So far (only 6 hours in, but some friends who went further confirmed), Expedition 33 seems to steer away from that, being a lot more story driven.
It also has, by far, the greatest prologue I've seen in a game.
Worse thing so far, the UI in the menu does take a second to get. Particularly the selected state is way too subtle and a bit confusing at first.
Of particular note is the care taken in facial animations. There’s still some uncanny valley (UE5 still sucks at human faces) but they’ve done a lot to make the characters emote believably during in-engine cutscenes.
I wish the out-of-engine FMVs weren’t so heavily compressed, but c’est la vie.
My advice: play this in performance mode. Parrying is significantly harder at 30Hz.
Story and environment rival a FF, with a European touch that’s a nice change. But it’s about 30 hours so not as immersive. Amazing achievement for an unknown team!
I normally get bored of JRPGs quickly but the game systems, music, artwork and story have all been stellar.
Edit: After watching more videos, I think it is, indeed, the mix of cartoon/early-video-game-era flashy animations on the screen (Or maybe think Batman comic books?), with a story-driven narrative, and characters that also toe the line between cartoon and realistic style.
There is some interesting sociology about why Clair Obscur hasn't been dogpiled by bad-faith reviews, but I don't think it says much about the quality of the game. In particular I am sure the score will go down once it wins some awards and bored losers get mad about it.
Only if you filter out the plethora of 10s that games that "clearly don't deserve them" either.
Who is the judge if a game deserves a score when the aggregator purpose is to normalize it anyway?
If a game sees a bunch of 10s and 0s it means that something in the game is polarizing. The fact that Clair Obscur has such a high rating means it pleased everyone across the board. Nowadays that is quite a feat.
Start with a quantitative analysis. A game has a 7. Is it a bunch of scores around 7? A bunch of 10s and some zeroes? Those will inform you some.
Then do some qualitative analysis. See what people are praising or complaining about. Check if the complaints matter to you. If they don't, you should try it.
> My point is that if a game gets exceptionally good critical reviews then a 0 is almost always a hissy fit, not a serious assessment
Hard disagree. Critical reviews are pure marketing. I played games that are aggressively mediocre that were critically praised before.
Is there a single game that averaged >80/100 on Metacritic which you would have given a 0?
Preposterous to you. You sound awfully judgemental of other people's opinions. Are your tastes inherently superior?
I didn't play BG3, mostly because I don't like D&D. If I played BG3, I would most likely not like it very much due to my predisposition to dislike it, due to my dislike of D&D. If I gave it a low score, you would dismiss my score as resentment? Sorry, this is bullshit.
This is hypothetical of course, since I didn't play nor rate BG3.
> Is there a single game that averaged >80/100 on Metacritic which you would have given a 0?
Me, personally? No, but that is more related to how I rate games. The games I played that I disliked the most got like a 3 or 4. Zero would be reserved to games that are fundamentally broken.
You don't often see people review-bombing games positively that they've never played, so the skew is going to be towards the negative and not the positive.
> If a game sees a bunch of 10s and 0s it means that something in the game is polarizing. The fact that Clair Obscur has such a high rating means it pleased everyone across the board. Nowadays that is quite a feat.
100% this. Clair Obscur, by every metric I can think of, is going absolutely nuts. I find it hard to imagine many upcoming games which might compete with it for GotY.
And that is valid information and context.
If I see a bunch of user reviews that gave a zero but no textual information on that zero (or the textual reviews that gave it a zero contained bullshit), I can ignore those as irrelevant for me and pay attention to the game.
> You don't often see people review-bombing games positively that they've never played, so the skew is going to be towards the negative and not the positive.
That absolutely does happen. Fanboyism is a thing.
[1] https://hard-drive.net/hd/video-games/huge-earthbound-fan-ex...
What I suspect has happened is that it is neither "conspicuously woke" nor "conspicuously anti-woke". Probably because it's French. Therefore it has avoided organized review-bombing campaigns, as well as being an extremely good game in a neglected genre.
(re: review bombing, a funny/stupid example of this was when Genshin Impact gave out anniversary freebies that the fandom deemed inadequate. So they started review-bombing it. Google removed the reviews. So they review-bombed https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.google.and... instead)
Are people that gave it a zero complaining only that the game is woke? If that does not matter to you, you may want to try it.
I enjoyed games that were review bombed before, as the reasons why people were review bombing it didn't matter to me.
"We leave tomorrow." click A "Huh" click A "We must drink tonight" click A "You're a bad influence" click A "Huh" click A
Someone will probably tell me this is the convention in the Final Fantasy style and that's FINE, and this would go a long way to explaining the reaction. It feels like a well above average game that is a GREAT game to a subset of gamers because they haven't had a game like this in so long.
It's incredibly hard to please everyone. I don't like reading in games, the UX is awful. If I wanted to read I wouldn't have started a game in the first place, I read books not games.
The dialogue is actually humerous(which is unusual for a game), the story is mysterious and intriguing, the music is great. Interesting take that this is average or derivative and just appealing to a certain type of gamer--can't say I agree.
Good, makes me want to play the game more. As someone that likes to pay attention to story and dialogue, I like to be able to control the flow of dialogue.
Talk about hyperbole
Review sites NEED reviews. Even unreliable reviews are better than no reviews. Otherwise you are dead. On top of that keeping users engaged in the review system drives revenue. All of this means adding hurdles like verification (however that might work for metacritic) or (for Steam) turning away reviewers because they played the game off-platform is a net negative for the company.
tyleo•10h ago
I don’t know what it’s about but I intend to play it and wanted to share with others.
PaulHoule•10h ago
jeffwask•10h ago
skyyler•10h ago
TimorousBestie•10h ago
bigstrat2003•10h ago
commakozzi•10h ago
Aeolun•9h ago
bigstrat2003•10h ago
jeffwask•10h ago
All while proving you don't need a $150-200 million dollar budget to make a good and successful game.
gaws•6h ago
Not true. Roughly 500 people worked on the game.
Jensson•3h ago
commakozzi•10h ago
coffeebeqn•9h ago
bigstrat2003•9h ago