Honestly I did not find the Ryse that different from the Arkham games in terms of their basic combat mechanic. If those games involved Batman dropping his utility belt, they would probably play alot like Ryse during those moments.
Ryse of the off-topic conspiracy rant (spawn)
- Thread starter Cyan
- Start date
Honestly I did not find the Ryse that different from the Arkham games in terms of their basic combat mechanic. If those games involved Batman dropping his utility belt, they would probably play alot like Ryse during those moments.
There seems to be little consensus as to similar titles to compare scores. From the sounds of it, Ryse plays like the PS2 LOTR games. Is this accurate?
I think consensus on scores can be just as indicative as a failure in the reviewing processes as it can be a way to judge a game. I think that review scores are often an attempt by a reviewer to gauge how they "feel" a game relates to and will be received by the market.
If you think about it, any review that doesn't start by trying to set out what a game tries to do, and then judge it against that, isn't a review of the game it's a review of the market. A game could be great at what it does, but be very niche. Or it could be sloppy but mainstream. Or something in-between. But I think reviews would better serve everyone if their main focus was the game and not the market as perceived by reviewers.
If you don't judge a game by what it tries to do, then you will inevitably to a greater or lesser extent end up judging it against what it isn't trying to do. You see this happen all the time in reviews. And it's insane.
Ryse is exactly the type of game that I would expect to be judged as much for what it is as how it does it. And as basically a big budget scrolling beat 'em up that means that's it's going to be judged harshly as it's neither a mainstream game type that can be judged by other big budget games, or an indie niche game that neckbeards can enjoy rallying round.
If you think about it, any review that doesn't start by trying to set out what a game tries to do, and then judge it against that, isn't a review of the game it's a review of the market. A game could be great at what it does, but be very niche. Or it could be sloppy but mainstream. Or something in-between. But I think reviews would better serve everyone if their main focus was the game and not the market as perceived by reviewers.
If you don't judge a game by what it tries to do, then you will inevitably to a greater or lesser extent end up judging it against what it isn't trying to do. You see this happen all the time in reviews. And it's insane.
Ryse is exactly the type of game that I would expect to be judged as much for what it is as how it does it. And as basically a big budget scrolling beat 'em up that means that's it's going to be judged harshly as it's neither a mainstream game type that can be judged by other big budget games, or an indie niche game that neckbeards can enjoy rallying round.
It was my bad, and BRiT was totally within rights to call me whatever. I know better, I KNEW better, and I stupidly did it anyways going for a giggle and in the process made the mods job harder...and I am sorry.
Modding console forums is probably the worst gig I've ever heard of in forum moderating, my respect and props go out to the people who put in all the time here doing it. I shouldn't have wasted their time making it harder, and I apologize for doing so.
Sorry again for this off-topic post, but I didn't want people derailing it defending me or attacking BRiT. I PMed an apology to BRiT, but I'd like to publicly apologize too. It was very uncool of me, and I'm sorry. It won't happen again. (At least not in consoles!
)
Modding console forums is probably the worst gig I've ever heard of in forum moderating, my respect and props go out to the people who put in all the time here doing it. I shouldn't have wasted their time making it harder, and I apologize for doing so.
Sorry again for this off-topic post, but I didn't want people derailing it defending me or attacking BRiT. I PMed an apology to BRiT, but I'd like to publicly apologize too. It was very uncool of me, and I'm sorry. It won't happen again. (At least not in consoles!
)Have you ever played Bayonetta? That´s what I think is a good game with similar mechanics to Ryse. You have good variety of enemies, bosses and weapons (that can be even combined), have to calculate precise times to dodge attacks and to make counters, etc. You just can´t get tired of the game until you finish it. The Arkham series is another example. God of War too is a funnier game, even though I was disappointed by Ascension.
Compared to Bayonetta and those other titles, Ryse doesn´t demand you to demonstrate any skill to evolve through levels. Enemies are predictable, you just have to press the buttons at a certain order to kill and progress. Then, repeat... That´s what I called a "dumb gameplay".
It's not the review -which I don't agree with, as it seems to be meant for criticising Crytek and add more fire to the Xbox One backlash- but the Digital Foundry article on Ryse, which was incomplete and rushed back in the day, as they admitted themselves.
Would it be so hard for them to play in the lowest difficulty level and try to progress as swiftly as possible?
The initial levels are the most difficult to play because I agree they are slightly more tedious when you don't know how to play and everything looks new, plus the areas are relatively confined, I am afraid.
Then the part with Boudica and the British nations is the most fun and the game shows what Ryse is capable of and shows a lot of potential.
I've never played PS2 LOTR games, but I suppose the primary difference -technology aside- is that the controls are kind of QTE events in Ryse, at times.... for finishing moves. You are attacking using several buttons and when the guy has low health an icon with a button press (A, B, X, Y... whatever) appears. If you fail no finishing move is performed.
Other than that you play it like any other hack and slash, beat'em up most of the time, no QTEs.
Once you gain skills you can perform a lot of combos -using skills mapped to the LB and RB buttons, which you gain when you level up- without quick time events and stuff like that, and it's where the game shines.
I guess the primary difference between Ryse and Knack is the intention of both games.
Knack was mainly made on the cheap, just designed to be a simple, family friendly game that people can add to their collection. It is mostly a secondary purchase next to Driveclub and Killzone, etc.
Ryse has had shit-tonnes of cash poured into the development process and also was shown off as a Xbox One system seller for the core fans.
So the fact that Knack is objectively a worse game, given the fact that the PS4 library of games is as lacklustre as it can be, it is also a far smaller loss.
The game might be fun to play but the textures aren't Pixar magic either.
It's not an AAA game, but neither it is a Titan flop -the Blizzard project-. :smile2:
So I consider Knack reviews fair --and Ryse reviews unfair (the DF article being the main offender).
I'm not sure what anything in this post is supposed to mean.
That reviewers should have gone easier on Ryse because it's more AAA and had a higher budget? (?????)
That because the PS4 had a lacklustre launch lineup, Knack being poorly-received was less of an issue? (Couldn't that make it a bigger issue?)
Also, I don't think you understand what "objectively" means.
You realize none of your text supports your conclusion? It was nonsense and it boils down to "I don't like Knack and I like Ryse, therefore...". BTW how much of Knack did you play?
scooby_dooby
Legend
But you can't really, cause it takes 2-3x times as long to take a guy down if you don't activate the QTE. So it just becomes endless repetition of gory finishing moves. If they had put half the effort into enemy AI, and a great combo system, as they did to the 101 kill animations, I feel it would be a much much better game. You can still kinda feel the dumbed down, 'kinectness' of it all...beautiful to sit back and watch, but the core gameplay is just not there.
Hopefully it gets better later, and I am gonna try and dive back in, but the fact that the opening 2-3hrs is that bad, might explain why so many reviewers said fuck it. And I can't really blame them tbh.
scooby_dooby
Legend
I get my ass kicked in Arkham, cause the enemies are faster, smarter and actually work together. It requires very quick reactions and perfectly timed combos. Ryse is like the kindergarten version of that, very little challenge or skill required.
D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
I am mighty confused. We know DF don't play entire game campaigns, a quick revisit of their Diablo III assessment shows they barely delved into the campaign and that's when DF weren't deep in a 2 week storm of nextgen console launches, along with a ton of oldgen vs. nextgen comparisons (COD, BF, AC4, Lego Marvel Superheroes etc).
But Ryse is universally acclaimed for its graphics tech. I don't see anybody questioning its technical chops. Is your point Ryse isn't just really pretty, it's really, really pretty? That's fine.
The meat of discussion is on the gameplay, i.e. the reason the game was scored low (actually average) by so many.
position_22585
164 posts discussing game reviews in general
http://forum.beyond3d.com/showthread.php?t=45535
Covers a lot of ground already covered or going to be covered here.
http://forum.beyond3d.com/showthread.php?t=45535
Covers a lot of ground already covered or going to be covered here.
D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
It's fascinating how much the whole situation with Ryse feels so similar to Lair in 2007. History repeating itself.
There will always be people for whom any game, no matter how flawed it's perceived by reviewers and masses, will be able to see past the flaws and enjoy the hell out of it.
A friend had Lair and could actually the control the dragon with the six axis control scheme. He liked the game too. I tried Lair a few times (as his insistence) and simply didn't think the reward of maybe liking the game was worth the perseverance required to learn how to fly the dragon. By the time they added conventional controls I'd moved on.
Lair sure often did look impressive, though. Almost impossibly good with the amount of mayhem on screen. Poor Factor 5.
FarticusMaximus
Newcomer
It doesn't. If you miss an execution it only take a couple of hits to finish your average enemy. I often accidentally kill enemies when I really want to keep them alive for multi-executions.
No more so that Batman or AC which are almost identical combat systems. You still have a few key attacks and then finishers. You will also get completely swarmed if you don't crowd control, just like in Batman/AC.
On harder difficulties there is considerable strategy and control needed to balance your XP gain, damage gain and life recharge favours when executing.
You also have Pila to use on ranged enemies in the same way the batarang and pistols work in Batman/AC.
Mobs in later levels are invulnerable to the basic attack patterns you use in earlier levels, and the only way you can kill them is with counters or dodge-backstab attacks. They also hit hard, and switching between Life regain and other favours becomes much more critical.
Crytek should have done a much better job of promoting the gameplay tools and they should have notched up the default difficulty a lot really. As with Halo, the real game (legendary/centurion difficulty) is nothing like the game you play at default difficulty.
I think every game faces that problem. Too hard and you turn people away. Too easy and they get bored. And if you try it on different people, you'll get different responses. I recall an online article not long ago about the issues of play testing/WIP builds. There might need to be a smarter approach by devs to handle difficulty and variety.
eg. How's about some training space where you play a bit and are then asked if you liked it. With options like 'too hard' and 'too boring', the setting could change and let you try again. That's kinda what I've been doing manually as I play test my game. That's actually not a bad idea to incorporate myself! Rather than sliders, an interactive settings level.
eg. How's about some training space where you play a bit and are then asked if you liked it. With options like 'too hard' and 'too boring', the setting could change and let you try again. That's kinda what I've been doing manually as I play test my game. That's actually not a bad idea to incorporate myself! Rather than sliders, an interactive settings level.
Well. I, for one, would have loved a PS4 version of this game. As if we're not used to grind through hours of boring gameplay just so we can see pretty graphics. We've all done it and it's fine to admit it.
Speak for yourself. Soon enough it will be $5 on Steam and I will still not likely bother.
Similar threads
