• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Geist IGN Review

6.5 Presentation
Great concepts, but sometimes sloppy execution. Compelling storyline. Adequate in-game cut-scenes. Basic menus. Lots of unlockables.

7.5 Graphics
There are times when Geist looks really pretty. It even runs in progressive scan and widescreen. The biggest disappointment here is the framerate, which suffers in high-action sequences.

7.5 Sound
Moody music and sound effects mix with spoken dialogue. But some of the sound samples are used too much.

8.0 Gameplay
Admittedly, the first-person shooter mechanics can be sloppy, but the possession elements are so well crafted that they outweigh the former. A fun, rewarding game with flaws.

8.0 Lasting Appeal
A decent-sized single-player quest and a wealth of fun multiplayer modes.

7.8 OVERALL
(out of 10 / not an average)
 
This game is a game that could benefit from having nicer graphics...Well all games can, but this game's concept in particular could benefit from nicer graphics and effects. I think at least.
 
The text made it sound good. I really hoped that they nailed the puzzle aspect of the game, as that was the most intriguing to me, and IGN would have you believe that they DID. A few more reviews should clear this up.
 
"8.0 Gameplay
Admittedly, the first-person shooter mechanics can be sloppy, but the possession elements are so well crafted that they outweigh the former. A fun, rewarding game with flaws.

8.0 Lasting Appeal
A decent-sized single-player quest and a wealth of fun multiplayer modes."



not at all. i might give it a try.
 
Matt Casamassina said:
Raimi downloads unto his PDA proof that the Volks Corporation has been dabbling in questionable cellular mutation
Click to expand...
Does Matt always write this way? I usually just skip to the overall scores.
 
7.8 is respectable - but certainly not enough to keep the haters from completely dismissing it.

I'm definitely picking it up though. Screw the haters.
 
The dude really goes out of his way to put a positive spin on just about everything. The shooter mechanics are underdeveloped, but not poor, they are clunky and sloppy, but not bad, and while sluggish they are still very functional. Ok dude.
 
I'll get it when it's cheaper for sheer curiousity, I haven't the money or the time to warrant buying it at full price at the moment.
 
But EGM and Game Informer, which are both very respected by gamers, gave it bad scores so IGN is wrong. ):

I'll definitely give this a rental. I'd buy it if I weren't already getting a few other games this month. .. Of course if I like it a lot like I did with Killer 7 I'll probably buy it anyway.
 
Musashi Wins! said:
haha, people will do anything to believe this game is good. to the bitter end.
Click to expand...

Nope. Maybe people want to actually decide for themselves instead of acting like an EGM score is the way of the gamer.
 
Zeo said:
But EGM and Game Informer, which are both very respected by gamers, gave it bad scores so IGN is wrong. ):.
Click to expand...

The IGN review has a definite positive spin; anyone who says otherwise probably spun along with it. Not once did the dude mention the quality of the A.I., despite this being a major negative in both of the other reviews. Then you have the FPS controls that are sloppy, clumsy, underdeveloped... yet they are very functional? That doesn't make much sense, does it? My bet is that the truth can be found somewhere in between these reviews... as always.
 
looks like N-Space didn't have the best technology according to the review but ill give this game a try when it hits $20
 
The good thing about Geist is that it is a video game.

You know, GameCube hasn't seen too many of them this year, forget about an exclusive one. So you can sort of forgive the Nintendo-faithful for holding out hope on this one.
 
Wow, that's a lot higher than I thought they would give it. This means that Gamespot's score will be somewherebetween 7.0 and 7.5 which means this would be worth trying out.

Also, from the interview with the N-space guy, it seems Nintendo's just as much to blame as N-space is.
 
I like the ign interview (video). basically he says that miyamoto came in halfway through development and told them the game was going to be about possessing items and they were going in a different direction with the game. It's kind of funny, because you get the tone through the whole piece, imo, that they had very little final say in what their game was going to be. Probably would have been worse.
 
You can't say they're not advetising the game,I saw a commercial for it while watching tv tonight. Something about some girl watching her tv then being posessed where they show a few secons of actual footage,something like that,I just saw the last few seconds of it.

My money is being spent on DarkWatch-I'll rent Geist just to see how I feel about it though.
I have a gut feeling that its one of those inbetween games. Where its not really bad or great. I guess thats the fun of renting though,seeing for yourself.
 
MaestroRyan said:
PERFECT DARK WITH GHOSTS




OH AND NOT REALLY THAT FUN


EDIT: BUZZJIVE GO BACK TO N-PHILES BECAUSE I AM USING CAPSLOCK

AND YOU DON'T POST THERE ENOUGH
Click to expand...

capslock.gif


You hurt my eyes.
 
Cerrius said:
7.8
Click to expand...

Better than I was expecting, but still probably not enough to pick it up. Maybe after price drops?

Schafer said:
7.8 from IGN for an exclusive translates into what.... a 2.6 in normal person ratings?
Click to expand...

This is IGNCube, not IGNXbox. I haven't read the text of the review, but IGNCube (read: Matt-IGN) seems typically harder on games when it comes to the score.
 
Zeo said:
But EGM and Game Informer, which are both very respected by gamers, gave it bad scores so IGN is wrong. ):

I'll definitely give this a rental. I'd buy it if I weren't already getting a few other games this month. .. Of course if I like it a lot like I did with Killer 7 I'll probably buy it anyway.
Click to expand...

Didn't GI give Paper Mario 2 a bad score since they thought the "average gamer" READ: fratboy, woudln't like it? I think there was a big stink about it.
 
Ulairi said:
Didn't GI give Paper Mario 2 a bad score since they thought the "average gamer" READ: fratboy, woudln't like it? I think there was a big stink about it.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I thought that was them. Although I could be wrong.

Didn't they also give every Mario Party since the first one, around a 3.0, saying it's not fun at all? Because they must have reviewed the single player only.
 
Ulairi said:
Didn't GI give Paper Mario 2 a bad score since they thought the "average gamer" READ: fratboy, woudln't like it? I think there was a big stink about it.
Click to expand...

And Matt has admitted to scoring games based on personal attachement before. What's your point exactly? Besides, Geist isn't Paper Mario; the game is geared towards the audience GI thinks would dislike Paper Mario. In essence, that argument needs to go as it does not apply.

It's obvious that Matt went out of his way to give the review a positive spin (no mention of a.i., controls being sloppy, sluggish and underdeveloped yet they're not bad, etc). Of course, there is nothing really "wrong" about that; Matt obviously wanted to highlight the possession and "adventure" aspect of the game, as he thought that outweighed the bad. Every reviewer does this. But to claim that this review is a good example of objective writing is about as false as false gets.
 
AltogetherAndrews said:
And Matt has admitted to scoring games based on personal attachement before. What's your point exactly? Besides, Geist isn't Paper Mario; the game is geared towards the audience GI thinks would dislike Paper Mario. In essence, that argument needs to go as it does not apply.

It's obvious that Matt went out of his way to give the review a positive spin (no mention of a.i., controls being sloppy, sluggish and underdeveloped yet they're not bad, etc). Of course, there is nothing really "wrong" about that; Matt obviously wanted to highlight the possession and "adventure" aspect of the game, as he thought that outweighed the bad. Every reviewer does this. But to claim that this review is a good example of objective writing is about as false as false gets.
Click to expand...

Did I make that claim? I think the Paper Mario review does hold water since GI has admitted to altering reviews based on what they think their readership wants and not how they feel about a game.

Matt thinks the adventure aspects of the game are more important than the FPS aspects of the game, they went that way.
 
AltogetherAndrews said:
And Matt has admitted to scoring games based on personal attachement before. What's your point exactly? Besides, Geist isn't Paper Mario; the game is geared towards the audience GI thinks would dislike Paper Mario. In essence, that argument needs to go as it does not apply.

It's obvious that Matt went out of his way to give the review a positive spin (no mention of a.i., controls being sloppy, sluggish and underdeveloped yet they're not bad, etc). Of course, there is nothing really "wrong" about that; Matt obviously wanted to highlight the possession and "adventure" aspect of the game, as he thought that outweighed the bad. Every reviewer does this. But to claim that this review is a good example of objective writing is about as false as false gets.
Click to expand...
Did you even read the review? He mentions all of those things in there, with specific examples. I'm not sure what you read then, outside of the end score synopsis.
 
I just don't understand how some people are actually willing to play such games with such low ratings. 7.8? I sometimes have trouble enjoying games that are rated higher than 8.5! It's a bad game and I don't think anyone should buy it. I just don't want the developer (n-space) or publisher (Nintendo) to think that this is a good game. I have no problems with renting though.
 
Im not going to pass judgement on you by that statement, but are you saying you only play games that got high reviews? Thats exactly the kind of thing that everyone complains about on here. Looking at it this way though, IGN also reviewed Mario Kart: Double Dash at only one point higher, a 7.9. I think the review score should be nothing more than a guideline, no one should base what they play on if it gets about a 8.0. Try it for yourself first.
 
Ulairi said:
Did I make that claim? I think the Paper Mario review does hold water since GI has admitted to altering reviews based on what they think their readership wants and not how they feel about a game.

Matt thinks the adventure aspects of the game are more important than the FPS aspects of the game, they went that way.
Click to expand...

Unless you're suggesting that GI made up the issues they found with the game, I fail to see how the Paper Mario argument is in any way applicable to this review.

The problem with Matt's review, and the thing that makes it hard to view his reviews as any more "reliable" than reviews written by GI, is that he made little of the issues brought up by others. He failed to mention anything about a.i., despite the fact that this was an issue brought up by both EGM and GI. Even if he felt that the adventure aspect weighed up for what the game lacked in just about every other area, shouldn't he have at least mentioned this?

He went out of his way to avoid calling the FPS controls outright "bad"; sluggish, unresponsive, lacks precision, sloppy... yet he claims that the controls are very functional? His infatuation with one aspect of the game caused him to seemingly ignore some issues completely, and in some cases his arguments are spun so much that they make no sense (like the shooter mechanics issue). This is hardly an honest approach, is it?

ImNotLikeThem said:
Did you even read the review? He mentions all of those things in there, with specific examples. I'm not sure what you read then, outside of the end score synopsis.
Click to expand...

You misread my post. Matt claimed that the shooter aspect was sluggish, unresponsive, sloppy, etc... yet he still manages to come to the conclusion that they are very functional? That makes absolutely no sense. As for the a.i., he didn't mention this at all in his review.
 
He went out of his way to avoid calling the FPS controls outright "bad"; sluggish, unresponsive, lacks precision, sloppy... yet he claims that the controls are very functional? His infatuation with one aspect of the game caused him to seemingly ignore some issues completely, and in some cases his arguments are spun so much that they make no sense (like the shooter mechanics issue). This is hardly an honest approach, is it?
Click to expand...

Something can be very functional while still being sluggish. Functional != good.
 
Ulairi said:
Something can be very functional while still being sluggish. Functional != good.
Click to expand...


BS. If something lacks precision, is sluggish, underdeveloped and sloppy enough to warrant being mentioned multiple times throughout the review, it's not "very functional".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

IGN Review: Code Red "is a bad game"
2
76
409
Heimdall_Xtreme replied
IGN reviews the "new" Commodore 64
13
338
IbizaPocholo replied
IGN MGS Delta Graphic comparison/tech review
1
243
Radical_3d replied
IGN: H125-2024 Max Flight Stick Helicopter Controls Review
Review Trailer Hardware 
4
430
Topher replied
Arknights: Endfield | Review Thread
Opinion Review 
12
71
Thick Thighs Save Lives replied
Top Bottom