Soul Sacrifice has finally arrived on the PS Vita. But is this the be-all, end-all handheld RPG many were hoping it would be?
Let's keep this simple: For those who played the demo, is this 7.7/10 material? Yes (agree) or no (disagree)? I've already sunk 10+ hours into the demo. Yeah...that doesn't sound like 7.7 material.
7.7 isn't a bad score, but it's a safe score. The review reads a lot better than the final score and I think the score is more a "hey, if you don't like it don't blame us". I think the fact the demo was so comprehensive and lengthy means reviews are a little irrelevent, you either liked the game or you didn't
Game rocks. And for the record out of all the reviews, Jim Sterling is the only one who completed the main campaign - so props to him for DOING HIS JOB. Mainstream reviewers like IGN are the worst sort of bottom-feeding, click hungry, Mountain Dew whoring trash. Not to mention the Avalon Quests and MP aren't even online. Really, its embarrassing that these people play MP centric games without ever dipping into the content. 75% of the quests aren't available for single player. I'd like to see them do that with the next CoD, but they won't. P.S. You can check what reviewers completed the game by their PSN profile. So far, only Jim. I bet the average reviewer clocks in at 12 hours for this game. I squeezed 80 out of the demo, make of that what you will. And the Polygon review that claims the game is "button mashing" is the biggest turd on the pile. Try doing a 3 star of higher quest "button mashing" and see how fast you die.
The demo is great, I thought it's gonna get at least 8 or maybe 9
My experience with the demo makes me feel it is better than a 7.7... more like a 9.0
@ bicfitness The difficulty (or lack thereof) is one thing I was fearful about. I didn't want it to be a cakewalk. I'm accustomed to MH's higher difficulty for all but the most basic monsters, and SS follows the same route.
The demo is great! The game is easy to pick up and play and its exciting to find new magic, but I can't see the game getting any deeper then that. The story is random dribble, the voice acting is pretty bad, the world isn't cohesive, the battle arena's are bland and recycled. It survives off its combat which is great fun and the magic is brilliant. 7.7 seems about right to me, seeing as its only $40 mayb they could bumped it up to a mid 8. If you're the sort of person who treats you handheld like a console, I think you'll probably find this game cool, but utimately shallow. If you only play an hour here and there you'd struggle to find a better distraction then this. -Its probably my favourite 1st party game for the Vita thus far. I'll be picking it up later in the summer.
I wish I could try the demo. This game was potentially going to push me to buy a Vita, but it looks like I should just get MH on my 3DS instead.
If a playstation exclusive is averaging 7-7.9 in reviews then the ps-only crowd will insist that the game is at least an 8-8.9 in their opinion. Take a look at reviews for Starhawk, Sly Cooper, Twisted Metal, PASBR and many others to see this in action. Same apllies for ps games at the 6-6.9 range, the ps fan will always insist that the game is 1 - 2 points better than average reviews. This is doubly true when a Vita game is being reviewed. Some ps fans feel the need to be protective over the struggling console for obvious reasons and will ecen go as far as saying a horrid short game like Declassification is getting unjust hate.Again, one needs only check past reviews to collaborate my words. What's my point? There's no point asking a mostly ps fan driven site if they believe a Vita exclusive game if it is 7.7 material, they'l always tell you it's at least an 8.7. Closing remark, one chapter of a game does not fully represent the entirety of said game. So those of you lambasting IGN for not completing the game and then turning around and saying according to the demo it is worth at least a 9 are being hypocrites.
demos should be more like SS. to be honest that was the deepest I've ever played. people sinking in 20 + hours in this demo. reviews are irrelevent after demos like that. it was smart and gives reviewers less power. devs need to take notes, this game will sell from demo players. if any doubt play the free demo, simple.
Reviews are not irrelevent. People just continue (and will always continue) to staunchly insist that review scores are an objective ranking for games. Reviews are completely...I repeat, COMPLETELY subjective articles. The only real attributes that can be objectively stated in a review are those that are quantifiable, such as number of polygons, sound quality, blah blah blah. There is no way to objectively prove that Mario controls wonderfully, or that Snake's ass looks great in tights. Reviews simply exist to present perspective. It may be a perspective that you vehemently disagree with, but what people don't seem to realize is that they are bringing their own biases into the mix SIMPLY BY DISAGREEING. Bias is not necessarily an ugly word. It is the culmination of all that we have seen and experienced that has brought us to the opinions that we form, and WE ALL DO IT. Stop looking to reviews for some misplaced reinforcement of your own opinions, and start accepting them for what they really are: perspective.
@GameCents It's the same as when Nintendo fans and Microsoft fans will bash reviews for giving games like New Super Mario Bros 2 and Gears of War Judgment lower reviews. As for Twisted Metal, the game is amazing and it deserves a high single player and offline multiplayer review. But online was broken until six months later when they finally fixed it. However, IGN didn't fail to show how bad of a gaming website they are when they still gave it a 9/10. It's clear they didn't put any time into the online multiplayer or they would have docked it another point I'm sure. Although, I guess we can't very well fault them for playing only a couple hours online, because after you actually get into a room, the game runs silky smooth, and doing everything single player they already have enough to review the game. Although, time and time again, sites like Kotaku and IGN prove there's a lot wrong with video game journalism.
LOL, IGN called this game a RPG... (It's a pure action game ya f' tards) nuff said
crazy how the review contradicts the score... wow ign...just wow. 7.7 lol....but the review reflects a 8.7 score...sad... what really sad is he didnt even beat the game.....lol wow
I really don't understand it. Since when are reviewers allowed to publish a review without finishing the game? That's completely bizarre and hurts their reputation even more, but when you're at the rock bottom, I guess you can't go any lower. -_- Judging by how much some of the reviewers had been playing the game, I would be more credible to write a review based on my 35+ hours of playtime... Sad is the entitlement "gaming journalists" are given...
Sadly, they only reserve that for CoD, making sure to prestige at least once to get the "full experience"
Hmmm 6/10 from polygon 6/10 from Edge 7/10 from Eurogamer 7/10 from IGN 8/10 from Destructoid Very predictable. The demo played like an 8/10 at least for me. Was still going to pick this up whatever the "main" websites scored it. I seem to be disagreeing with a lot of review scores these days, they all seem to be marked on the reviewers bias, attention span and how much hype and marketing goes into the game. I've also read a lot of the reviewers have neither finished the game or played the online portion which is arguably the biggest part of the game. Polygon's review is laughably short and claims it to be a "button masher" which anyone who has played the demo knows is clearly not the case.
Go back in time and tell them that it's on 3DS. Instant 9/10s. Can't wait to see Modojo's review...Chris Buffa will probably review it himself and give it a 3/10.
Just because it is on a PS doesn't necessarily mean reviewers will intentionally keep the score lower. There are many games on PS that received high scores, Uncharted 2 and 3 came to mind. Demon's Souls is another, so is LBP Vita, etc. Uncharted Vita also received some good scores, but because of the game's many flaws it wasn't favored with boatloads of 9+ scores, but the game was still well received nonetheless for a spinoff. Zelda Skyward Sword had some controversy from GameSpot. Xbox360 exclusive franchises have declined a bit as well in the scoring department. Oh and Call of Duty Black Ops II, the list goes on. You just have a thing with Nintendo, and when people argue your points you respond with some "you're just playing the victim" comment while doing damage control for Sony when the company and its products get criticized.
This game deserves at least an 8.
Been playing the demo for a while and just got in some time with the game(about 2hrs in) and I'm enjoying it. So far it's a solid 8.5 for me, can't wait to log in some more time.
Other reviews suggest a solid average of 8, http://psp2roundup.blogspot...
just as expected from ign they gave gravity rush 7/10 should i expect more..
yeahhhh... i play it... so i know how it feel.. it deserve more than 7.. i would give it 8.8 to this game.. i'ts a great approaching title to vita.. i'm with love with this game..!
Hello! Have you checked for droplets recently? Anyways IGN never liked games made by Sonys Japan Studio. Demon Souls doesn't count because it was made by From Software. Motorola RAZR i
It's annoying, Studio Japan makes some great games and they always feel fresh. I guess Puppeteer and Rain will be shying away from the IGN 8 as well.
IGN gave GT5 an 8.5 though.
Funny is that IGN gaves it a score of 7.7 yet they are saying as if it is an 8.7 . These game is 9/10 better than MH to be honest.
Much better than MH ;)
I agree and mh is complete repetitiveness also. You cant call a game repetitive because all games are repetitive in their own way with diverse mechanics to break it up. I enjoy all action rpgs or mh clones as some people call them and the repetitive aspect is whats enjoyable as long as the difficulty keeps increasing.
Why does IGN always let someone who isn't a fan of a typical game genre review said game?
Good score nevertheless.
When did a 7.7 = bad or a non purchase???
Because these game deserves better than 7.7 for sure. And what makes it worst is that he didn't even finished the game and criticize it's repetitiveness when as a matter of fact, it can be applied into almost all kind of games.
That's not the point. People that played the demo knows if they were going to buy the game or not. But for someone on the fence or that is not following the game, this can mean a non purchase. This idiots reviewing games don't know how much they are ruining this industry. They'r over hyping garbage like COD and GTA wile downplaying games like this one. This game, like a lot of others, deserve to be successful. This is noting more than bias BS. MH has never have a good reception this side of the world (NA) yet now since the WiiU MH is "great" and most of the same people that didn't like MH are comparing it to SS just to put it in a bad light.
"for someone on the fence or that is not following the game, this can mean a non purchase" - That's a personal/individual choice. The review/reviewer has nothing to do with that. Imagine if the score was an 8.7. By your logic this same person could STILL say it's a non purchase. "8.7 isn't high enough". Again, the review/reviewer has absolutely nothing to do with that. Still, 7.7 isn't a bad score. This seems to be more about peoples expectations or some kind threshold. A 7.7 is a non purchase but an 8.0 is. Really, a .3? Ridiculous.
^^ I see where you'r coming from. Me I don't care about reviews but there's a lot of people out there that look at metacritic first when they want to buy a game. All I'm saying is that reviews shouldn't be consider "opinions" they should be about facts. If it's about personal opinion and by your logic it makes no difference, then why waste the time and do it? Because it's got a purpose which is to inform potential costumers about the facts and i feel that reviewers are not taking that into consideration. They just talk all sorts of crap and since it's his/hers opinion. Who's to disagree?
Currently on metacritic, Soul Sacrifice has a metascore of.......77.
7.7 is a good score. In the real world 5 means mediocre , 6 is above average, 7 is good, 8 is great, 9 is brilliant and 10 is fantastic.
Round off 7.7 = 8 great game :0 pretty nice logic ;P
"7.7 is a good score. In the real world 5 means mediocre , 6 is above average, 7 is good, 8 is great, 9 is brilliant and 10 is fantastic." if you go by % that is 77% over all score...a [email protected] pretty good score, but remember this is subjective based on what he was able to play, the fact that a demo got this rating speaks loud and clear about how good this game really is. anytime you can get over a 70% out of a max 100% is freaking good, and this is 77% so higher end 70 percentile. this pretty much confirms a must buy for people that take review's well into insight before purchase about a game. for me i play games that interest me. and i have been playing the demo, and its is pretty awesome in my opinion..i keep thinking of Katy Perry's -Self inflicted song when i play this game and a slight smirk come's across my face because it's a song that just so fit's this game to a tee. grin
Real world and gaming world are 2 different things. In the gaming world 5 or below means trash/bad/awful/etc, 6 is below average, 7 is mediocre/middling/average/okay /etc, 8 is good, 9 is great, 10 is excellent. That is the reality of how game reviews work. You can pretend that 5/10 is average all you want just because it's that way in the "real world" but look at games that average 5/10's and tell me honestly if you think they're "average." 7/10 is the real average for games. The vast majority of games receive that score.
meh. considering the way people were talking about it. I expected better.
Nice way of judging a game by people's talk and reviews -__-
Well, this is odd. You've got something to say in the low-scored reviews, but not one comment for the higher ones. That's a pretty interesting observation. Then again, that comment history of yours...
Someone didn't get their pockets lined.
It's so obvious it's sad. How does a game like this get 7.7 compared to the average COD score which is always a 9 or higher?
When was the last time a CoD averaged 9 or higher? So tired of people always running to the same CoD nonsense to try and excuse their favourite platform's game not recieving the score they hoped it would.
IGN always rates Vita games low. I already knew what to expect before I even clicked on the article. They are like a horror movies ... totally predictable.
This reviewer didn't finish the single player, lol. I want to work at IGN where i can half ass at my job and its fine. This isn't the first time they have had a reviewer who didn't do his job right reviewing a game. God Hand got a 3/10 and that reviewer IGN paid didn't play after the first level.
collin is a PS fan all the way.. He might be correct on this.. 7.7 isnt that bad though i think it deserves better than that.. I really dont get how someone can review this game without completing the side quests & actually defeating the final boss.. That makes almost NO SENSE what so ever.. Ill see for myself as Im still getting my copy today...
this guy did the same with sfvt....didnt complete it and someone on his friends list exposed him. the guy states that in sfvt he had only 15% of trophies. did not complete 10 online games ect. what I need these lazy reviewers to do is show me your trophies list so I can see exactly what you completed. I mean at least 35% of trophies means you played the game enough to review it properly...smh... what's funny, the comments on the actual review say what I said earlier the review doesn't match the score. also one point ive seen that bothers me is when they say a game is fun that should be the meat of your score fun is what matters most in gaming. if the only flaws are repetitive enemys and levels on a action rpg that's constantly compared to MH then why give MH a better score? because thats MH's flaws too
Don't know how this can get less than FFXIII. Seriously that game should have gotten a 4/10, and that is being generous.
I suppose this game isnt the Vita killer App everyone hoping for, the Vita cant catch a break. At least the few people that will give it a chance will have a blast.
What a random score...could they not just give it an 8? Personally I think this game deserves at least a 7.84.
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.