I enjoyed the review (as I usually do) even if I thought that he was being overly harsh. As someone who completed the game and felt compelled enough to play it again, I think I got my money's worth out of it, and frankly, isn't that the point?
Honestly, I understand that ZP reviews tend to focus on the failures / inadequacies of a game-- that's the schtick, really. And while I wouldn't expect him to be slobbering all over Dead Space like many of the reveiewers out there, I had hoped he would've spent a bit more time lauding the positive, because there are a lot of good things in the game, and people- both the consumers who buy the game and the developers who make it- need to at least hear about what was done right, else they won't know what to keep.
(Just for the record, although others have covered it before in this forum, it bears reiteration- how they handled the HUD is brilliant, the audio production values are astonishing, and the zero-G mechanic is fantastic. Please game developers, more of that sort of thing! Just FYI: yes, I know that developers will not read the comment threads, so that statement is somewhat pointless, which is exactly why I wished Yahtzee covered those things in his review, because I know the Devs *will* watch that.)
I think the thing that people need to realize is that EA is not going anywhere, so rather than boycotting them or complaining about the blandness of their titles ad nauseum, you should probably do your best to encourage things like Dead Space, where they are trying something different, even if they only get it partly right.
And to the person who said that DS was the true spiritual heir to System Shock, and not Bioshock, I agree completely... now if we can just get EA to actually make SS3 since they own the rights to it, preferably with the same team as DS, then I would be estatic.
EDIT: I can't wait to see his Fallout 3 review. It's gotta be done-- I mean, how many sites and reviewers gave it perfect scores? (And yes, I played it all the way through. Yeah, it's a good game. Perfect? No. Freaking. Way.) Somebody has to call BS on that.
Honestly, I understand that ZP reviews tend to focus on the failures / inadequacies of a game-- that's the schtick, really. And while I wouldn't expect him to be slobbering all over Dead Space like many of the reveiewers out there, I had hoped he would've spent a bit more time lauding the positive, because there are a lot of good things in the game, and people- both the consumers who buy the game and the developers who make it- need to at least hear about what was done right, else they won't know what to keep.
(Just for the record, although others have covered it before in this forum, it bears reiteration- how they handled the HUD is brilliant, the audio production values are astonishing, and the zero-G mechanic is fantastic. Please game developers, more of that sort of thing! Just FYI: yes, I know that developers will not read the comment threads, so that statement is somewhat pointless, which is exactly why I wished Yahtzee covered those things in his review, because I know the Devs *will* watch that.)
I think the thing that people need to realize is that EA is not going anywhere, so rather than boycotting them or complaining about the blandness of their titles ad nauseum, you should probably do your best to encourage things like Dead Space, where they are trying something different, even if they only get it partly right.
And to the person who said that DS was the true spiritual heir to System Shock, and not Bioshock, I agree completely... now if we can just get EA to actually make SS3 since they own the rights to it, preferably with the same team as DS, then I would be estatic.
EDIT: I can't wait to see his Fallout 3 review. It's gotta be done-- I mean, how many sites and reviewers gave it perfect scores? (And yes, I played it all the way through. Yeah, it's a good game. Perfect? No. Freaking. Way.) Somebody has to call BS on that.
