I'm not too sure where I sit on this particular review. A little drunken from end to end, considering how many times it hobbles between the "good" and "bad" labels. If anything, I'm more curious about the fanbase than the review-content itself. It's a lot easier to be negative and funny than positive, but angry rants seem to have a limit of how much they can truly accomplish.
Somehow, Zero Punctuation has reminded delightlessly immune to long-running positive commentary, and it ends up making the series strike me as stale. The humor's still there, and still funny, but bile gets so tiresome for more than a video at a time. Although that's the genius of one video a week.
Radu889 said:
I agree with Yahtzee. Dark Void feels unfinished and overambitious.
My question is how ambitious does something have to be before it's overambitious. I'd like to see more games spew the kind of ambition this game shows. The ambition wasn't met with enough drive to really capitalize itself on a solid game. I remember enjoying what of it I played, and finding out it ended too quickly is a shame, but the ambition is something that should be celebrated, not condemned. Perhaps not due to unfulfilled potential, but at least the game tried. It's a lot more than we can say for a lot of titles out in the world right now.
Shamanic Enzan said:
Makes you wonder just how much money it'll take for the studios to let someone actually finish a decent game.
Depending on how you define decent game, but there are arguably examples out there. The games
Indigo Prophecy (
Farenheit in most other countries) and
Shenmue both saw a lot more development time and budget than many games do, are ambitious, and accomplish the scope of their dreams. So it's not impossible to find an example of games that really spent the money and time.
They're out there, if you look, just not many of them.
Cyanide Christ said:
Thanks yahtzee, you saved me 60 bucks once more
I'd say you should be careful with listening to reviews too closely for all your purchasing decisions,
especially those by
Yahtzee. While he may be technically a game critic, his work often lacks the depth to really detail whether or not a game is worth the mention.
As well as that, part of his charm is his subjectivity. The issue comes from the fact that subjectivity is the sort of thing that needs to be put aside for game reviews. It's subjectivity that made Yahtzee speak a little too favorably on
Psychonauts, and a little too harshly on
Brutal Legend. That same subjectivity manages to paint every review he's made.
So, you're welcome to take his opinion. Just do so with a grain of salt, and looking around at other reviewers as well. It never hurts to have a wide opinion.
BlueInkAlchemist said:
Why didn't someone on the planning committee realize "Wait! The jetpack is the cool, innovative, fun thing about the game? Make the game about THAT! Ditch the story, forget trying to be Uncharted, just give the player a jetpack and have them fly around shooting crap at a whim! Like Grand Theft Auto but in three dimensions!"
The biggest problem with this is it would become an offline MMO. While a lot of
Grand Theft Auto makes its calling on being sandbox-y, the games wouldn't have a bit of direction to explore when the sandbox mood is set aside. I'm not sure a jetpack would be enough to justify getting bored of sandboxing.
Depends on the gamer, though.