While it does deliver on its high quality resolution, that’s about ALL it delivers on.
Did they expect a complete remake as opposed to a remaster? I'm confused.
They probably don't know the difference. Most idiots don't. -_- Update: He talks about hardly any of the new content that comes with this version to begin with. This suggests that he doesn't even know it was there...which suggests that he didn't play it very long. Reviewers have got to up their game. So lazy these days. Update 2: I just checked the Alexa rank of this site. 975,000, which means almost nobody ever goes there. So at least there's that.
Apperently he doesnt heow if you hold l/r/select/start it resets the game without quitting out, just like the ps2...And what exactly was he looking for? A totally redesigned game? We got amazing graphics overhaul, the international versions(didnt have those in u.s. before), 2 completely overhauled games for $40. His complaints honestly seemed like he was just looking for shit to complain about.
*One recurring thought I've had while playing this was: This game has no business looking as good as it does. I'm about fourteen hours into X, and even after platinuming Second Son I find myself stopping to admire the scenery. It's so vivid and colorful. I was shocked by how much it holds up. Playing through this again is exhilarating. They did a commendable job with these release.
Completely agreed...the game is beautiful. The art style and world fit perfectly. Honestly it looks good enough to be an actual new release imo...after spending hundreds(thousands, really) of hours staring at the game on ps2 over the years its mind boggling how damn good they made it look. I totally love it!
The Soft Reset is a Square thing in almost all their games since before I can remember.
I totally forgot about the reset thing. WOuld have been handy during trying to get Jecht Shot or winning the first blitzball game.
26 hours into the game, game is gorgeous, and the battle system still holds up against the new " advanced " ones, simply put, the game is a classic, a brainless purchase if you ask me.
One thing that I noticed about the battle system is just how pretty it is. Every spell has a unique look and every aeon has a different style. It's so much more interesting to watch than the newer FF games where so many of the attacks aren't visually unique.
Geez, what a crappy review. Dunno what this guy was expecting, but he certainly shouldn't have been.
It is like, "all it has is the same features as the original game". WTH did he expect minigames? lol It is a JRPG that is about story and gameplay mechanics, not some gimmicky new features. Now on remasters need to have new stupid ass features that are not necessary or they get 3/5. I really wish I understood what kind of features he was expecting, maybe he was disappointed it lacked theatre mode and forge, or even custom games and just a tacked on multiplayer mode.
There was no multiplayer fps mode included.
A review you disagree with is not necessarily bad!
But a bad review IS bad. Or would you care to explain exactly what it us you thought this game would have that it lacks? You left all such details out of your review, after all. You failed to accurately explain why you came to the conclusion you did, which is the main reason why your review is crappy. You seem to have no clue what the game was to contain, and so you somehow expected more than the game gave you, more than it ever intended to give. When you fail to grasp the basic premise of a game, your review fails fundamentally. You might as well be reviewing it as a racing game. The same goes for this review AND yours.
And a review you agree with is not necessarily good either.
Not necessarily. It might be bad by coincidence. Either way, this one is bad.
Pozzle, this lot have been giving my review the same treatment. It's a good review and makes perfectly valid points. Keep at it.
Yeah keep up the terrible way you rate games. No reviewer should ever allocate a score based on graphics and features. For example his system is flawed. Say he reviewed TWD he would have to give it a 1/5 on features thus he would give it a poor score due to averaging out final verdict, eventhough the game can not really offer features nor should it have to. The only games that should have features are open world and multiplayer games
I actually agree that linear scoring is flawed and I'd do away with it if I could. But that's the world we live in and we have to deal with it. A reviewer should allocate scores based on what to them makes the game good or bad, and I think it's slightly presumptuous to think you can tell them what they should think.
I'm actually amazed at how good this game looks. It looked good back then, but whatever they did, it looks way better than the other HD remasters. It has such a clean look, at times I forget I played this on PS2, not even last generation. Square actually did something right when they put their time and effort into something.
its the best hd remake yet, and it has all the international content, its fantastic, these are facts.
Besides the fact that story gets a tiny paragraph review and gameplay gets no mention at all the final paragraph seems like it was written by someone else. He reviews the features, story and audio/graphics and seems to be satisfied with the features added to the HD. But then when he gets to the last paragraph he starts really nitpicking like how he has to quit to the menu like an animal. Also on average of his own scores it should be 3.6/5. Other than that theres nothing wrong with the review.
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.