New Heavenly Sword Info (screens included)

[Cheezdoodles]

Stop Being Such Bloody Fanboys

The final score is absurd considering their criticisms. It doesn't get everything perfect, but perfect is a 10/10 - I'd put it at 8-9 from their comments. HS is a casualty of the console it's on - Sony's need for something revolutionary puts far too much pressure on its games, and makes expectations absurd. If Kameo can get 8.4 on the 360, then I expect HS would have got an 8.6 on the 360 as well. PS3's own fault I suppose.

I suggest you people go to Gameranking and look at the "lots of stats" page.

And you can look how consistent each site scores their games for every platform out there, compare and then make up theories.

The bashing of reviewers after Lair and HS is starting to get ridiculous. THEY HAVE PLAYED THE GAME, YOU HAVE LOOKED AT PRETTY PR PICTURES AND GETTING HYPED. They are in a 10x better position to determine if the game is good or not. This is something i expect from the GameFAQs crowd, not B3D.

Here are some stats for IGN.

IGN Avg Ratio For All Games: 69.9%
Gamerankings Avg Ratio for All titles this site has reviewed: 69.0%

PS2

IGN's Avg Ratio For PS2: 70.9%
Gamerankings Avg Ratio for PS2 titles this site has reviewed: 69.7%

X360

IGN's Avg Ratio For X360: 70.9%
Gamerankings Avg Ratio for X360 titles this site has reviewed: 70.5%

PS3

IGN's Avg Ratio For PS3: 73.8%
Gamerankings Avg Ratio for PS3 titles this site has reviewed: 73.5%

There you have it, IGN is far from biased against the PS3, HS apparently is not the worlds best game, neither is Lair, stop bitching.

Unless ofcourse, the ZOMG-Sony lair is now going to tell me that every reviewer in the world is actively biased against the PS3.

 

[ninzel]

Uh no. I tell you that when I play this game I will be more impressed by the overall grandure, and perfected combat mechanics than playing those games for a lifetime. The games look will blow my socks off - the combat will be exciting. The story will be immense.

Now, this is enough for me to see that any bad choices in level design can be wavered...because my experience with the game will be magnificent...all be it short (I never complained about this with ICO - that was 7 hours for me...and no reason to play through it again AT ALL). Game reviewers have become complacent when their lofty expectations aren't met. It's unfair on the developers.

This is a joke post? I must have missed some of year earlier sarcasm.

 

[deepbrown]

stuff

Now you are being absurd. Did I say IGN were biased against the PS3...in that they are consciously lowering their scores? No I didn't. I simply said it was the fault of Sony for their hyping up their console and need for killer aps, that creates a tangible sense of negativity when a game doesn't live up to your lofty expectations.

I'm sure you agree that the expectations for the ps3 are considerably higher than for any other platform out at the moment.

This is a joke post? I must have missed some of year earlier sarcasm.

editted

Have you played any of the games? Ive played PD:Z and Kameo, they wheren't half-bad, certainly more enjoyable than the 5minute demo thought.

I wasn't necessarily supporting his comparison, just opening up the possibility that his opinion may well be accurate for him.

 

[Cheezdoodles]

I'm sure you agree that the expectations for the ps3 are considerably higher than for any other platform out at the moment.

Higher expectations by whom? Hyped Fanboys? Yes.

Reviewers? No.

Apparently, going by reviewers, games on the PS3 are consistently 3.5% higher average scores than games on the X360.

 

[Acert93]

Are IGN saying HS is worse than Harry Potter Game, Cars Game, Pac-Man, Perfect Dark Zero, Kameo, Flatout, Marvel:Ultimate Alliance, World Snooker, King Kong and Zuma?

The final score is absurd considering their criticisms. It doesn't get everything perfect, but perfect is a 10/10 - I'd put it at 8-9 from their comments. HS is a casualty of the console it's on - Sony's need for something revolutionary puts far too much pressure on its games, and makes expectations absurd. If Kameo can get 8.4 on the 360, then I expect HS would have got an 8.6 on the 360 as well. PS3's own fault I suppose.

Many very good PS3 games will get many bad scores. You will see. Now the war is not about hardware or software but about media control. Just like presidential elections. Paramount/Dreamworks got $150M to drop Blu-Ray. It was not about hardware. Landscape has changed. Stake is too high for players to not play the new game. When you look at the market from business stand-point it is easy to see.

The whole review is really just picking things they think are bad= crap
Also I fail to see how bioshock has a half point better graphics acording to ign, thats complete nonsense, imo any casual person wathcing both would say HS is way more impresive.

The demo alone is better than those games...

Wow, you guys are being absolutely paranoid.

I don't agree with all reviews or reviewers. I do think certain genres or platforms have different expectations due to market conditions (namely competition in the genre and as a hole) and that reviewers are influenced by games on various platforms.

Reviewing is not so much a science, but an art form.

We all have reviewers we like and dislike; rating systems we like and dislike. And certainly there are inconsistancies in all publications. But that is why there are places like Gamerankings, to get a broader consensus.

And even then, some of my favorite games didn't get 9+ scores. I love Battlefield 1942 and believe its gameplay dynamics and its contribution to not only the FPS genre, but to online gaming in general, is hugely significant. The game, to me, is insanely fun and the design balance is so pure that it still draws me in. Over 4M people bought the game which is online only I might add. Instant classic. Yet it only has an average score of 88% Gamerankings and places like PC Zone get it a 78%. Different folks, different strokes. Then again, places like IGN, PC Gamer, Eurogamers, Game Informer, agree with me and put it in the 90%+ range. And Gamespot seems to settle right on the average.

But all that doesn't matter because it is the text -- the good and bad, and YOU deciding what is relevant to YOUR tastes -- that matters. Further, not all rating systems are the same. A 9 from Edge is worth more than a 9 from 1Up.

So putting aside the numbers, it does appear that Heavenly Sword has some pacing and gameplay issues, while not breaking the game do frustrate. Further, the game doesn't appear to be really long.

If you are a gamer who...

1. Demands a long game; and
2. Get frustrated and bored with the mentioned game design issues

Heavenly Sword isn't for you. If you are a gamer who...

1. Length is secondary to production values; and
2. Absolutely love the combat of the demo

Then Heavenly Sword could be well worth splashing down $60 for.

I think we are all a little dissappointed. DeanoC, DeanA (formerly at NT I believe), and nAo have contributed substantially to the forums, and the gaming community at large. Great guys all around, and prefessionals who give their valuable time to let us peak into the world of game making. And, no doubt, Heavenly Sword is an important strategic title for Sony. The negative, or more accurate lukewarm, reception by the press is surely frustrating after spending years of uncompensated overtime and millions of dollars on a title.

Yet all we can do now is put aside the fanboy banter and motives, appreciate the good which is in Heavenly Sword, and hope it sells well enough that the great guys at Ninja Theory get the chance to make Heavenly Sword 2 -- correcting the criticisms they deem worthy of their attention and improving the game in general with new ideas, techniques, and implimentations to make an even better title.

No game is perfect, neither is any reviewer. Take everything with a grain of salt, play the game if it sounds appealing to you, and don't allow a consensus put a damper on your fun. Sure, the game may not be perfect, and maybe 3 out of 10 people see significant issues with it, but that shouldn't stop the other 7 from having a blast. It doesn't mean the 3 are wrong, just that the issues shouldn't prevent the 7 from enjoying it.

The same applies to games like Doom 3, which got a lot of hardcore flack, but was really enjoyed by a lot of nastolgic gamers and those looking for something more primal and simple. It just wasn't for everyone. No game is. It had faults. They all do. Just some more than others, and in some cases some faults are more easily overlooked than others.

By all means, the reviews of Heavenly Sword indicate it has a lot of positives and is a working game with some good high points. If the negatives are something you can overlook, Heavenly Sword could be a great game.

But it doesn't automatically jack up the score or diminish the presence of the faults.

 

[rekator]

Are IGN saying HS is worse than Harry Potter Game, Cars Game, Pac-Man, Perfect Dark Zero, Kameo, Flatout, Marvel:Ultimate Alliance, World Snooker, King Kong and Zuma?

The final score is absurd considering their criticisms. It doesn't get everything perfect, but perfect is a 10/10 - I'd put it at 8-9 from their comments. HS is a casualty of the console it's on - Sony's need for something revolutionary puts far too much pressure on its games, and makes expectations absurd. If Kameo can get 8.4 on the 360, then I expect HS would have got an 8.6 on the 360 as well. PS3's own fault I suppose.

I don't think if HS was only on 360, it's got a better score…
I also think you underestimated games on 360… like PDZ very good for launch game and Kameo good game atleast today… and Flatout, impressive for a crash car game…

And I think the "Big" problem is we have tendancies to always expect more than the reallity…
But you have a demo, so you can have your personnal opinion for this game… so jump on the demo!
On PS3 and 360 we have demos for many games, so we don't care of the opinions of reviewers. It's not like the PS2, Xbox period where you have only reviewers opinions for new game… a lot of bullshit purchases due to "some good" reviews.
But, if your first motivation is "How people thinking about PS3" I can understood you disappointment. You're a Sony marketting people? No, so don't care of opinion of others, play the game and appreciate it for only it, not for a GoW-Killer or App-Killer…

HS seem to be a beautyfull and esthetic game, the complaint of reviewers come from the gameplay… gameplay it's question of taste so…
And for the end, it's the only game on PS3 that interesting me… may be because there no real equivalent for this type on 360…

 

[patsu]

And if swordplay was 90% of the runtime, the game would be too repetitive.

I was thinking the same thing when scanning through the reviews too. I don't see how variety is bad. I saw the Kai sniping demo and generally like it (but it may be too long to shoot 45 enemies down at one go).

The IGN reviewers think the combat is repetitive because the basic play mechanics is the same; enemy variety is little and revealed up front; plus arena is always locked down so you can't run away or solve the problem in a different way (like open ended games ?). But they also mentioned that Nariko gains more combat moves later on.

Essentially if you like to max out the combat system and play the game "as is", you may lean towards Zapak TV/Nextgen Ireland's enthusiasm. If you have a preconceived idea on how the game should work like an epic GoW game, then you will be closer to IGN's 7/10 score. Either way, the game looks and sounds stunning.

Heavenly sword doesn't seem to have the GoW puzzle/platform elements so I'm not bothered if they added some other kind of variation.

I think it has some puzzle elements.

Btw does anybody know if this game has DTS sound?

I have no idea. I thought it's all LPCM sound ?


EDIT: Speaking of maxing out combat system. Will the game has Playstation Home Trophy integration ? It's not that easy to have Nariko perform all the moves as intended (I clearly lack the skills so far). NT should have some sort of trophy meta-games so that fans can show the world how good with women they are (if not already in the plan).

Hmm... I think I missed out the unlockables and secrets.

 

[Deepblue]

I don't think if HS was only on 360, it's got a better score…
I also think you underestimated games on 360… like PDZ very good for launch game and Kameo good game atleast today… and Flatout, impressive for a crash car game…

And I think the "Big" problem is we have tendancies to always expect more than the reallity…
But you have a demo, so you can have your personnal opinion for this game… so jump on the demo!
On PS3 and 360 we have demos for many games, so we don't care of the opinions of reviewers. It's not like the PS2, Xbox period where you have only reviewers opinions for new game… a lot of bullshit purchases due to "some good" reviews.
But, if your first motivation is "How people thinking about PS3" I can understood you disappointment. You're a Sony marketting people? No, so don't care of opinion of others, play the game and appreciate it for only it, not for a GoW-Killer or App-Killer…

HS seem to be a beautyfull and esthetic game, the complaint of reviewers come from the gameplay… gameplay it's question of taste so…
And for the end, it's the only game on PS3 that interesting me… may be because there no real equivalent for this type on 360…

The only problem here is that some demos don't completely represent the full game. FEAR for example. The demo was awesomeness, the game, not so much. Then you have the polar opposite in games like Crackdown where you are practically given the opportunity to try out thge entire game.

 

[SugarCoat]

Are IGN saying HS is worse than Harry Potter Game, Cars Game, Pac-Man, Perfect Dark Zero, Kameo, Flatout, Marvel:Ultimate Alliance, World Snooker, King Kong and Zuma?

The final score is absurd considering their criticisms. It doesn't get everything perfect, but perfect is a 10/10 - I'd put it at 8-9 from their comments. HS is a casualty of the console it's on - Sony's need for something revolutionary puts far too much pressure on its games, and makes expectations absurd. If Kameo can get 8.4 on the 360, then I expect HS would have got an 8.6 on the 360 as well. PS3's own fault I suppose.

doesnt get much more bias than you. if all else fails blame everything else right? Play the victim? And since when did it become a good idea to start comparing games from completely different platforms with totally different game styles and/or totally different years of release. Talk about ignorance. Why dont you just keep quiet and buy the game and let yourself be the judge rather than going out of your way to try and cry foul about what the reviewers think cause it doesnt jive the way you wanted it to. I dont think we need that tripe here.

If anything i'd say you have a good example of when great visuals cant buy you a triple A status. Pretty much all reviewers say the gameplay is somewhat hollow in that its repetitive so what did you think they were going to do when it came to scoring?

Just incase you're may be being protective since obviously a couple of the developers post here, its not a complete loss, not by far. I'll be willing to bet you it will still sell well even with the PS3s low install base and will continue to sell well enough as the PS3 brand expands over the years, plenty to keep them in business so i wouldnt worry about them. You take what you learn from where people see a need for improvement and make it better, same as you would if the game was indeed rated perfect. Its not like a 7 is a bad score.

 

[patsu]

Does anyone know what the unlockables and secrets are ? Have people unlocked them ?

 

[Deepblue]

Does anyone know what the unlockables and secrets are ? Have people unlocked them ?

You can get them now from the website.

 

[patsu]

OK I see them now. The only inaccessible ones are new combo moves.

It will do much good if NT patches the game with PS Home Trophy integration then.

 

[D3B]

Higher expectations by whom? Hyped Fanboys? Yes.

Reviewers? No.

Apparently, going by reviewers, games on the PS3 are consistently 3.5% higher average scores than games on the X360.

Your point doesnt count really because those other systems have more games.

 

[Tap In]

Wow, you guys are being absolutely paranoid.

I don't agree with all reviews or reviewers. I do think certain genres or platforms have different expectations due to market conditions (namely competition in the genre and as a hole) and that reviewers are influenced by games on various platforms.

Reviewing is not so much a science, but an art form.

We all have reviewers we like and dislike; rating systems we like and dislike. And certainly there are inconsistancies in all publications. But that is why there are places like Gamerankings, to get a broader consensus.

And even then, some of my favorite games didn't get 9+ scores. I love Battlefield 1942 and believe its gameplay dynamics and its contribution to not only the FPS genre, but to online gaming in general, is hugely significant. The game, to me, is insanely fun and the design balance is so pure that it still draws me in. Over 4M people bought the game which is online only I might add. Instant classic. Yet it only has an average score of 88% Gamerankings and places like PC Zone get it a 78%. Different folks, different strokes. Then again, places like IGN, PC Gamer, Eurogamers, Game Informer, agree with me and put it in the 90%+ range. And Gamespot seems to settle right on the average.

But all that doesn't matter because it is the text -- the good and bad, and YOU deciding what is relevant to YOUR tastes -- that matters. Further, not all rating systems are the same. A 9 from Edge is worth more than a 9 from 1Up.

So putting aside the numbers, it does appear that Heavenly Sword has some pacing and gameplay issues, while not breaking the game do frustrate. Further, the game doesn't appear to be really long.

If you are a gamer who...

1. Demands a long game; and
2. Get frustrated and bored with the mentioned game design issues

Heavenly Sword isn't for you. If you are a gamer who...

1. Length is secondary to production values; and
2. Absolutely love the combat of the demo

Then Heavenly Sword could be well worth splashing down $60 for.

I think we are all a little dissappointed. DeanoC, DeanA (formerly at NT I believe), and nAo have contributed substantially to the forums, and the gaming community at large. Great guys all around, and prefessionals who give their valuable time to let us peak into the world of game making. And, no doubt, Heavenly Sword is an important strategic title for Sony. The negative, or more accurate lukewarm, reception by the press is surely frustrating after spending years of uncompensated overtime and millions of dollars on a title.

Yet all we can do now is put aside the fanboy banter and motives, appreciate the good which is in Heavenly Sword, and hope it sells well enough that the great guys at Ninja Theory get the chance to make Heavenly Sword 2 -- correcting the criticisms they deem worthy of their attention and improving the game in general with new ideas, techniques, and implimentations to make an even better title.

No game is perfect, neither is any reviewer. Take everything with a grain of salt, play the game if it sounds appealing to you, and don't allow a consensus put a damper on your fun. Sure, the game may not be perfect, and maybe 3 out of 10 people see significant issues with it, but that shouldn't stop the other 7 from having a blast. It doesn't mean the 3 are wrong, just that the issues shouldn't prevent the 7 from enjoying it.

The same applies to games like Doom 3, which got a lot of hardcore flack, but was really enjoyed by a lot of nastolgic gamers and those looking for something more primal and simple. It just wasn't for everyone. No game is. It had faults. They all do. Just some more than others, and in some cases some faults are more easily overlooked than others.

By all means, the reviews of Heavenly Sword indicate it has a lot of positives and is a working game with some good high points. If the negatives are something you can overlook, Heavenly Sword could be a great game.

But it doesn't automatically jack up the score or diminish the presence of the faults.

Hear hear!


we missed you around here.

 

[deepbrown]

doesnt get much more bias than you. if all else fails blame everything else right? Play the victim? And since when did it become a good idea to start comparing games from completely different platforms with totally different game styles and/or totally different years of release. Talk about ignorance. Why dont you just keep quiet and buy the game and let yourself be the judge rather than going out of your way to try and cry foul about what the reviewers think cause it doesnt jive the way you wanted it to. I dont think we need that tripe here.

If anything i'd say you have a good example of when great visuals cant buy you a triple A status. Pretty much all reviewers say the gameplay is somewhat hollow in that its repetitive so what did you think they were going to do when it came to scoring?

Just incase you're may be being protective since obviously a couple of the developers post here, its not a complete loss, not by far. I'll be willing to bet you it will still sell well even with the PS3s low install base and will continue to sell well enough as the PS3 brand expands over the years, plenty to keep them in business so i wouldnt worry about them. You take what you learn from where people see a need for improvement and make it better, same as you would if the game was indeed rated perfect. Its not like a 7 is a bad score.

I think it's better to say that it "doesn't get much more bias than your post"

Anyway it was worth a try to see if there was any logic in what I was saying - the comparisons were merely to put it into perspective. I do sense a slight negativity towards hyped PS3 games - and I do believe that's Sony's own fault - noone else's. They brought it on themselves, and it's no wonder when a game doesn't quite hit the mark the feeling is a bit "meh". But hey, I have a feeling that we might all just enjoy HS and the humour in it as well.

As a huge fan of combat games, I think HS could offer something new, something original in it's take on the genre, and I hope it won't let me down. Being too short has always grated me slightly - but if the overall experience is a positive one, I will sigh with a smile - and if the combat is engrossing, I'm sure I'll give it another play through (especially on Hell mode)

A big criticism is the gameplay in the IGN review, that a lot of the progress is "kill all the folks in this area and then move on". But I seem to remember that in GOW there were magic forcefeilds which would stop you from progressing. And in NG there are locked doors which you can't get past. Perhaps it's simply that there needs to be more variety - though some of the variety IGN feel is overdone/long. Perhaps pepper the combat with variety, rather than long sections of combat and then shooting. Equip Nariko to do some exploration perhaps?

Well it's a lot of things to think about. I might just find it perfect...?

 

["Nerve-Damage"]

Excellent post (#1045) Joshua Luna!! :smile:

 

[Cheezdoodles]

Your point doesnt count really because those other systems have more games.

im very curious to hear your logic behind this.

 

[Nesh]

im very curious to hear your logic behind this.

The majority of games released in general are low scored. The more support a console has the more such games are released on a console and these grow at a faster rate than AAA or atleast very good titles.

As a result keeping everything else constant the console with the most games is bound to have an average lower score.

 

[-tkf-]

I would buy this game just to support the guys who had brought so much value to these forums.

I´m lucky though, i like the demo and the way "they" wanted us to play the game. And the games beauty is just the price worth alone. I guess i will be one of those who will pick up the controller, play for a bit, do something else and repeat.

Here is a request for a patch that provides a Screen Saver function that shows the different stages and visual, it would look cool on the big screen

 

[patsu]

I´m lucky though, i like the demo and the way "they" wanted us to play the game. And the games beauty is just the price worth alone. I guess i will be one of those who will pick up the controller, play for a bit, do something else and repeat.

Yes, Heavenly Sword is very accessible. The game concept and the combat system seems to have some legroom too. This is a good thing. The challenge will be how they reward people with good use of combos or advanced moves (PS Home, PS Home, PS Home).

For the nth time, I am still asking around for ways to sweep an area by swinging an enemy around. I manage to clear the pillar area very quickly with that move, but I couldn't repeat it after multiple tries. I got other interesting moves though.

In comparison, the MP game in Resistance has high entry barrier. It's very difficult to introduce newcomers to the game... which is a pity since I want to share the joy with someone close to me (other than the cats in GAF clan ).

Due to my schedule, I play games in short sessions. Once I find something rewarding, simple and "standalone", I can stick to it for months and years. These include Diablo hack-n-slash run for certain (short) quests, specific Halo encounters, and *drum roll* Ikaruga.

I can see myself replaying this game for a long time too if the combat is varied enough and the boss fights are interesting. I have to play it one round to like it first. Time sure passes slowly these days.