Support NeoGAF

[Stallion Free]

I'm enjoying the hell out of this. Some of the chase scenes are spectacular.

 

[Why For?]

Score is not entirely unexpected. The Club was garbage and obviously Activision has something to hide the way they released this title.

The Club was awesome.

I assume you didn't play it?

If this plays like the Club, and the driving scenes like PGR, then this is probably worth a pick up. Especially since IGN's review doesn't actually give a genuine reason why this isn't a good game.

 

[FrostuTheNinja]

Seriously, when you press a button, does it really feel like you're swinging a sword/shooting a gun?

As long as it's responsive and plays well, I don't really care how it, "feels".

 

[MiniDitka]

I'm enjoying the hell out of this. Some of the chase scenes are spectacular.

Same here. During one of the chase sequences I didn't use my e brake and flew off the dock into the water :lol

Seriously, when you press a button, does it really feel like you're swinging a sword/shooting a gun?

As long as it's responsive and plays well, I don't really care how it, "feels".

Controls feel fine to me.

 

[Broadbandito]

gamespot gave it a 7.5

 

[Dreohboy]

I'm going to get it for the PC, but I'm not sure when.

If it's 6 hours on the hardest setting then I'll give it a shot. Man, I wish there were a way to modify the in game AI routines on the PC version (ala fixing the AI like they did for Crysis).

 

[dark10x]

Still enjoying it. I'm incredibly disappointed to see that Activision basically sent this game out to die. This is basically the next Everything or Nothing, but it feels more polished and plays much better (to be expected, considering it's 2010). Bizarre did an amazing job here.

Gamespot's review was much better, but I still don't agree with their distaste for the "gadget" sections. They claim them to be filler, but I felt that they added to the atmosphere the game was trying to build. It's true that you are basically just walking to way points set by your smartphone, but it allows the games pace to slow down for just a bit. The pacing is pretty good, in fact, as you never feel as if you're stuck doing the same thing for too long. I can see why this game is a bit short. Some developers would keep you in an area for much longer fighting waves of enemies where as Bloodstone might send you through several detailed rooms with just a handful of guys to fight. It really wouldn't make sense for waves of enemies to be flooding your position, would it? Spending less time in each environment keeps the game moving, but is obviously going to shorten playtime as designing those environments definitely takes time.

Thus far, my biggest complaint lies with the poor video compression. There are some terrible artifacts in the videos. I'm playing on PS3, so it is especially surprising, but they must have used the same video quality for all three versions.

I took advantage of the B2G1 at Target and picked up Goldeneye just for kicks along with Bloodstone. Thus far, Bloodstone is much more engaging and significantly more polished than Goldeneye. GE feels pretty low budget in comparison, though it's still a pretty good time.

Seriously, when you press a button, does it really feel like you're swinging a sword/shooting a gun?

As long as it's responsive and plays well, I don't really care how it, "feels".

Feels fantastic to me. Definitely very satisfying to play.

 

[Xater]

The Club was awesome.

I assume you didn't play it?

If this plays like the Club, and the driving scenes like PGR, then this is probably worth a pick up. Especially since IGN's review doesn't actually give a genuine reason why this isn't a good game.

Of course I palyed it. I don't make such a judgement without doing that. I thought it was terrible. And so was Bizarre's previous third-person shooter Fur Fighters. Have you played that?

 

[dark10x]

Of course I palyed it. I don't make such a judgement without doing that. I thought it was terrible. And so was Bizarre's previous third-person shooter Fur Fighters. Have you played that?

Fur Fighters was terrible indeed. I remember playing that back on the DC.

I thought The Club was fantastic, though, and plays nothing like Fur Fighters.

 

[eshwaaz]

Still enjoying it. I'm incredibly disappointed to see that Activision basically sent this game out to die. This is basically the next Everything or Nothing, but it feels more polished and plays much better (to be expected, considering it's 2010). Bizarre did an amazing job here.

Gamespot's review was much better, but I still don't agree with their distaste for the "gadget" sections. They claim them to be filler, but I felt that they added to the atmosphere the game was trying to build. It's true that you are basically just walking to way points set by your smartphone, but it allows the games pace to slow down for just a bit. The pacing is pretty good, in fact, as you never feel as if you're stuck doing the same thing for too long. I can see why this game is a bit short. Some developers would keep you in an area for much longer fighting waves of enemies where as Bloodstone might send you through several detailed rooms with just a handful of guys to fight. It really wouldn't make sense for waves of enemies to be flooding your position, would it? Spending less time in each environment keeps the game moving, but is obviously going to shorten playtime as designing those environments definitely takes time.

Thus far, my biggest complaint lies with the poor video compression. There are some terrible artifacts in the videos. I'm playing on PS3, so it is especially surprising, but they must have used the same video quality for all three versions.

I took advantage of the B2G1 at Target and picked up Goldeneye just for kicks along with Bloodstone. Thus far, Bloodstone is much more engaging and significantly more polished than Goldeneye. GE feels pretty low budget in comparison, though it's still a pretty good time.


Feels fantastic to me. Definitely very satisfying to play.

Dammit, dark - your positive, well-written impressions are making me want to give this game a shot. Preview videos had me interested, but then IGN's review pretty much slammed the door in Blood Stone's face. But, what you're describing sounds really appealing to me. The short campaign length is still off-putting, though.

 

[AgentOtaku]

Still enjoying it. I'm incredibly disappointed to see that Activision basically sent this game out to die. This is basically the next Everything or Nothing, but it feels more polished and plays much better (to be expected, considering it's 2010). Bizarre did an amazing job here.

Gamespot's review was much better, but I still don't agree with their distaste for the "gadget" sections. They claim them to be filler, but I felt that they added to the atmosphere the game was trying to build. It's true that you are basically just walking to way points set by your smartphone, but it allows the games pace to slow down for just a bit. The pacing is pretty good, in fact, as you never feel as if you're stuck doing the same thing for too long. I can see why this game is a bit short. Some developers would keep you in an area for much longer fighting waves of enemies where as Bloodstone might send you through several detailed rooms with just a handful of guys to fight. It really wouldn't make sense for waves of enemies to be flooding your position, would it? Spending less time in each environment keeps the game moving, but is obviously going to shorten playtime as designing those environments definitely takes time.

Thus far, my biggest complaint lies with the poor video compression. There are some terrible artifacts in the videos. I'm playing on PS3, so it is especially surprising, but they must have used the same video quality for all three versions.

I took advantage of the B2G1 at Target and picked up Goldeneye just for kicks along with Bloodstone. Thus far, Bloodstone is much more engaging and significantly more polished than Goldeneye. GE feels pretty low budget in comparison, though it's still a pretty good time.


Feels fantastic to me. Definitely very satisfying to play.

Great right up man. Really hyped to play it now. Just gotta decide between the PC version or 360. Is the 10 dollars more worth it for the achievements? ...hmmm

 

[Stallion Free]

Great right up man. Really hyped to play it now. Just gotta decide between the PC version or 360. Is the 10 dollars more worth it for the achievements? ...hmmm

I bought the PC version on Steam yesterday and it runs great (60 fps except for crazy explosion moments) and looks great maxed. The downside is that it doesn't change button prompts to 360 buttons

I didn't even bother trying MKB, the game feels incredibly tight on the pad.

 

[RocketDarkness]

I spent most of yesterday evening playing this game on Agent difficulty (the middle difficulty). Haven't quite finished it yet, but overall I'm fairly pleased with it. It's definitely inspired by Everything or Nothing, though personally, I feel it's not quite as good. While I love Craig's 007 for the movies, his mostly gadgetless adventures don't work quite as well for switching things up from level to level. EoN has a ton of cool shit, from those bouncing coin grenades to a grappling hook to robot spiders.

Fortunately, what Blood Stone does have feels pretty good. Sneaking around is a ton of fun. I've had a blast trying to remain as stealthy as possible, and it makes you feel pretty badass when you navigate several rooms using only takedowns and silenced pistol shots to the head. The story's fairly uninteresting, but since it's basically an excuse to throw you from one setpiece to the next, I'll accept that. The driving sections are pretty intense, and make me wish I had a decent controller to use for them. While the physics themselves feel much tighter compared to EoN in these sections, I felt EoN had more clever roadway missions overall, allowing for much more creativity on the part of the player. Blood Stone's are fairly scripted, so as said before, you'll die as you figure out the proper paths to take. Still exciting, but it feels much more like you figured out what the devs wanted you to do, as opposed to simply being badass on your own. There's also a surprising lack of Bond Moments in the game, unfortunately.

Nevertheless, if you're still not convinced to pick this up now, be sure to do so if it goes down to a more reasonable (in your eyes) price. It's definitely worth checking out at some point if you're a Bond fan.

 

[AlphaTwo00]

Thus far, my biggest complaint lies with the poor video compression. There are some terrible artifacts in the videos. I'm playing on PS3, so it is especially surprising, but they must have used the same video quality for all three versions.

The intro was COMPLETELY ruined by the big ass pixelated color blocks. Who the hell let that pass QA?

Overall, I found the shooting and driving to be average/just above average. I was hoping to be more blown away by the game.

 

[farnham]

gamespot gave it a 7.5

same as bloodstone eh ?

 

[dark10x]

Eurogamer hit it with a 5/10 as well.

Very odd. I'm surprised that people claim the on-foot action to be average and generic. In reality, there really aren't as many great playing 3rd person games out there as people seem to think there are.

How many games have been released this year that actually play like this? Very few, really.

 

[Stallion Free]

Eurogamer hit it with a 5/10 as well.

Very odd. I'm surprised that people claim the on-foot action to be average and generic. In reality, there really aren't as many great playing 3rd person games out there as people seem to think there are.

How many games have been released this year that actually play like this? Very few, really.

It's why I don't read reviews. I don't have to play every shitty third person action game that reviewers do so I'm not burned out on the genre.

 

[Rated-Rsuperstar]

I finished it this morning. It could very well be the best Bond game. Tons of awesome moments like

Spoiler

the drill chasing you, shooting the airlock to suck the guy out of the hovercraft, and the Bangkok chase sequence.

Besides the lack of facial animation this game is stunning especially when it involves water, snow, jungle, or the driving sequences. The snow in the siberia level made me wish the game was in 3D.

And anyone who hears the game is too easy and short should play on a higher difficulty. On hard the game removes your reticule and any auto aim.

 

[Penguin]

I've added Eurogamer and GameSpot, any other reviews floating about?

 

[Gospel]

DS version looks boss.

 

[Stumpokapow]

It's why I don't read reviews. I don't have to play every shitty third person action game that reviewers do so I'm not burned out on the genre.

But presumably if you don't play every shitty third person action game, then you're also picky about which third person action games you do play. If you're only going to play 3 TPS games this year, you should try to find the 3 best, not say "Thank God I haven't been spoiled by the genre so I can just play any old game and not know any better".

 

[The Elite]

Ok, I want this game now.

 

[Dreohboy]

But presumably if you don't play every shitty third person action game, then you're also picky about which third person action games you do play. If you're only going to play 3 TPS games this year, you should try to find the 3 best, not say "Thank God I haven't been spoiled by the genre so I can just play any old game and not know any better".

Unfortunately, on the PC...a "shitty third person game" may in fact be the best third person action game on the platform.


Anyone, are there any better third person action games that have been released in the past two years that you've played?

 

[RocketDarkness]

Well, part of what Stal's trying to say is that the reviewers have lost all will to play third-person shooters, so of course being forced to review another one will get them off on the wrong foot. Also, they'll probably only appreciate them if they bring something brand new or ridiculously amazing to the table. Conversely, people like me, who don't play many, will be plenty satisfied by the core gameplay. Sure, I could play Gears of War and get what is presumably a far superior third-person shooter experience, but I won't. I don't care about GoW, but I do care about 007.

 

[The Bookerman]

I'M sorry but this game is not cutting it for me. It's too by the numbers. I need more ambition for a bond game. Alpha protocol had plenty of problems but at least it was trying to be innovating.

Edit it's not a bad game.... I simply want more out of my games.

 

[SonOfABeep]

Can't wait for it to get below $20. Looks nearly as mediocre as the last activision bond game, which I also got for super cheap.

 

[teruterubozu]

Sounds like the PC version is the superior version and something went amiss in the consoles?

 

[SonOfABeep]

Um no

Unless the PC version is a different game that isn't just ripping off Splinter Cell Conviction +driving sequences. Giant Bomb Quick Look looked very dull.

I AM however insterested in playing a james bond game where bond is constantly tweeting what he just did and texting his bros to go out and get hammered later.:lol :lol

 

[dark10x]

Um no

Unless the PC version is a different game that isn't just ripping off Splinter Cell Conviction +driving sequences. Giant Bomb Quick Look looked very dull.

I AM however insterested in playing a james bond game where bond is constantly tweeting what he just did and texting his bros to go out and get hammered later.:lol :lol

It's not really ripping off Conviction, though it certainly shares some elements. What's more important, however, is that it controls better than Conviction AND runs MUCH MUCH smoother. Conviction on 360 was a choppy, low resolution mess.

 

[Rated-Rsuperstar]

Sounds like the PC version is the superior version and something went amiss in the consoles?

There's nothing wrong with the ps3 version. No framerate issues or glitches. Controls fine.

 

[Stallion Free]

Giant Bomb Quick Look looked very dull.

I hate to break it to you but they make every game look dull. See: Bloody Good Time QL.

 

[jett]

I hate to break it to you but they make every game look dull. See: Bloody Good Time QL.

It's true. The GB peeps are just not only awful at nearly every game they play, most of the time they couldn't give two fucks about what they are doing.

 

[dark10x]

It's true. The GB peeps are just not only awful at nearly every game they play, most of the time they couldn't give two fucks about what they are doing.

Yeah, I have to agree. I love listening to them on the Bombcast, but their Quick Looks always come off as half assed. I do kind of enjoy their nonsense, but they rarely do a good job painting a positive picture of a game.

 

[Penguin]

It's true. The GB peeps are just not only awful at nearly every game they play, most of the time they couldn't give two fucks about what they are doing.

I don't know, their QuickLooks have helped sell me on some of the games.

Granted, sometimes I wish they prepared ahead of time so wouldn't be wasting time with repeating segments or cutscenes, but eh

 

[SonOfABeep]

I hate to break it to you but they make every game look dull. See: Bloody Good Time QL.

Their experience with BGT was pretty equal to mine. "okay, I get it. That's not fun"

When a game is fun they have fun playing it. Blood Stone is a dull 3rd person shooter. I knew exactly what was going to happen before they even did it in that game. BO-RING.

 

[MiniDitka]

Thus far, my biggest complaint lies with the poor video compression. There are some terrible artifacts in the videos. I'm playing on PS3, so it is especially surprising, but they must have used the same video quality for all three versions.

I took advantage of the B2G1 at Target and picked up Goldeneye just for kicks along with Bloodstone. Thus far, Bloodstone is much more engaging and significantly more polished than Goldeneye. GE feels pretty low budget in comparison, though it's still a pretty good time.


Feels fantastic to me. Definitely very satisfying to play.

I did the same Target deal and picked up Bloodstone,Goldeneye and Vanquish I'm enjoying Bloodstone a bit more than Goldeneye as well though I disagree about the low budget statement, I think GE has some nice presentation, graphics, voice acting and overall is a very well made game. Not quite as polished as Bloodstone but still nice. My only real problem with GE is I'm still trying to find a setting in the controls that I'm comfortable with.

 

[Rated-Rsuperstar]

I looked at the QL. Why won't Jeff turn the stupid cellphone off? You don't even need it. And you'd think he'd know how to use the cover system even if he's playing on the easiest difficulty.

 

[Stallion Free]

I looked at the QL. Why won't Jeff turn the stupid cellphone off? You don't even need it. And you'd think he'd know how to use the cover system even if he's playing on the easiest difficulty.

:lol

 

[Square Triangle]

The first level feels like something right out of a Bond film, loved it!

The graphics and animations are terrible but the pacing seems really awesome.

 

[segarr]

Eurogamer hit it with a 5/10 as well.

Very odd. I'm surprised that people claim the on-foot action to be average and generic. In reality, there really aren't as many great playing 3rd person games out there as people seem to think there are.

How many games have been released this year that actually play like this? Very few, really.

Dude, this game was not hyped. Journalists don't generally give great scores to games with no hype. Nature of the biz. That's why I fucked off reviews long ago.

 

[RedSwirl]

First hour or so is good. Very good.

Yeah it's a basic third person shooter with light stealth elements put together with driving parts, but the important part is that it nails the pace and rhythm of the Bond movies. The music might be a big part of it, but I feel like I'm in a Bond firefight when I'm in a firefight, and so on.

 

[jkanownik]

It's why I don't read reviews. I don't have to play every shitty third person action game that reviewers do so I'm not burned out on the genre.

If you actually read reviews the scores don't matter. They are helpful in filtering reviews to decide which ones to read.

 

[Choc]

i really am liking this game

reviewers have not got a clue. Its not a 9/10 or 8/10 but the way some are going on is ridiculous

the driving elements as expected from bizarre are so much like PGR its not funny even the engine noises

Activision totally sent it to die which is annoying.

 

[Sew]

First hour or so is good. Very good.

Yeah it's a basic third person shooter with light stealth elements put together with driving parts, but the important part is that it nails the pace and rhythm of the Bond movies. The music might be a big part of it, but I feel like I'm in a Bond firefight when I'm in a firefight, and so on.

Well said.

I'm one of those "there hasn't been a real Bond game since Goldeneye" guys. I bought this expecting the worst, and I'm actually having a lot of fun. It's not a ground breaking game by any means, and it tends to hold your hand in places, but it's actually a solid romp in the Bond universe.

I think the fact that it's an original story / cinematic game, as opposed to a token movie-themed shooter, really helps it stand apart from the many shit Bond games that have come before it.

 

[hamchan]

So this game sounds solid yet does nothing truly spectacular. Seems more like an EDGE 5/10 rather than an IGN 5/10.

 

[SapientWolf]

Dude, this game was not hyped. Journalists don't generally give great scores to games with no hype. Nature of the biz. That's why I fucked off reviews long ago.

It's more like journalists feel obligated to give great scores to hyped games because their audience uses them to validate their purchases. It's a vicious cycle.

 

[T.M. MacReady]

Can't wait to get this off amazon for $30 in a few weeks.

 

[Rated-Rsuperstar]

I've been playing the objective based multiplayer mode and really like it. I'm ranked #1 in the world on the objective leaderboard. Yay! Out of 130 people. Boo.

 

[Mega Man's Electric Sheep]

I'm really enjoying this game. The pacing is great.....Any given chunk starts you with a slower part, then starts the action, and ramps it up usually climaxing with a chase scene. Really gets the adrenaline going, and makes me feel more like Bond than the other games I've tried. And the 4 hour playtime reported is not holding true for me....I've timed myself, I'm at 5 hours and there's no sign it's ending in the next little while.

It's a simple straightforward action game that's fun.....and it's not trying to be anything more than a game version of a Bond movie. And I think it does an admirable job of it.

 

[Fun Factor]

Fur Fighters was terrible indeed. I remember playing that back on the DC.

I thought The Club was fantastic, though, and plays nothing like Fur Fighters.

Are you kidding? Fur Fighters was amazing.
It a was huge non-linear Banjo Kazooie like platformer with proper 3rd person shooting mechanics.

There hasn't been a game like it every since.