Aretak
Member
LargeExplosive.com staffed by ex-GI employees coming soon to an internet near you.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Call of Duty: Black Ops: Declassified |OT| Ad-Hoc Summary: It Is Not Terrible!
- Thread starter Kazerei
- Start date
Mushroomer25
Member
That tends to happen when a game costs $50, instead of $5. People mysteriously want more content when they pay more for the game.
It's pretty silly how some of you are saying Giant Bomb is anti-Vita because they haven't shown a lot of enthusiasm toward it. Most of the gaming world is unenthusiastic about the Vita. This doesn't mean that reviewers can't separate the game from the system and review a title on its own merits.
Shiny bling means nothing when the core stuff about your game is broken beyond repair and the available content barely makes for a $10 downloadable game.
schwabdizzle
Banned
Sony should of just shelled out the money to have Treyarch make this. I knew this was going to be a disappointment.
Are you really looking for that sort of checklist-style review? Is that really what matters when you're trying to get a review out there to aid people's purchasing decisions? He was too busy talking about how everything was crap to mention whether there was an option to change sensitivity. I think he has his priorities straight.
ScreenSplitter
Member
Why they didn't do a straight console port is beyond me.
SteveWinwood
Member
When I read a review, I want to know in text how pretty the game looks.
schwabdizzle
Banned
IDK....Sony could have scored it is was cross play with PS3 or at least your rankings carry over....God, if they did this they would of sold a million units easily.
It's fair to ask how the game looks, considering there aren't any screenshots of Declassified, besides the four or five released at Gamescom :lol
Nothing wrong with questioning the tone of the site torwards vita. Hivemind can happen in any workplace.
Most if not all of the gaming press was against ps3 at 599. Also against 360 during red ring. Certain sites have a bias lean sometimes.
firehawk12
Subete no aware
Awesome.
Like I said, that doesn't mean they can't separate these biases from the individual games they're reviewing. It's their job to do so. On the other hand, posters in here who have played the game are all so invested in the Vita that they're far less likely to review the game on its own merits.
Ask PocketGamer ...
I haven't read the GiantBomb review yet so I'll comment when I read.
I imagine Sony's agreement with Acti was: Here's some money, make us an exclusive CoD game on the Vita and we'll advertise it ourselves.
Then Activision turned around and went to Nihlistic to make that 'exclusive' CoD. You can see Sony trying to distance itself from it, pimping out AC instead of COD in all the interviews.
Ollie Pooch
In a perfect world, we'd all be homersexual
I know it's easy to go 'JUST PORT IT OVER!' like they have to just hit the 'PORT' button - but why didn't they do it? Seems like the obvious choice - it makes no sense to me.
Awesome I hear ya and will sleep easy tonight. Good to know the hype men always do their jobs.
You answered your own question. It was obviously far cheaper to do what they did than to try to recreate all of Black Ops 2 in portable form.
Giant Bomb editors are about the polar opposite of "hype men".
Green Yoshi
Member
At least the game made so many people write their first user review ever on Metacritic.com.
Sigh. :-(
User Score BOD: 7.1
User Score Black Ops 2: 4.2
That's hilarious. ;-)
chickdigger802
Banned
don't sony and activision not even have the best of relationships?
OT, but with sony scoring all kind of exclusives content or w/e with ubisoft and EA, you'd expect them to put some effort with vita.
OT, but with sony scoring all kind of exclusives content or w/e with ubisoft and EA, you'd expect them to put some effort with vita.
This is often seen as evidence of foul play by the developers.
It doesn't have to mean that, but it has been the case in a lot of reviews, which have often been terribly done - already been covered in these threads and others.
Especially giant-bomb. I actually thought they were credible before I started reading reviews like the AC one.
Ollie Pooch
In a perfect world, we'd all be homersexual
I wonder if recreating Black Ops 2 was ever an option - as in, if Sony coughed up the cash it would have happened. Guess we'll never know.
chickdigger802
Banned
porting over the wii version of BLOPS1 would have been better than this.
So I read the Giantbomb review. It's not a bad review. This game is having a Tebow effect.
A couple question though ... Is it really a 3/5 game that got 1/5 for (a) multiplayer issues and (b) it's $50 dollars retail? Did Jeff not know that this game will be missions based ie Spec Ops plus some story?
A couple question though ... Is it really a 3/5 game that got 1/5 for (a) multiplayer issues and (b) it's $50 dollars retail? Did Jeff not know that this game will be missions based ie Spec Ops plus some story?
^I didn't even bother with the giantbomb review.
I'm pretty sure it was Sony being a greedy cheapass here. Remember the tweets from the cod devs - "up to acitivision and sony to get that implemented." 5 days later "up to sony". Not that it is surprising Activision isn't interested considering the vita userbase and how nihilistic were chosen as the devs.
I'm pretty sure it was Sony being a greedy cheapass here. Remember the tweets from the cod devs - "up to acitivision and sony to get that implemented." 5 days later "up to sony". Not that it is surprising Activision isn't interested considering the vita userbase and how nihilistic were chosen as the devs.
Sony : Activision, could you port COD to Vita?
Activision: No.
Sony : Pwease?
Activision : No
Sony : How about we pay for it?
Activision : OK, 7 million Dollars
Sony : Ok
Activision : Hey Nihilistic, make this game in 6 months for $750k and we'll buy you a lobster dinner. Maybe we'll let you dust of StarCraft Ghost.
Activision: No.
Sony : Pwease?
Activision : No
Sony : How about we pay for it?
Activision : OK, 7 million Dollars
Sony : Ok
Activision : Hey Nihilistic, make this game in 6 months for $750k and we'll buy you a lobster dinner. Maybe we'll let you dust of StarCraft Ghost.
xxbrothawizxx63
Member
Couldn't have said it better myself...
Ollie Pooch
In a perfect world, we'd all be homersexual
Sounds like it - so shitty. And they wonder why the system is failing - there's no effort going into it, even from the company that made it.
TwoDurans
"Never said I wasn't a hypocrite."
This feels like another one of those Alpha Protocol situations. If you know what you're getting yourself into then this game is a great buy and a lot of fun. If you're expecting it to be a "console worthy experience" which is how Sony is selling the Vita, then you're going to be very disappointed.
Really this is Sony's fault more than Nihilistic's for billing the entire console wrong.
Really this is Sony's fault more than Nihilistic's for billing the entire console wrong.
Didn't mean to slam nihilistic there, just meant that it seemed Sony had most of the say. And they tried to pull a fast one imo.
Unless they go out and announce proper post-launch support for the title, free of charge (fix issues, new maps and at least bots for the sp - not that that will satisfy all those who wanted a full length campaign but it should do for most..) - anyway, unless that happens, they pretty much deserve any outlash from people who let go of £45 trustingly on it.
It's obvious most people are going to hear of the bad review scores (when they all start arriving) sooner or later, despite the game not actually being that bad (3/10 lol). A promise to improve things would be a good idea imo.
You mean Activision's, right?
Really like alpha protocal also moh. Sometimes reviews are right for me. Announcing additional support would be nice.
TwoDurans
"Never said I wasn't a hypocrite."
Nope. Sony's. Watch this - http://youtu.be/_gsE_1I5dBM
The very last thing said is "console quality on the go." They're trying to say that CoD Vita is exactly the same as CoDBlops2. If you read all the reviews almost all of them compare the game to it's console big brothers, which imho isn't really fair.
I don't think it is totally about console quality, I think it is about shite value. Number of maps. Number of missions. Etc..? It doesn't have to be a console game to have more then 5-6 maps, surely. Especially at the price they are charging (especially digital in EU).
That value is only there if you think you're going to be putting in hours and hours into it with what content is there..
That value is only there if you think you're going to be putting in hours and hours into it with what content is there..
Oh right, sorry I though you were faulting them for the lack of content which would be Acti's fault. Technically, though, those ads are the responsibility of the publisher as well (though we all know Acti doesn't give a shit).
It's silly to dismiss everyone's opinions here.
Not obviously cheaper, no. The Wii port of one of Treyarch's Call of Duty game was made by a team of 5 people, this game took at least 50. Granted, Nihilistic had 6 months instead of 2 years but the math still ends up favoring a port being cheaper than a brand new game.
Sony and Activision probably cut a deal for an exclusive Vita game, which would have been much better for the Vita than a port if they had actually put more effort into it.
the_korben
Member
So true. This COD seems like a FIFA game based on the "FIFA 08" engine with 8 teams. But when you're playing online, you are just allowed to play with 7 players per team on a field half the usual size. Sure it might be fun to play the game every now and then, but who would pay $50 for that if the regular price on the platform is around $35?
TwoDurans
"Never said I wasn't a hypocrite."
No, but reviewers might not be comparing it to CodBlops2 like they are here in NA. Look at the first few lines of both Game Informer and GiantBomb's reviews:
GA - "Releasing on the same day as the solid Black Ops II, Declassified in no way resembles that games level of quality."
GB - "Call of Duty: Black Ops Declassified attempts to bring some of the flavor of 2010's Call of Duty: Black Ops to the PlayStation Vita..."
All I'm saying is that they shouldn't be comparing a Vita game to a console game.
Ollie Pooch
In a perfect world, we'd all be homersexual
It's like i was saying earlier, their tweets always seemed really like they had their hands tied and slightly bitter - 'we want to put this in, but we can't. because Sony says so'. It is like Sony pulling a fast one on their customers - bullet point a CoD game for their system, with minimal effort and a crazy deadline to get some quick system sales. I guess that's being rewarded by the shitty reviews. Stuff like this coupled with the outrageous memory card prices just reeks of arrogance. Granted, Nihilistic haven't the best track record, but I think much of the blame here lies with Activision and Sony - no time and no budget.
And I don't necessarily think people are so invested in the Vita here they can't take their blinkers off - from reading the impressions it seems are genuinely surprised the gameplay turned out to be (relatively) solid. But the fact it could have been so much more, and it's priced so high, says a lot about Sony's attitude to the whole thing.
Perhaps not graphically, but the fact is they COULD have ported down a Vita-tailored version of Black Ops 2 and chose instead to release a game on the same day that by all accounts is extremely light on content - and priced really high.
That's what the impression I'm left with is too, exactly. And they could have charged half price and this would have been amazing. [still mad and broke ;P]: They wanted to pretend they got a full game when it isn't compared to what we're used to, and should rightly be expected to be slammed* for that..otherwise standards would just drop and drop..shame about putting off people who would have otherwise enjoyed it but still. Gotta keep those standards up.
* The review scores don't seem actually representative though. I'd expect a 4-5 (minimum) following industry standards. Just saw giantbomb's reivew score 20/100, lol. Useless. Doubt giantbomb even shed light that it is probably still the best handheld fps available. Did they slam the mp, judging it based on the current patch problems too? Giant bomb are remarkably narrow minded when it comes to the vita.
* The review scores don't seem actually representative though. I'd expect a 4-5 (minimum) following industry standards. Just saw giantbomb's reivew score 20/100, lol. Useless. Doubt giantbomb even shed light that it is probably still the best handheld fps available. Did they slam the mp, judging it based on the current patch problems too? Giant bomb are remarkably narrow minded when it comes to the vita.
That would have been fantastic. All I want is a solid Vita FPS with enough content to justify the price.
Ollie Pooch
In a perfect world, we'd all be homersexual
Yeah, the no reviews thing, the media blackout leading up to the game, the middling impressions from game shows, etc. There's no effort there - the game just sounds like a desperate rush to get a game out so Sony had something to sell for Christmas in bundles and not much more.
Being the best handheld FPS doesn't really mean anything, either. There aren't many! This had so, so much potential to be amazing, to sell systems, to be something that was a must-buy and match the console versions but on-the-go, and it's none of those things. It's being panned more than any high profile game in ages. What a disaster.
^ Yep...could have been insanely good. Still hopefully everything is fixable with money. If enough people get mad about it surely they would do something to fix it... Except the 30 fps. Is it liveable for CoD (the framerate)? .. still haven't played it.. But yeah probably too late, too much work..not that they wouldn't have the funds now that it's in stores with the cod logo.
Ollie Pooch
In a perfect world, we'd all be homersexual
I think 'fixing' it to the level it should have been at would involve creating a new game
AndrewDean84xX
Banned
But at least then, it would be as advertised, console gaming on the go.
Danny Dudekisser
I paid good money for this Dynex!
Gosh... so I guess the solution is to make a new game that's good, too?