First Horizon review [Engadget]

Status
Not open for further replies.
thuway said:
Why are people picking on the review itself because it focused on conveying how the author connected with the game ? It's refreshing and offers a massive amount of hope on the narrative being solid.
Click to expand...

Yup, were gonna get a bunch of reviews that will go in depth, this one was nice to read and something that's not typical.
 
WordsintheWater said:
I gotta say something these Horizon threads are getting really annoying and it's not cause people are saying something you see as negative, it's because every time someone does the rest of you jump down their throats. Mention Ubisoft, 5 posters jump on them, mention Far Cry, same story. That is getting so annoying, not everyone is out to get this game. This is getting just a tad ridiculous, let people voice their opinion.
Click to expand...

Cannot really agree, you are missing context. There is legit discussion about the game, like the poor Human AI. The issue is it is the same usual suspects most of the time, dropping into the thread with an agenda, without knowing much about the game, and saying the same, generic criticism. So it's "Far Cry with Dinos", "Guerilla has not made a good game", "Good impressions mean nothing", "Another Ubisoft game" People have had enough of that, if you want to discuss the game discuss the game and provide more context then what you hear warriors repeating in other threads.
 
Back-In-Black said:
It's not, when I'm looking for an opinion on a new story driven RPG the last person I want to hear is someone whose never played or finished one and doesn't care much for story in games. It'd be like me reviewing a fighting game, I would be completely out of my depth there.
Click to expand...

Not only being out of depth, your priority in what you wanted in a game would not be the same thing that some one who likes fighting games would. So you might miss things that a fighting game fan would either really hate or love as it wouldn't matter to you or even like something (or hate something) that a fighting game fan would hate (or love). Though for the latter as long as you wrote what about the game you hated or loved that should give useful info to anyone looking for that game.
 
Mubrik said:
man. i sunk days!! into KZ multiplayer
guess i preferred generic turrets and spawn beacons to wall running, sliding and 180 quick scope(whatever the fuck that is) lol
Click to expand...

Ohh man i remember Radec Academy. That place was shitfest. GG please remaster KZ2 :O
 
onemanasylum said:
Cannot really agree, you are missing context. There is legit discussion about the game, like the poor Human AI. The issue is it is the same usual suspects most of the time, dropping into the thread with an agenda, without knowing much about the game, and saying the same, generic criticism. So it's "Far Cry with Dinos", "Guerilla has not made a good game", "Good impressions mean nothing", "Another Ubisoft game" People have had enough of that, if you want to discuss the game discuss the game and provide more context then what you hear warriors repeating in other threads.
Click to expand...

I've read it all, there are guilty parties on both sides.
 
Tigress said:
Not only being out of depth, your priority in what you wanted in a game would not be the same thing that some one who likes fighting games would. So you might miss things that a fighting game fan would either really hate or love as it wouldn't matter to you or even like something (or hate something) that a fighting game fan would hate (or love). Though for the latter as long as you wrote what about the game you hated or loved that should give useful info to anyone looking for that game.
Click to expand...

Pretty much. Not saying the review is worthless, as I said before it just doesn't help me in any way. It's like people that praised Fallout 4 when it's easily probably the worst Fallout game yet and barely an RPG. But, they had different priorities and thus judged it differently than someone who cares about the franchise or RPGs in general. Fallout 4 is a decent game, but it's a bad RPG and a horrible Fallout.
 
Back-In-Black said:
It's not, when I'm looking for an opinion on a new story driven RPG the last person I want to hear is someone whose never played or finished one and doesn't care much for story in games. It'd be like me reviewing a fighting game, I would be completely out of my depth there.
Click to expand...
If I dont particularly play fighting games, and a title was a gateway game for someone who feels similarly, that really hooked them deep, that they enjoyed and excelled at despite their inexperience, that's more informative than any review by a genre veteran would ever be. The genre veteran could easily miss the little things and aspects that make that game unique for the non-veteran.

Like when people who have played every game in a series think certain aspects are so simple to learn or rote because they're so accustomed to them. Or like the reviews of remasters, where the usual tone of the review is "remember that thing you and I really loved, it's just as great as you remember", rather than someone playing the game for the first time.

There are tens of millions of people who are just now venturing into new genres, playing games for the first time, who haven't played games for decades and know what kinds of games they like or dont like, or learning why they like certain genres. The notion that reviews should always be aimed at the super experienced people, and only focus on certain aspects from a certain lens, is extremely restricting
 
I have history with GG after playing killzone 2 and 3 a nice amount. Presentation has always been their strong point along with shooting mechanics like hit detection and feedback but it's everything else thst is questionable.

Yea imma need to hear about all the "under the hood" gameplay mechanics before I jump on this.
 
Gorillaz said:
I have history with GG after playing killzone 2 and 3 a nice amount. Presentation has always been their strong point along with shooting mechanics like hit detection and feedback but it's everything else thst is questionable.

Yea imma need to hear about all the "under the hood" gameplay mechanics before I jump on this.
Click to expand...

All that information is out there and has been for a bit. You won't have anything to worry about.
 
More_Badass said:
If I dont particularly play fighting games, and a title was a gateway game for someone who feels similarly, that really hooked them deep, that they enjoyed and excelled at despite their inexperience, that's more informative than any review by a genre veteran would ever be. The genre veteran could easily miss the little things and aspects that make that game unique for the non-veteran.

Like when people who have played every game in a series think certain aspects are so simple to learn or rote because they're so accustomed to them. Or like the reviews of remasters, where the usual tone of the review is "remember that thing you and I really loved, it's just as great as you remember", rather than someone playing the game for the first time.

There are tens of millions of people who are just now venturing into new genres, playing games for the first time, who haven't played games for decades and know what kinds of games they like or dont like, or learning why they like certain genres. The notion that reviews should always be aimed at the super experienced people, and only focus on certain aspects from a certain lens, is extremely restricting
Click to expand...
But is anyone saying that? I see people saying that they personally don't care the review because it doesn't align with their experiences. You yourself said that the review isn't for everyone, and that's fine because it offers a unique look, but that also means that people will pop up and say "Oh, this review isn't for me"
 
Tigress said:
Not only being out of depth, your priority in what you wanted in a game would not be the same thing that some one who likes fighting games would. So you might miss things that a fighting game fan would either really hate or love as it wouldn't matter to you or even like something (or hate something) that a fighting game fan would hate (or love). Though for the latter as long as you wrote what about the game you hated or loved that should give useful info to anyone looking for that game.
Click to expand...

Tbh, most reviews can't review fighting games as is. They are far too mechanically complex to result in anything but a cursory glance of the features present and a surface level analysis of how the gameplay is. If you are a fighting game fan, there are not many reviews that you could read to figure out if a sequel to your favorite game is actually as mechanically in depth and features much of the nuance as the predecessor. e.g. Ain't no one figuring out whether SF4 or SF5 is the better fundamental fighter from a review.

And that doesn't just apply to fighters but many other mechanically complex games where often times, you have to wait for the game to get in the hands of the players to see how it shakes up to its contemporaries and whether or not it actually holds up.

With that view, I much prefer reviews that focus on emotional attachment and the experience of someone playing the game, new to the genre or not, than someone who does a poor job of presenting "substantive gameplay analysis" which generally never works because most reviews are too short and too broad to cover a game in adequate detail.
 
Back-In-Black said:
Pretty much. Not saying the review is worthless, as I said before it just doesn't help me in any way. It's like people that praised Fallout 4 when it's easily probably the worst Fallout game yet and barely an RPG. But, they had different priorities and thus judged it differently than someone who cares about the franchise or RPGs in general. Fallout 4 is a decent game, but it's a bad RPG and a horrible Fallout.
Click to expand...

Not every review is going to speak to everyone.....there will be other reviews for you.
 
wenaldy said:
Ohh man i remember Radec Academy. That place was shitfest. GG please remaster KZ2 :O
Click to expand...

Was that the one with the open spot in the middle with corridors all around it? I'd better Google it. Yeah, that's it. I have no idea how much time I spent on that map. Loved that shitfest.
 
After reading such a glowing review I can't help but be even more excited. Hopefully my wife will also find as much to love about it too, maybe even more than me. It's really exciting to have strong, compelling, well-written female leads these days.
 
Kinyou said:
But is anyone saying that? I see people saying that they personally don't care the review because it doesn't align with their experiences. You yourself said that the review isn't for everyone, and that's fine because it offers a unique look, but that also means that people will pop up and say "Oh, this review isn't for me"
Click to expand...
They arent saying that though. They're saying reviews need to look at these things and a reviewer should like this and that, and if the reviewer and review doesnt, then it's not a valid review. Opinion invalid if conditions arent met
 
onemanasylum said:
Not every review is going to speak to everyone.....there will be other reviews for you.
Click to expand...

More_Badass said:
If I dont particularly play fighting games, and a title was a gateway game for someone who feels similarly, that really hooked them deep, that they enjoyed and excelled at despite their inexperience, that's more informative than any review by a genre veteran would ever be. The genre veteran could easily miss the little things and aspects that make that game unique for the non-veteran.

Like when people who have played every game in a series think certain aspects are so simple to learn or rote because they're so accustomed to them. Or like the reviews of remasters, where the usual tone of the review is "remember that thing you and I really loved, it's just as great as you remember", rather than someone playing the game for the first time.

There are tens of millions of people who are just now venturing into new genres, playing games for the first time, who haven't played games for decades and know what kinds of games they like or dont like, or learning why they like certain genres. The notion that reviews should always be aimed at the super experienced people, and only focus on certain aspects from a certain lens, is extremely restricting
Click to expand...

No one here is saying this. I've never said this, I said the review doesn't help me. Specifically me, an experienced RPG gamer.
 
More_Badass said:
If I dont particularly play fighting games, and a title was a gateway game for someone who feels similarly, that really hooked them deep, that they enjoyed and excelled at despite their inexperience, that's more informative than any review by a genre veteran would ever be. The genre veteran could easily miss the little things and aspects that make that game unique for the non-veteran.

Like when people who have played every game in a series think certain aspects are so simple to learn or rote because they're so accustomed to them. Or like the reviews of remasters, where the usual tone of the review is "remember that thing you and I really loved, it's just as great as you remember", rather than someone playing the game for the first time.

There are tens of millions of people who are just now venturing into new genres, playing games for the first time, who haven't played games for decades and know what kinds of games they like or dont like, or learning why they like certain genres. The notion that reviews should always be aimed at the super experienced people, and only focus on certain aspects from a certain lens, is extremely restricting
Click to expand...

Yeah but I don't think the original post lambasted that they didn't care about this review was saying it wasn't useful for anyone. They were saying it wasn't useful to them (some one who likes RPGs and wants some one with the same priorities views on it). I don't think they were trying to say the review wasn't useful. Just not useful to them.
 
When I read reviews I want to know why the reviewer felt of any particular way regarding the game. If the game interest me then I probably know enough about mechanics and stuff but even if I don't, again, knowing why a reviewer gives a good or bad calification to a game is more important to me than how the game plays and blah.
These days there are many ways to be informed about a game, not only reviews. Reviews aren't the begining and ending of a video game, they're just another piece of information.
 
I know this is the title that I want to play and will have to get a PS4, for. Next year I will be a broke gamer (as this year is all about saving)
 
Back-In-Black said:
No one here is saying this. I've never said this, I said the review doesn't help me. Specifically me, an experienced RPG gamer.
Click to expand...
Tigress said:
Yeah but I don't think the original post lambasted that they didn't care about this review was saying it wasn't useful for anyone. They were saying it wasn't useful to them (some one who likes RPGs and wants some one with the same priorities views on it). I don't think they were trying to say the review wasn't useful. Just not useful to them.
Click to expand...
The kind of nuanced reasonable comments that acknowledge "it's not a review aimed at me and I'm fine with that" are not the norm. (To be fair, nuanced and reasonable comments are not the norm in any review, best of, etc. thread)
 
onemanasylum said:
Ok, but that's now what you initially said. That is every exclusive review thread, news at 11.
Click to expand...

My initial point was that even things that aren't shit posts are regarded as such just because Far Cry is mentioned, I mean it doesn't happen all the time, but its happened enough times that I noticed. Anyways we're gonna keep debating in circles, we've each said our piece.
 
The opening paragraph manages to be more nauseating than the console war skirmish that seems to be surrounding this game. The last paragraph is pretty bad too. Some real corny shit I'd expect from a school newspaper. I don't read many reviews these days, but probably one of the worst I've read in a while. Hope the game is decent.
 
Normally when you see someone reviewing a game in a genre that they are not fond of it does not go over very well. It's nice to see an exception and the possibility that this game can potentially open the door for many who usually are turned off by open world epics. This is more or less what More_Badass is trying to convey, I think. It bodes well for the game.
 
Mentioning Katniss in a kind of a appraising way is making me fear this game must have a real superficial bad story full of clichés which doesn't resonate with me. Too bad, was kind of looking forward to it.
 
de_reddy said:
Mentioning Katniss in a kind of a appraising way is making me fear this game must have a real superficial bad story full of clichés which doesn't resonate with me. Too bad, was kind of looking forward to it.
Click to expand...

She is just talking about archery skills here.
 
ironcreed said:
Normally when you see someone reviewing a game in a genre that they are not fond of it does not go over very well. It's nice to see an exception and the possibility that this game can potentially open the door for many who usually are turned off by open world epics. This is more or less what More_Badass is trying to convey, I think. It bodes well for the game.
Click to expand...
I said as much earlier. I've experienced that moment that the reviewer conveyed so many times. It makes a game special when it happens. It's the kind of thing you don't forget
More_Badass said:
A random aside: there's something really cool reading about someone finding their gateway game into a genre. XCOM Enemy Unknown was my first turn based game, Demon's Souls my first action RPG, Elite Dangerous my first space sim, Company of Heroes my first RTS.

I know that feeling expressed in the review very well. It's like suddenly being aware of an entire new dimension, a itch you never knew existed now being scratched
Click to expand...
 
Hey, first post on gaf after many years as a filthy lurker! Im very excited by Horizon, it looks incredible and i'll preorder it this week from the store, even though i have a backlog of biblical proportions! The next two weeks are going to drag waiting but at least we have the reviews to keep us occupied. Im predicting 90+ on metacritic, it will be raining 10's haha
 
Gorillaz said:
I have history with GG after playing killzone 2 and 3 a nice amount. Presentation has always been their strong point along with shooting mechanics like hit detection and feedback but it's everything else thst is questionable.

Yea imma need to hear about all the "under the hood" gameplay mechanics before I jump on this.
Click to expand...

Same for me.

Of course I know there is a lot of first impressions already out there, however first impressions usually tend to be overly positive (unless the game is absolute shit) because the 'honeymoon period' is at its strongest and people like to focus on what they like.
 
ironcreed said:
She is just talking about archery skills here.
Click to expand...

Yeah I know, but thinking of top tier archers in stories Katniss isn't the first that pops in my mind but it gives some info about what the author likes. This combined with the further appraisal makes me fear it won't be the dystopian epic I was hoping for.
 
de_reddy said:
Yeah I know, but thinking of top tier archers in stories Katniss isn't the first that pops in my mind but it gives some info about what the author likes. This combined with the further appraisal makes me fear it won't be the dystopian epic I was hoping for.
Click to expand...
Which archers do? Legolas?

What other well known bow-wielding characters are there? Legolas and Katniss are the first ones that come to mind
 
de_reddy said:
Mentioning Katniss in a kind of a appraising way is making me fear this game must have a real superficial bad story full of clichés which doesn't resonate with me. Too bad, was kind of looking forward to it.
Click to expand...
lol.... She was mentioning Katniss because both use bow and arrow.
 
More_Badass said:
They arent saying that though. They're saying reviews need to look at these things and a reviewer should like this and that, and if the reviewer and review doesnt, then it's not a valid review. Opinion invalid if conditions arent met
Click to expand...

Not gonna say your opinon is wrong but shouldn't reviewers try to review and analyze more than one aspect of the game?

After reading this review I got nothing more than one thing out of it "This reviewer really like the main character" because that is all she talked about and she didn't even go into much depth while doing it either.

I believe a review should analyse the different aspects of the game, not everything needs to be analysed as much and priorities can be different from person to person, and it should come to some sort of conclusion about the game in its entirety. I don't think this "review" did that at all, it felt more akin to a pure opinion piece or small essay about the main character and not the game as a whole.

If you're gonna say that this that having these kinds of expectations on a review is false then I'm just going to counter with this being my opinion and that I probably would get failed in my Swedish courses if I tried to review a book by just analyzing the main character without conclusion with a small introduction about the rest of the book, so that's where I got that opinion from.

Of course I believe the game will be good and this review does make me think that way but I don't think this review is any good.
 
de_reddy said:
Mentioning Katniss in a kind of a appraising way is making me fear this game must have a real superficial bad story full of clichés which doesn't resonate with me. Too bad, was kind of looking forward to it.
Click to expand...

She compare the Aloy traits to other characters .
It had nothing to do with the story unless you think story going to be like harry potter since she mention Hermione.
 
Spirited said:
Not gonna say your opinon is wrong but shouldn't reviewers try to review and analyze more than one aspect of the game?
Click to expand...
No, a reviewer should discuss why the game worked for them. That's all review is, why that individual person enjoyed the game and a review score is a representation of their enjoyment. It has nothing to do with quality
 
Riposte said:
The opening paragraph manages to be more nauseating than the console war skirmish that seems to be surrounding this game. The last paragraph is pretty bad too. Some real corny shit I'd expect from a school newspaper. I don't read many reviews these days, but probably one of the worst I've read in a while. Hope the game is decent.
Click to expand...

yup.
 
de_reddy said:
Yeah I know, but thinking of top tier archers in stories Katniss isn't the first that pops in my mind but it gives some info about what the author likes. This combined with the further appraisal makes me fear it won't be the dystopian epic I was hoping for.
Click to expand...
If you have to think about a female archer... yes, Katniss is the first that comes to my mind.
gundamkyoukai said:
Name one other female that is well know for archery at least to the mainstream .
Click to expand...
Bingo
 
de_reddy said:
Yeah I know, but thinking of top tier archers in stories Katniss isn't the first that pops in my mind but it gives some info about what the author likes. This combined with the further appraisal makes me fear it won't be the dystopian epic I was hoping for.
Click to expand...

Name one other female that is well know for archery at least to the mainstream .
 
gundamkyoukai said:
Name one other female that is well know for archery at least to the mainstream .
Click to expand...
The Brave character

Who also has red hair.

That movie was bad. Aloy has red hair. So did she. Seeing a pattern here. Also killzone was bad. Have I said that?
 
That was a really glowing review although it didn't get too in depth into many of the systems or gameplay itself. Excited to read more after the embargo lifts, assuming we aren't lucky enough for more to leak between now and then.
 
More_Badass said:
No, a reviewer should discuss why the game worked for them. That's all review is, why that individual person enjoyed the game and a review score is a representation of their enjoyment. It has nothing to do with quality
Click to expand...

Then every post on gaf that has an opinion about a game, a character in that game, a part of the story classifies as a review to you?
 
More_Badass said:
I said as much earlier. I've experienced that moment that the reviewer conveyed so many times. It makes a game special when it happens. It's the kind of thing you don't forget
Click to expand...

Exactly. It makes it sound like it is going to be a special game, even for those of us already entrenched in the genre. It's rare to see this.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Lego Horizon Adventures | Review Thread
Analysis Review  2 3 4 5
215
13K
Nydius replied
DF - Horizon ZD/FW Pro review
2
81
4K
sachos replied
Horizon Zero Dawn Remastered | Review Thread
Analysis Review  4 5 6 7 8
379
25K
kruis replied
Famitsu Review Scores: Issue 1892 — The First Berserker: Khazan, AI LIMIT and more scored
Review 
6
575
FalsettoVibe replied
The First Berserker: Khazan - Reviews Thread
4 5 6 7 8
371
21K
Lucifers Beard replied
Top Bottom