Ryse: Son of Rome Review - Vengeance and Glory
- Thread starter Encaen
- Start date
Thats definately a surpryseing conclusion, it's getting panned mostly. It looks vaguely interesting but more like bargain bin fodder to me.
These reviews for Xbox One launch exclusives are going to hurt its first run of sales. Still can't wait to see the first day sales though.
Actually, they probably won't. People will go and buy them regardless, just because they want something to play. It's not like the PS4 isn't experiencing the same potential sales "issues" with a lack of good launch titles either.AzrealMaximillion said:
OT: I pre-ordered Ryse and Dead Rising 3, and they've both gotten pretty good reviews from here. I generally trust the Escapist reviews, although brevity is a minor thing to me as far as a review goes. As long as the game itself and combat is fun (which is why I bought Ryse in the first place), I'll be happy. Looking at Metacritic, Ryse only has one "bad" review of a 3/10, which looks to be the outlier here. Rarely does any game ever deserve a 3/10, so I think that may just be a site desperate for hits.
That is an absolute deal breaker for me. Fuck any game company that, after tacking a price onto their game, force micro-transactions down your throat, and make it next to impossible to upgrade your character without them. Fuck Crytek, and fuck this game.
And I think there's a good reason for that. This may just be my observation and opinion, but most games out there are simply mediocre, earning the 5-6 ratings. A 3/10 to me screams "do not play this game - it is utter beta-trash."Vivi22 said:
I doubt that if Ryse was such a flop that it truly deserved a 3/10, that MS or that studio would let it fly as a launch title. Just looking at the curve of reviews for Ryse, the 3/10 is the only one that stands out as being a little too harsh. A 3 would mean that a game is nigh-unplayable to me. Even if it was just a fancy tech demo, I'd give it more than a 3. Hell, to make a completely unrelated comparison, Dear Esther wasn't much of a game. Just a walking story, but people loved it and it garnered some high scores.
Sounds interes-
*Xbox One*
Oh...
Well maybe it'll be on PC someday but my bet is that they're going to have to keep it console exclusive for some time.
*Xbox One*
Oh...
Well maybe it'll be on PC someday but my bet is that they're going to have to keep it console exclusive for some time.
I agree with this wholeheartedly. Almost every review for this game has said it isn't even worth the retail price, just to make it more insulting.Brian Tams said:
Add me to that list, I was at least interested in the setting (not getting an Xbox One so wouldn't get to play anyway) but that's damn disappointingly insulting.Shamanic Rhythm said:
I?m willing to forgive a lot of this game problems as long as it can capture the feeling of playing as a roman legionnaire, but a six hour campaign just isn?t going to do it for me especially since I also have to get a xbox one.
It?s a shame because I really like the idea of playing as a roman legionnaire, if this game was longer and maybe a bit better(most reviews on metacritic are mixed) It might have become a system seller for me.
It?s a shame because I really like the idea of playing as a roman legionnaire, if this game was longer and maybe a bit better(most reviews on metacritic are mixed) It might have become a system seller for me.
A six hour campaign... Ya, no thanks.
Also, even though this reviewer enjoyed the combat, the majority of other reviews I've seen have called the combat extremely repetitive. Basically, the game is just eye candy with a decent story. Pretty much a tech demo.
Also, even though this reviewer enjoyed the combat, the majority of other reviews I've seen have called the combat extremely repetitive. Basically, the game is just eye candy with a decent story. Pretty much a tech demo.
The story sounds very, very cool and I don't even mind a short campaign, but the combat sounds terrible from the way you describe it.
The "simplicity" makes it sound like the game just plays itself.
Also there that one... little... nagging... issue... *cough* XBONE *cough*
The "simplicity" makes it sound like the game just plays itself.
Also there that one... little... nagging... issue... *cough* XBONE *cough*
Woah, a cripplingly short campaign with microtransactions. Good job, Microsoft! Not only are you expecting people will pay to progress, but you're expecting they'll pay to progress in a game that's diabolically short. That's... I don't understand what their logic is.
I'd also like to add... "microtransactions..."RedDeadFred said:
BWAHAHAHAHAHA!!! Really, on a game like this? Are they really going to try to ram pay-to-win down our throats on this one?
That it's an inordinate amount of grinding to accrue gold only makes the situation more laughable. There's nothing here that I haven't seen already in God of War, or a dozen "sword and sandal" movies and TV shows. It isn't as if this will be some must-have fighting game.
Yet they go for the EA FIFA treatment on it...okay...have fun with that guys. I agree, it looks like an interesting rental, or a good bargain title.
With a 6-8 hour campaign, I am really curious who thought it would be acceptable as a AAA title. I'll be surprised if this actually performs to such a standard.
Having watched more than a couple people play this, and had my own hand at this . . . thing I couldn't possibly call a game with a straight face . . . I have no idea how you came to your conclusions.
"The simple, yet always dynamic combat is how it really sinks its teeth into you."
Dynamic? Really? In another area of the article you even call it challenging. The 6-8 hour campaign is an issue, I agree, but when you seem to be experiencing combat form another . . . game . . . entirely, I just don't know how to take this review seriously.
Joshua Vanderwal wrote this. There are voices on the Escapist I respect and listen to. I'm sorry, but I don't feel like this voice is one of them, especially after this review. Maybe another review, at a later time, will change my mind. I'd prefer that be true, I certainly don't go out looking to dislike things or people at a base.
-
On the matter discussed above: Microtransactions. A game this short and depth deprived doesn't need microtransactions it needs gameplay that isn't wooden, repetitive and mostly absent. It needs a full campaign - not a fraction of one. It needs to not be a graphics obsessed movie that grudgingly shoehorned a few barely present 'gameplay mechanics' into it. It needs countless things.
It didn't need microtransactions. It needed to be a bloody game.
"The simple, yet always dynamic combat is how it really sinks its teeth into you."
Dynamic? Really? In another area of the article you even call it challenging. The 6-8 hour campaign is an issue, I agree, but when you seem to be experiencing combat form another . . . game . . . entirely, I just don't know how to take this review seriously.
Joshua Vanderwal wrote this. There are voices on the Escapist I respect and listen to. I'm sorry, but I don't feel like this voice is one of them, especially after this review. Maybe another review, at a later time, will change my mind. I'd prefer that be true, I certainly don't go out looking to dislike things or people at a base.
-
On the matter discussed above: Microtransactions. A game this short and depth deprived doesn't need microtransactions it needs gameplay that isn't wooden, repetitive and mostly absent. It needs a full campaign - not a fraction of one. It needs to not be a graphics obsessed movie that grudgingly shoehorned a few barely present 'gameplay mechanics' into it. It needs countless things.
It didn't need microtransactions. It needed to be a bloody game.
Adam Sessler gave Ryse a 2/5. The thing is, his review is generally known to be more honest due to Rev3 Games scores not being registered on Metacritic (which is a good thing). Ryse has been getting a little beat up in reviews due to it being stupidly short and very repetitive. Dead Rising 3 has been getting good reviews but its agreed that its not as good as previous Dead Rising games.Midniqht said:
Trusting Metacritic scores for games is a pretty big gamble and I'd highly suggest you ready the reviews instead of trusting Metacritic due to the damage it has done to the way games are reviewed and how certain developers make games. I'm looking at you Total War Rome II...