Support NeoGAF

[Mistle]

omg thanks for whoever suggested launching in exclusive mode. fixed the stuttering completely, game is buttery smooth now! also turned off ingame vsync and enabled it through my GPU settings, along with triple buffering. the game plays so much more smoothly now, it's night and day. the stuttering was really ruining the experience.

enjoying this way more than reviews would have you expect. lots of fun

 

[Captain Europe]

Sorry, but it really is not too difficult. It is uncommon to have a platforming section of maybe three minutes without checkpoints, but come on. The argument that you are running against two timers is also quite strange, because you really are running against the short of those, which should be the timer for the light. The section took me four tries, so I really don't feel it's outrageously difficult. I rather enjoyed that failure had some consequences here. Had they put a checkpoint after each rolling section, they would have had one every 40 second or so, what's the point in that?

I was prepared for shitty controls and frustrating parts because of the gamexplain guys, especially because Derrick described himself as being fantastic at platformers. And yet, everything he had trouble with in his video, or said he had trouble with, has been really easy for me.

Maybe most people just suck at platformers.

 

[PeakPointMatrix]

Like

Who the fuck actually missed the jumpy-speech sounds from the banjo days? It's total ear poison and my most hated thing so far. I'd seriously take a 10¢ VA job over this constant garble.

Everything else is ace though, fuck the reviews.

 

[The Third Heat]

Really warming up to this game more and more as I play it. I think once I've trained my brain to accept that I'm gonna fall a lot and slide around and not get everything on the first try, I'm okay. This game doesn't coddle you. Yes, the controls are wonky, but I kinda think that's the point? (Although I do think the first Rextro game is broken and needs to be fixed because it's the worst thing I've played in a video game in ages). Spent most of tonight doing World 2 stuff and actually had fun. Didn't let the jank get to me and just tried to work with it.

I dunno. I hate feeling like I have to justify liking something but those reviews made it seem like this was unplayable filth. Even with all my skepticism going in, I'm very impressed.

 

[DieNgamers]

Like

Who the fuck actually missed the jumpy-speech sounds from the banjo days? It's total ear poison and my most hated thing so far. I'd seriously take a 10¢ VA job over this constant garble.

Everything else is ace though, fuck the reviews.

Despite disagreeing (but understanding the issue some people have) about the voices...Right? What's up with reviews being THAT negative? At its worst it's a charming platformer that may not be for everyone because there's so much to collect.

I don't get it! I almost completed world one and I have to say...It's simple and charming fun so far. <3 Anyone who played the toybox demo should have known what's in store here.

 

[HeroR]

Despite disagreeing (but understanding the issue some people have) about the voices...Right? What's up with reviews being THAT negative? At its worst it's a charming platformer that may not be for everyone because there's so much to collect.

I don't get it! I almost completed world one and I have to say...It's simple and charming fun so far. <3 Anyone who played the toybox demo should have known what's in store here.

What's charming to you isn't charming to another person. Even those who like the game well enough had issues with it. Whether those issues break the game is an individual preference.

 

[DieNgamers]

What's charming to you isn't charming to another person. Even those who like the game well enough had issues with it. Whether those issues break the game is an individual preference.

I don't see anything gamebreaking as much as I try. Not digging the style is a matter of preference but I don't think of it as "gamebreaking".

I think elements that come down to taste shouldn't necessarily be seen as faults.

 

[Artanisix]

Like

Who the fuck actually missed the jumpy-speech sounds from the banjo days? It's total ear poison and my most hated thing so far. I'd seriously take a 10¢ VA job over this constant garble.

Everything else is ace though, fuck the reviews.

they did it completely wrong in yooka. in banjo, the voice is quite smooth and expressive, whereas yooka is a bunch of sharp short samples strung together. it is ear cancer in yooka 100%

 

[dh4niel]

I love 3D platformers but all of the videos I've seen of the game highlight some annoying platforming, puzzles and enemies. Not to mention some confusing level design.

I don't care about the writing or voice acting. It's a platformer not a visual novel.

 

[Octavianus]

I was prepared for shitty controls and frustrating parts because of the gamexplain guys, especially because Derrick described himself as being fantastic at platformers. And yet, everything he had trouble with in his video, or said he had trouble with, has been really easy for me.

Maybe most people just suck at platformers.

Same, I was preparing myself for some really awkward controls combined with having to do battle with the camera. Five hours in and I've had zero issues.
Plays like any other 3D platformer.

 

[HeroR]

I don't see anything gamebreaking as much as I try. Not digging the style is a matter of preference but I don't think of it as "gamebreaking".

I think elements that come down to taste shouldn't necessarily be seen as faults.

From what I have read, the gamebreakinig thing about this game is that just isn't fun to play for various reasons. Gameexplain have three people play the game and their reaction was lukewarm at best and even they admit that this game is polarizing since it has such mix reaction.

 

[ClivePwned]

I played an hour or so Monday after getting the game and my initial impressions were mixed. Apart from camera and gibber-voice, I really hated the feeling of all this shit was around be locked. It wasn't until I had enough feathers and bought some maneuvers off Trowzer (unlocking the sonar thing the butt-stomp and the shooting ability) that I was actually able to do anything.

Now I'm enjoying it a lot more. That said, that camera is atrocious and they really, really need to get someone on that.

 

[StayDead]

I've only played about an hour of this, but I'm in love so far.

Even the voices!

 

[The perfect Dark]

I'd rate it a solid 10 so far. (World 4)

Visuals are great, gameplay is amazing, humour is good, music is fantastic, level design is great.
A perfect Banjo Kazooie successor.

 

[DarkStream]

I absolutely adore this game.

This year made me lose all faith in professional "reviewers". Don't get me wrong, I've been reading reviews since forever but as of now I don't care anymore.

Certain games got almost perfect score this year - A lot of them I didn't like one bit.
Yooka-Laylee gets slammed and I adore it. What really rubs me the wrong way are those strange reviews complaining about story and voices. They also claim the game isn't "modern" enough. Excuse me, what?!

I love how the game simply just starts. Evil guy does something and we are gonna check it out. That's it. No goddamn 3 hour cut scenes, audio logs, backstory. Just gameplay. They also perfectly nailed the aesthetics. Controls feel tight, the humour is on spot on.

I love how Laylee is complaing about those modern shooters with refilling health. It is old school by design, yet fresh (expanding worlds) with some witty takes on gaming culture in its jokes - A lot of reviewers seem to completely miss the point of the game and like sheeple flock around the same review scores.
Old school doesn't = outdated....

I'm so happy this game exists, especially in a world where Rare is only a shadow of its former self.

 

[Lynd7]

I'm kinda surprised people thought the first world was too big etc, it really isn't all that big and doesn't take long to get across it.

 

[Mistle]

Man I feel a bit sorry for the devs. I'm having heaps of fun with the game, I think it's exactly what they promised and what I expected. Nobody is wrong to express their opinion if they didn't like it but it must suck for them to see how lukewarm the reception has been. Sure the game isn't a masterpiece, but my personal experience has been really positive. I'm having such a great time playing a sandbox platformer with the Rare aesthetic and writing, never thought there'd be a new one. I'm kind of over sidescrollers at this point, or goal-based platformers like 3D World and even Galaxy to a certain extent (even though it's a masterpiece). Bring on Odyssey, I'm ready.

Camera hasn't bother me too much. Something that would help big time though is if I could adjust the angle, and it would stay where I adjusted it to. It's so quick to readjust to what it thinks is better. I've found that just letting it do it's thing is usually the best solution

But yeah I'm having a blast. If you're curious about this game give it a shot. Maybe you'll agree with the reviews and that's OK, but honestly, play the game and decide for yourself. I feel Playtonic deserved better.

 

[jimboton]

I'm liking it a lot so far, just 6 world 1 pagies in. Yeah, so the camera makes some very occasional weird zooms or gets stuck very briefly in enclosed spaces, if it weren't for all the flak it's got I'd have barely noticed it...

 

[Harmen]

Yes, I am digging this game, in world 2 now. There are a lot of things to do and since I am not a completionist, I just skip the challenges that annoy me to focus my time on the quality content that is there as well.

This year made me lose all faith in professional "reviewers". Don't get me wrong, I've been reading reviews since forever but as of now I don't care anymore.

It is not that any of the reviewers is "wrong", but I think it is good to realise that ultimately a couple of dozen or even a hundred professional reviewers is still an extremely small subset of people compared to the total amount of people that will be playing a game. Usually not even close to being 1%. It is not that surprising that for many titles there are large groups of people not really respresented by reviews prominently, especially when talking averages (because this game in particular in fact has reviews on both ends of the spectrum, a mere average number does not show that).

 

[Savantcore]

I'm a little further into world two and still think a 6/10 is about right. You run around collecting things with an occasionally janky camera and some annoying noises made bearable with a nice aesthetic and fun level design. Some of the minigames are crap while there's sometimes a tidy bit of platforming. It does what it set out to do and does it neither brilliantly or terribly.

Edit: Just looked on Metacritic and seen that it's rocking a 69. Suddenly don't understand any of these 'I don't trust professional reviewers anymore' comments. It's not like it's sub-50 or anything.

 

[Yoshi]

Few strange design decisions here, in Kazooie and Tooie Bottles/ Jamjars would tell you if you needed a specific move for a jiggy but you don't get that for Pagies here.

I know they sometimes did, but not in all instances, right? Thinking of shooting Konga or destroying buildings in Mumbo's Mountain or killing Snowmen in Freezeezy Peak. As far as I remember (nowadays I of course know which moves I need and I always play the game fast, so I don't approach anything that I cannot do yet), it were only few, specific points where such an information was given. Still, I would appreciate it in Yooka to an extend as well.

Like

Who the fuck actually missed the jumpy-speech sounds from the banjo days? It's total ear poison and my most hated thing so far. I'd seriously take a 10¢ VA job over this constant garble.

Everything else is ace though, fuck the reviews.

I missed it, in particular when I had to endure the horrible voice acting in Zelda BotW. I'm loving the fact that they are using this kind of speech in the game. I am reevaluating if I should do that in my own game though, because of the almost general hate for it.

What's charming to you isn't charming to another person. Even those who like the game well enough had issues with it. Whether those issues break the game is an individual preference.

While Yooka-Laylee is in my eyes extraordinarily charming, I don't think this is the major point towards the suprise at the negative reviews. In fact, even if it had some horrible aesthetics and atmosphere, I would still be hard pressed to see how one could call it a bad game. Even strictly from a gameplay perspective, I think this is a very, very well-designed game, where minor issues or absolute non-issues (that lie more on the lack of platforming skills with the reviewer than the game) are blown well out of proportion. In particular, Sterling's claim that you'd need to be desparate to get enjoyment out of the game is, in a word, outrageous.

 

[DarkStream]

It is not that any of the reviewers is "wrong", but I think it is good to realise that ultimately a couple of dozen or even a hundred professional reviewers is still an extremely small subset of people compared to the total amount of people that will be playing a game. Usually not even close to being 1%. It is not that surprising that for many titles there are large groups of people not really represented by reviews prominently, especially when talking averages (because this game in particular in fact has reviews on both ends of the spectrum, a mere average number does not show that).

I think you are quite right. Reviews certainly aren't "wrong", they are perfectly valid. In fact, every review is a good review simply because they offer differing perspectives.
I agree that reviews are a very small subset. I all goes back to the old question if aggregated review scores à la metacritic have any value at all.
I think nowadays it is more important than ever to maybe just find one or two reviewers that really like the things you like. This mentality would be poison if applied to newspapers and politics (you really need both sides) but when it comes to video games, I am just not looking for the critical dissection of every little detail in a game. I look for a fun time and will, from now on, stick to a select few people that categorize "fun" in the same way I do.

Anway, that was kind of OT. Back to the game

 

[wetflame]

I booted this up briefly on my PS4 last night as I hadn't had much of a chance to play it since I got my code. Took a very long time to load and noticed some stuttering, it even froze completely at one point, and this was all before gameplay. Got about halfway through the opening cinematic before I had to stop (like I said, very brief!) but so far it's very Banjo. The voices are a little annoying in this day and age, but I can forgive that as it's a deliberate nostalgia piece. More annoying is that I didn't seem to be able to speed up the dialogue or skip through the lines. Had to sit there while they garbled away at each other and the text speed is way too slow.

Looking forward to actually getting to play the game and seeing how it feels.

 

[Maxwood]

Yeah, i'm not getting the complains about the camera. It's not perfect, sure, but it's far from horrible.

This sure ain't Rayman 3. Thank god.
Or Tomb Raider Underworld. Now those games have horrendous camera's.

Played for three hours. It's charming, colourful and fun. Yooka controls quite well and the game is filled with a lot of great animation work. I also love little victory dance enemies make after they hit you.
Not a fan of the double jump, though. Level-design wise it's also a bit of a mixed bag. (only played World 1, though)

Anyway, it's really fun so far. Glad I bought this.

 

[Ilmyr]

Nope. Playing on a pro here with boost mode and its fine. However, I can occasionally get interference from my router as its close to the PS4 which can affect it occasionally. A reset of router normally sorts it. Try wired controller see if it goes away.

Tried a wired connection for the controller, but the game still feels slow. I definitely sense input lag.

I tried other games to exclude and hardware problems (Yakuza, Horizon, Steep). They still run flawlessly with highly responsive inputs.

On PC the game runs flawlessly without any input lag. I know its not a good comparison, but the PS4 feels way below 30 FPS with input lag not doing it any favors.

 

[nkarafo]

I'm a little further into world two and still think a 6/10 is about right. You run around collecting things with an occasionally janky camera and some annoying noises made bearable with a nice aesthetic and fun level design. Some of the minigames are crap while there's sometimes a tidy bit of platforming. It does what it set out to do and does it neither brilliantly or terribly.

Edit: Just looked on Metacritic and seen that it's rocking a 69. Suddenly don't understand any of these 'I don't trust professional reviewers anymore' comments. It's not like it's sub-50 or anything.

It's mostly about reviewers who only care about controversy, like Jim who gave this game a 2/10. I don't care how opinions work, a professional reviewer has to be more objective with his reviews.

 

[MrBadger]

It's mostly about reviewers who only care about controversy, like Jim who gave this game a 2/10. I don't care how opinions work, a professional reviewer has to be more objective with his reviews.

An objective review would just be a list of facts about the game with no opinions at all. But that's silly because a review is someone's experience with a game. The most important thing is clearly describing why a specific thing is good/bad so the reader can decide whether or not that would bother them personally.

 

[nkarafo]

An objective review would just be a list of facts about the game with no opinions at all. But that's silly because a review is someone's experience with a game. The most important thing is clearly describing why a specific thing is good/bad so the reader can decide whether or not that would bother them personally.

So then what's the difference between a random user review from Gamefaqs and a professional review that affects Metacritic scores?

 

[Skyzard]

Having finally played this, that score was a joke. Pretty shameful tbh, major exaggeration and hurts the chances of 3D platforming revival. This is Banjo 3.

 

[Yoshi]

An objective review would just be a list of facts about the game with no opinions at all. But that's silly because a review is someone's experience with a game. The most important thing is clearly describing why a specific thing is good/bad so the reader can decide whether or not that would bother them personally.

I agree that the most important thing is to detail why something is good / bad, but (some) reviewers tend to just deal out platitudes. Also, as outlined in a different discussion, I feel a review should not just give a very personal account of the game, but be a more distanced critic. If something is well-made, but you personally don't like it, it should not be detrimental to the game's verdict.

 

[dark10x]

they did it completely wrong in yooka. in banjo, the voice is quite smooth and expressive, whereas yooka is a bunch of sharp short samples strung together. it is ear cancer in yooka 100%

Honestly, I always felt the Klonoa "fake language sounds" approach was superior - but those gibberish lines were actually spoken so it's pretty different.

 

[woopWOOP]

It's gonna be a while before I have the chance to play this, but even Giant Bomb's rather frustrating quick look made the game look pretty fun. I want to explore those levels!

 

[Skyzard]

It's gonna be a while before I have the chance to play this, but even Giant Bomb's rather frustrating quick look made the game look pretty fun. I want to explore those levels!

You'll love it.

 

[The perfect Dark]

Having finally played this, that score was a joke. Pretty shameful tbh, major exaggeration and hurts the chances of 3D platforming revival. This is Banjo 3.

As I said before he's nothing but a sad troll who needs controversy and attention.

 

[Mega Man's Electric Sheep]

If you score a game on anything other than how much you like it, you end up with Game Informer's Paper Mario The Thousand Year Door 6.75/10 review, where they personally liked it, but scored it based on what they thought their readers would like.

 

[Yoshi]

If you score a game on anything other than how much you like it, you end up with Game Informer's Paper Mario The Thousand Year Door 6.75/10 review, where they personally liked it, but scored it based on what they thought their readers would like.

No, going by what other people like is not the same thing as evaluating how well the game executes what it sets out to do.

 

[MrBadger]

So then what's the difference between a random user review from Gamefaqs and a professional review that affects Metacritic scores?

I don't think I need to explain the difference between a long, detailed account with clear reasoning and a brief paragraph by some kid

 

[Skyzard]

I feel like the game would benefit from decreased sensitivity while rolling at less than max speed (analogue pushed all the way forward).

You'd be able to maneuver Yooka more easily while rolling and navigating tight platforming sections. It feels slightly too sensitive now. Will take some getting used to.

Also, jumping into a roll would be sweet for flow, it's pretty strict as it is.


Btw, something I learned early on: At the end of a double jump, press forward and attack and you'll cover more distance to make jumps when he does his attack in the air.

 

[nkarafo]

I don't think I need to explain the difference between a long, detailed account with clear reasoning and a brief paragraph by some kid

There are user reviews out there that make professional ones look exactly like that.

IMO, a professional reviewer, who knows his words are taken more seriously, should be able to see when something is well made, even if he personally doesn't like it. Back in the day of magazines, i always thought that reviewers are those experienced gamers who know when a game has bad graphics because they know how many colors are used, how many sprites, by comparing with other games, etc. Naive, i know, but if a professional review is nothing more than a well written user review then why is it taken more seriously, affects Metacritic, etc? If it's only just an opinion, why is it more important than others who don't get paid for them?

I don't personally care about reviews anymore, i just wonder if there is something i'm missing.

 

[HeroR]

I know they sometimes did, but not in all instances, right? Thinking of shooting Konga or destroying buildings in Mumbo's Mountain or killing Snowmen in Freezeezy Peak. As far as I remember (nowadays I of course know which moves I need and I always play the game fast, so I don't approach anything that I cannot do yet), it were only few, specific points where such an information was given. Still, I would appreciate it in Yooka to an extend as well.

I missed it, in particular when I had to endure the horrible voice acting in Zelda BotW. I'm loving the fact that they are using this kind of speech in the game. I am reevaluating if I should do that in my own game though, because of the almost general hate for it.

While Yooka-Laylee is in my eyes extraordinarily charming, I don't think this is the major point towards the suprise at the negative reviews. In fact, even if it had some horrible aesthetics and atmosphere, I would still be hard pressed to see how one could call it a bad game. Even strictly from a gameplay perspective, I think this is a very, very well-designed game, where minor issues or absolute non-issues (that lie more on the lack of platforming skills with the reviewer than the game) are blown well out of proportion. In particular, Sterling's claim that you'd need to be desparate to get enjoyment out of the game is, in a word, outrageous.

I think it is very dismissive to say that the people who don't like it are lacking plateformer skills. Especially when the a lot of the people reviewing it are Banjo fans or just fans of plateformers. To them, this isn't a well made plateformer. It is mediocre.

Also, I have to agree that the voices in this game are grinding and I am used to the babble in Banjo.

 

[Mega Man's Electric Sheep]

No, going by what other people like is not the same thing as evaluating how well the game executes what it sets out to do.

You're not following my point. I'm not saying it's the same thing, I'm saying it's dumb to score a game on anything other than how much you liked it, because it can lead to disingenuous reviews like that. I hated Driveclub. Didn't have one second of fun playing it. I would give it a 2/10 if I reviewed it, because I enjoyed looking at the pretty graphics and not one other aspect. Using your logic I should give it an 8 because it executes what it sets out to do, even if I hated every second I played it.
The reviews for this are spot on for me anyway. I loved BK, and I think Yooka is a 6/10 at best so far. Bad camera, bad minigames, character has no weight and moves too fast, the game is glitchy and froze on me after I died. But if it set out to be a worse BK, 10/10.

 

[DylanEno]

I love how the game simply just starts. Evil guy does something and we are gonna check it out. That's it. No goddamn 3 hour cut scenes, audio logs, backstory. Just gameplay. They also perfectly nailed the aesthetics. Controls feel tight, the humour is on spot on.

I love how Laylee is complaing about those modern shooters with refilling health. It is old school by design, yet fresh (expanding worlds) with some witty takes on gaming culture in its jokes - A lot of reviewers seem to completely miss the point of the game and like sheeple flock around the same review scores.
Old school doesn't = outdated....

I'm so happy this game exists, especially in a world where Rare is only a shadow of its former self.

Just starts? Yes. After a pointless 5 minute cutscene that sets up the laziest, most asinine plot imaginable with some truly generic characters both in terms of personality and design. Like, it's laughably bad. I'm not saying I want MGS levels of story shit, but at least give me SOMETHING to care about ffs.

And then there's the poor excuse for a spiral mountain replacement that is...wherever yooka and laylee live (was there a name for it?). Completely flat and uninspired and zero fun to explore. The pirate ship had a cute bit of charm to it along with the paint cans (do not apply paint to butt), but overall it's just void of any sort of character.

The game is constantly beating you over the head with fourth wall breaking humor and it's irritating as all get out. Like, iirc Kazooie only did it on occasion and was vastly more charming for it - not more than 1 hour into the game and the characters are already constantly making references to the game itself or other games like "omg I used this move to beat the third boss in the game" or "wait up Yooka we haven't even visited the casino world yet!" (Thanks for spoiling that btw, you fucking obnoxious bat) and "lol we take damage unlike soft modern day shooters lolololol". It's awful.

If modern rare can't do better than this whenever they inevitably release the next Banjo game... We're fucked.

 

[balladofwindfishes]

Their house is called Bat Ship Insane

 

[nkarafo]

You're not following my point. I'm not saying it's the same thing, I'm saying it's dumb to score a game on anything other than how much you liked it, because it can lead to disingenuous reviews like that. I hated Driveclub. Didn't have one second of fun playing it. I would give it a 2/10 if I reviewed it, because I enjoyed looking at the pretty graphics and not one other aspect. Using your logic I should give it an 8 because it executes what it sets out to do, even if I hated every second I played it.

But how do you know when "it executes what it sets out to do" well or not?

That's what professional reviews should be about. People who have the experience to know when this is the case. That's why they get paid for IMO.

 

[PSFan]

So then what's the difference between a random user review from Gamefaqs and a professional review that affects Metacritic scores?

I don't think I need to explain the difference between a long, detailed account with clear reasoning and a brief paragraph by some kid

There are user reviews out there that make professional ones look exactly like that.

IMO, a professional reviewer, who knows his words are taken more seriously, should be able to see when something is well made, even if he personally doesn't like it. Back in the day of magazines, i always thought that reviewers are those experienced gamers who know when a game has bad graphics because they know how many colors are used, how many sprites, by comparing with other games, etc. Naive, i know, but if a professional review is nothing more than a well written user review then why is it taken more seriously, affects Metacritic, etc? If it's only just an opinion, why is it more important than others who don't get paid for them?

I don't personally care about reviews anymore, i just wonder if there is something i'm missing.

IMO, the only difference is that a professional is paid. And in a lot of cases, overpaid, and all for just their opinion. And their opinion is no better or worse than a user who writes a legit review on gamefaqs or here.

 

[firebricks3]

Their house is called Bat Ship Insane

I noticed that right away and I think it's hilarious. Also, as a backer, this game scratches an itch I've had for almost decades now. There are a few problems with the game, but it turns out they really don't matter in the end because of how joyous the game is.

 

[Lynd7]

You're not following my point. I'm not saying it's the same thing, I'm saying it's dumb to score a game on anything other than how much you liked it, because it can lead to disingenuous reviews like that. I hated Driveclub. Didn't have one second of fun playing it. I would give it a 2/10 if I reviewed it, because I enjoyed looking at the pretty graphics and not one other aspect. Using your logic I should give it an 8 because it executes what it sets out to do, even if I hated every second I played it.
The reviews for this are spot on for me anyway. I loved BK, and I think Yooka is a 6/10 at best so far. Bad camera, bad minigames, character has no weight and moves too fast, the game is glitchy and froze on me after I died. But if it set out to be a worse BK, 10/10.

Just being enjoyable to the reviewer isn't the be all and end all.

If you didn't like Drive Club, being a reviewer you should be able to identify if its actually doing things well for a driving game or not, how does it compare to its contemporaries in terms of features etc.

Basically even if someone doesn't like a game, they definitely should be able to see the innate quality it has or doesn't have.

Yooka for me so far would be around an 8 or so, there may be some niggles here and there but its still competently made and constructed. The art and animation alone are wonderful.

Anyway, lets not all try and go back to the review discussions again, it just goes round in circles for pagies and pagies.

 

[FinalAres]

Despite disagreeing (but understanding the issue some people have) about the voices...Right? What's up with reviews being THAT negative? At its worst it's a charming platformer that may not be for everyone because there's so much to collect.

I don't get it! I almost completed world one and I have to say...It's simple and charming fun so far. <3 Anyone who played the toybox demo should have known what's in store here.

Reviewers live and breathe games, and their writing teaches them to look at games as parts, rather than the sum of their parts.

As a result they are more annoyed by bad controls and performance, and more easily woo-ed by something that is new and different.

Yooka is neither of those things.

 

[Mega Man's Electric Sheep]

Just being enjoyable to the reviewer isn't the be all and end all.

If you didn't like Drive Club, being a reviewer you should be able to identify if its actually doing things well for a driving game or not, how does it compare to its contemporaries in terms of features etc.

Basically even if someone doesn't like a game, they definitely should be able to see the innate quality it has or doesn't have.

Yooka for me so far would be around an 8 or so, there may be some niggles here and there but its still competently made and constructed. The art and animation alone are wonderful.

Anyway, lets not all try and go back to the review discussions again, it just goes round in circles for pagies and pagies.

That's part of a review yes, but it can have every feature ticked off on a checklist and still not be a fun game and deserve a bad score from that reviewer. Games can be more than the sum of their parts, but sometimes they are less. Where are all these high scoring reviews people are reading where the reviewer hated it but gave it 9/10 because it did what it set out to do?

 

[DieNgamers]

Reviewers live and breathe games, and their writing teaches them to look at games as parts, rather than the sum of their parts.

As a result they are more annoyed by bad controls and performance, and more easily woo-ed by something that is new and different.

Yooka is neither of those things.

This makes me think...In my opinion you can live and breathe a game much better without a time limit or the overall goal to finish and analyze it for a review. I can see some reviewers playing Y-K and being annoyed by its overall pacing and the need to find stuff to progress.

I can give it all the time it deserves. That's why I feel it's a relaxing and fun experience so far.