• 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.

[The Guardian]The sexualised monstrosities suggest James is a man living life with Incognito Browsing set to default, score: 2/5

GHG

GHG

Member
Jsisto said:
lol incognito browsing is for losers. I’m proud of my search history. All of it.
Click to expand...

Having a search history available comes in handy from time to time if you know what I mean.

Close Up Flirting GIF
 
Last edited:
Krathoon

Krathoon

Member
I think there are some people on YouTube trying to make the game look bad.

This game has an absurd markdown on the key market. I may get it. 39% off.
 
Last edited:
PaintTinJr

PaintTinJr

Member
semiconscious said:
i give'm credit: the guy's air of 'suave dismissiveness' is off the scale...
Click to expand...
The best part is him doing the Oxford Uni misdirection - where he's done a short paid anyone can do it, probably can't fail course as his last piece of academic study listed to give off the Oxford graduate association touch. Which is odd considering his First from UCL in a soft subject should carry more than enough weight in the circles he operates and chosen line of work.
 
Saber

Saber

Member
AV said:
Spoilers for a 23 year old game remade, but it's staggering how the author appears to have not understood that the sexualised monsters, and Maria, are manifestations of James' sexual frustrations with his wife being sick and bedbound. Did he actually finish the thing..?
Click to expand...

I honestly dunno how many times I had to explain that.
Its fucking tiring. Even more when dealing with trolls that throws low effort comment saying she showing more skin is yank material, sexism or calling incels.
These people never played or even watched the game.
 
Last edited:
NeoIkaruGAF

NeoIkaruGAF

Gold Member
AV said:
"I don’t have time to care about Angela or her missing mum."

This review is fucking abysmal. That's a pretty core part of the story.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Frankly I, too, couldn't care less about the secondary characters in SH2.
In SH1, the NPCs were there to help, use, or dupe Harry. They were part of the main plot, not other random people psychologically affected by the town and haunted by their own past.
In SH2, I hated every single one of them, and I just wanted them to get out of the way asap. I don't remember what that fatso - can't remember his name - was babbling about, just that fighting him was a chore (like pretty much every boss in the original game).
Another thing where SH1 was way better than 2.


The sexualised monstrosities roaming the streets, meanwhile, suggest James is a man living life with Incognito Browsing set to default
Click to expand...
This is actually the best description of SH2's main theme I've ever read. You gotta admit it, it's what everyone would think if this was a new game and not a remake.
 
Krathoon

Krathoon

Member
The game does sound like a better version of the original. I assume it has all the secret endings?

Did they add any endings?
 
BbMajor7th

BbMajor7th

Member
xiskza said:
The Guardian is a far left rag that isnt worthy of wiping my ass
Click to expand...
More of a centre-right security blanket for the overpaid, underworked metro media class. Lefties are all about emancipating the working classes, outfits like The Guardian want to recast them as thugs and bigots, barring them from positions of influence and protecting their own place at the feeding trough.
 
SirTerry-T

SirTerry-T

Member
It's the Guardian. Their articles are a toss between genuinely good journalism on the arts or politically driven shite.

Keith Stuart writes their only gaming articles worth reading.
 
Mr Hyde

Mr Hyde

Member
Wow! That was the most pathetic "review" I've read in my entire life. Talk about missing the entire point of the game, it's suggestive and sexual themes and the psychological effects it has on James and what he is suffering from. And the graphical quality is outstanding. This review is more embarrassing to read than watching Dean Takahashi play Cuphead.
 
Astral Dog

Astral Dog

Member
NeoIkaruGAF said:
Frankly I, too, couldn't care less about the secondary characters in SH2.
In SH1, the NPCs were there to help, use, or dupe Harry. They were part of the main plot, not other random people psychologically affected by the town and haunted by their own past.
In SH2, I hated every single one of them, and I just wanted them to get out of the way asap. I don't remember what that fatso - can't remember his name - was babbling about, just that fighting him was a chore (like pretty much every boss in the original game).
Another thing where SH1 was way better than 2.



This is actually the best description of SH2's main theme I've ever read. You gotta admit it, it's what everyone would think if this was a new game and not a remake.
Click to expand...
I think what bothers people here is the low score 2/5 along with the full review complaining about graphics, plot, and the critic just being short and shallow, its fair the reviewer didn't enjoyed the game, but she never played the original either so its a perspective from a modern game journalist

Thats what i get from this, i didn't played the original SH2 ,or remake or any SH game either 🤭 so i don't know how it compares, but it seems that fans of the original SH2 are very happy with the remake, even if it stays faithful to the 2001 experience
 
Yoshichan

Yoshichan

And they made him a Lord of Cinder. Not for virtue, but for might. Such is a lord, I suppose. But here I ask. Do we have a sodding chance?
they need to get fucked by pyramid head in the ass, while James is watching in the closet
 
Braag

Braag

Member
Not really surprising in the least that the themes of a game like SH2 is bound to go way over head of today's game critics who judge games mainly by the DEI scale.
I'm was actually expecting more reviews like this.
 
skit_data

skit_data

Member
Jsisto said:
lol incognito browsing is for losers. I’m proud of my search history. All of it.
Click to expand...
I keep my browsers in incognito mode in order to get search results that at least is tangentially related to what I'm actually searching for.

And all that 1 badger 1 midget cake fart pr0n search history of course.
 
Last edited:
Mister Wolf

Mister Wolf

Member
Shaming tactics by feminists. Both sexes objectify each other. An unflattering reality of our species. Men objectify women as sex objects due to our natural sexual opportunism. Women objectify men as living tools to benefit their life. Like having a mule to pull your cart or a plowhorse to till your field.
 
Chiggs

Chiggs

Gold Member
Gonzito said:
Why do these kind of people get the privilege to review games? I will never understand this
Click to expand...

What privileges are you referring to? The exceedingly low pay, or the lack of respect and dwindling audience?

Ogbert said:
The first paragraph is nonsense.

The second is valid criticism.
Click to expand...

I read through the whole thing and didn't find it to be that outrageous. He basically thinks the gaming is a boring slog.

It is a fatal problem, in a game as long and slogging as this one, that a bunch of one-dimensional characters do not add up to a three-dimensional story. James mumbles sadly. He explores the town sadly. He bludgeons a monster that looks like a trawlerman’s catch got rolled together in glue – and for just a moment you can tell he’s stopped being sad, because of all the shouting and the grunting. But then it’s back to sadly plodding about the town, bumping up against a Wickes showroom’s-worth of locked doors.
Click to expand...

Again...I don't think any of that is really that crazy. It's stuff I read about the original when it released.

Some of the people here are so easily butthurt it's kind of pathetic.
 
phant0m

phant0m

Member
Kamina said:
Some people are clearly unfit for writing
Click to expand...
really, critiquing

publishers really should start wrangling in who they give codes to. not because of bad scores or criticism, but from uneducated, unprofessional reviews that make journalism as an industry look bad.

example -
product : hot dog

reviewer 1: the bun was cold, the hog dog itself was ok but the condiment selection was limited. 3/5

reviewer 2: another example of the patriarchy exhibiting misogyny by forcing me to indulge in their phallic foodstuff. aren't we a little too old for this now? the bun was a little cold too. 2/5

the first reviewer provides several points of criticism that justify the score. the second reviewer comes out with absolute nonsense and wraps it up with a similar "common" criticism so their review seems valid.

tl;dr - don't review hot dogs if you don't like fucking hot dogs.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom