The Wonderful 101 Review Thread

Why did Street Fighter IV get such high scores then? I sure can't do a special move 100% of the time, let alone the supers where you have to hit more than one button at once.

THIS. Can anyone tell me why? Because I get beaten a lot playing online and I'm doing exactly what the game tells me to do (or at least that is what I like to think). 2/10 Would not recommend.

/s
 
Can't believe that ANYONE gives a shit about reviews after that.

Not just that, but I certainly haven't been letting negative reviews put me off from getting games I think I might like.
Otherwise I wouldn't buy all these Dynasty Warriors games I've been getting over the past month, nor would I buy the EDF games.
And guess what I've been playing lately? Nothing but those. Loving it. Screw the haters. :)
 
Don't do this....Aside from one review the reception for this isn't even bad. Whats the point of knocking another game in a review thread for a completely different game.

The Last of Us and The Wonderful 101 are inseparably connected for some reason.

I'm guessing it's the "The" in the titles.
 
I'm reading Rich Stanton's Eurogamer review myself. I really enjoyed his Metal Gear Rising review, he seemed to have an above-average degree of competence for a game journalist, noted he beat it on Very Hard roughly around the same time for hard, so he understands learning and understanding action game mechanics.

I've only been reading the more negative reviews, as I'm already sold on the game so I'd rather challenge my established perception of the game than reaffirm it.

but gonna give this guy's review based on your post.

Edit: fuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuck that too much content details!
 
So pretty good all round so far! =D
The Blistered Thumbs review is baffling though.

As for controls, what I've played with the demo they were pretty much spot on. Using a mixture of stick for quick fire morphs, and the screen for powerful ones seemed pretty intuitive.

Those saying that you shouldn't have to learn controls, personally I disagree.
The closest thing we have to a universal constant control-wise is "Press A to Jump"

And TW101 releasing that close to GTAIV in the US feels just like the Rayman Origins launch all over again. D=
 
If anything, I think the demo was the best thing they could have done to stave off the lower reviews.

Give them ~15 times to play through the game and see if they enjoy it after getting used to the controls. Whereas with reviewers, they had to keep progressing forward to get the review out. Not fully defending the game's controls, but I think the demo should give people more of what to expect at least.
 

In the best tradition of director Hideki Kamiya's games, Vorkken has all of your moves plus a few extra, and the many fights you have against him are simply sensational: two small groups crashing giant fists against each other, switching between swords and whips and bazookas, before a good strike hits and sends one side scattering, which quickly gathers itself for another go. These battles are magnificent: intense, surprising, challenging, and eye-popping in action.



That gets me pretty excited.
 
Also it's crazy to me how much drama has surrounded this game since its first reveal. It has been born into turmoil.
 
Why is this surprising? These reviewers are fresh off of the Last of Us, where controls are secondary to the movie that is called a game. Of course when a game expects you to draw a circle as opposed to pushing a triangle to avoid death, the controls will be an issue.

Flame away!

Not this shit again.
 
true, but thanks to those 10's all round your guaranteed a gta 5/6/7.
thanks to some low scores for wonderful 101, and given the wii u potential low customer numbers,
it might mean we never get to see what this series could have gone on to be in the future.
scores sadly mean something to a lot of people,
and it might make them hold off getting a wii u or even the game if they have one,
though that last bit is unlikely as it's all we really have.

We were going to get a GTAV regardless of whether GTAIV got 2s across the boards or 10s. Let's not pretend otherwise, it's rockstar we are talking about and they do whatever they want regardless of what anyone has to say.

With that being said, if W101 doesn't get a sequel, the only blame will be because they decided to release on a system that is trying to gasp for its last breath.
 
Why are people discussing and worrying about the sequel of a game that isn't even out yet?
 
We were going to get a GTAV regardless of whether GTAIV got 2s across the boards or 10s. Let's not pretend otherwise, it's rockstar we are talking about and they do whatever they want regardless of what anyone has to say.

With that being said, if W101 doesn't get a sequel, the only blame will be because they decided to release on a system that is trying to gasp for its last breath.

Stealth port-begging drenched in bitterness?
 
If anything, I think the demo was the best thing they could have done to stave off the lower reviews.

exactly my thoughts,
most of these reviews would be far lower scores if it weren't for the demo,
ign sounded like they were on the verge of a 4 or 5,
they got so much backlash from people playing the demo that i'm certain it pushed up the score.
 
Why is this surprising? These reviewers are fresh off of the Last of Us, where controls are secondary to the movie that is called a game. Of course when a game expects you to draw a circle as opposed to pushing a triangle to avoid death, the controls will be an issue.

Flame away!
lol gaf always delivers
 
I'm not internally sure: But should a reviewer bash a game for not being suitable for children? Eurogamer.

Some slight spoilers

For eight-year-olds, this might be one of the best games ever made. That's why it's so disappointing that Platinum has included content that isn't suitable for children, and ended up with a 12 rating.

Most female characters are introduced with ass and boob shots, which I can just about get over - with these character models, such assets are basically triangles anyway. There are sub-surface sexual tensions, too, particularly with the 101's base, the Virgin Victory, and its pilot Alice, but these will arguably sail over the heads of children. The mind-boggling inclusion is a female boss whom the Wonderful 101 refer to as a 'cougar' and who makes several jokes about the size of Wonder Blue's penis.

I'm not the morality police, so take this as you will; that boss is such a minor part of the overall experience, and yet it ruins the gleeful innocence of a game that would otherwise be perfect for children. I would love to pass The Wondeful 101 on to my eight-year-old nephew, but I don't want him asking his mum what a cougar is. This is not edgy, or clever, or cool. It is Platinum cutting off its nose to spite its face for a joke that isn't even funny.
 
Why is this surprising? These reviewers are fresh off of the Last of Us, where controls are secondary to the movie that is called a game. Of course when a game expects you to draw a circle as opposed to pushing a triangle to avoid death, the controls will be an issue.

Flame away!

Please don't.
 
If people honestly think that Nintendo is going to touch this IP ever again they will be sorely disappointed.

Not too hard to imagine that this could get a sequel:

1) Does about a million worldwide over the next two years (not great but probably profitable at that point)

2) Nintendo needs some more games because HD development is hard

3) There's already a TW101 engine and assets

4) Cheap, quick turn around sequel

5) ???

6) Profit
 
With that being said, if W101 doesn't get a sequel, the only blame will be because they decided to release on a system that is trying to gasp for its last breath.

wait a minute...
i think i might need to go and get my shovel.
i've made a huge mistake.
 
This is not subjective. It is absolutely close-mindedness if a reviewer cannot be bothered to learn the god damn controls in a game. Its their job. Same thing happened with Skyward Sword.

they probably best serve their readers by playing the game in exactly the way they would expect their readers too.
 
I'm not internally sure: But should a reviewer bash a game for not being suitable for children? Eurogamer.

Some slight spoilers

I'm not sure why he wouldn't follow age recommendation (12+). Or why his 12+ year old child wouldn't know what Google is.
 
Why is this surprising? These reviewers are fresh off of the Last of Us, where controls are secondary to the movie that is called a game. Of course when a game expects you to draw a circle as opposed to pushing a triangle to avoid death, the controls will be an issue.

Flame away!
Oh fgs

Well, first GTA and now TLOU comparisons I guess.
 
We were going to get a GTAV regardless of whether GTAIV got 2s across the boards or 10s. Let's not pretend otherwise, it's rockstar we are talking about and they do whatever they want regardless of what anyone has to say.

With that being said, if W101 doesn't get a sequel, the only blame will be because they decided to release on a system that is trying to gasp for its last breath.

You know that Nintedo paid for this game, don't you? I don't think TW101 would get a sequel without existing in the first place.
 
It's their job to review games based on the perspective they have and the writing experience they have. It isn't their job to master or learn control or input methods. If you feel they didn't play the game right, acknowledge the difference in perspective and know the game won't be for specific audiences.
Don't you think though that the process of reviewing a game should be comprised of a certain degree of objectivity? What if a particular reviewer hates a certain type of game, should he rate it lower just because it's not his favourite genre?

It's not just a matter of conveying one's experience with the game, that'd be a simple opinion, not a review. A reviewer should take into account:


  • The value of the game, what you get for the price you pay (something which is almost never taken into account).
  • How innovative is that game for its own genre, or how well the formula of the genre is conveyed in its gameplay and controls.
  • How much it manages to do technically in regards to the maximum specs of the system it's played on (graphics and sound).
  • He should aknowledge any artistic traits of the game.
  • Most importantly, he should be able to see what the game tried to accomplish as a whole, and decide if the game reached its self-imposed goal, or if it failed trying to reach it.
 
Why is this surprising? These reviewers are fresh off of the Last of Us, where controls are secondary to the movie that is called a game. Of course when a game expects you to draw a circle as opposed to pushing a triangle to avoid death, the controls will be an issue.

Flame away!

Never give up.
 
I'm not internally sure: But should a reviewer bash a game for not being suitable for children? Eurogamer.

Some slight spoilers

It's a good thing to know about for any parents looking to buy this for their kids. Worth mentioning, shouldn't affect the game's score.

Bit dumb of Platinum to do this I must say. Talk about cutting off your sales potential even more.
 
Between the defenders with stupid arguments and the people who absolutely want this game to be shit and die for some reason despite high scores, I'm really starting to think people on this board have issues.
Oh well, talking about videogames on the internet was a bad idea to begin with.
 
Lol @ ign. You have one of the lowest review and then the highest. To be fair to ign never knew they had any other sites. Bet it is a free lancers just trying to find a job.
 
Well of course the scores are going to be all over the place, it's a 3rd party Nintendo exclusive Platinum Hardcore title. What else did you expect?

Whatcha got Nirolak huh?!

In all seriousness, The reviews seem good enough. The demo was fun but it didn't blow me away, and they say the controls are what's wrong, I had none of that so I'm not that worried, c'mon release already!
 
What determines how well a game sells anyway? Do kids these days look at metacritic? Word of mouth? What is the deciding factor.
 
Don't you think though that the process of reviewing a game should be comprised of a certain degree of objectivity? What if a particular reviewer hates a certain type of game, should he rate it lower just because it's not his favourite genre?

It's not just a matter of conveying one's experience with the game, that'd be a simple opinion, not a review. A reviewer should take into account:


  • The value of the game, what you get for the price you pay (something which is almost never taken into account).
  • How innovative is that game for its own genre, or how well the formula of the genre is conveyed in its gameplay and controls.
  • How much it manages to do technically in regards to the maximum specs of the system it's played on (graphics and sound).
  • He should aknowledge any artistic traits of the game.
  • Most importantly, he should be able to see what the game tried to accomplish as a whole, and decide if the game reached its self-imposed goal, or if it failed trying to reach it.

Reviews can be written in any manner, how well they're written or the way they're written is what dictates if a review is good or not. They don't need to follow the guidelines you posted.
 
Top Bottom