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

IGN Review: Black (PS2/XB)

I just finished it and it took me around 4 hours. I beat it in 2 sittings.

I probably could of beat it in 1,if I didn't get lost in level 5 and turned it off out of frustration.

Weak ending I must say. Although the ending is the least of black's problems......
 
I <3 Katamari said:
What game demo did you play? I just played it again an hour ago and it controls just as good/bad as any other console FPS.
Click to expand...

The PS2 demo where aiming is as slow as running molasses. What other demo is there?
 
Seems to me like they screwed up the balance. There was one comment in the IGN review, "It's almost as if the game set its bar right from the get-go and never really strays from it, neither lower nor higher". You need to have some less intense portions, or the initial high will just become the new norm. Or you could balance it by way of introducing new and preferably smarter enemies, but it doesn't look like they did that either.
 
AltogetherAndrews said:
Seems to me like they screwed up the balance. There was one comment in the IGN review, "It's almost as if the game set its bar right from the get-go and never really strays from it, neither lower nor higher". You need to have some less intense portions, or the intensity will just become the new norm.
Click to expand...

That was the point of the game from the start though. Complete destruction and just constantly firing at almost everything. In alot of ways it sounds like a FPS version of games like Contra. Those games are really short too because they'd get really boring due to the style of gameplay.
 
Dual Shock is ass for FPS. Sorry Sony Fanboys but your blessed bullshit dual shock ass controller is fucking lame for FPS.

Additionally if the Xbox version controls as fukin sluggish you can count me out too.
 
Borys said:
Damn that Gamespot score. Now I don't know if the game is worth it :|
Click to expand...

It's probably very good while it lasts. I have no problem with a 6 hour game. A game like this shouldn't be anymore than 8 hours or it gets old.

But they fucking needed multiplayer, the more I think about it. It's just silly not to. It would have added so much replay and I bet it would have gotten 9's. As Halo 2 proves, an FPS doesn't even need a good singleplay if it has awesome multiplayer.
 
I <3 Katamari said:
It's probably very good while it lasts. I have no problem with a 6 hour game. A game like this shouldn't be anymore than 8 hours or it gets old.

But they fucking needed multiplayer, the more I think about it. It's just silly not to. It would have added so much replay and I bet it would have gotten 9's. As Halo 2 proves, an FPS doesn't even need a good singleplay if it has awesome multiplayer.
Click to expand...

Yeah, so why they didn't put it in? I really don't understand, even only on the SP maps... damn you, Criterion.
 
Seems IGN caved under the pressure of their own previews, they've been telling everyone how awesome this game will be for nearly a year. Gamespot (to their credit) have been more reserved, its another black mark on the vg journos though that this game can be (apparently) so average and get so much god damn hype.


It'll be interesting to see 1ups review.
 
What was the deal with all the hype this game got? Every E3, these morons kept spouting "OMG WAIT TILL U SEE THIS IT'S AMAZING!", and when we do, it's just an average FPS? Fuck that shit.
 
I <3 Katamari said:
8.7 for PS2: http://ps2.ign.com/articles/690/690579p1.html
8.6 for Xbox: http://xbox.ign.com/articles/690/690732p1.html

Still waiting for the GameCube review
lol

Not sure why the difference in score.



That's the only comparison I read, but they both have 10s for Sound.

Anyway, sounds great and I really liked the demo. I'll probably wait for a price drop though, just because there's so much other stuff coming out.
Click to expand...

Too high, both of them. There are too many things worng about this game. It is not a bad game and it is really enjoyable but certain bugs, unresponsive controls, shortness and the absolutely stupid story make it a below 8.5 experience.
 
typhonsentra said:
What was the deal with all the hype this game got? Every E3, these morons kept spouting "OMG WAIT TILL U SEE THIS IT'S AMAZING!", and when we do, it's just an average FPS? Fuck that shit.
Click to expand...


graphically, it's a great looking shooter -- perhaps the best of the gen -- and it originated on the ps2.

that's why.
 
siamesedreamer said:
What-the-fuck-ever.......

A 2006 FPS that lasts six hours, has absolutely nonexistant AI, no jumping, no leaning, no story, and NO MULTIPLAYER is now an 8.6 game?

Oh, but you can blow shit up and...............wait for it..............its made by EA!!!!

Should've known.
Click to expand...


look at the halo 2, which was overrated as all hell.

it happens all the time.
 
Project Midway said:
dont even mention Halo and Black in the same sentence, its an insult toward a great game like Halo 2.
Click to expand...

there's nothing "great" about halo 2.

besides its sales.

but that's for an entirely different thread.

the tangent was only meant to respond to he who questioned how black, with its problems, could have scored what it did.

halo 2 had a weak storyline, with a premature end; a broken online model, with bugs that bungie still, to this day, refuses to address; and gameplay that really hadn't evolved much from the first game.

every game gets overrated.
 
phonte said:
there's nothing "great" about halo 2.

besides its sales.

but that's for an entirely different thread.

the tangent was only meant to respond to he who questioned how black, with its problems, could have scored what it did.

halo 2 had a weak storyline, with a premature end; a broken online model, with bugs that bungie still, to this day, refuses to address; and gameplay that really hadn't evolved much from the first game.

every game gets overrated.
Click to expand...
but atleast Halo 2 controls well, Black just felt unresponsive and detestable right from the start.
 
Reilly said:
why?
Click to expand...



For me it is because my thumbs are too close together on a DS2. I prefer the way the analogs are offset on the S. Also the analogs on the DS2 are just too springy IMO.

It just feels like I am trying to rub my stomach at pat my head at the same time when playing a FPS with a DS2.

There is a third party PS2 controller out there that lets you swap around the dpad, analogs, and face buttons. That is exactly what I need...but for the life of me, I can't remember the name of it. Anybody ever seen one of these controllers?
 
MrAngryFace said:
Dual Shock is ass for FPS. Sorry Sony Fanboys but your blessed bullshit dual shock ass controller is fucking lame for FPS.

Additionally if the Xbox version controls as fukin sluggish you can count me out too.
Click to expand...

Ugh, I have no problems controlling a FPS with the DS2. It's exactly the same as controlling one on Xbox only the analogs are in a better position and you don't have two extremely small and out of place black and white buttons to worry about.
 
tegdf said:
a 6 hour game with no MP for $40 fucking dollars, what a damn rip off
Click to expand...

Damn Metal Gear Solid games were such a rip off!

I'd pay 40$ for an intense 6 hours of quality (does not mean Black is like that) instead of a 30 hours game with 10 hours that are actually good.
 
MrAngryFace said:
Dual Shock is ass for FPS. Sorry Sony Fanboys but your blessed bullshit dual shock ass controller is fucking lame for FPS.
Click to expand...

I feel the same way. I simply HATE the Dual Shock for FPS and racing games. Its sex for everything else but I actually admire people who can play racing and FPS games with that controler.

It physically pains me to play an FPS on the dual shock :(
 
Most of my interest in this game was squashed by playing the PS2 demo. It was the essence of mediocrity.
 
phonte said:
there's nothing "great" about halo 2.

besides its sales.

but that's for an entirely different thread.

the tangent was only meant to respond to he who questioned how black, with its problems, could have scored what it did.

halo 2 had a weak storyline, with a premature end; a broken online model, with bugs that bungie still, to this day, refuses to address; and gameplay that really hadn't evolved much from the first game.

every game gets overrated.
Click to expand...

I'm not a fanboy of Halo and generally only like the multiplayer in that game but the comparison between those two games is night and day. I keep going back to one game being a complete experience versus the other being a broken experience. While I may not agree with how Halo handles things like their level design, there is still an actual game in there. Black is a tech demo or engine demo pretending to be a game. It really is that incomplete and limited.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Grimbeard - Siren (PS2) - Review
Review Retro Trailer 
1
184
Plague Doctor replied
IGN Steam Controller Review 9/10 : 'It’s the PC controller to beat.'
Review  2 3
100
897
GymWolf replied
IGN Review: Code Red "is a bad game"
2
76
994
Heimdall_Xtreme replied
Saros | Review Thread
Review  8 9 10 11 12
586
2K
ByWatterson replied
Motorslice | Review Thread
Analysis Review  2
77
648
Guilty_AI replied
Top Bottom