Hands-on with Revolution in the next GameInformer - Ubisoft's Red Steel, aka "Katana"

Well, Gamespot's review had the following complaints:

1. Sword fighting isn't that fun...
2. ...yet there isn't enough sword fighting in multiplayer.
3. There are sequential levels.
4. The voice acting and plot are cheesy...almost like it was on purpose!
5. The cutscenes are storyboards (didn't Ubi say they were going for a manga look?)
6. The game is too easy...
7. ...but the game is also too hard.
8. The sword fights aren't based off Indiana Jones. Rumor has it that you also can't swing across chasms with your whip.
9. It's not revolutionary...like many other FPS's, you spend most of your time in firefights with bad guys rather than reinventing entertainment.
10. The game looks dated, almost like it's not running on a 48-pipe USA chipset.
11. You can't shoot NPCs in the back.

You know, there are legitimate reasons to complain about a game. This sounds a lot like some of those early DS reviews on Gamespot that said things like "sadly, the graphics don't measure up to current-gen consoles, the music and sounds certainly are not CD quality, and there's no widescreen."

This review I think is more balanced. They give the game kudos for the things it does well (they even compliment Ubisoft for taking advantage of the platform's existing graphical capabilities rather than generating quantum fields from the WiFi transmitter to change Hollywood into Xenos) and criticize it for the things it doesn't do well.

You know, the way reviews should be.
 
One negative I took note of (from the Gamespot review) was the fact you seemed to be forced into the sword fights. Even if you can see your sword wielding enemy off in the distance you can't kill them by shooting them and you have to engage them in a sword fight to do any damage....
 
fearsomepirate said:
This review I think is more balanced. They give the game kudos for the things it does well (they even compliment Ubisoft for taking advantage of the platform's existing graphical capabilities rather than generating quantum fields from the WiFi transmitter to change Hollywood into Xenos) and criticize it for the things it doesn't do well.

You know, the way reviews should be.
Click to expand...

While it might have been written better than the gamespot review, both 1UP (who dishes out 10s fairly often) and edge gave this game 5\10. Lets face it, the game probably sucks.

However, for some wierd reason i still want it.
 
Inquisitive_Idiot said:
Are you trying to be sarcastic:???:
Click to expand...

No. They actually did say those things.
In between missions, you'll sometimes get graphic-novel-style cutscenes, reminiscent of Max Payne or Sin City, except they look like storyboards rather than completed images.
Click to expand...
That would be that manga look they were going for, which I think they pulled off rather well.
Some of the dialogue is just rotten, while some of it is unintentionally funny.
Click to expand...
See, the reviewer doesn't have what we call an "irony detector." Either that, or he didn't read any interviews. Devs said on multiple occasions that they were going for a feel more based on what you see in movies, anime, and manga rather than authentic Japanese culture.
if you dodge out of the way too many times, suddenly both you and your opponent will calmly walk back to the center of the arena, which disrupts the flow of the fight.
Click to expand...
I guess Ubi couldn't afford Soul Calibur's "RING OUT!" announcer.
Even when you're about to die, it's simply not possible to draw a gun during a sword fight. Haven't any of these people seen Raiders of the Lost Ark?
Click to expand...
I am at a loss on how to comment on this. I thought the point of the sword fights was that they were "honor battles."
The latter choice earns you a sum of "respects," which presumably are tied to how many new moves you're able to learn, though neither the manual nor the game explains this clearly.
Click to expand...
OK, so he hasn't read any interviews. More respects make the game easier later on, as you don't face the goons of the boss you defeated anymore. I didn't even mention where he complained about guys that you can't see sniping you. In an X360 game, that would give it bonus points for its teh awexxom3 realizm, but in a Wii game, bad guys should have big purple icons over their heads. And after complaining at length about how he doesn't like the game's sword duels, he then criticizes the multiplayer because
The action feels flat and is limited to gunplay, not sword duels.
Click to expand...
And then there's the problem that the game doesn't magically turn the Wii into an Xbox 360:
Red Steel might have looked pretty good for the time, had it been released a few years ago....it's decidedly below par by today's standards.
Click to expand...
And he complains that there's no swearing--I guess games should never go for the T rating.

I will summarize the review in a useful way:

1. Red Steel is mostly a by-the-numbers shooter, and the sword play could use some polish.
2. It's got some bugs in the physics and AI, and multiplayer is fairly bare-bones.
3. Wii is not nearly as powerful as an Xbox 360.
4. Greg Kasavin loves to whine.

When I parse through the classic GK whining, it sounds like a 7.5-8.0 kind of game. It's similar to his Chaos Theory for PS2 review, which was mostly a huge rant that the PS2 isn't an Xbox. Overall, I find Greg Kasavin's reviews to be pretty worthless. He should just write one-line reviews: "Buy an Xbox."
 
fearsomepirate said:
No. They actually did say those things.
Click to expand...

I know what he said, I watched the video review! The impression I got from the review was that Red Steel was just a poorly executed game in every measurable way, and for what its worth, Greg did a good job of juxtaposing the poorly executed gameplay over top of his voice as he describe the game. You seem way to eager to defend this game by criticizing the reviewers credibility rather than looking at the points he brings up and demonstrates in his video review. I know I have not played the game, but from what Greg demonstrated the game looks mediocre compared to what the other consoles (and PC) are offering.

I think the most interesting point he brings to bear is that the Wiimote does nothing to enhance the FPS experience for the console player. I mean, after all the hype Nintendo put into this new control system the best it could do was equal the gamepad? Maybe its just the way Ubi managed the control system or the fact that Red Steel is a first gen game, but as far as I am concerned the Wii has done nothing to prove this new control system offers anything better than a gamepad could!
 
Yeah its probably not a really good game. But most reviews do mention that if you can adjust to the not so great controlls (turning around is almost impossible) that it is a decent game. Most reviews state the obvious I think. Cheesy story and bad acting. Isnt that what you get in 90% of fps? bad gfx. Well wii just isnt x360 or ps3 we already knew that. Plus most of the game is probably developed with GC in mind instead of Wii specs.

I still buy it at launch because there isnt anything that interrests me besides Zelda but I do think that in the end it wont be worh my 60 euro's. But I just need something to play.
 
Inquisitive_Idiot said:
You seem way to eager to defend this game by criticizing the reviewers credibility rather than looking at the points he brings up and demonstrates in his video review.
Click to expand...

I can't watch the video reviews on my machine because I'm a Linux n00b. Either that, or they're using Flash 8, which I don't have.

In general, I've found Greg Kasavin to be hypercritical when he's reviewing games for non-Xbox systems and something of a graphics whore (although he will forgive any flaw if there is a sufficient amount of bump-mapping present). I've bought games that he said were utter crap that turned out to be fairly good. Not 10.0 material, but not the poorly-executed pile of trash he said they were. I'm not defending the game because I haven't played it, but I do find GK's reviews to be unhelpful. One game may be worth an A+++ because it delivers the same kind of firefights we've been playing for years, but now with 75% more bump mappification, but another game may get an F- because it delivers the same kind of firefights we've been playing for years, and GK expects innovation!

Like I said, here are the useful things I drew out of his review:
1. Red Steel is mostly a by-the-numbers shooter, and the sword play could use some polish.
2. It's got some bugs in the physics and AI, and multiplayer is fairly bare-bones.
3. Wii is not nearly as powerful as an Xbox 360.

Here's my summary of IGN's review:
1. Red Steel actually has pretty good graphics for a Wii game, and the sound is great.
2. The sword play is mostly fine.
3. The turning is slow enough that it severely affects the gameplay, and the controls occasionally glitch out. If they don't bother you, the game is pretty good, but he feels that they really hurt the experience.

Frankly, I found Matt C's review a thousand times more informative than GK's, because rather than carp about not being able to shoot NPCs in the back or the inclusion of Indiana Jones-style swordplay, he talked about non-stupid things that actually matter. For the record, here's what I got from some friends at a different forum:

1. Graphics are pretty good for a Wii game.
2. If you turn the auto lock-on off, the controls quit glitching out, and if you turn the turn speed up to the Expert setting, it works a lot better.
 
fearsomepirate said:
I can't watch the video reviews on my machine because I'm a Linux n00b. Either that, or they're using Flash 8, which I don't have...
Click to expand...

:LOL: Why do you hate Greg so much? He made valid complaints and and from what I have seen of Red Steel it looks to be a less than bare bones first person shooter with poorly executed ideas. In comparison to what is being offered in the genere on other platforms, I cannot see why you are trying to defend what looks to be a crappy attempt at an FPS by discrediting the reviewer as biased.
 
pc999 said:
Something interesting about this game, while in usual FPS lands it not even (or hardly?) received a 8 in Japan (Famitsu) it got very nice reviewns.

http://wii.ign.com/articles/747/747024p1.html
Click to expand...


Which just goes to show the Japanese wouldn't recognize a good FPS if it hit them in the face with a brick.

I got to spend some time playing this game at my brother in law's house this past weekend. I wouldn't give it over a 5-6 in a review. The controls were horrible. My worst fears of the Wiimote come true. Granted, it would have only been an average FPS if it had used a standard gamepad, but in this games case, that would have been an improvement.
 
fearsomepirate said:
Anyone noticed the split in UK vs USA reviews of this game?

UK sites: Flawed, but still cool. Scores in 7's and 8's.

USA sites: Total crap. Scores in 5's and 6's.

Any thoughts?

Here's yet another fairly positive UK review: http://www.game.co.uk/ViewProduct.a...m_mmc=update-_-wk4306-_-general-_-redsteelrev

Maybe the problem is Brits don't have enough gun violence in their country.
Click to expand...

Edge magazine gave this a 5 and that's way more credible than all UK sites together.

Oh and it's not Kassavin's fault that Red Steel is a piece of shit.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I still wonder how bad it is though. Last week was gameplay 2006 in Holland and most people on other forums who had hands on with red steel wernt that negative about it. It seems that if you dont mind counter-strike-ish gameplay with alot of short camping that the controlls are decent enough. But if your more the UT like player than it will suck more because you cant turn fast etc.
 
tongue_of_colicab said:
I still wonder how bad it is though. Last week was gameplay 2006 in Holland and most people on other forums who had hands on with red steel wernt that negative about it. It seems that if you dont mind counter-strike-ish gameplay with alot of short camping that the controlls are decent enough. But if your more the UT like player than it will suck more because you cant turn fast etc.
Click to expand...

If you ingore the controls, it's not bad, but nothing particularly special either. It has moments of near greatness, and moments of being not so special. Overall I would call it an average FPS as far as gameplay and presentation go.




But the controls are absolutely horrible. Even on the Expert setting they aren't very good. Default is enough to make you want to throw the game in the trash.
 
fearsomepirate said:
You know that scene in Zoolander where the hand model gives this lengthy explanation for why male models are used as assassins, and then Derek Zoolander says "Yes, but why male models?"
Click to expand...

Yes, except you bring no valid points to support your hate for him. He did not like the game and showed visual evidence to support his opinion. Greg doesn't seem biased to me and nothing he did in that review would indicate that he has bias towards Microsoft or Sony. Again, Red Steel is just crappy game, no way around it, and no matter how much you whine and complain about the integrity of the reviewer that fact will not change.
 
Inquisitive_Idiot said:
Yes, except you bring no valid points to support your hate for him.
Click to expand...

Except for those ones I made. Since you apparently don't have the internal memory necessary to remember more than about eight words at a given time, I'll repeat:

IMO, Greg Kasavin tends to give bad reviews to games that aren't on Xbox. I've been reading his reviews for a long time, and I've found his reviews of Gamecube, PS2, and DS games to be pretty worthless.

Gamecube: "Sadly, this game doesn't have online multiplayer, and everyone knows that splitscreen is for losers."
PS2: "Sadly, this game doesn't feature normal mapping or 5.1 sound."
DS: "Sadly, the graphics of this game are nowhere near current-gen consoles."

I just don't find his reviews helpful or informative. He complains about idiotic things like the lack of high-res textures in systems with small amounts of RAM, the lack of pixel-shader lighting effects on a machine with no pixel shaders, the lack of the ability to shoot a guy in the middle of a sword fight when the game is supposed to center around honor fights, etc.

Good criticism: "The aiming controls are glitchy."
Bad criticism: "I don't want to be forced to sword fight. I'd rather be Indiana Jones and shoot the guy with the sword."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

S
  • Locked
Here are the 10 reasons why the Saturn failed
Replies
18
Views
4K
jvd
J
Back
Top