God of War Review Thread

[hanselthecaretaker]

Another commendable point is it's not often we see a visual upgrade, but Santa Monica Studios appears to have continued their trend from the PS3 days

Spoiler

Also good to see the standard PS4 version hanging in there with the Pro. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6VB3aIdXu_U]

 

[Captain Marvelous_v1legacy]

I'm really excited for this game and I'm looking forward to continuing Kratos' story. I do remember the previous God of War games and I've got to say; Kratos doesn't deserve a redemption story of any kind. He is without a doubt one of the worst protagonists I've ever played. He's a scum bag who has sacrificed many innocent lives for the sake of his petty revenge and at the end of it all, became an even greater monster than any of the gods he's killed. He's a real piece of shit, sad backstory be damned. That said, I'm willing to give Santa Monica the chance to try and convince me that Kratos is redeemable. I still want him to die, though. I'd actually love to play as the character that kills him.

Spoiler: Dumb rant about review scores

Some people have taken to twitter, displeased with God of War getting 10/10's claiming "The score is meaningless now!" or "A 10/10 should mean 'perfect' or 'flawless'" and even "This game has no multiplayer and doesn't deserve a 10/10". Frankly, the scores after reviews have never meant anything. a 9, 8, or 1/10 is meaningless without context from the actual review. They are made further useless by editorial mandate to keep the score in line with other scores. So a review will read like "This game sucks!" but the review score will still be a 7/10. And a 10/10 certainly does not mean said piece of media is perfect or flawless as there is no such thing. These scores aren't even measures of perfection, but of enjoyment. I find the idea of 10/10 meaning "perfect" just as ridiculous as someone throwing a tantrum because a game they like doesn't get it. *Lookin' at you Zelda Fanatics* I wouldn't mind permanently getting rid of review scores in favor of a better system. Sadly, any system will likely be reduced to "positive review" or "negative review" for easier mass consumption.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

I'm really excited for this game and I'm looking forward to continuing Kratos' story. I do remember the previous God of War games and I've got to say; Kratos doesn't deserve a redemption story of any kind. He is without a doubt one of the worst protagonists I've ever played. He's a scum bag who has sacrificed many innocent lives for the sake of his petty revenge and at the end of it all, became an even greater monster than any of the gods he's killed. He's a real piece of shit, sad backstory be damned. That said, I'm willing to give Santa Monica the chance to try and convince me that Kratos is redeemable. I still want him to die, though. I'd actually love to play as the character that kills him.

Spoiler: Dumb rant about review scores

Some people have taken to twitter, displeased with God of War getting 10/10's claiming "The score is meaningless now!" or "A 10/10 should mean 'perfect' or 'flawless'" and even "This game has no multiplayer and doesn't deserve a 10/10". Frankly, the scores after reviews have never meant anything. a 9, 8, or 1/10 is meaningless without context from the actual review. They are made further useless by editorial mandate to keep the score in line with other scores. So a review will read like "This game sucks!" but the review score will still be a 7/10. And a 10/10 certainly does not mean said piece of media is perfect or flawless as there is no such thing. These scores aren't even measures of perfection, but of enjoyment. I find the idea of 10/10 meaning "perfect" just as ridiculous as someone throwing a tantrum because a game they like doesn't get it. *Lookin' at you Zelda Fanatics* I wouldn't mind permanently getting rid of review scores in favor of a better system. Sadly, any system will likely be reduced to "positive review" or "negative review" for easier mass consumption.

I will be going into the game where only the events of the original God of War actually happened unless the game directly references the sequels because of how bad the plot and characterizations were in the sequels. I'm guessing you'd have to fill in the basics of Kratos destroying the Greek gods and that's why he's now moved to the Norse mythology, and I'll just fill-in the super basics of Zeus being pissed at Kratos basically forcing Kratos' hand. The actual plot reason why Zeus was mad at Kratos in the sequels was so fucking stupid. I was with Kratos as a character from what I recall of the first game, he did kill innocents but his motivations were understandable as every action he took was to get back at Ares and nothing else mattered to him. Not that Kratos was morally right in doing such things but his actions were in line with most revenge stories.

Yeah, video game review scores are pointless. I only somewhat "trust" a few reviewers on Youtube, and the ones I really do think are great reviewers (like Super Bunnyhop and Errant Signal) do their reviews at least like a month or so after release. The guys that I do somewhat trust as giving genuine takes on every game, their preferences usually don't line up with mine very well. For example, I definitely think Jim Sterling is completely honest about every game he plays, but I just don't think he's good at reviewing games. You know professional review scores are FUBAR because if games where to have a Tomato-meter, every game would be like 99% fresh. Games routinely get average scores that are higher than the vast majority of movies' Tomato-meters, that don't make sense.

Yes, I knew it was Godhand, some Japanese game from the PS2, because I remember you talking to me about it and posting a video. I mixed up the titles because the games don't matter to me and I never look at them. Thanks for the worthless response, though (and probably getting me permabanned after three suspensions).

You can't try to say something sucks, then ignore the example/proof of why your argument is wrong. You can't say God of War will suck because of the camera angle when there's a game using that same angle and it has one of the best melee combat systems ever. It's like saying some upcoming 1st-person platformer will suck because 1st-person platforming doesn't work when Mirror's Edge exists and proves that to be wrong. You can argue back and forth and be civil about it.

 

[McElroy]

You know professional review scores are FUBAR because if games where to have a Tomato-meter, every game would be like 99% fresh. Games routinely get average scores that are higher than the vast majority of movies' Tomato-meters, that don't make sense.

I think I've mentioned this before, but the reason is simple: games are reviewed like TOYS instead of art like movies usually are. Stuff like praising the replay value or length of the game are things you could praise toys for too but not movies. And so on. It's the same issue when you see reviews of Undertale complaining that the gameplay is too retro (or something).

 

[Rangaman]

So...what is this game? I mean, what is the gameplay like? Because after reading this thread, I have genuinely no idea what the hell is going on with it.

The only thing I know for certain is that it's different to the old games. Not that I have a problem with that, the old formula needed a shake-up and anything that has the potential to make Kratos a decent human being and a relatable protagonist is okay by me.

 

[Captain Marvelous_v1legacy]

So...what is this game? I mean, what is the gameplay like? Because after reading this thread, I have genuinely no idea what the hell is going on with it.

The only thing I know for certain is that it's different to the old games. Not that I have a problem with that, the old formula needed a shake-up and anything that has the potential to make Kratos a decent human being and a relatable protagonist is okay by me.

From what I understand the combat is a little like Assassin's Creed Origins. The shoulder buttons are used to attack instead of the face buttons. Kratos's Axe can be used in Melee or thrown and, much like Mjolnir, the Leviathan Axe can be recalled at any time. When he doesn't have his Axe, Kratos uses his fists to attack. His Rage meter is still there and he can pull off brutal finishers on enemies after attacking for a while. That's about all I really know, at least until I get my hands on the game later this week.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

You know professional review scores are FUBAR because if games where to have a Tomato-meter, every game would be like 99% fresh. Games routinely get average scores that are higher than the vast majority of movies' Tomato-meters, that don't make sense.

I think I've mentioned this before, but the reason is simple: games are reviewed like TOYS instead of art like movies usually are. Stuff like praising the replay value or length of the game are things you could praise toys for too but not movies. And so on. It's the same issue when you see reviews of Undertale complaining that the gameplay is too retro (or something).

I don't even know how toys are reviewed, but shouldn't how enjoyable the toy is be a big part of how good the toy is? It's not even that I require a game reviewer to on par a movie reviewer's critical analysis of writing, characters, plot, etc. But at least try, several games' enjoyment hinge on that stuff nowadays, have an opinion about it. Why can't one game reviewer not like something because they didn't enjoy it? For example, Hideo Kojima's writing, lots of people hate his writing yet MGS4 has a 94 average score (when over half the game/experience is cutscenes). Or, why can't a reviewer blast a game having functional Arkham combat but saying it totally doesn't fit the game? You can enjoy Arkham combat (or really any element/mechanic) in a one game and hate it in another depending on how it's used and other factors. Board game reviews can be very divisive and board games are more 'game-y' (they live/die completely on mechanics and balance) and are closer to toys than video games. I can see how toy reviewers would be much more about function and durability over enjoyment because I assume adults would be rating/reviewing toys while they don't actually play with them so enjoyment is obviously not something they could even rate. Whereas everything else that is reviewed is reviewed by people that enjoy said products (when they are good obviously) from movies to music to video games.

 

[hanselthecaretaker]

I've read combat is more deliberate this time, especially in terms of melee. People have said it has a momentum-like weightiness and feels crunchy, kinda like how The Last of Us is when you're smacking a 2x4 over an infected's face. The combat has moved to the shoulder buttons like Souls, but more tactical in that you will get into trouble more often trying to spam attacks. It sounds like it was designed to mix things up between the ax for both melee and range, melee with fists, and Atreus who can be used on cue to initiate or extend combos.

 

[Redryhno]

I've read combat is more deliberate this time, especially in terms of melee. People have said it has a momentum-like weightiness and feels crunchy, kinda like how The Last of Us is when you're smacking a 2x4 over an infected's face. The combat has moved to the shoulder buttons like Souls, but more tactical in that you will get into trouble more often trying to spam attacks. It sounds like it was designed to mix things up between the ax for both melee and range, melee with fists, and Atreus who can be used on cue to initiate or extend combos.

So basically what you're telling me is that it's no longer a spectacle HxS, but a Last of Us analogue?

Sounds like a bigass pass if you ask me.

 

[hanselthecaretaker]

I've read combat is more deliberate this time, especially in terms of melee. People have said it has a momentum-like weightiness and feels crunchy, kinda like how The Last of Us is when you're smacking a 2x4 over an infected's face. The combat has moved to the shoulder buttons like Souls, but more tactical in that you will get into trouble more often trying to spam attacks. It sounds like it was designed to mix things up between the ax for both melee and range, melee with fists, and Atreus who can be used on cue to initiate or extend combos.

So basically what you're telling me is that it's no longer a spectacle HxS, but a Last of Us analogue?

Sounds like a bigass pass if you ask me.

Considering 95% of the combat in the old games wasn?t spectacle, how much is being lost? The series was overdue for a deeper combat engine regardless of camera perspective, and considering TLoU?s hard hitting melee is pretty much a gold standard the similarity isn?t really a bad thing.

 

[Neurotic Void Melody]

I still don't see how this really zoomed in camera is a good idea. No one has made a good argument for it. How is constantly having to now lock on and rotate the camera in these chaotic battles better than a standard classic third person camera? I corrected myself and said classic because almost all the big third person games use these really zoomed in cameras now. It's absurd. I was frustrated in the last hours of Uncharted: The Lost Legacy that I couldn't change the field of view (while aiming) at all. This game's combat does look nice, but for me it's ruined by this shit camera.

Why not?

Why shouldn't they? Why not go for a change? Change is good. Stagnation and comfort zones are not. Why does everyone have to "make a good argument for it" to you when you clearly have decided what the objective truth is in your head?

If you don't like it, that's unfortunate, because a lot of people do. A lot of people like a change every now and again. And they don't need to justify the developer's decision to you.

 

[ChupathingyX]

Change is good.

No, change is not inherently a good thing.

 

[Redryhno]

Considering 95% of the combat in the old games wasn?t spectacle, how much is being lost? The series was overdue for a deeper combat engine regardless of camera perspective, and considering TLoU?s hard hitting melee is pretty much a gold standard the similarity isn?t really a bad thing.

About 70% of the screen from what I've seen of it. Which is never a good thing when it comes to any HxS.

And the originals weren't about hard-hitting melee, they were about flashy combos, zooomed-in executions, one-god-destructo-blenders, and just brutality to the degree that it was stupid if you sat down and thought about it. Kinda like it was considered by the creator as a somewhat dumbed-down DMC mixed with someone that's had a very bad day and a complete lack of a sense of humor or style.

 

[hanselthecaretaker]

I've read combat is more deliberate this time, especially in terms of melee. People have said it has a momentum-like weightiness and feels crunchy, kinda like how The Last of Us is when you're smacking a 2x4 over an infected's face. The combat has moved to the shoulder buttons like Souls, but more tactical in that you will get into trouble more often trying to spam attacks. It sounds like it was designed to mix things up between the ax for both melee and range, melee with fists, and Atreus who can be used on cue to initiate or extend combos.

So basically what you're telling me is that it's no longer a spectacle HxS, but a Last of Us analogue?

Sounds like a bigass pass if you ask me.

Considering 95% of the combat in the old games wasn?t spectacle, how much is being lost? The series was overdue for a deeper combat engine regardless of camera perspective, and considering TLoU?s hard hitting melee is pretty much a gold standard the similarity isn?t really a bad thing.

I still don't see how this really zoomed in camera is a good idea. No one has made a good argument for it. How is constantly having to now lock on and rotate the camera in these chaotic battles better than a standard classic third person camera? I corrected myself and said classic because almost all the big third person games use these really zoomed in cameras now. It's absurd. I was frustrated in the last hours of Uncharted: The Lost Legacy that I couldn't change the field of view (while aiming) at all. This game's combat does look nice, but for me it's ruined by this shit camera.

From the footage I've seen and things I've read it doesn't sound like anyone's fighting the camera system, which ironically happened occasionally in all the previous games anyways. Other than being able to move it freely now it still follows the player but just usually closer and forward-facing; although it does pan out for climbing or other context sensitive things. I've also seen how enemies will still try to flank or attack from other directions but the game has a way of highlighting that so the player isn't cheaply blindsided.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

I think YOU have to answer that. Why go for a change? How is that change functionally superior? They're not doing it in the best interest of the game, they're doing it because everyone else is doing it, because it looks cinematic to some people, which is stupid. It's a bad choice for chaotic melee combat. Using a normal field of view because it works best isn't stagnation. According to you, we should change everything for the hell of it. Cars are easier to drive with steering wheels, but lets replace them with levers just for the hell of it.

No, change is not inherently a good thing.

Change isn't inherently good but can be needed. For example, everyone hopped on the Arkham combat bandwagon and I got so tired of it that I'm pretty much done with it even though I do think it's a good system. Or, of course, Ubisoft's open world games, which I find better than Rockstar's games but I was done with that formula after a couple games. Even if you find Arkham combat to be the best melee combat system, every game with it that you play has diminishing returns. Thus, you can't be like this is best for melee combat, this is best for shooters, and then make every game exactly the same as stagnation is the reason why most of last-gen and the beginning of current-gen was arguably the worst period for AAA gaming. We literally went from being tired of WWII shooters to being so tired of MMSs that WWII felt fresh again. Or just look at the history of rogue-likes and you're most likely seeing the same thing with souls-likes if that trend continues.

And the originals weren't about hard-hitting melee, they were about flashy combos, zooomed-in executions, one-god-destructo-blenders, and just brutality to the degree that it was stupid if you sat down and thought about it. Kinda like it was considered by the creator as a somewhat dumbed-down DMC mixed with someone that's had a very bad day and a complete lack of a sense of humor or style.

The new combat system does fit with God of War's brutal style though. The zoomed-in nature will give the combat more "crunch" to it and make it more visceral. Whereas this new system wouldn't work for a DMC or Bayo game with regards to theme and just the spectacle of combat those games are about. God of War wasn't what I'd call a spectacle fighter, it had an epic-ness to it but the actual combat system itself wasn't spectacle; it had more in common with PS2 Prince of Persia's combat than DMC.

 

[Redryhno]

And the originals weren't about hard-hitting melee, they were about flashy combos, zooomed-in executions, one-god-destructo-blenders, and just brutality to the degree that it was stupid if you sat down and thought about it. Kinda like it was considered by the creator as a somewhat dumbed-down DMC mixed with someone that's had a very bad day and a complete lack of a sense of humor or style.

The new combat system does fit with God of War's brutal style though. The zoomed-in nature will give the combat more "crunch" to it and make it more visceral. Whereas this new system wouldn't work for a DMC or Bayo game with regards to theme and just the spectacle of combat those games are about. God of War wasn't what I'd call a spectacle fighter, it had an epic-ness to it but the actual combat system itself wasn't spectacle; it had more in common with PS2 Prince of Persia's combat than DMC.

Since when? I might be agreeing with you if I hadn't had a stream on in the background about a week ago that I looked over to every once in a while(nostalgia and all that, even though I was always more on the DMC side of the coin), but a third of the screen during any combat sequence is filled with flashing lights from your weapons and magic. The only time it ever zoomed in was during executions and specific scripts(during which you were probably breaking some poor plebs kneecaps before feeding him his own ears).

I've no doubt it'll be an alright game, but as far as branding goes, I feel it'll fall short. Though I'm not sure anyone would've given a hoot if the branding wasn't there.

Spoiler: I got linked this a while back and it covers most of what I feel about the new GoW

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

The new combat system does fit with God of War's brutal style though. The zoomed-in nature will give the combat more "crunch" to it and make it more visceral. Whereas this new system wouldn't work for a DMC or Bayo game with regards to theme and just the spectacle of combat those games are about. God of War wasn't what I'd call a spectacle fighter, it had an epic-ness to it but the actual combat system itself wasn't spectacle; it had more in common with PS2 Prince of Persia's combat than DMC.

Since when? I might be agreeing with you if I hadn't had a stream on in the background about a week ago that I looked over to every once in a while(nostalgia and all that, even though I was always more on the DMC side of the coin), but a third of the screen during any combat sequence is filled with flashing lights from your weapons and magic. The only time it ever zoomed in was during executions and specific scripts(during which you were probably breaking some poor plebs kneecaps before feeding him his own ears).

I've no doubt it'll be an alright game, but as far as branding goes, I feel it'll fall short. Though I'm not sure anyone would've given a hoot if the branding wasn't there.

Spoiler: I got linked this a while back and it covers most of what I feel about the new GoW

I wasn't trying to say previous GOWs had zoomed-in cameras, I'm fully aware they were fixed cameras pretty far zoomed-out most of the time (I played the main 3). I was saying the zoomed-in nature can actually fit with the brutal combat style of GOW, the combat might actually end up feeling more brutal than previous games. Whereas other games like DMC, a zoomed-in camera totally wouldn't fit really any element of the series. Every great game really comes down to having everything designed around supporting that core, this new camera style does work and support the core of God of War IMO even though it's quite a departure from previous games. I don't get how this new game can't still very much be on par with David Jaffe's original vision for God of War, which as quoted from Jaffe himself is "brutal, nasty, violent, anti-social, pissed-off, angry, fuck you" (and that is literally in GamingBrit's video).

I found the criticisms in the video really poor. He's criticizing the new game for not being focused on gameplay like previous games but from everything I've heard about the combat, it has more depth than the previous games. It's not like the old games set some high bar, it's almost impossible to make a combat system simpler than classic GOW. He complains about the camera being too close to input complex moves yet God Hand exists (and he actually has a pic of its cover art in the video) with a similar camera and its combat system is very complex. Basically he's complaining that GOW should be about good gameplay and the new game has better gameplay than the old games so his argument literally doesn't make sense. He even complains that the new game "looks like the kind of game made for people that really don't wanna play a game, don't want to have to learn how to use a combat system like the old ones." Or the following quote, "It's like back then (PS2 GOW) you needed to learn how to play a game, that shit's so old-fashioned." Yet he claims classic GOW combat is just mashing square in literally the opening seconds of the video and later on claims GOW's simple combat opened up the genre to casuals so what is there to "learn" with regards to combat in the prior games? Then, he goes down the very slippery slope of asking what if new God of War becomes popular and "ruins gaming" when every other game gets dumbed-down.

I personally loved the 1st God of War and hated the sequels and hated Kratos. I totally wrote off this game because of how shit the sequels were (Extra Credits GOW story analysis [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BtgA6SaHHa0]), I didn't want more God of War and definitely not more Kratos. I'd be the first to admit that the new direction didn't grab me and thought it probably was the wrong direction mainly because I couldn't really care less about the series and gave the initial trailer/reveal like 2 seconds of thought. Although Kratos being the main protagonist AGAIN was by far the biggest turn-off, much more than the different direction. It wasn't until seeing the reviews that actually made me interested in the game and that it could actually be good again. Now I'm thinking I'm going to buy it on release when it was a game I completely wrote off until Hansel posted this thread on April 12th along with reviews showing up on my Youtube feed. Will I find it as great as the reviews claim? Maybe, maybe not. But I wouldn't be even giving this new game the time of day if it was just more classic God of War.

 

[Samtemdo8_v1legacy]

So can anyone exaplain to me what the hell is going on with this story?

Why is Kratos in Norseland?

Why is Kratos even alive when he stabbed himself with the Blade of Olympus?

What happened to Ghost Athena?

Am I to believe that the end of the World as shown in God of War 3 was a localized apocolypse?

Why does he have a Son now and who was Mama Kratos that birthed him?

 

[Casual Shinji]

So I've been playing it for a good couple of hours and god... DAMN!!!

I'm still high on the experience, but I can't say I've felt this giddy, excited, and amazed at a game in a long while. It kinda feels like Santa Monica just casually strolled up on stage and did a mic-drop infront of Naughty Dog. 'Thought you were the king of the linear, story-driven, action blockbuster? Well check this shit out.' There's a fight early on in the game that made my nuts EXPLODE.

It's hard to discribe what the game is like, because dispite how it might seem derivative of other games it feels very much like it's own thing. The combat especially feels incredibly unique, and almost like a rhythym game (on the difficulty that I'm playing on anyway). And the gameworld is ludicrous in how it twists and turns into numerous side paths. There were areas where I figured a side path would lead to a chest and/or some enemies, only to be presented with a legitimate sidequest.

So that's it for now. I don't know how the rest of the game is going to fare, but these first 4 to 5 hours is getting a colossal thumbs up from me.

 

[Redryhno]

I like this picture.

Spoiler

Well, they gotta find SOME way to keep the pleb-boxes from chugging.

You expect them to sacrifice leaf detail on those trees or something?

So I've been playing it for a good couple of hours and god... DAMN!!!

I'm still high on the experience, but I can't say I've felt this giddy, excited, and amazed at a game in a long while. It kinda feels like Santa Monica just casually strolled up on stage and did a mic-drop infront of Naughty Dog. 'Thought you were the king of the linear, story-driven, action blockbuster? Well check this shit out.' There's a fight early on in the game that made my nuts EXPLODE.

It's hard to discribe what the game is like, because dispite how it might seem derivative of other games it feels very much like it's own thing. The combat especially feels incredibly unique, and almost like a rhythym game (on the difficulty that I'm playing on anyway). And the gameworld is ludicrous in how it twists and turns into numerous side paths. There were areas where I figured a side path would lead to a chest and/or some enemies, only to be presented with a legitimate sidequest.

So that's it for now. I don't know how the rest of the game is going to fare, but these first 4 to 5 hours is getting a colossal thumbs up from me.

I really don't know, from what I've seen on the hardest difficulty, the game wasn't really balanced all that well with it in mind, at least early on. Parrying locks you into a slo-mo that you have to attack to get out of, while enemies that weren't parried aren't, you sorta have to use magic and abilities to survive simply because there is no viable mini-stun or interrupt otherwise, and I feel like I'm fighting with the camera more than the original Dark Souls port, with Kratos taking up a good 40% of the screen adding to the general feel that the game isn't difficult because of the enemies, but because of the lack of visibility and how many are just sponges.

Also fuck the kid, he's a Tails for most of it, so he's a marginally better escort minion with your only real interrupt, but he just doesn't shut up. Heaven forbid you die a few times in some areas, because you will hear him repeat the same fucking line over, and over, and over again. And that's before I consider his voice, little bastard's not developed enough to be able to say half the shit he has to say properly.

As for the story, it's getting more than a bit stale that the last five or so years has had an overflow of "YOU ARE NEW PARENT, ACT LIKE NEW PARENT" storylines. I get that it's probably because the devs that were working ten and fifteen years ago are just having their kids and all, but jesus christ can we get some more stuff along the lines of Enslaved? Adults with different strengths and weaknesses instead of kids that are your sidekicks and effectively sole motivators? Kratos just isn't a good enough character with enough motivation to just basically jump into it, especially since the guy had a kid and wandered off immediately after for like ten years.