Top
350°

Sony Executive Was Hoping For Mediocrity With Knack, But Still Fell Short

Hardcore Gamer: Hoping a game could score in the mid 70s isn't something that makes me particularly excited about the product when it is said by the boss of the company that made it. It would be like if some father said about his kid, "Well, yeah he's stupid, but he's not F stupid. If he applies himself just right we really think he can get a C- average and someday work at the ditch digging company."

Read Full Story >>
hardcoregamer.com
The story is too old to be commented.
admiralvic1653d ago

Thats a shame. Knack might not be ground breaking or redefine gaming, but I still think it's fun.

ChaosKnight1653d ago

But is it more than mediocre?

MrDead1653d ago

Thats down to the player to decide, some people will love it some won't.

Game4life1653d ago

way better than mediocre. Its a great game so far.

Ketzicorn1653d ago

Well considering everyone I've seen streaming or playing this game has thoroughly enjoyed it and I myself have been having a lot of fun with the game I would say it's better than mediocre.

nukeitall1653d ago

Media consistently thinks it is well below mediocrisity.

However, I'm surprised anyone actually thought anything else based on footage. The game play seemed incredibly dull!

NewMonday1653d ago

what Sony meant was that they didn't expect 30 year old reviewers to like a game made for 6 year old kids.

the game did get a number of 9s and 8s from those who did get what the game is about.

if you are over 12 then the game is not for you, you don't expect every game to fit your age or taste.

Concertoine1653d ago (Edited 1653d ago )

@newmonday
Why are you putting words into Sony's mouths? They just admitted they hoped for mediocre reviews, not that the game is meant for people BELOW the rating the ESRB assigned the game (E10+)!
a bad game is a bad game regardless of its audience, and nintendo makes child friendly games anyone can enjoy. spyro, crash, tons of other games are for kids but good games in their own right. if i played this mindless game when i was 10 after playing a game like spyro, i too would give it a 6/10.
i can't believe you guys are damage controlling this game. If a new mario got poor reviews, would the argument "but it's a kids game" be in the slightest bit valid?

ScorpianusNoir1653d ago

Knack is much better than reviewers are saying but it depends on what you are looking for. Ratchet and Clank and Crash Bandicoot are the closes thing to this game. Is it more family oriented. sure but that doesn't make it a mediocre game. 3 levels of difficulty, varying attacks by the AI, beautiful graphics. I am liking it a lot.

cleft51653d ago

I enjoy Knack, it's a simple light hearted game.

MrDead1653d ago (Edited 1653d ago )

@Concertoine

Who are you to decide whether someone will like a game, just because you don't like something or a reviewer doesn’t does that mean nobody else in the world can enjoy it?

There are plenty of people that enjoy Knack, it’s even got good reviews from people that enjoy this genre of game at the end of the day only the person playing can decide if they enjoy what they are playing.

I can’t stand Assassins Creed games but because they have good review scores does that mean I have to like them?

slimeybrainboy1653d ago

Mediocre is the middle 5, 7 is good. duh!

Concertoine1653d ago (Edited 1653d ago )

@MrDead
please explain where i said you COULDN'T enjoy Knack. I never once said that was wrong. i said its wrong to blame its mediocrity on the fact that it's a kids game when it's ESRB rating doesn't indicate that, and kid's games can be great regardless. Sony shouldn't release a game "hoping" for mediocrity either, regardless of it's target audience.

thisismyaccount1653d ago

Mediocre = Superman 64
Knack = Fun, prolly not $60 of fun. 30-45? FAKIEA

memots1653d ago

agreed with thisismyaccount

If the game was 30$ i would have downloaded it.

ABizzel11653d ago

I understand games like Knack are a dying breed on consoles like PS and Xbox, but why settle for mediocre in any game? It sets you up for failure.

Look at Ratchet, Sly, and Jak they are great games in the genre, but even they only have an audience of 500k - 1M. If you want sales and good reviews you have to have a great game off top. People aren't spending $60 on mediocre or even good. They're spending $60 on Great, Fun, and Amazing.

MrDead1653d ago (Edited 1653d ago )

@Concertoine

"knack is soulless"

"bad game is a bad game"

"i said you were wrong for blaming it's mediocrity on the fact that it's a kids game"

Only the player can decide these thing’s and unless you've played the game you should reserve judgement as you never know you may love it.

Mid 70s isn't mediocre, it's a solid place for a new ip and a good place to aim, unfortunately it didn't reach its goal but people will still enjoy the game regardless of the score.

Edit: Sorry Concertoine my comment shouldn't of been aimed just at you lots of people judge a game on its score alone, but if you do this you could miss out on something you love.

LonChaneyTV1653d ago

"Sony Executive Was Hoping For Mediocrity With Knack, But Still Fell Short"

Tells everyone greatness awaits, hopes for Mediocrity. this gen was so rushed.

morganfell1653d ago

How many times is someone going to rewrite this story? Desperate much? Play Knack. It is far above mediocre.

Hicken1653d ago

Seems like it IS more than mediocre for most people that play it. The disconnect- which is painfully evident in the comments you yourself quote- is with reviewers, who aren't likely to take Knack for what it is.

THAT'S why he was "hoping" for those scores.

Oh, by the way, mid 70s isn't mediocre. It's not even average(which is pretty much the same thing, but you've chosen the word with the more negative connotation). It's good.

Again, they were expecting mid-70s scores for the game based on what they thought reviewers would give it. They didn't create the game to be in the mid-70s.

But hell, who uses common sense, context, and deductive reasoning anymore, right?

Irishguy951653d ago

Everyone saying "It's like crash and *** " etc, we know it's like them, but it's got nothing on them quality wise. It's quite a poor attempt at something like Crash.

Sarcasm1652d ago

I played Knack before the PS4 came out, and it has a fun element to it, primarily timing of your attacks and the enemies. The graphics are good (not great). IMO it does deserve around a 7/10. Looking forward to get it when the price drops.

DragonKnight1652d ago

@nukeitall: Less dull than Ryse: Son of QTE on Rails.

darx1652d ago

Knack....lol game is lame

BBBirdistheWord1652d ago (Edited 1652d ago )

Knack is a kid's game
It has a score of 59% on metacritic.

It may be fun for kids, but the ps4 has never been a kid's gaming machine. The ps4 has been posited as a hardcore gamer's dream. That is no lie.

Lukas and I had a disagreement regarding this game the other day. I maintained that this game did not introduce anything groundbreaking. I maintained it was a casual and cutesy game that could have been done on the ps3.

Lukas disagreed. Lukas maintained that ONLY the ps4 was capable of the kinds of physics in Knack.

I guess the aggregate reviews have proven me right.
The average score for this game is 59%. No one is talking about the amazing physics in Knack. In fact, other users have proclaimed it is a kid's game.

Yeah, so I guess that's the end of that then.

+ Show (20) more repliesLast reply 1652d ago
sobotz1653d ago

If it's not made by Sony, it wouldn't be fun as you think. Moreover, Sony should've released it for $30

Raf1k11653d ago

To be honest I wouldn't take it as a negative on his part as he's actually being honest. Most people in his position would end up lying to us about how they were aiming for 9s.

come_bom1653d ago (Edited 1653d ago )

"Sony Executive Was Hoping For Mediocrity With Knack, But Still Fell Short"

This is just wrong. Sony Executive has to hope for great games, and NOT mediocre games.

As for Knack, I'll wait for it on PS+.

admiralvic1653d ago

Sometimes things fall short, ideas don't plan out and your product doesn't meet expectations.

Activision knew Declassified was going to get flamed and they knew it was an awful game. This is precisely why reviewers (even IGN tier) didn't get a review copy till after the release.

If anything, I think this shows what kind of company Sony is. They had realistic expectations (no one was expecting Knack to be a 10/10 system seller) and they were honest about it. I really wish more companies would say things like this, instead of having another Redner Group fiasco (Duke Nukem Forever review complaints).

zerocrossing1653d ago (Edited 1653d ago )

Crash Bandicoot and Spyro might have been "kids games" but they were enjoyable for all ages.

I do get what Sony are saying but a good game will offer appeal beyond it's intended age group, where as a poor game will just please those who don't know any better (aka kids).

No hate intended, just giving my two cents.

Felonycarclub81652d ago

I love knack but then again I used to play crash bandicoot, I really don't know what people were expecting from a game like knack? To me is fun and reminds me of the old days but then again am not like a lot of gamers where they only play certain games. I actually like lair yeah I said lair and I got really good at using the six axis controller but i know a lot of people hated that game but i don't care. Sometimes I think people expect to much from certain games but everyone has their opinion and I respect that.

admiralvic1652d ago

Going off what I read online, it seems people see Knack as a last generation game. Now, I have no clue what this means, since a lot of these games could have been done on the PS3 (with adjustments to various things, which is also true for Knack), but thats what they say.

turgore1652d ago

Fun as in getting hit with a toy baseball bat by a 5 year old over and over again.

admiralvic1652d ago

Some people like dying hundreds of times to various traps in the Souls series, so who's to say what is and is not fun for a person?

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 1652d ago
Concertoine1653d ago

Wow, you should never release a game "hoping for mediocrity". That's just pathetic.
They should have delayed it or reworked it entirely and released it hoping for great reviews. This could've been the next crash and wouldve broadened the PS4's audience.

iamnsuperman1653d ago (Edited 1653d ago )

Well it is a children's game. Sony hasn't hidden this fact and Cerny himself said Knack was created as there was no family/Children games for the PS4 at launch (huge market to ignore if Christmas is just round the corner) . With that in mind I don't see anything wrong with aiming for mediocre scores as

A the game with serve it's primary purpose and
B games marketing solely for the family/Children market are often rated far lower due to reviewers never review the product for its target audience (I bet if you hand this game to a 7 year old they would love it and their parents would love to play it with them)

@below I get your point about Nintendo but I don't rate any of their more child friendly games (demographic to knack) as they don't really have soul. The only think I relate to is the nostalgia with the character I grew up playing with on the original game boy. I feel nostalgia gets in the way when people think of Mario games because they recognise the character and they know them very well. I would say Mario has soul. It is a bit like if crash was released today. We all say we want it but do we really want it? If crash was new would we still feel the same way? I severally doubt it. I play crash now but only because I have history to it

Concertoine1653d ago (Edited 1653d ago )

Nintendo makes tons of child-friendly games that get good reviews, among the highest of all time. And knack is souless by any standard, it even takes the formula of a pixar movie (childish facade, some darker themes) and goes no where with it. The game is E 10+ so it's clearly not made for anyone under 10, or they wouldve tweaked it to be E.

nukeitall1653d ago

Yeah, I don't know anyone would aim for mediocrity, even if it is a childrens game.

As concertoine said, Nintendo makes plenty of childrens game that are fantastic even for adult. Look no further than the consistent high quality Mario games.

It is sad a company would push out a game that is hoping to be mediocre. That is a huge disservice to all gamers, young or old!

Anon19741653d ago (Edited 1653d ago )

First off, the guy didn't say he was hoping for mediocrity. He said they weren't aiming for any specific review score but were looking for an overall score in the mid 70's. Since when is an average of 75% "mediocrity"? You know how few games break a metacritic score of 80%? Way to put words in the guy's mouth. If you think an average of 75% is "mediocre" in the games world, you haven't a clue what your talking about.

I found the bulk of the reviews for Knack odd. When you read a review for Skylanders, you'll see comments like "Kids will love this," or "parents will appreciate this feature," or they comment on the reaction of the children they tested it on.

With a bunch of the Knack reviews, nowhere did they mention about the game's suitability for younger kids. The things people picked apart like the straight forward level design, simple combat, easily found hidden items, etc...these are all positive things for a game geared towards a younger audience but that fact escaped the majority of reviewers somehow.

Interestingly enough, the higher reviews were the ones that commented on it as a kids game, compared it to other kids games and some even shockingly tried it out on actual children. Honestly, I don't care that your 30 year old ass found the hidden stuff too easily, I need to know if my kids are going to like it!

Looking back at games Knack clearly took inspiration from like Crash Bandicoot or Spyro, was there complicated level design in those? Were there a tonne of moves? Of course not. Because games for kids need to be kept relatively simple. I can't believe I saw so many reviewers completely miss the point, and many didn't even bother mentioning features of the game like co-op or the online features.

I haven't played the game so I'm not defending it, but what I do know is there were a lot of reviewers that weren't doing their jobs. It's as if they walked into a screening of Spy Kids, didn't realize it was a kids movie and proceeded to trash it for being a kids movie.

DejectedJeff1653d ago (Edited 1653d ago )

@darkride
...But plenty of other kid's games are actually good. this game sucks. Spyro was a hard game with hard to find collectibles, as was mario 64, crash. are you saying that dumbing down games is good? The game is bloody 10 and older, what 10 year old would feel satisfied with this game? i wouldn't!

_QQ_1653d ago (Edited 1653d ago )

Thats BS and you know it, you can say any game isn't good because it lacks "soul".making a good/great/amazing game with "soul" is a product of ability not genre.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 1653d ago
Baka-akaB1653d ago (Edited 1653d ago )

Lol that's really reaching imo (but then again maybe i am too . I interpreted it as the way they expected the game to be received that's all given it's genre , the playstation audience and content .

Let's not pretend as many people than in the past , are anymore in love with the like of Ratchet ... ON playstation platforms .

For some reason people act as if maturity and playing a regular platform game are incompatible . Hell it's the bulk of some of our resident trolls' attack on Mario games

MattyG1653d ago

So a 7/10 is mediocrity now? Lovely.

Nazara1653d ago

Agreed. Review scores are ridiculously stupid lately. Why have a ten point scale when anything below an 8 is considered crap by shallowminded consumers?

nukeitall1653d ago

Most games below 8 tends to be fairly bad games in my experience. An 8 is really the lowest I would go, and I find it pretty consistent.

Think of it more as graded on a curve. The vast majority of games land in the 5+ region, so an 8 do seem a proper average.

admiralvic1652d ago

@ Nukeitall

Most games land in the 5+ range, because of how reviewing actually works. The vast majority of games actually work, thus they get points for simply working. It would make no sense for a game to have game breaking bugs and match a game that has little to no bugs (many of which are minor and unimportant) that just isn't that enjoyable. Logically it should be the 3 or less range, though it tends to be the 4 or less range now a days. Lets also not forget how bad a game would have to be to score a 1/10.

So, as long as the game actually works, it should score a 5 minimal. This is a moderately fair scale, since 5 would be average and I expect anything that scores average or better to be fully playable.

As far as your 8+ remark... you really need to give some more things a try. There are many fantastic games that score low over unrealistic expectations or reviewers going about them the wrong way.

Doletskaya1653d ago

Since most games are rated 8 or above these days, a "good" game would be considered average while an "average" game (rated in the 7-8 range)would be considered mediocre. I don't see how that's hard to understand? Especially in the video game industry where there is competition everywhere, everything is relative.

RytGear1653d ago

Pretty sure the definition of mediocrity would be a 5... as you know... its the medium?

zerocrossing1653d ago (Edited 1653d ago )

What a lot of people need to realise is, many video game reviewing websites have a set criteria when it comes to their review scores, obviously they allow reviewers some wiggle room but you'll still be required to follow the guidelines.

An 8 might be a fantastic game but so could a 7 or even a 6, they just might have smaller "niche" appeal, or have something holding them back from greatness.

Honestly, if you're buying games based solely on their review scores then you're going to be missing out, some of the best games I've played average around 6.5 and 7 on some websites.

BABY-JEDI1653d ago

@ nuketail . If I followed your view concerning review scores. Well lets just say there would be some excellent games out there that I just wouldn't have played. All because some reviewers are bought or they just don't appreciate what constitutes a good game.

_QQ_1653d ago

70% on a test is barely passing, a C seems like a mediocre score to me.

MattyG1652d ago

Review scales =/= high scool gradding scales. They're two completely different things.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 1652d ago
Detoxx1653d ago

For the first time today, I saw the PS4 in person and actually played it for the first time aswell, I was amazed.

The new Duallshock 4 feels so different from the Duallshock 3, but in a good way ofcourse.

However I was only able to play Knack. The game is seriously nothing special, even boring for most people. It still boggles my mind how this game isn't 60FPS.