the same room as the guy.

As for the comments, there were definitely comments that have since been deleted because they were nothing more than personally attacking GB staff because the staff wasn't gushing about DS. Were they "extra toxic" compared to some of the garbage on, say, the Disco Elysium QL? Arguably not, but that's not a high bar being there cleared at all. The comments sections are often terrible, sadly, and I imagine the mods at a certain point just lump it all in the same category of needing to be deleted. If a mod wants to offer some perspective either way here, please by all means do.

For the record, I've played MGS2. It's a good game with a dumb story, IMO. I've otherwise consumed Kojima's material via GB, and I found MGS3 to be the one that I'd call his best work. I enjoyed that game for balancing the silly and serious in ways he often doesn't pull off. I like MGS3. Otherwise, I don't have that strong feelings about his work one way or the other until his big chance to do something special fell a bit flat here to me. The guy is a good director of short scenes and an awful writer who typically makes interesting, but highly flawed products that meander into questionable territory as often as they shine. Death Stranding isn't much different there, IMO, but is being painted as some magnum opus by many reviews, which is what's drawing my ire.

I'm not pretending to have played the game (I've openly stated I haven't multiple times and detailed why), but if you want to think it doesn't make me qualified to speak on DS, that's cool. However, in that case, I'd ask you to detail what you believe I'm missing out on or which statements of mine you feel are off base so that we may discuss them.

@notnert427: Play it on sale if nothing else. The social features are on a level of groundbreaking that the Nemesis system was in Shadow of Mordor / War - and I'd be just as surprised if other open world games don't gobble it up. I can't recommend it enough for small bits of problem solving, pick up and put down quick, rewarding scenarios, at least through chapter three, at which point it's been very quickly getting better.

I will say I very much agree with Jeff's opinion that Death Stranding doesn't really "earn" it's weirdness. MGS ostensibly is a military game, with anime bullshit layered on over the years, and it earns this. Death Stranding sort of starts with the weird. Not a very solid, or earned, foundation. The story will 100% rub probably most people the wrong way because of this. That said, I still find the setting and world super interesting, if desolate (largely probably due to budgetary limitations rather than intentional feel of isolation, if I had to guess - see the copy/paste interiors, one npc per city, etc). I about lost my mind when I saw another porter walking around.

@notnert427:

Kojima quote -

How does that translate to Kojima saying or thinking “I’m a genius.” Is this really what made you think he thinks he’s a genius? A talk show host asked “are you a genius?” which is an awkward question to begin with and sounds like Kojima gave a silly answer to an equally silly question. Here is how you know he gave a silly non-answer: it doesn’t even make sense!

If you read further, he ends that question with a more serious answer “I’m surrounded by talented people who inspire me, especially those from whom I learned. Tarkovsky, for example. For me, genius people are those who inspire me.”

Reedus quote -

When an actor calls a director he’s worked with a genius, do you really take that seriously? Especially when it’s during a promotional cycle? This is a really common thing that gets thrown around by actors constantly. I’m also not sure how this relates. Is Reedus representative of the fanbase? Or you think Reedus is speaking for Kojima? Or just don’t like him calling Kojima a genius?

“The mad genius of Hideo Kojima and why Death Stranding may be the weirdest triple-A game ever made” article -

Did you read this article? Sounds like you fell for a clickbait title. It doesn’t call him a genius or suggest any such thing. It’s just speculation on Death Stranding.

“Hideo Kojima might be overhyped (but he’s still a genius)” article -

That’s a pretty grossly pro-Kojima article but again, another clickbait title. Even tho the writer is very bias, in the actual article, not a word about him being a genius.

You do know a lot of headlines are generated completely divorced from the actual article right? And that they are specifically designed to be eye-catching? Often it’s not even the author that writes them and even more often it has nothing to do with the actual article.

The shirt -

Dude, that shirt is clearly a joke shirt. You can’t possibly think that’s serious or I really hope you’re not.

Again, my point wasn’t that there aren’t ppl that call him this or that, my point was that there seems to be more ppl like you that say “his fanbase thinks he’s a genius” which is a broad inaccurate statement. You can’t even come up with good examples to prove your point. You’re pointing to bad examples and at the same time generalizing something that’s simply not true. And the kind of ppl you’re thinking of don’t constitute the fanbase. They’re the vocal minority if anything.

TGS selfie -

I still don’t get your point on this. Yes, there are some hardcore fans. So what? Are they bad ppl doing ppl things? And do they only exist for Kojima? Leave them alone.

Again, absolutely petty.

Comment section -

I literally did the legwork asking 2 mods to verify your claim yet that’s not good enough. Alright man.

“Death Stranding...is being painted as some magnum opus by many reviews, which is what’s drawing my ire.”

Why do you care? Didn’t you say you had little investment in this? Again, you haven’t played the game but some critics thinking the game was good draws your ire? This is my problem with your post. How do you have this reaction to something you haven’t touched, said you won’t, and claims you don’t care about? You clearly care too much.

Also, you make a point about how the game clearly has issues yet some reviewers gave it high scores. Have you really never replayed games with lots of problems you really liked and would give high scores to? Pokemon Red/Blue/Green, MGS2, MGSV, Killer7, Silent Hill 2, Ico, The Last Guardian, Zelda BotW, Gravity Rush 2, RDR2, REmake2, FFX, ME2, Life is Strange, Persona 3, Wolfenstein 2, The Evil Within, Rez, Hitman 2: Silent Assassins...I mean, I could literally go for days.

It’s so easy to see issues in games and have problems with them, yet at the same time really like them and think they deserve high ratings. It’s not some conspiracy, it’s actually one of the easiest things to understand cuz the whole thing is subjective!!

List of your off base statements:

• "if I’m being honest, I’m somewhat enjoying the staff’s largely negative reaction to it"

Nice dude, sounds healthy

• "There’s just seemingly this massive gulf between what this game actually is and what some people want to pretend it is"

Really? Ppl are pretending?

• "I don’t think the glowing reviews will age well at all. There’s an argument that they already aren’t."

You’re certainly making the argument I guess? Reviews often don’t age well period. Is that a huge knock against DS or do you just want to believe so?

• "I’m certain there are folks willing to die on the hill in touting this game who will never admit it’s anything but incredible. I’m just personally struggling mightily to understand the rationale there."

Admit? Oh right, cuz they are “pretending.”

• "Moreover, the video game annoyingly goes out of its way to make references to video games. I guess Kojima thinks this is all some brilliant meta shit?"

This sounds like a completely sane, non-emotional comment. How come everything with you with Kojima has to do with genius or brilliant or whatever? Maybe he is just trying? Trying is a no-no with you? Is failing something so shameful?

• "Kojima’s brand of “storytelling” is basically nonexistent. Having “characters” who are literally there to live up to their trait/descriptor of a name isn’t an arc. It’s “x is x”, which says nothing and means nothing. They might as well be cardboard cut-outs."

Is this something a GB member said? And now you’re confirming it as your own?

• "Worse yet, the characters in this are pretty much just his buddies, or more accurately, people Kojima wanted to hang out with. Most of the people in this game are at least actors, but del Toro, Refn, Keighly, Conan, etc. are just random cameos there for Kojima amusement. Having to dub over several of them should have maybe been a sign, but fuck it, Kojima don’t care as long as he can fancy himself among the Hollywood crowd."

"Fuck it, Kojima don’t care as long as he can fancy himself among the Hollywood crowd." Nice, another rational, non-emotional thought.

• "Ironically, he lampoons the need for likes within this game while very clearly basking in fame, and this game’s setting of “America” is hilariously off-base geographically, but Kojima is clearly too busy living his IRL American dream to notice. The auteur thing at this point isn’t helping; Kojima just seems like a guy who’s fairly out of touch and doesn’t really concern himself with anything beyond what he thinks/wants."

oops, did it again.

• "I would have respected if it had totally played it straight and really committed to the walking sim bit. However, that requires some variance in visuals, music that goes beyond scripted moments, and immersion not being constantly broken by meter maintenance survival mechanics and off-screen characters interrupting you all the time to tell you shit you probably already know."

Another one of your borrowed thoughts.

• "Ultimately, the product we got features an apparently aimless narrative and gameplay that it might be being kind to label tedious."

Another.

• "After hearing a bunch of generally smug “this is art” crap from Kojima himself and some early reviews and then seeing what this game actually turned out to be along with the GB staff’s experiences with it, it is a little satisfying from a standpoint of helping me feel like I’m not the only crazy person who doesn’t see the appeal of this thing."

Not crazy at all.

• "I’m disappointed that unfettered Kojima isn’t better than I hoped he was, so I’m left to derive some small joy in hearing others express frustrations with it and call it out for what it is and isn’t in my mind."

You’re disappointed at something you have zero experience with. Seems pretty off base.

• "I just can’t shake this feeling that the guy exists now in this Apple-esque space where people are so enraptured when he makes something that it doesn’t even really matter what it is or if it’s even good, and that’s fairly annoying."

I thought you said the reviews all pointed to issues and aren’t you happy, I mean disappointed that it’s a bad game?

• "Based on everything I’ve seen, I don’t think Death Stranding in and of itself is a good game, by any metric."

Ok. Glad ya figured it out!

• "I firmly believe that if someone who isn’t Kojima put out this game, it would be near-universally panned for its myriad flaws."

You made this up and you don’t know this. It could go either way.

The social stuff here is pretty neat. I like quasi-online stuff like Drivatars in Forza because it makes it feel a bit more authentic, and at this point I'm on board with any social gaming experience that's not people yelling awful things at each other. That it's structured to be an inherently positive experience is rad. That's definitely a good idea I would like to see make it into other games. As for the Nemesis system, it hasn't really been adopted in other games like I expected. I still kinda want to see that make it into a HITMAN or something similar, but I digress. It's great to see new ideas in gaming, so all credit to Kojima there.

If/when I play this, I'm going into it fully expecting the story to be somewhere between forgettable and bad. I've just never been impressed with Kojima's writing, and I can't imagine this one would be much different. Still, the desolate world and social infrastructure is the sort of thing I could be into; I'd just have to try to compartmentalize the other stuff that doesn't do it for me. I really appreciate your impressions of this, duder; they're helping me better understand the appeal of this game and potential find some ways it could appeal to me personally. Cheers.

It's shit like "you will be ashamed of your words and deeds", "everyone cries here", and the general way Kojima carries himself that speaks to his self-satisfaction. Tweets like "A HIDEO KOJIMA GAME means the declaration of me doing concept, produce, original story, script, setting, game design, casting, dealing, directing, difficulty adjustments, promoting, visual design, editing, supervising the merch" don't help, either. For fuck's sake, there was a Kojima Tracker made to count all the times he name-drops himself because it's done to a comical degree. I don't feel like suggesting that Kojima considers himself some form of genius is a bold take.

You took issue with one throwaway line in which I suggested that Kojima and his fans seem to think he's a genius and called it a straw man argument, so I in turn cited multiple examples of people saying exactly that. Now these examples don't count because...reasons? Yes, I understand the concept of promotion. Yes, I understand what a headline is. It's still people outright saying the thing you're claiming people don't actually say. And given the jokey shirt, the genius stuff is actually said so often that it has reached meme status, yet you're acting like I (and apparently others) just invented this baselessly.

Their behavior simply speaks to the point at hand, given that they're clearly huge fans of Kojima who very likely consider him to be something of a genius, and it's totally fine for them to feel that way. I didn't come anywhere close to suggesting they were bad people or that Kojima is the only person who has hardcore fans. These are straw man arguments.

Where did I suggest it wasn't good enough? I acknowledged that the DS comments may well have not been "extra toxic" compared with some other comments, but also pointed out that this isn't necessarily some great endorsement of the DS/Kojima fans who showed up specifically to trash the staff for not liking the thing they like.

I care because this is a highly notable game and it merits discussion. However, it is in my opinion a very flawed game at minimum, and many reviews/scores of it are incongruent in ways I haven't really seen before, so this thread is me wondering out loud as to why that might be case. If reviewers were saying how they loved DS in a review touting every aspect of it and then scored it a 1/10, I'd be similarly curious as to how they arrived at that conclusion.

And no, were I a reviewer, I wouldn't score games that I know have significant issues 10/10, no matter how much I personally may like said game. I believe that's a fairly selfish disservice favoring subjectivity over objectivity, and it makes the review far less helpful to an average reader. Simply saying "I like this thing" is opinions are like assholes, everyone has one territory. Saying "I like these aspects of this game and don't like these other aspects" is far more relatable. I am in no way suggesting people who like DS are wrong, lying, or whatever, but the reasoning given within many of the 10/10 reviews was lacking.

Far Cry 5, for example, is a game I consider both enjoyable and flawed. I reviewed it as such here if you're curious. It's the most fun I had with a game in 2018, but it has a dumbass story featuring some annoying characters. I absolutely had a 5/5 time with co-op shenanigans in Far Cry 5, but that didn't nullify the game's issues, so I scored it a 4/5. This is how I view flawed games. They simply shouldn't be graded as perfect if they have flaws, no matter how much someone may personally enjoy them in spite.

FWIW, I was more interested in discussing which statements of mine were offbase in reference to the game and why, not simply statements you don't like quoted without context, but okay, let's do this.

I explained why I felt this way in great detail multiple times throughout this thread. I've also said several positive things about the game and Kojima himself in this thread, but apparently those aren't worth noting.

It is fair to observe that those who wrote reviews detailing a slew of issues and scored DS 10/10 anyway are either knowingly or subconsciously pretending those issues don't exist in scoring it so highly.

DS has been somewhat of a zeitgeist thing, and it's certainly possible that people's excitement for its very existence crept into some review scores. MGSV had a similar thing where it reviewed very well, but a whole lot of people including those who were initially wowed by it soured on it over time once the novelty wore off. Maybe DS will have lasting appeal. Time will tell.

We've been over this. 10/10 scores inherently don't admit flaws into the equation.

I haven't purported myself to be a robot devoid of emotion, although I don't consider this a particularly emotional statement. I simply don't see the point of Kojima shoehorning in video game lingo randomly. I'm not sure how you gleaned that I find the very concept of trying unacceptable from that, but okay. However, if we're going to put the video game references to that scrutiny, Kojima's attempts to be cute or clever there do fall pretty flat for me. Maybe there's someone out there thrilled or in hysterical laughter because a video game character made an overt, fourth-wall-breaking video game reference. It just doesn't do it for me.

I would imagine this is a fairly common qualm people have with Kojima's insultingly unambiguous character names and generally lacking character development, but if you want to consider this some GB exclusive take that I'm plagiarizing, go ahead, I guess?

At this point you're essentially just getting mad that I have opinions. Now, if you would care to present a counterpoint as to why it was definitely necessary and in no way Kojima enjoying his stardom to go hang out with and include in his game random celebrities that were so glaringly unqualified for their inclusion that it required hiring other voice actors to do their lines for them, then please feel free to make that case.

I don't know what I'm supposedly doing again. (Britney, bitch?) I guess I'm showing emotion, since that seems to be unacceptable? Again, please feel free to address the content of what I say instead of getting mad that I said it so that we may have a discussion. Explain what part of America looks even remotely like the setting of Death Stranding. Make a case for how Kojima apparently isn't living out his Hollywood fantasies by cozying up to famous people he likes. Etc.

Borrowed from whom? If you're going to accuse me of plagiarism, at least cite it. This again does not appear to be a particularly unique thought, admittedly, but that doesn't make it "borrowed". It is also entirely possible for people to independently have similar thoughts about a thing. Hell, Dan in one of the GB videos asked a "who is this game for?" question I'd raised verbatim in a thread before that video was posted, and I'm not about to suggest Dan stole that line from me, as it's a fairly logical question for anyone to ask that I'm not going to claim is solely my property.

Citation, please. This is a very general statement of which some variation is probably out there in most of the negative reviews, and I outright stated "apparently" to indicate I'm echoing the gameplay experience of others there.

Wait, you're sarcastically suggesting that I am crazy if I don't see the appeal of DS? Sorry, I guess?

At no point have I claimed to have played DS. I explicitly said I haven't multiple times so that anyone reading this thread can take my opinions with however much of a grain of salt they want. Since we're on the subject, though, have you played DS? I'm curious because your retorts to my criticisms of DS aren't referencing the game at all, meaning that either you've played it and can't find much actual fault in the critiques themselves, or you haven't played it and all the vexation over me readily admitting I haven't played it is moot.

Many of the reviews did mention issues and then totally ignored them when it came to scoring the game, very possibly because of "new Kojima game" fervor. It's one of my theories to try and explain the discrepancy between much of the review content and scores, anyway. Feel free to take it or leave it.

I'm disappointed that DS doesn't look to be the game I'd hoped for. I'm glad it seemingly is that for others. I did take some issue with what I felt were poorly-reasoned adulative scores, and therefore found it somewhat refreshing that GB didn't fall in line with that and eloquently expressed some issues with the game that I also had. I hope this clarifies my feelings on DS.

There is a reason I said that "I don't think DS is a good game" instead of declaring that it isn't, because I don't claim to have "figured it out". I may well still play it someday to be sure that it isn't for me, but it doesn't appear to be my kind of game and dropping $60 and 60 hours to find out is a big ask for me when I generally know what I like.

Yes, that is what the word believe means. Hence, why I used it. This indeed is unknowable. What we do know is that there are a fuckton of people saying DS is fairly flawed and giving it perfect scores anyway, which is unusual and somewhat irrational. Which begs the question of why DS' flaws apparently don't count against it in the minds of many the way most games' flaws count against them. I believe Kojima's involvement is definitely a factor. You are welcome to disagree, but I would then ask for your theory as to why many reviews have been atypically willing to forgive DS for its shortcomings. For me, this has been a curiosity worth pondering about a game worth discussing.

@notnert427: Hey man, you do you. If this actually gives you pleasure, I shouldn’t be telling you otherwise. Sorry about that.

Based on everything I’ve seen, I don’t think Death Stranding in and of itself is a good game, by any metric. I firmly believe that if someone who isn’t Kojima put out this game, it would be near-universally panned for its myriad flaws

It's funny how people who people who haven't even played a game can be so confident on whether a game is good or bad. One of the most interesting things about this game is how divisive it is. You can love or hate various parts of the game; love or hate ,the first 2 chapters, chapters 5-8, action sections, the story/characters, the weirdness. But you can't really tell unless you play it.

I can firmly say it's a good game, if not a very good game. It somehow turns the very mundane act of traversal into a fun mechanic. It's very hard to describe, because you can't really compare it to much. The gameplay and progression is fun, world atmosphere is fantastic, the novelty of the strand system is very cool. The flaws are very minor to me. I can recommend it, but there's about a 50% chance you'll hate it.

You say that the high reviews are inflated, but on the flipside, have you ever considered, that if it weren't made by kojima, it woudn't get as many low reviews because there'd be zero expectations, and it'd be treated as some darling indie game?

I've never played a Kojima game before and I think Death Stranding's terrific, the gameplay loop is pretty darn addictive discovering/creating new paths or coming across ones left behind by other player is quite special.

Dismissing the overwhelmingly positive reviews or people's own experince in this thread bassed solely on Kojima is disingenuous at best, the fact is Kojima games have always been good mechanically.

I think the game would have scored much higher after release anyway.

After unlocking a new area and then seeing what everybody else has built/building is a core feature of the game, it makes repeated journeys quicker/easier.

Pre-release Death Stranding would be quite painful, bridges and roads are community endeavours it would be tedious/exhausting building them otherwise.

Yeah, every day I'm logging in I'm seeing more and more structures being built, to the point I'm not sure if its my link level rising (one of the stats actually purports to increase the amount of stuff you see from other player's games) or just more people getting further into the game. It's a weird feeling driving down a highway you built to deliver stuff, literally driving on a raised highway and seeing a ladder you previously used to cross some stream below you. The world changes enough to begin to make it tough to recognize certain areas. I'm super interested to see other games run with this idea, it's really incredible stuff. Brad mentioned a bit of this on the podcast as well, how different pre-release was.

Many of the reviews did mention issues and then totally ignored them when it came to scoring the game, very possibly because of "new Kojima game" fervor. It's one of my theories to try and explain the discrepancy between much of the review content and scores, anyway. Feel free to take it or leave it.

Isn't it more likely that certain outlets write subjective reviews about their personal experience through a game instead of objectively scoring all the aspects of the game? A style that you have told me don't prefer over a more objective approach to reviews, but is increasingly happening in the review industry. In which games can be incredibly niche or good at one or two singular things , yet still come away from a review being rewarded with a high score because the reviewer on duty loved it. Like this game is all about the journey and how you experience that. A near impossible task to give a score for that can apply to the general audience out there. Do you like stacking up cargo? Do you like the act of walking around? Are you the type of person that tunes out of a game once bodies spontaneous explode because it's not realistic? At some point it makes sense to just document your own experience and hope people are able to see things your way and try to imagine how they would feel about it if they had to do the same. Because otherwise you're doing mental gymnastics about what the general gamer is like and what the general gamer might want to see from a game. Are the graphics amazing or just good enough for the price that people will play it for? Are the graphics technically good enough but the style makes it look bad? Is it an ugly style to the general gamer or is that just my own perception?

I think back on Austin's opinion of Fallout 4 and how much he enjoyed the basebuilding in that game and making it all look pretty. On a mechanical level, all that stuff he was doing was a waste of time. The game doesn't acknowledge how well made his settlement is, but it made for a great experience to him. Now he didn't review that game ,but if he did i'm pretty sure that we would read both about how the game doesn't integrate that system very well, while also reading that he enjoyed it greatly and made the game better. This is one aspect where two reviewers could arrive at completely different opinions and it requires knowledge about the reviewer to figure out why a game gets the score it ends up at. Austin would bump up the score for the inclusion of this mechanic, i would read it and be like 'nahh, dog i'd get 0 enjoyment out of that'.

Personally i think Dota 2 is a 5 star game, while also realizing that it's a game that does an awful job at tutorializing, takes at least a year to get decent at and has a ton of idiosyncrasies that make no sense yet are required learning. That doesn't detract from the fact that it's among my top 3 games i ever played and i look back with fondness on my thousands of hours with it. I could write an objective review about it and end up at a 6/10 or 7/10 because only the gameplay truly stands out, and the average person would probably have a harder time getting into the game than i did as i learned the game at a stage where the game was fresh and people were learning along with me, but that wouldn't come near my true feelings at all. I think a similar thing is happening here with Death Stranding where some of the reviewers had a great experience while also seeing a bunch of stuff that the average person might be turned off from.

I just don't see the Kojima bump that you see. It has a 83 on metacritic, same as a flawed game like Final Fantasy XIII, which also received multiple perfect scores. A game that looks & sounds beautiful, has quite snappy combat, but also features a story with a ton of throwaway antagonists, a lack of towns & npc's and misused environments that are foreshadowed to be important and could've been used for emotionally resonant storytelling but are completely wasted. Not to forget, the grueling 10-chapter long lineair road before you get to a more open area which.. has not much to do there neither and is a huge dissapointment. The first 100% score on metacritic i pull up on that game (gamesradar) even has a pro/ con list where 3 cons are listed, in a similar way that a bunch of Death Stranding reviews are openly talking about the (potentially) negative aspects of the game.

Other 83 score games includes the likes of Two Point Hospital ( a decent re-make of an old 90's hit, that hasn't changed all that much regarding the way levels are structured, the menu's you have available, how you build rooms & how you research new equipment and does very little in the story department) , and Bloodstained ( A game that scratches the Symphony of the Night itch well, but also suffers from performance issues, has some quite ugly background art, stilted storytelling , wacky stuff that sticks out like a sore thumb juxtaposed to the time period the game borrows from and contains a bunch of imbalanced weapons). Death Stranding doesn't seem out of place between those games to me.

Or on GB we have a game like Undertale given the perfect 5/5 score, while visually it looks like a game that could've been made in the 80's. An objective review would have to adress that these parts of the game pale in comparison to the COD's and Uncharteds of the world and even games from it's own genre like Persona and Final Fantasy. Therefore it could never objectively arrive at the highest score. I'd even say that an objective review would never be able to give an indie game a perfect score because it straight up requires a multi-million dollar operation to be among the best in class on every front of game development. That's why i find it often more useful to read reviews of people's experiences through a game and quickly see what it all looks like instead. I don't care if a game looks like it's from the 80's if it has a fascinating story or does cool gameplay things. I might be down for a generic shooter game if it's an audiovisual spectacle that pushes the genre forwards in those aspects.

Therefore i could totally see how a subjective review ends up at a perfect score for Death Stranding as being an unforgettable experience that does things that no other game does. Whether we agree whether that deserves a 'perfect' score is besides the point, that's up to each outlet. It also strikes me way easier for GB to arrive at the highest score than outlets that use a 10 point scale, yet both are registered as a 10/10 to the wider gaming audience when they check out OpenCritic or Metacritic. That said, there are plenty of reviews out there with the highest score that still contain a list of cons or adress flaws in the review just like many Death Stranding reviews do. That it ends up at the 83 score doesn't strike me as out of place or Kojima worship.

Kudo's to how much you're answering on this though. I would've probably said my piece and said peace afterwards after the amount of pushback that you're getting. It's admirable how willing you are to defend and explain your opinions.

Just to clarify, the purpose of this thread for me isn't just so I can tell others it's a definitely a bad game and they should hate it. It's me attempting to articulate why it doesn't appear on a surface level to be something I'd be into and trying to understand how some of the 10/10 reviews arrived at that conclusion. I'm truly not that confident that DS is a bad game. If I were, I'd dismiss it as such and wouldn't bother myself with thinking or talking about it, but seeing so much positivity out there about DS from others while it doesn't look like my cup of tea piques my curiosity.

A large part of the reason I'm enjoying discussing it is because it is so polarizing. Maybe I'm wrong about DS. Maybe the effusive reviews are. This thread is largely me thinking out loud here to try and figure that out. My opinions aren't really etched in stone, and some of the points that have been made here and people detailing what they're liking about the game (yours are very appreciated as well) has softened my stance a bit from "I won't play this" to "maybe I'll give this a shot."

There are only a couple of negative reviews of DS, and the most notable one by this very website was IMO extremely well-reasoned and objective. That said, you make a fair point about expectations. I'll admit that my feelings on DS are colored a bit by hype about the potential of DS vs. the disappointment of what it seems to be, and that hype wouldn't really exist to be followed by a letdown were this just some indie game. Still, I don't think there's any way people would be as willing to forgive the flaws and throw 10/10s at this game if Kojima weren't involved.

I'm actively trying not to dismiss anything. I want to hear people's experiences, and I'm efforting to understand the overwhelmingly positive reviews. I do have some significant issues with Kojima's writing/maturity, but that's not solely what I'm criticizing here. I personally struggle to enjoy games that are heavy on survival mechanics, as DS certainly seems to be. Also, the pacing seems pretty rough. That the late game is supposedly filled with lengthy cutscene character info dumps is a big turn-off for me.

I hope the community aspect of this does take off and people collectively construct some elaborate stuff where Sam gets to basically cruise on his future bike down a highway in a couple years (Ride with Norman Reedus, indeed). I think that would be rad as hell if DS managed to unite gamers to make a virtual Department of Transportation. There's definitely something to the social aspect, and it's truly cool that Kojima has created an inherently positive online experience here.

That's awesome. I'd be curious to see the algorithms determining what shows up in your game and what doesn't. Seems like that would be very interesting. How quickly are the things you've built degrading? I ask because for me, the slower the better, and I'd be totally fine with having all my efforts have significant permanence. I also think I'd want to see a bunch of other people's stuff randomly scattered about to help maximize the impact of what seems like the coolest aspect of DS, so it's neat if it does in fact get more common the more you play.

A good portion of my hand-wringing about the reviews is against the subjectivity. It's fine for someone to love DS, but I just don't think reviews that essentially just say "I loved it, many people won't, it's got issues, 10/10" are particularly helpful, relatable, or rational. It's part of the reason I'm seeking further opinions here.

FWIW, I don't think DS' current overall Metacritic score of 83 is all that unreasonable. 83 accounts for what the game does well, while also recognizing that it has some issues. Interestingly enough, while looking into the numbers there I discovered that Metacritic uses what's called a weighted average, meaning that they assign more value to certain reviews than others based on their perceived stature of the reviewer. If you actually average all the scores, DS is sitting at an 86 (85.61). Maybe Metacritic assigns more weight to GB than most outlets?

I digress. My qualms are largely with the 10/10s here. For a game with flaws in which the enjoyment seems heavily dependent upon the individual, the 10/10s are tough for me to buy as a rational score. As a personal score? Sure, but there's a smug detachment to a reviewer valuing their own opinion/experience so highly that even if they recognize that the game has issues and that it has some limited appeal, they just basically say "who fucking cares, I enjoyed it, 10/10".

I get that DS is somewhat of a niche thing and that this makes it hard to fully endorse to a wide swath of gamers, but a 10/10 score is a strong endorsement. It's actually the strongest possible endorsement. Obviously reviewers aren't obligated to somehow guarantee that various gamers will all have as good a time with a thing as they did, but I can't see any way in which a reviewer can score something as polarizing as DS a 10/10 without first deciding that they don't actually give a shit if their audience likes it or not, and that attitude kinda pisses me off.

Viewed individually, subjective reviews aren't that big of a deal. However, fifteen reviewers very arguably being far too subjective does skew things a bit. It sets up a situation where your average person then has to be familiar with the predilections of fifteen different people to be able to parse out what of the subjectivity may actually translate to them personally, and that's a failure of the very point of reviews, IMO. I'm rambling, but suffice it to say that for me, an "I like this thing" statement in and of itself has very little value.

Thanks for the last paragraph. I really do make an effort to consider opinions other than my own and to hopefully elucidate mine to where others can at least understand where I'm coming from, even if we may disagree. I'm sure I don't always succeed there, and it's always entirely possible that I'm full of shit, but it's been great to discuss this. I feel like I do have a better grasp and a more positive overall opinion of DS than I did, and I appreciate all the duders who've contributed here for that.