Zero Punctuation: Monster Hunter Tri

 Pages PREV 1 . . . 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 NEXT
 

I'm glad people aren't putting up with Yahtzee's bullshit for a change.
He shouldn't review a game he played 30 minutes of. That's fucking lazy and insulting.
And then he tries beating around the bush by talking about a kazillion irrelevant subjects.

This new trend sucks, Yahtzee. We deserve more.

go nana go:

epsilon246:

go nana go:

epsilon246:

ForgottenPr0digy:
Hooray another shitty game for the wii

I don't get it why do Japanese people like this sort of grind fest with no storyline(final fantasy and so many other JRPGs are grind fest with a storyline)

Believe it or not japanese gamers like being told what to do next.
evidence: fusion the most linear of the metroid games did much better in japan than it's predecesors. That's just what they're like.

Fusion was 2D
Those do good in Japan dude,
They INVENTED it!

Other 2d metroid games didn't do as well as fusion, and they were much less linear. Japanese gamers prefer linear gaming western prefer open.

Super Metroid, good
Metroid Zero Mission, good
This doesn't make sense!!!!

Wiki on fusion:
"The game went on to sell over 940,000 copies in North America by August 2006, with revenues of $27 million.[33] As of November 2004, the game has sold 155,000 units in Japan."

Wiki on super metriod:
"Super Metroid sold poorly in Japan. With the help of strong marketing from Nintendo, Super Metroid sold better in North America and Europe."
?!?!?! A 2d linear game selling better in North America?!?!?!?
image
It's more about the fact metroid is not japanese at all. It's pure sci-fi with no spirits or folklore or allusions or chosen ones or any staples of japanese society, and it fits in perfectly with the american audience. We DO love shooting stuff in space. EVERY game was linear back in the day. And no one complained they wished they could have dialog options and bang Asari in space for the lulz.

Lineality is more than just story, you're never really told where to go in super it's up tp you to explore... actually perhaps japaneese gamers just like being led around.

Telekinesis:
I'm glad people aren't putting up with Yahtzee's bullshit for a change.
He shouldn't review a game he played 30 minutes of. That's fucking lazy and insulting.
And then he tries beating around the bush by talking about a kazillion irrelevant subjects.

This new trend sucks, Yahtzee. We deserve more.

Thank you for saying what I have been thinking for the past days.

He didn't play for more than a couple of hours, impossible! If he did, he would've at least encountered the Great Jaggi, a monster possibly a little larger than Lagiacrus, and his opinion should change fast.

Off course the 1 star quests are nothing more that fetchquests. ANY RPG has you do stuff like that for the first hours.

This was a piss poor review, and not quite the best video either. I know the bar takes up a lot of time, but if you can't even do these viedos right anymore, please chose one of two things: the bar or the videos. A local bar or a global website.

Aylaine:

feather240:

Aylaine:
In response to anyone bashing Yahtzee here, something you should keep in mind:

He reviews how he wants. If it's not adequate for you, the viewer, then it can't be his fault. He does things his way, you choose to accept or not accept it, and move on. Arguing about it won't accomplish anything in my opinion because this method works for him and most of the people who watch Zero Punctuation. He's also not here to do 100% professional reviews. They do contain validity, but it's at a 40% vs 60% humor ratio in my opinion, averagely so expecting him to play through the entire game in a week when he has other things to do, clearly doesn't like the game or simply lost interest (or perhaps all 3) is asking too much. He knows how to do his job, and if you guys don't really agree with it, I'm sorry. That's the way things go. Arguing about it won't solve anything though, and it will likely cause more problems.

Just thought I would clear that up. :)

Well said, we need a disclaimer like that at the beginning of the OP for his videos.

Quaidis:

feather240:

PayJ567:

Daystar Clarion:
Wow, Yahtzee completely missed the point of the game. Me thinks he didn't play long enough to fight some of the bigger monsters.

Just what I was about to say. He basically summed up the HR1 experience.

How long does it take to get to the good part? It isn't one of those "Only 13hours until FFXXXX gets good!" things is it?

Apologies if someone already answered you. It takes less than an hour (two hours at most if you take your time enjoying the scenery) to get to the bigger monsters. The first quests are very easy and quick, and are there to help you get a feel of the game and controls. If you are use to previous Monster Hunter games, it takes less than thirty minutes.

Maybe he was playing with the wiimote instead of the controller. He probably had one at some point, but maybe he sold it. To get money for a triple-cun- *cough* Nevermind... <.<

Finally someone who actually understood my post. Cookies to you for being able to read past all the arguing and vs-ism here. :)

It's easy, when ZP has a lot of posts I just don't read them all. It saves me time and protects me from the mind flailing.

Quaidis:

feather240:

Quaidis:

feather240:

PayJ567:

Daystar Clarion:
Wow, Yahtzee completely missed the point of the game. Me thinks he didn't play long enough to fight some of the bigger monsters.

Just what I was about to say. He basically summed up the HR1 experience.

How long does it take to get to the good part? It isn't one of those "Only 13hours until FFXXXX gets good!" things is it?

Apologies if someone already answered you. It takes less than an hour (two hours at most if you take your time enjoying the scenery) to get to the bigger monsters. The first quests are very easy and quick, and are there to help you get a feel of the game and controls. If you are use to previous Monster Hunter games, it takes less than thirty minutes.

Maybe he was playing with the wiimote instead of the controller. He probably had one at some point, but maybe he sold it. To get money for a triple-cun- *cough* Nevermind... <.<

Ahahaha... Ahh..... Good times.

Honestly, I've been playing with the Wiimote and haven't had any trouble. It takes getting use to, mind you.

Bloody well that could be read in all sorts of fashions.

How is the wiimote used? Is it like an FPS or TPS because then I don't see the problem. Most of those work fine with the wiimote. (...or there's that Prince of Persia Rival Swords control system, god I loved that game, even for the Wii.)

I have to wonder at this point how Yahtzee will respond, I don't think this sort of stir has been stirred up since his SSBB review. Will he respond and admit his mistakes? Or will he convince himself he is too popular to care?

Telekinesis:
I'm glad people aren't putting up with Yahtzee's bullshit for a change.
He shouldn't review a game he played 30 minutes of. That's fucking lazy and insulting.
And then he tries beating around the bush by talking about a kazillion irrelevant subjects.

This new trend sucks, Yahtzee. We deserve more.

Agreed, it also doesn't help that Yahtzee hates most Japanese games to begin with, something everyone dumb enough to believe his words to be fact should've taken into effect first and foremost before they posted on these forums.

And no, this isn't just because MH3 is on the Wii, the very console and it's games that Yahtzee has been directly attacking in these recent reviews either. If he did the same thing to the 360, I'd be beating that dead horse as well. I just watch ZP to be entertained and there's nothing entertaining about Yahtzee when his schtick is composed of the same pretentious anti-Wii shit that I can get from the pretentious SONY fanboys that make up the TreyBrotherhood.

Mr Companion:
Well I am glad I did not take heed of the positive reviews. This review pretty much explains exactly what the footage looked like to me, running around smacking monsters in order to gather up bits of pointless tat.

So... despite most reviews giving it a generally positive score, you take the one critic who disagrees (and who obviously isn't interested in laying out information in anything but an entertaining context) as the gospel truth?

feather240:

How is the wiimote used? Is it like an FPS or TPS because then I don't see the problem. Most of those work fine with the wiimote. (...or there's that Prince of Persia Rival Swords control system, god I loved that game, even for the Wii.)

It's a well-balanced, "the 'wand' controller is basically for actions and the 'nun-chuck' is for defense and movement." The camera follows the character loosely, and if you want to see what's behind you, you can turn the character around and hit a button to recenter the camera. You can set the camera to follow the character at three different angles with the touch of a button (but not straight through their eyes like your typical FPS). The scheme of it takes a while to get use to since there is so much to do, which basically explains why there are a handful of fetch quests in the beginning, and once you do things become more or less reflex. But it's not mind-numbingly difficult like Tomb Raider. And it's not piss-easy like... Oh... Metroid. The entire game and way it works reminds me of Way of the Samurai in more ways than one, but my memory may be askew.

The only thing that really bugged me about the game controls was that, in utter panic at being attacked by something rather large, I ask it to use an item and the character sheaths their weapon. Then I have to ask it to use an item a second time for the item-taking to be done. This is antagonistic due to the fact that sheathing and unsheathing something, depending on how heavy the weapon you have is, takes a wee bit too long. As is taking/eating an item. If I am in a frizzy over the fact that t-rex over there is going to kill me in one poke and I get all the way to a safe area for two seconds, the last thing I want the game to do is take its time sheathing my weapon instead of eating the potion while the dinosaur rips my head off. Though I think this unnecessary difficulty was done on purpose, to put you into more of a panic when you are in actual danger.

Quaidis:

feather240:

How is the wiimote used? Is it like an FPS or TPS because then I don't see the problem. Most of those work fine with the wiimote. (...or there's that Prince of Persia Rival Swords control system, god I loved that game, even for the Wii.)

It's a well-balanced, "the 'wand' controller is basically for actions and the 'nun-chuck' is for defense and movement." The camera follows the character loosely, and if you want to see what's behind you, you can turn the character around and hit a button to recenter the camera. You can set the camera to follow the character at three different angles with the touch of a button (but not straight through their eyes like your typical FPS). The scheme of it takes a while to get use to since there is so much to do, which basically explains why there are a handful of fetch quests in the beginning, and once you do things become more or less reflex. But it's not mind-numbingly difficult like Tomb Raider. And it's not piss-easy like... Oh... Metroid. The entire game and way it works reminds me of Way of the Samurai in more ways than one, but my memory may be askew.

The only thing that really bugged me about the game controls was that, in utter panic at being attacked by something rather large, I ask it to use an item and the character sheaths their weapon. Then I have to ask it to use an item a second time for the item-taking to be done. This is antagonistic due to the fact that sheathing and unsheathing something, depending on how heavy the weapon you have is, takes a wee bit too long. As is taking/eating an item. If I am in a frizzy over the fact that t-rex over there is going to kill me in one poke and I get all the way to a safe area for two seconds, the last thing I want the game to do is take its time sheathing my weapon instead of eating the potion while the dinosaur rips my head off. Though I think this unnecessary difficulty was done on purpose, to put you into more of a panic when you are in actual danger.

"Heh, watch your back..." "OM NOM NOM"

Horrible review. He obviously couldn't even find the time to play past the tutorial levels.
These days I find Classic Game Reviews much more entertaining and endearing.
http://www.youtube.com/user/InecomCompany
Shame on you, Yatzee. Poor bastard can't even kill a Kut-Ku.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EUj_A7TL9fk

AwesomeFerret:
I have to wonder at this point how Yahtzee will respond, I don't think this sort of stir has been stirred up since his SSBB review. Will he respond and admit his mistakes? Or will he convince himself he is too popular to care?

We might get another mailbag showdown type of episode, which would be awesome. :)

AwesomeFerret:
I have to wonder at this point how Yahtzee will respond, I don't think this sort of stir has been stirred up since his SSBB review. Will he respond and admit his mistakes? Or will he convince himself he is too popular to care?

Dude, that ferret is adorable.

Aylaine:

AwesomeFerret:
I have to wonder at this point how Yahtzee will respond, I don't think this sort of stir has been stirred up since his SSBB review. Will he respond and admit his mistakes? Or will he convince himself he is too popular to care?

We might get another mailbag showdown type of episode, which would be awesome. :)

Hm, indeed- I'll be interested to see the EP for this...

joshuaayt:

AwesomeFerret:
I have to wonder at this point how Yahtzee will respond, I don't think this sort of stir has been stirred up since his SSBB review. Will he respond and admit his mistakes? Or will he convince himself he is too popular to care?

Dude, that ferret is adorable.

Aylaine:

AwesomeFerret:
I have to wonder at this point how Yahtzee will respond, I don't think this sort of stir has been stirred up since his SSBB review. Will he respond and admit his mistakes? Or will he convince himself he is too popular to care?

We might get another mailbag showdown type of episode, which would be awesome. :)

Hm, indeed- I'll be interested to see the EP for this...

I actually suspect it will be an Extra Punctuation though, but a whole episode of it would still rock.

How about this for a change:
WHY
DO
YOU
GUYS
EVEN
FREAKING
CARE?
I didn't think anybody took yahtzee seriously EVER, He has made a few good points, but as he's said before, IT'S NOT FUNNY IF HE THINKS A GAME IS GOOD. Now some people don't think he's funny at all, as they have a different sense of humor. But seriously, why does everyone complain like a bunch of 7 year old girls when yahtzee gives a game that they like a bad review?
And if he stopped playing 30 minutes in, who cares? maybe he just hated it. I played Fatal Inertia for 15 minutes before returning it to gamestop and getting a different game. Is that wrong? No, because I hated Fatal Inertia. Some people enjoy certian games more than others, like if I don't like Fatal Inertia, someone else might love it. Do I care? No. Should you care if yahtzee doesn't like Monster Hunter Tri? No, you shouldn't.

So I loved the original game, despite not wanting to sell burnt meat just in case you need it. Still nothing is going to make me buy a wii. The classic controller almost sold me, but surely that just turns it into a game cube?

Dalton Frantz:
How about this for a change:
WHY
DO
YOU
GUYS
EVEN
FREAKING
CARE?
I didn't think anybody took yahtzee seriously EVER, He has made a few good points, but as he's said before, IT'S NOT FUNNY IF HE THINKS A GAME IS GOOD. Now some people don't think he's funny at all, as they have a different sense of humor. But seriously, why does everyone complain like a bunch of 7 year old girls when yahtzee gives a game that they like a bad review?
And if he stopped playing 30 minutes in, who cares? maybe he just hated it. I played Fatal Inertia for 15 minutes before returning it to gamestop and getting a different game. Is that wrong? No, because I hated Fatal Inertia. Some people enjoy certian games more than others, like if I don't like Fatal Inertia, someone else might love it. Do I care? No. Should you care if yahtzee doesn't like Monster Hunter Tri? No, you shouldn't.

It's not the thing thats he gave a negative review... and believe it or not there are People that seriously belive what he says.

The Problem is, he never mentioned how long he played, in his review the whole game looks like a boring grind-fest.. and this is a think only people can see who played it further (hence the complains from the fans).

And the about your 15 min adventure, no it's not, you don't review it for the public, your are not paid for playing it. Yahtzee himself sayes he's a game critic, so he should at least give it a chance.

Not to mention that later, there are much more chances to make fun of the game (for example the exaggerating animations everytime the character uses a item while a dragon tries to bite your head off).

Am i one of 100 people who actually like this game, me and a friend of mine have delved combined 400 hours into the PSP Monster Hunter Freedom Unite. IT IS AWESOME!
Most people are just too blind to see that, if you look at most professional reviews on other sites they have given in at least an 8, if you bother to play past the first few quests then you will see that its not just gathering that you have to do, there is in fact large beasts like the one that attacked Yahtzee that you do vs, quite a few actually.
It is a slow paced start, but it gets oh so much better.
This game isnt about the storyline as much as it is about the accomplished feeling you get when you have slain a monster with your own skill instead of grinding up your level against weaker opponents then taking on the big one only to be 10 levels higher than it and slaughtering it with ease. Where is the fun in that?

Yahtzee, I usually agree with you on most games but this review just makes you look like you are paid to make games look as bad as possible, even though they arent isnt.
For F*** sake you even hated Uncharted 2 which won so many awards that it was shitting them out. BTW also awesome.

Dalton Frantz:
How about this for a change:
WHY
DO
YOU
GUYS
EVEN
FREAKING
CARE?
I didn't think anybody took yahtzee seriously EVER, He has made a few good points, but as he's said before, IT'S NOT FUNNY IF HE THINKS A GAME IS GOOD. Now some people don't think he's funny at all, as they have a different sense of humor. But seriously, why does everyone complain like a bunch of 7 year old girls when yahtzee gives a game that they like a bad review?
And if he stopped playing 30 minutes in, who cares? maybe he just hated it. I played Fatal Inertia for 15 minutes before returning it to gamestop and getting a different game. Is that wrong? No, because I hated Fatal Inertia. Some people enjoy certian games more than others, like if I don't like Fatal Inertia, someone else might love it. Do I care? No. Should you care if yahtzee doesn't like Monster Hunter Tri? No, you shouldn't.

I only read like half of that post, so forgive me if I missed your point, but we've covered this a billion times:
We care because that review sucked. It wasn't fun. It wasn't relevant. It didn't tell me shit about the game. It wasn't funny. It was lazy. It was reused material/jokes/insults. It was just plain insulting. He was basically farting in our face and waiting to see if we'd inhale it.

I smell a good extra punctuation article.
I can see is now "Yatzee talks about rabid fanboys".

What sucks is that Yatzee spent more time on FFXIII (5hours) than he did on Monster Hunter Tri. How do I know this? Because within the first hour and a half I was already fighting the large monsters in the game. If he didn't even mention the large monster aspect of the game, then he did a shit job. Hate to put it that way, but he's paid to spend at least a few hours with the game to get a feel of combat, story or whatever so he can make jokes about it.

I was hoping to hear jokes about how hard some the monsters were and what not. I was just very disappointed with this overall. There was some funny things, but it wasn't his funniest. :\

EDIT: The reason people are upset is not because he didn't LIKE the game, no it's becuase he DIDN'T give it more than an hour. Sorry, but he's paid to 'review' games, meaning he must actually play the game. Only playing an hour doesn't even make the 'review' funny. I normally find Yatzee hilarious, even when he bashes games I love, but this was so lazy that it wasn't even funny.

Not to derail the "AMG THIS GAME ROX" vs "STFU THIS GAME SUX" debate, but to instead ignore it and ask a question: Who is the neutral-plain-faced guy that shows up in lots of Yahtzee's videos? The guy who was the ball-eating squidfishmonster in this one. Who is he!?

I like Monster Hunter Tri. At least it doesn't treat you like an imbacile if you didn't get it the first time, as the game provides sufficient hints and context with regards to the items (dung bombs, for instance).

If you want absolute asspulling, play any of the Phatasy Star Online games. Now those...I'm pretty sure Yahtzee can spend a whole day picking about. At least Tri removes many of the annoying elements of those games.

Mazty:
A sh*t game on the wii - oh no, what a surprise....

Oh, a troll in the forums. How swell.

Yahtzee was spot on about those gathering quests, though. And that's one of the reasons why I love this game. They never tell you what to expect.

Steampirate:
Not to derail the "AMG THIS GAME ROX" vs "STFU THIS GAME SUX" debate, but to instead ignore it and ask a question: Who is the neutral-plain-faced guy that shows up in lots of Yahtzee's videos? The guy who was the ball-eating squidfishmonster in this one. Who is he!?

There you go mate, post 20 has the right answer, he talked about it in an interview

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.182077-The-ZP-face

sfried:
I like Monster Hunter Tri. At least it doesn't treat you like an imbacile if you didn't get it the first time, as the game provides sufficient hints and context with regards to the items (dung bombs, for instance).

If you want absolute asspulling, play any of the Phatasy Star Online games. Now those...I'm pretty sure Yahtzee can spend a whole day picking about. At least Tri removes many of the annoying elements of those games.

Mazty:
A sh*t game on the wii - oh no, what a surprise....

Oh, a troll in the forums. How swell.

Yahtzee was spot on about those gathering quests, though. And that's one of the reasons why I love this game. They never tell you what to expect.

If I'm a troll how have I been here this long? -.-
No, I just can see a pattern in wii games. Sorry but bad tech is generally going to lead to bad games because with each generation what a gamer demands, and rightly so, increases. Simplistic gather quests etc as well as the same kart game from the N64 just won't hack it when put next to the likes of Motorstorm and Oblivion etc.

I bet Yahtzee is laughing his ass off right now

Mazty:

No, I just can see a pattern in wii games. Sorry but bad tech is generally going to lead to bad games because with each generation what a gamer demands, and rightly so, increases.

Yeah, your reasoning makes perfect sense.
That's probably where the "PS3 has no games"-argument is coming from.

It's exactly the reason why I stopped playing modern PC games and stick to indie games and rougelikes.
All that new games have is shinier graphics, no innovation whatsoever.

PS3 and XBox360 failed to spark my interest, since they have chosen to go down the same path, while having more restrictions.

I don't want to say the Wii is the holy grail of gaming.
I probably wouldn't even have one if my brother didn't wish for it.
It's nevertheless a nice console, with a good amount of games which are enjoyable.

I like how people are steadily behind Yahtzee and watch every ZP until he turns on them and berates a game they love.
And then the pull out that classic line, "He's not even a real critic, he's just a comedian" or some such tripe.

Get OVER yourselves, seriously. Yahtzee is a critic, a damn fine one at that, and has a respectable view on games. Much more so than the IGN, Gamespot, Game Informer twats who review their game based on public opinion and launch hype more than anything else. Yahtzee dares to say the Emperor has no clothing, and for that he is valuable.

This is not to say that I simply agree with everything he has to say about games. I hated AC2, thought Arkham Asylum was meh, LOVED Mercs 2, and a few other things I've long forgotten by now. But you know what I do when I don't agree with Yahtzee? I consider his points, mull it over for a while, and usually walk away with a more informed, if largely unchanged view of the game.

Now, I realize he probably didn't play this one all the way through, or to where it really kicks in. So yes, this review contains a bias, but I think that's what a review should contain. It's a review, or retelling, of Yahtzee's experience with the game. The very nature of criticism is steeped in bias. If you want an un-biased review, look at boring Metacritic numbers. Indeed, it is not similar to your experience with the game, but I'd probably have a very similar experience. I am an impatient man. A game can have un-actioney bits at the beginning, but if it's got flat-out BORING bits at the beginning, I'll probably put it down.

Great review, A++ would buy again.

EDIT: I want to add a little postscript about Game Informer reviews, 'cause I really do respect the fuck out of those guys. They write good, well balanced and professional reviews, but there seems to be some cognitive dissonance going on between the actual written review and the number score they give. Often a game 'contains major flaws' and gets a 10, or provides a solid, entertaining and touching experience (again, according to the text) and gets something like an 8.5. What /is/ that.

thublihnk:
I like how people are steadily behind Yahtzee and watch every ZP until he turns on them and berates a game they love.
And then the pull out that classic line, "He's not even a real critic, he's just a comedian" or some such tripe.

Get OVER yourselves, seriously. Yahtzee is a critic, a damn fine one at that, and has a respectable view on games. Much more so than the IGN, Gamespot, Game Informer twats who review their game based on public opinion and launch hype more than anything else. Yahtzee dares to say the Emperor has no clothing, and for that he is valuable.

This is not to say that I simply agree with everything he has to say about games. I hated AC2, thought Arkham Asylum was meh, LOVED Mercs 2, and a few other things I've long forgotten by now. But you know what I do when I don't agree with Yahtzee? I consider his points, mull it over for a while, and usually walk away with a more informed, if largely unchanged view of the game.

I figured I would just quote this, seeing as how it's pretty much my opinion as well. Lots of times I agree with Yahtzee's criticisms, and even if he shits all over a game a like, for whatever reason (even if the criticism is "it's not immediately entertaining"), then I'm emotionally stable enough to handle it and move on.

So what if he played a game for only an hour? What kind of standards are we placing on him nowadays? "You need to beat a game before you can make humorous criticisms about it?"

Thunderhorse31:

thublihnk:
I like how people are steadily behind Yahtzee and watch every ZP until he turns on them and berates a game they love.
And then the pull out that classic line, "He's not even a real critic, he's just a comedian" or some such tripe.

Get OVER yourselves, seriously. Yahtzee is a critic, a damn fine one at that, and has a respectable view on games. Much more so than the IGN, Gamespot, Game Informer twats who review their game based on public opinion and launch hype more than anything else. Yahtzee dares to say the Emperor has no clothing, and for that he is valuable.

This is not to say that I simply agree with everything he has to say about games. I hated AC2, thought Arkham Asylum was meh, LOVED Mercs 2, and a few other things I've long forgotten by now. But you know what I do when I don't agree with Yahtzee? I consider his points, mull it over for a while, and usually walk away with a more informed, if largely unchanged view of the game.

I figured I would just quote this, seeing as how it's pretty much my opinion as well. Lots of times I agree with Yahtzee's criticisms, and even if he shits all over a game a like, for whatever reason (even if the criticism is "it's not immediately entertaining"), then I'm emotionally stable enough to handle it and move on.

So what if he played a game for only an hour? What kind of standards are we placing on him nowadays? "You need to beat a game before you can make humorous criticisms about it?"

Maybe this game is one of those games where you need to play for more than an hour to get the full story?

Just putting that out there. You can probably play Pac-Man for an hour and tell me what the whole game is about, maybe this game isn't like that.

I wouldn't know though, i do not own a Wii and never played this. But it seems a lot of people are complaining over this.

Caradinist:
Maybe this game is one of those games where you need to play for more than an hour to get the full story?

Just putting that out there. You can probably play Pac-Man for an hour and tell me what the whole game is about, maybe this game isn't like that.

I wouldn't know though, i do not own a Wii and never played this. But it seems a lot of people are complaining over this.

Dude absolutely, I'm the last person to argue that you can judge a book by its cover - hell most of my favorite games of all time aren't "kickass" in the first half-hour of gameplay. That's got to be one (of many) reasons for Yahtzee's JRPG hate - I can't think of any that are totally full of must-play awesomeness before you invest even a little bit of time into the characters.

So sure, he should play the game longer to get a more thorough grasp for it, but then again, I'm not going to fault him for hating the 1-2 hours he did play it.

Caradinist:

Thunderhorse31:

thublihnk:
I like how people are steadily behind Yahtzee and watch every ZP until he turns on them and berates a game they love.
And then the pull out that classic line, "He's not even a real critic, he's just a comedian" or some such tripe.

Get OVER yourselves, seriously. Yahtzee is a critic, a damn fine one at that, and has a respectable view on games. Much more so than the IGN, Gamespot, Game Informer twats who review their game based on public opinion and launch hype more than anything else. Yahtzee dares to say the Emperor has no clothing, and for that he is valuable.

This is not to say that I simply agree with everything he has to say about games. I hated AC2, thought Arkham Asylum was meh, LOVED Mercs 2, and a few other things I've long forgotten by now. But you know what I do when I don't agree with Yahtzee? I consider his points, mull it over for a while, and usually walk away with a more informed, if largely unchanged view of the game.

I figured I would just quote this, seeing as how it's pretty much my opinion as well. Lots of times I agree with Yahtzee's criticisms, and even if he shits all over a game a like, for whatever reason (even if the criticism is "it's not immediately entertaining"), then I'm emotionally stable enough to handle it and move on.

So what if he played a game for only an hour? What kind of standards are we placing on him nowadays? "You need to beat a game before you can make humorous criticisms about it?"

Maybe this game is one of those games where you need to play for more than an hour to get the full story?

Just putting that out there. You can probably play Pac-Man for an hour and tell me what the whole game is about, maybe this game isn't like that.

I wouldn't know though, i do not own a Wii and never played this. But it seems a lot of people are complaining over this.

The 'full story' and 'some enjoyability' are two completely different concepts.

A good game might not be a THRILLING, ENGAGING, AWESOME ADVENTURE OF EXPLOSIONS AND TITS FOR ALL 59 HOURS OF GAMEPLAY, but it should definitely be GOOD for ALL HOURS of gameplay. (Imagine all my caps being said in a big, boomy voice and that all makes a little more sense)

I guess what I'm saying here is that while I don't need the thrilling opening of James Bond, I do need, say, an interesting main character introduced or some interesting (if not MIND BLOWINGLY AWESOME) gameplay. Just hook my interest. It's what writers, filmmakers and everyone else have had to do for AGES. If you don't hook your audience in the first few minutes, they might not be engaged for the rest of the story. Game developers are not, I repeat NOT, above this nor should they be.

I've actually just made an account, just so I can post in this epic thread.

First off I would like to point out, like so many other people have, that Yahtzee makes videos for our enjoyment and amusement.

Now that I have made that clear, what I am about to say will make more sense.

How do you people know that Yahtzee has played Monster Hunter for 2 hours, or whatever period of time. How do you know that he didn't complete the game, go "Oh shit, this game isn't great but, it isn't shit, so I can't say it's amazing, so I'll have to add it to the pile of games I don't like. I'm going to have to do this is in an interesting and funny way, so I'll talk about the first few hours of the game and nothing else, hopefully with the material I have it should make people laugh, and make the fan boys cry their eyes out. Job done."

thublihnk:

The 'full story' and 'some enjoyability' are two completely different concepts.

A good game might not be a THRILLING, ENGAGING, AWESOME ADVENTURE OF EXPLOSIONS AND TITS FOR ALL 59 HOURS OF GAMEPLAY, but it should definitely be GOOD for ALL HOURS of gameplay. (Imagine all my caps being said in a big, boomy voice and that all makes a little more sense)

I guess what I'm saying here is that while I don't need the thrilling opening of James Bond, I do need, say, an interesting main character introduced or some interesting (if not MIND BLOWINGLY AWESOME) gameplay. Just hook my interest. It's what writers, filmmakers and everyone else have had to do for AGES. If you don't hook your audience in the first few minutes, they might not be engaged for the rest of the story. Game developers are not, I repeat NOT, above this nor should they be.

So you say, a tutorial is something that doesn't belong in a Videogame because it's not part of the story and/or isn't as exciting as the rest?

And by the way, MH3 doesn't really has a story, you are a hunter, called to hunt a specific Monster (the monster that Yahtzee saw in the water), but since you are a beginner you need to work you way up. But wait how can you knew that, Yahtzee didn't even bother to metion this...

And you mentioned before (or more agreed), Yahtzee is a critic, so he should at least try to play through the tutorial.

Even as a fan you can laught about his reviews, you see his points and laught about them because they are true. He doesn't invent them out of thin air... and his review so far wasn't wrong ...but it was incomplete -> therefore bad review

Edit:@Anaklusmos ... really? I guess you havn't played it, right? If he had played so far he would have made a lot more jokes about it. And why reviewing the first hour of a nearly 100 hour game? Yahtzee's reviews usually are somewhat competent, he at least tries to show the whole game...

deckai:

thublihnk:

The 'full story' and 'some enjoyability' are two completely different concepts.

A good game might not be a THRILLING, ENGAGING, AWESOME ADVENTURE OF EXPLOSIONS AND TITS FOR ALL 59 HOURS OF GAMEPLAY, but it should definitely be GOOD for ALL HOURS of gameplay. (Imagine all my caps being said in a big, boomy voice and that all makes a little more sense)

I guess what I'm saying here is that while I don't need the thrilling opening of James Bond, I do need, say, an interesting main character introduced or some interesting (if not MIND BLOWINGLY AWESOME) gameplay. Just hook my interest. It's what writers, filmmakers and everyone else have had to do for AGES. If you don't hook your audience in the first few minutes, they might not be engaged for the rest of the story. Game developers are not, I repeat NOT, above this nor should they be.

So you say, a tutorial is something that doesn't belong in a Videogame because it's not part of the story and/or isn't as exciting as the rest?

And by the way, MH3 doesn't really has a story, you are a hunter, called to hunt a specific Monster (the monster that Yahtzee saw in the water), but since you are a beginner you need to work you way up. But wait how can you knew that, Yahtzee didn't even bother to metion this...

And you mentioned before (or more agreed), Yahtzee is a critic, so he should at least try to play through the tutorial.

Even as a fan you can laught about his reviews, you see his points and laught about them because they are true. He doesn't invent them out of thin air... and his review so far wasn't wrong ...but it was incomplete -> therefore bad review

Edit:@Anaklusmos ... really? I guess you havn't played it, right? If he had played so far he would have made a lot more jokes about it. And why reviewing the first hour of a nearly 100 hour game? Yahtzee's reviews usually are somewhat competent, he at least tries to show the whole game...

It doesn't belong smack dab at the beginning! Engage me a little bit! Don't bore me to pieces before you've even launched into the meat of the material. BE CREATIVE. Throw something in at the very beginning that will make me want to play. Fallout 3 made it's tutorial interesting, the bond that was developed through the tutorial was the catalyst for the main character's motivation throughout the entire game.

Tutorials need to be in games, but they don't need to be boring as shit.

Anaklusmos:
I've actually just made an account, just so I can post in this epic thread.

First off I would like to point out, like so many other people have, that Yahtzee makes videos for our enjoyment and amusement.

Now that I have made that clear, what I am about to say will make more sense.

How do you people know that Yahtzee has played Monster Hunter for 2 hours, or whatever period of time. How do you know that he didn't complete the game, go "Oh shit, this game isn't great but, it isn't shit, so I can't say it's amazing, so I'll have to add it to the pile of games I don't like. I'm going to have to do this is in an interesting and funny way, so I'll talk about the first few hours of the game and nothing else, hopefully with the material I have it should make people laugh, and make the fan boys cry their eyes out. Job done."

This has been explained a dozen times over.

It's extremely clear what he has and has not played of the game from what he described.

Even that very part with the sea monster is a specific segment in the tutorial. You do not see this sea serpent again until significantly later into the game, at which point you are blatantly sent on a QUEST to kill it. For that matter, the entire 'game' which he describes is nothing like what the actual game is like, all the stuff he mentions is part of the tutorial. The rest of the game consists primarily of getting bounty hunting quests to kill gigantic dragons and what not. These boss fights themselves also take a very long time from anywhere in the 20-40 minute. Closer to the latter if you're new. If Yahtzee had actually fought one of them, you'd know. It would be very obvious, not to mention he wouldn't make any of the ignorant statements about going around murdering creatures moms/children if he had, as that's only related to killing random little creatures scattered about the map which are mostly harmless. At best, he may have fought some small weakling enemies, like raptors or lizards, but that's about it.

In the end, he did not mention or review a single thing in relation to the actual meat of the gameplay and claimed it was something else entirely.

This is why people are annoyed. However, I guarantee he will still hate the game anyway after playing that ACTUAL gameplay, but that's exactly what people want to actually see, a REAL review. Whether it's good or bad, it doesn't matter. We want to hear him play the actual game before judging it, not the tutorial.

It would also be highly appreciated if he would actually blatantly mention right at the start of the review how much of the game he actually played, and also acknowledge the fact that the game is designed as a 4 player cooperative game, whether he plays it online or not. Acting as if these features do not exist is tantamount to lying and false advertisement.

There are plenty of other things he could make fun of within the actual gameplay, as it's far from perfect. However, he didn't even try.

 Pages PREV 1 . . . 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here