Support NeoGAF

[Vinterbird]

Is this a game where we are doing always the same thing or it bring new stuff to entertain?

It's primarily and action platformer, which is what you are going to be doing for 12-13 hours, alongside painting, erasing and talking to people.

 

[Sagitario]

Music is one the best things about this game. The sound is totally Disney and while walking around Mean Street for instance is fantastic. Other levels within the game, same. Music during cutscenes are fun aswell. And to me, it sounds like Junction Point gave every level the right type of music.

That's soooo good to hear!

 

[JRW]

I was 13.5 hours with mostly all sidequests done.

Wow I must be slow how many quests did you finish? im at 21 hours but im close to the end finally lol. These last few hours of the game have been the best yet.

 

[Vinterbird]

Wow I must be slow how many quests did you finish? im at 21 hours but im close to the end finally lol. These last few hours of the game have been the best yet.

I had 98 missions complete and one failed, but it includes main story stuff in that number. No clue about sidequest stuff, but I did everything I ran into and sought out a bunch as well.

 

[Sadist]

I just want to ask one thing. It doesnt look like it is (at all) but would you consider this game to feel "soulless"?

Epic Mickey certainly has "soul"

 

[YagizY]

I guess my main question is:

If you find story and atmosphere more important than gameplay and love Disney, is this the right game for me?

Most games I like have average gameplay but usually suck me into their world. Does this game have that effect?

 

[JRW]

I had 98 missions complete and one failed, but it includes main story stuff in that number. No clue about sidequest stuff, but I did everything I ran into and sought out a bunch as well.

Wow im at 127 quests so far. I found a lot of them by talking to everyone.

 

[Vinterbird]

I guess my main question is:

If you find story and atmosphere more important than gameplay and love Disney, is this the right game for me?

Most games I like have average gameplay but usually suck me into their world. Does this game have that effect?

You will enjoy it then, no doubt about it. The story doesn't go as far as I wanted it to, but it is good and the game is drowning in atmosphere.

 

[EatChildren]

I guess my main question is:

If you find story and atmosphere more important than gameplay and love Disney, is this the right game for me?

Most games I like have average gameplay but usually suck me into their world. Does this game have that effect?

I guess so, yeah. As I and others have said, opinions are probably going to be pretty polarised on this. For people with only a passing interest in Disney, there's really not much to the game that will impress them. For people who love Disney, they're naturally going to be far more interested in the world and what is around the next corner.

 

[Stinkles]

Why are people being banned in here, roughly?

 

[Vinterbird]

Why are people being banned in here, roughly?

I don't think anyone in here was banned (unless they were non-reviewers and therefore pirated it), the rest of the bannings came from the reveal thread were people were going "oh man, why Wii?" and "port it, POOORT IT".

 

[EatChildren]

Why are people being banned in here, roughly?

The thread title? Came from the reveal thread. All the port begging. Many, many bans.

( ._.) So many bodies...

 

[mantidor]

I installed Thief (it's called Dark Project here in Germany ) yesterday after I didn't play it for years. Surprisingly I just had to do two things to run it on Windows 7 (setup.exe -lgntforce to ignore the NT message) and disabling the other CPUs in the task manager.
Well, I hope it's still fun in 2010.

Thief is still better than most game of the years of this decade, of course it holds up, unless you have something against rough polygons.

 

[apana]

So this game is like Banjo Kazooie right? I'm nervous about how this game is going to turn out but I'll support regardless since I really don't have any other options for adventure platformers. I'm not so concerned about whether they got the mechanics perfectly right; more interested in whether the world and story are interesting/engaging.

 

[EatChildren]

So this game is like Banjo Kazooie right? I'm nervous about how this game is going to turn out but I'll support regardless since I really don't have any other options for adventure platformers. I'm not so concerned about whether they got the mechanics perfectly right; more interested in whether the world and story are interesting/engaging.

Its more like Banjo Kazooie than Super Mario Galaxy, but its not exactly like Banjo.

 

[MYE]

You will enjoy it then, no doubt about it. The story doesn't go as far as I wanted it to, but it is good and the game is drowning in atmosphere.

Wooooo

 

[nemesun]

I've been on a complete media blackout since the game was announced. I'm one of those old school Disney fans who grew up with Goofy, Mickey, and Donald. I think what draws me to this game is pure nostalgia. I'm hoping for it to be a massive blockbuster so Disney somehow greenlight another Quackshot.

 

[Vinterbird]

I've been on a complete media blackout since the game was announced. I'm one of those old school Disney fans who grew up with Goofy, Mickey, and Donald. I think what draws me to this game is pure nostalgia. I'm hoping for it to be a massive blockbuster so Disney somehow greenlight another Quackshot.

Warren wants to do Ducktales if he gets his way, but the game is very much setting up a sequel

 

[Hiltz]

I wonder if the quality of Epic Mickey will end up contradicting what Warren Spector has said in past interviews about how he must be given enough time to make great games. I mean, with enough time you'd think Warren and his development crew could have spent more time fine tuning the camera and perhaps even fixing the "mediocre" platforming.

Are the game's boss battles creative and enjoyable ? Is it correct to assume that like with the Capt. Hook boss fight, there's typically two ways to take on other bosses ?

 

[Vinterbird]

I wonder if the quality of Epic Mickey will end up contradicting what Warren Spector has said in past interviews about how he must be given enough time to make great games. I mean, with enough time you'd think Warren and his development crew could have spent more time fine tuning the camera and perhaps even fixing the "mediocre" platforming.

Are the game's boss battles creative and enjoyable ?

They are as basic as you would fear.

 

[EatChildren]

They are as basic as you would fear.

Clumsy too.

I liked the idea of each boss battle, but I dont think any of them played particularly well.

 

[nemesun]

Warren wants to do Ducktales if he gets his way, but the game is very much setting up a sequel

Oh, that's good to hear, although with the recent top brass shakeup I'm less than enthusiastic about a possiblity of another project such as this.

 

[Hiltz]

Man, I hope Spector has prepared himself for the backlash coming from players and reviewers criticizing this game.

Seriously, after the hype and PR talk of games like Silent Hill: Shattered Memories (the game is watching you), Metroid: Other M (characterization of Samus and the focus on her past) , and now Epic Mickey (the emphasis on player choice matters and alleged AAA gameplay) , it's going going to be difficult for me to really trust what game designers have to say about their games.

I suppose I won't feel as bummed about the overall game now that I can get $10 off the game from Target (thanks to he DKCR offer).

 

[EatChildren]

My review is up.

 

[Vinterbird]

My review is up.

Mirroring my feelings exactly.

 

[nemesun]

My review is up.

That's a disappointing score. Although reading through the review it doesn't match the negativity of that score. The major gripe you had with it seems to be with the clumsy mechanics. I can live with that.

 

[nemesun]

" the cheeky writing and creative animations manage to capture the unmistakable charm of a true Disney animated featured."
That's all I needed to hear. I'm getting this.

 

[EatChildren]

That's a disappointing score. Although reading through the review it doesn't match the negativity of that score. The major gripe you had with it seems to be with the clumsy mechanics. I can live with that.

6.5/10 isn't a disasterious score. We try not to hand out 9's and 8's to every game that slightly impresses us. My review made it clear that what impressed me most was the standout attention to Disney, but this is not enough to alone judge a 'videogame'. As a videogame too many mechanics and ideas are either underused or poorly implimented.

The platforming is a bit crap. The combat is a bit crap. The exploration is a bit crap. The missions are a bit crap. The level design is a bit crap. Too many elements that are intengral to play fail to live up to the hype and quality one would expect.

But as I also said, its not a bad game, its just not a great game. If you love Disney, and know Disney, you're still in for a treat.

 

[nemesun]

6.5/10 isn't a disasterious score. We try not to hand out 9's and 8's to every game that slightly impresses us. My review made it clear that what impressed me most was the standout attention to Disney, but this is not enough to alone judge a 'videogame'. As a videogame too many mechanics and ideas are either underused or poorly implimented.

The platforming is a bit crap. The combat is a bit crap. The exploration is a bit crap. The missions are a bit crap. The level design is a bit crap. Too many elements that are intengral to play fail to live up to the hype and quality one would expect.

But as I also said, its not a bad game, its just not a great game. If you love Disney, and know Disney, you're still in for a treat.

I fall under that category.

However, it’s the 2D side scrolling stages that really steal the show. A treat for the eyes and ears, each perfectly recreates the style and animation of their associated cartoons, accompanied by the original musical scores and beautiful animations. Disney fans will adore taking a trip down memory lane

 

[MYE]

My review is up.

That is one low score. Damn

 

[Sadist]

Well written and I can relate to certain criticisms.

 

[Hiltz]

What an informative review, EatChildren. I appriciate how you took the time to dissect the game and reveal Epic Mickey for what it really is. I'm disappointed the gameplay isn't going to be nearly as fun or as creative as Warren Spector made it out to be.

It's not like Wii owners need a good excuse such as the lack of compelling gameplay to not buy core third-party titles. However, when a video game is lacking this then it obviously make matters worse by becoming a major turn-off. Disney and Spector had everything they needed to make this game a great one: long enough development time, good-sized budget, well hyped and marketed, massive Disney nostalgia, the interesting concept of player choice and the twisted creation of the Wasteland. Spector, you've made a disappointingly average game.

 

[EatChildren]

I fall under that category.

Then you're bound to have fun , just as I did.

 

[SpacePirate Ridley]

Well, I have been playing this and I think is awesome.
Never played Banjo Kazzoie, but I played and beat, Conker's Bad Fur Day, and it plays exactly the same as it (without the b stuff that give you diferent actions and adding the paint and thninner, of course)

Its a Small World was really changed since those first shots we saw of the game, and I can say it was for the better, it really feels like the real ride now.

I know why you put that score EatChildren, but yet I feel is too harsh. My parents always thought a 6 was not good at all, so I have lived with that thing all my live, and with what I have played, and whta you have written I think is a pretty bad score and give a totally diferent impression.

And you know how the people (that are too idiot to read) will use that type of score.
But as I say, is not your fault, seems the review system you are using works like that.

 

[Vinterbird]

Well, I have been playing this and I think is awesome.
Never played Banjo Kazzoie, but I played and beat, Conker's Bad Fur Day, and it plays exactly the same as it (without the b stuff that give you diferent actions and adding the paint and thninner, of course)

Its a Small World was really changed since those first shots we saw of the game, and I can say it was for the better, it really feels like the real ride now.

I know why you put that score EatChildren, but yet I feel is too harsh. My parents always thought a 6 was not good at all, so I have lived with that thing all my live, and with what I have played, and whta you have written I think is a pretty bad score and give a totally diferent impression.

And you know how the people (that are too idiot to read) will use that type of score.

6 is above average, which is exactly what this game is. Charming, but above average.

 

[MYE]

Well, I have been playing this and I think is awesome.
Never played Banjo Kazzoie, but I played and beat, Conker's Bad Fur Day, and it plays exactly the same as it (without the b stuff that give you diferent actions and adding the paint and thninner, of course)

Its a Small World was really changed since those first shots we saw of the game, and I can say it was for the better, it really feels like the real ride now.

Good to hear

 

[EatChildren]

And you know how the people (that are too idiot to read) will use that type of score.

Yeah, I know, and it sucks, but I'm really not going to conform to Metacritic standards, and I like trying to stay as close to a true 10 point scale as possible, where a 6/10 does not mean "WORST GAME OF ALL TIME", but instead means the game is still enjoyable, but has a good few flaws holding it back from perfection. It's an above average game, but its not a great game.

I gave GoldenEye 7.5/10 and it's probably my favourite shooter of the year. 8/10 is GOTY material, and neither that nor Mickey come close.

 

[SpacePirate Ridley]

6 is above average, which is exactly what this game is. Charming, but above average.

I understand, but as I have explained, I still find it kind of harsh.

 

[Deleted member 30609]

6 is above average, which is exactly what this game is. Charming, but above average.

in all scales that matter -- which is to say -- public perception, developer/PR bonuses and the average score range of every other scale on the video game planet, 6 is decidedly below average.

you can sing your "6 is above 5 which is half of ten and therefore it is above average", but unfortunately 'your' website doesn't exist in a vacuum.

I'm not trying to say the score wasn't justified, but to call it an above-average score is completely ludicrous. An average score is defined by its environment, not the scale you place on it. It's a messed up situation, but thems the reality of the hole ign/gamespot and the rest have dug themselves in the early 00s, and thems the hole we live in now.

 

[nemesun]

in all scales that matter -- which is to say -- public perception, developer/PR bonuses and the average score range of every other scale on the video game planet, 6 is decidedly below average.

you can sing your "6 is above 5 which is half of ten and therefore it is above average", but unfortunately 'your' website doesn't exist in a vacuum.

I'm not trying to say the score wasn't justified, but to call it an above-average score is completely ludicrous. An average score is defined by its environment, not the scale you place on it. It's a messed up situation, but thems the reality of the hole ign/gamespot and the rest have dug themselves in the early 00s, and thems the hole we live in now.

I concur.

 

[EatChildren]

in all scales that matter -- which is to say -- public perception, developer/PR bonuses and the average score range of every other scale on the video game planet, 6 is decidedly below average.

you can sing your "6 is above 5 which is half of ten and therefore it is above average", but unfortunately 'your' website doesn't exist in a vacuum.

I'm not trying to say the score wasn't justified, but to call it an above-average score is completely ludicrous. An average score is defined by its environment, not by the arbitrary scale you place on it.

Totally, which is why its always important to actually read the review, even though we all know a lot of people wont. Just because gaming journalism is total mess of shit does not mean journalists should be encouraged to conform to this absurd standards.

I'm certainly not going to, and I'm glad the website I write for mostly refuses to as well. We have score guidelines, which states;

6.5 – 7: Above average. Here we're getting into games that you may actually want to play even if they're not from your preferred genre. Games of these scores or above would be described as 'good' by most gamers. Most people should be able to enjoy this title to some degree if they like the gameplay type or property at all.

If I start caring about Metacritic, publishers, public perception, and all that shit, I feel my integrity as a reviewer is damaged.

 

[MYE]

I understand, but as I have explained, I still find it kind of harsh.

I only find it harsh because 6 will never be above average to me.

If someone rated something i did with a 6, i would certainly not percieve that as positive feedback. Its just how my mind works.

I understand what EatChildren is saying, btw. Just sharing my thoughts on this kind of scoring system

 

[Deleted member 30609]

I feel like, as a reviewer, you number one priority is communicating something to an audience. If you're using your sites scale, don't get me wrong, I think its admirable, but who are you helping? If the majority of your readership perceive a 6/10 as below average, then by any measurable scale, doesn't that make it below average?

I like the idea, but I believe a totally different scale needs to be adopted if that's the objective. The /10 scale is irreparably ruined.

I'm not taking shots at you, mind. It's easy to sit here and have a go when I don't actually have a voice outside of GAF to maintain. I'm just thinking out loud, as usual.

 

[one_kill]

A 6 for me suggests a "it's just fine" game, whereas a 7 would suggest a "good" game.

I'm not sure if I want to get this game yet.

 

[Vinterbird]

I feel like, as a reviewer, you number one priority is communicating something to an audience. If you're using your sites scale, don't get me wrong, I think its admirable, but who are you helping? If the majority of your readership perceive a 6/10 as below average, then by any measurable scale, doesn't that make it below average?

I like the idea, but I believe a totally different scale needs to be adopted if that's the objective. The /10 scale is irreparably ruined.

I'm not taking shots at you, mind. It's easy to sit here and have a go when I don't actually have a voice outside of GAF to maintain. I'm just thinking out loud, as usual.

Totally agree that we need a new scale to review games in (how about no scale, and actually reading the god damn opinion), and GiantBomb has gotten out of that stuff by being clever and using a five star system, which oddly enough translates differently, mentally, then a 10, 50 or 100 point scale does.

If I start caring about Metacritic, publishers, public perception, and all that shit, I feel my integrity as a reviewer is damaged.

Then hope you never become EIC. It is absolutely horrible fighting with PR after a bad review, trying to maintain a relationship while still keeping integrity is the thing that I admire the people in the business most for.

The fact that the reviewers themselves crack up, and think it will please everybody and give a higher score is a totally different story.

 

[nemesun]

I feel like, as a reviewer, you number one priority is communicating something to an audience. If you're using your sites scale, don't get me wrong, I think its admirable, but who are you helping? If the majority of your readership perceive a 6/10 as below average, then by any measurable scale, doesn't that make it below average?

I like the idea, but I believe a totally different scale needs to be adopted if that's the objective. The /10 scale is irreparably ruined.

I'm not taking shots at you, mind. It's easy to sit here and have a go when I don't actually have a voice outside of GAF to maintain. I'm just thinking out loud, as usual.

The 5 star scale should be the de facto for now. Every site should implement it now that 10 point system is unsalvageable.

 

[EatChildren]

I feel like, as a reviewer, you number one priority is communicating something to an audience. If you're using your sites scale, don't get me wrong, I think its admirable, but who are you helping? If the majority of your readership perceive a 6/10 as below average, then by any measurable scale, doesn't that make it below average?

I completely agree, but I feel that, as a reviewer, my job is to analyse the mechanics and presentation of a game and communicate that directly through text. I dont feel it is my job to to babysit the lazy who refuse to read, or conform to standards set by the average (insert terrible website) reader who dismisses any game under an 8/10. It is not my job to sell the game to anybody, but to articulate its quality. I feel this is the most important aspect of journalism and reviews.

Plus, under the score of every single review on our website we provide a link that details our scoring system. If people wish to ignore this and adopt their own standard, fine, but I'm not going to switch from our clearly stated standard to theirs.

Not shots taken, nor any offense. I can see your point, but that is mine. I simply dont believe in conforming to the Metacritic age. Even if this might seem unjust and misleading, considering how many people adopt their own perception of 10 point scale rankings, this is still how I chose to operate as a reviewer.

If I had it my way we'd use a five point scale, but its not my call. On that scale Epic Mickey would be ~3/5, which doesn't sound half as bad.

Then hope you never become EIC. It is absolutely horrible fighting with PR after a bad review, trying to maintain a relationship while still keeping integrity is the thing that I admire the people in the business most for.

The fact that the reviewers themselves crack up, and think it will please everybody and give a higher score is a totally different story.

EIC?

As for relationships with publishers, I have some and am quite happy to keep them, but I'm not going to sell out my reviews. If they're going throw a hissy fit over a low score, that's their problem. How the higher ups on our website feel is beyond me, but I'm not going to bend under publisher might. I'd be quite happy to throw away a lifetime supply of free games rather than artificially bump a low score because the pub is cranky.

Thankfully I havent had to deal with anything like that yet.

 

[Vinterbird]

EIC?

As for relationships with publishers, I have some and am quite happy to keep them, but I'm not going to sell out my reviews. If they're going throw a hissy fit over a low score, that's their problem. How the higher ups on our website feel is beyond me, but I'm not going to bend under publisher might. I'd be quite happy to throw away a lifetime supply of free games rather than artificially bump a low score because the pub is cranky.

Thankfully I havent had to deal with anything like that yet.

Editor in Chief, and seeing you say that you dont bend to make people happy, makes me smile. Now if only everyone could think like that.

 

[mantidor]

As a first impression a 6 in a scale for 1-10 for me is a bad score. However I find the 1-10 scale useless and meaningless in game reviews, I'd read the reviews but I don't want to get spoilers, and no matter how much the reviewer claims the review is spoiler-free, I have kind of absurd standards for what is consider a spoiler.

I'll take what little information the thread can give me, and while I was excited about this game before I'm a bit hesitant now, but I just have to wait for more impressions.

 

[hatchx]

Regardless if it's a six or seven, it sounds as if this could be the big disappointment of the year. With the hype and advertising and Spectar-praising I'd expect the lowest scores to be 8-range.