If anything, he was too forgiving of Valkyria Chronicles. He doesn’t get into how weird it is that you can activate a single soldier 47 times in one turn.
Otagan
4442
I take issue not with the general conclusion of the review but with a number of things he said about the game which are patently false if you spend more than an hour playing it. One that jumps to mind is how he said the upgrade system was just a single series of upgrades you spent money on, but once you reveal the tree of potential upgrades, most categories have several branches you can choose from. The existence of multiple options for your weapon upgrades vindicates the inclusion of the system in the first place, whereas if there really was a single linear set of upgrades for each weapon type I would agree that the system was superfluous.
I am not about to defend every aspect of VC, nor am I about to say Yahtzee’s review was completely inaccurate in its assessment. It was, however, rather flawed compared to most of his other work. I realize he’s an entertainer first and reviewer second, but he chose all of the least credible areas to mount his criticism and ignored the game’s real flaws that he could have targeted instead (such as the dominant strategy of scout rushing or the game’s scoring system being based purely on speed and never giving credit for bothering to defeat the enemy army).
I sure hope that wasn’t the real ending.
Considering the story is the main attraction of LA Noire it had to be more spoilery than others.
But yes it’s 100% dead on.
Yep, right down to the “wait, what? That’s fucking absurd!” reaction when that final mission happens. But I’d say that knowing that silliness doesn’t spoil anything much, due to the actual story being at best extremely tangential to all the bang-bang.
I didn’t watch the LA Noire one because I was worried aobut the story spoilers.
I watched this week’s The Witcher 2 though.
The spoiler alert for this one is mostly on the prologue and some elements of Chapter 1. So up to you to decide whether you want that potentially spoiled.
What I’ll say is that I understood some of his criticisms but just couldn’t relate to his conclusions.
Wendelius
This review seemed more about not liking PC games than anything else, but maybe I’m biased.
To a degree. Though you can sympathise with his trouble with the inventory screen which keeps telling you you are doing it wrong. Also, the game doesn’t explain all its concepts very well (how many here have asked how to apply mutagens?).
Those parts, I can relate to.
I don’t think that a total lack of handholding is symptomatic of PC gaming in general either. It certainly happens in this game. But we (collectively) mostly got over it and really enjoyed it once it clicked.
I guess I’m surprised he threw his hands up and quit though.
Wendelius
peterb
4451
One person’s handholding is another person’s interaction design. I personally am more than willing to abandon a game early on based on the “if they couldn’t be bothered together the first 20 minutes right it’s not likely to get much better” principle.
Expect nothing less from a console wuss.
I recently tried the first Witcher, and found it so boring that I dropped it after about 10 hours. Tedious exposition, uninspired combat, no interesting quests - it just did not grab my attention, much as I tried to like it. This ZP makes me think that most of the things I couldn’t stand about the first game are present, and extended, in the second.
As for the knocks on PC gaming, Yahtzee is unfairly extrapolating from the game’s well-documented design flaws, which have nothing to do with the PC platform, so I’m not sure why he chose this review to carp about PC gaming in general.
No, no and… no.
I’m only a wee way in, but TW2 really is streets ahead of its predecessor in all those ways. It’s not flawless, of course - but it’s really, really good.
Are you saying this as someone who also didn’t care for the original, but slogged through it nonetheless? I ask because these days I’ve got more games than I have time to play, and my tolerance for “I know if I just give this a few more hours I’m going to start liking it” game experiences is about zero. So if this game has a shallow “enjoyment curve” like the first one did, I’m out.
Eh, I’m never one to hang around and hope a game gets better, there are way too many gaming options these days for that, but Witcher 2 captured my imagination pretty much from the very beginning and didn’t let up the entire game. Sure there were some things that took me a while to figure out - I didn’t know what the hell to do with Mutagens until over halfway through the game - but such things are minor details when the overall game experience is so exceptional.
I didn’t mind the first one’s opening, but recognised the flaws. Second one has none of the flaws you identified (though it has some of its own, which have been … well canvassed :)
The combat is hard at the beginning, but it’s fun hard and verrry satisfying when it clicks.
Quitch
4458
I wish less games would hold my hand, I get tired of Valve sitting me on their knee and making sure I spend five hours practising before they let me loose on a couple of puzzles. Games like Space Rangers 2 were a breath of fresh air from that design.
I haven’t watched it as I don’t want a spoiler until I’ve played so I don’t know if it’s more an issue with poorly explained mechanics. The original certainly needed you to pop into the glossary of the in-game journal to get a handle on things.
That’s too bad for Yahtzee. I’ve been in his position before, frustrated by a game many people love – infuriating checkpoint saves, or a lame story that bugs me. I’m glad I lucked out so I could cherish this one. Yay.
I hope they even off the rough edges for console gamers. But you’ll never get a positive review from Yahtzee because the game will still be old school with things like inventory management. shrug
Everything Yahtzee said was unsurprising. They’re the notably ugly trees in what is actually a very pretty forest.
