Zero Punctuation: Ryse: Son of Rome
- Thread starter Yahtzee Croshaw
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I never got the graphics in this game, apparently they are impressive, but from what i´ve seen it all looks rather awful. A whole lot of boring grey and brown with gritty and ugly character models with strange faces. It just looks very unappealing in every thinkable way and the gameplay looks rather awful and boring.
But what can you expect from a game that started its life as a kinect exclusive?
But what can you expect from a game that started its life as a kinect exclusive?
No, I mean the core combat, which is currently hack-and-slash meets Arkham Asylum with Call of Duty style setpieces thrown in, weren't originally there at all; that was all QTEs as well, somehow. Again, just going by what I've heard, and I have no idea how that would have worked if it was originally envisioned as a showcase for Kinect's features, so I could be way off.MonkeyPunch said:
so basically instead of playing it for yourselves, the bulk of you opt to line up and join whatever the other guy is saying? lol sounds about right for this generation of gamers.
the game isn't close to being the worst launch game out there nor is the combat. unless you think Assassin's Creed 4 and a variety of other games all have repetitive gameplay that takes away from the experience because guess what .. nearly ALL games run you through the same function repeatedly.
how about this concept .. try the game and see if you agree with what this guy is saying. i've read hundreds of favorable opinions to contrast the uninformed rants people throw at this game.
it's not the greatest .. but it's not the worst either. it's a very good launch game .. one that you won't find many that look as good as .. the gameplay won't be for everyone but it's not unlike many others in its genre.
like i said, try it before you decide to bandwagon and have someone form your opinion for you.
the game isn't close to being the worst launch game out there nor is the combat. unless you think Assassin's Creed 4 and a variety of other games all have repetitive gameplay that takes away from the experience because guess what .. nearly ALL games run you through the same function repeatedly.
how about this concept .. try the game and see if you agree with what this guy is saying. i've read hundreds of favorable opinions to contrast the uninformed rants people throw at this game.
it's not the greatest .. but it's not the worst either. it's a very good launch game .. one that you won't find many that look as good as .. the gameplay won't be for everyone but it's not unlike many others in its genre.
like i said, try it before you decide to bandwagon and have someone form your opinion for you.
Actually...well, you better just adapt, cuz this is and will be the current trend for any game with "action" in the title. Talking about an action game of any sorts in this day and age having any type of decent plot/storyline is tantamount to talking about a normal person who lost the bronze in the special olympics because he saw a shiny nickel.Reddington said:
The only genre's that are pretty much guaranteed to have some semblance of a story, whether or not it is palatable, are sci-fi, adventure, and rpg's. And those genre's have been slowly shrinking, or are being blended into the action category, for nearly a decade. So either go into, or start, an indy game group, or just chalk it up to an emerging fact of life and go get your good stories from a book(s).
"Try the game and see if you agree"? By that logic, every time I open up a Game Informer I should go out and buy every game they review and try it for my own opinion...or how about this: Go fuck yourself. I'm glad your daddy and mommy have the money to buy you whatever your little pre-pubescent heart desires, but for the majority of us that is not option as we work for a living, and have bills to pay.deacon said:
Game reviewers exist, and receive a paycheck (or most of them do), for a reason. Their opinions, and yes we know it is an opinion, help us gamers to decide whether or not a game sparks our varied interests (and/or looks like fun) before we go out and spend our hard earned money on it. Granted, a lot of game companies probably do not care for this as it allows us to exercise a little thing called purchasing power, but hey! A free market is dandy ain't it?
So continuing on your path of genius, game reviewers shouldn't exist. Riiiight...First off, this is Yahtzee we're talking about. He is a cynic, sarcastic bastard, and that's why we love him. But you have to take 90% of his reviews with a grain of salt. If you go through all his reviews, you can probably count the number of games he has given a thumbs up to on one hand. I know for damn sure you won't be needing to take off your shoes to count your toes. However some of the games he has stomped into a prostitute's crabby cavern I have personally enjoyed, both the story as well as the game mechanics.
Yahtzee is funny, and he does speak some truths that a lot of us have realized or are beginning to, but there are multiple reviews for the same game out there so go read something. I know that's a shocking revelation for you, even though most of us learned that fact, and nearly everything mentioned in this wall of text, by the time we were ten-frikkin'-years-old.
Yahtzee...funny, as usual. Although, as the barbarians were also burly white men, at least in Central and Western Europe, and had hounded the Roman Empire multiple times and even sacked the city of Rome on occasion, I don't think they had logistics issues. Think of it like this, a crossbow bolt...that is a inch thick wooden dowel with a metal point...could pierce roman (and even some medieval) plate armor. Who knew a stick can be such a wonderful tool, right?
Isn't it sad that the closest thing you can get to fighting as a roman legionary is in a futuristic postapocalyptic wasteland set in an alternative history of the US. They don't even wear armor for crying outloud! They run into fights wearing football pads!randomthefox said:
I was really hoping this'd be a good game based off Roman history, but they just had to fuck it up for what? To dumb it down with action? Real roman history had plenty of action! Why not just make a game playing various Romans through each of those battles? Keep the elephants to the Punic wars, keep Boudicca in Britain, and keep the ambush in the Teutoburg to the Germanics! Don't just smash all that into a giant 'bad guy' army and have it attack Rome.
It literally is like Call of Duty Ghosts, but replace 'The U.S' with 'Rome'.
It literally is like Call of Duty Ghosts, but replace 'The U.S' with 'Rome'.
I get the feeling game companies do that a lot more than we catch them at it. Like you'll see "...a great game" - PC Gamer and the actual quote was "One way you could describe half life 2 is: a great game. CoD: Ghosts, on the other hand..."DeadCoyote said:
The problem with getting rid of an unreachable upper limit so that some games can have the maximum rating is that it starts to lose its specialness. You start oversaturating the review boards with games with inflated scores. It's why they reworked the ratings system in madden a few years back- too many players were just showing up as 99's because they set the bar for the maximum available value too low. It did make custom characters hilariously overpowered, though, which always cracked me up.TizzytheTormentor said:
Scores are shit anyway, people should try reading instead of having all things summed up in a few numbers.
Is there a "bad" ending where Boudicaa conquers Rome, crucifies Marius and feeds Nero to the lions? Because I'm rather tickled by the idea of the Historical "Villain" Upgrade being applied to ancient Britain... *waves Union Jack, sips tea*
For me it was worse than Yahtzee said, as the graphics/physics were lame for the new consoles as well. Oh, and Zero (pun intended) replayability - unless you down three dirty martinis made with antifreeze - which makes you slightly brain damaged before (for drinking antifreeze), and leaves you very brain damaged after (and blind in your left eye).