Top
130°
6.0

inFamous: First Light Review Playing Fetch | Eurogamer

Eurogamer - When is DLC not DLC? When it's also a standalone game. That's the case for First Light, in which you play as Abigail "Fetch" Walker, a character you met in inFamous: Second Son - unless you didn't play it. This game doesn't really mind one way or another, and although the broader context of inFamous' world of Conduits and DUP will be hard to discern from this bite-sized spin-off, there's no reason it can't serve as your introduction to the series.

Read Full Story >>
eurogamer.net
The story is too old to be commented.
ABizzel11092d ago

Solid review as always, but the score is off based on the reading. It may be a stand-alone game masking as DLC, but at the end of the day it's a $15 game, and shouldn't be reviewed as a $60 game.

Should price reflect in review scores....Absolutely IMO, because a 3 or 4 hour $60 isn't as easily recommendable as a 3 or 4 hour $15 game. Other than that, good review.

thorstein1091d ago (Edited 1091d ago )

I imagine the score is just to get hits and not any reflection of the actual game since most reviews are coming in at @8. I still see it as DLC, even though it can stand on its own.

SlapHappyJesus1091d ago

Eurogamer is large enough to not need to depend on shadiness to keep eyes on their work and continue what they are doing.
Moreso, they've remained a rather respectable amd dependale site overall.

Perhaps this was just, you know . . . their opinion?

Thantalas1091d ago (Edited 1091d ago )

Part of the issue the reviewer has with the game is that he is not sure whether to categorise it as a 'pretty generous' DLC or a trimmed down full title.

Whilst it does seem to be a reasonable portion of gaming it would be silly to think this should be compared to full priced PS4 games just because it is standalone DLC. However the reviewer's confusion seems to be a factor in how Eurogamer graded it.

AndrewLB1091d ago (Edited 1091d ago )

Not true at all. Right now the average score among 14 reputable review sites is 73/100.

edit:

I personally think many review sites are being overly generous. Especially those giving it an 8+. Think about how good TLOU was, or think about a game you believe to be a 10. Then compare First LIght to it. lol. Sorry... but I think 6/10 is right on point.

IcyEyes1091d ago (Edited 1091d ago )

The truth is the score is way too low.

slimeybrainboy1091d ago

Just to get hits?! Ahaha, 6/10 what a score to get the world's interest. Could it not just be possible one person thinks his own way?

Ridiculous, funny, but ridiculous.

thorstein1091d ago

You know what I love about N4G. You can click on a tag and get all the latest stories about a game as well as the average review score.

And when I click on inFamous First Light, the average of 17 reviews comes in at 8.1.

Hmm... sorry for being SOOO wrong.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 1091d ago
lashes2ashes1091d ago

I disagree. A game should be reviewed on its quality not on how long or how much it costs. It's price should not be a factor because a price in no way makes a game better or worse.

iamnsuperman1091d ago

Oh but it should. At the end of the day value for money I vital in products. Look at Ground Zeros. It may be a solid game but how can you say it had value for money with its short length and high price tag. That is a perfect example of why price is important when reviewing a product. It has to justify the price.

Thantalas1091d ago (Edited 1091d ago )

@lashes2ashes.
I won't make any statement about the validity of the Eurogamer review score because I haven't played it yet.

inFamous First Light is a big DLC pack for inFamous: Second Son. What Sony have done is made it work as a standalone title so that people who didn't buy the full game can still play this (and hopefully lead to more sales for them). Recently Ubisoft also did this with the Freedom Cry DLC for AC IV.

However I think it would be wrong to compare a DLC pack like First Light or Freedom Cry with a full priced game like Watch Dogs. They have less content and are priced accordingly. Just because they benefit gamers by functioning as a standalone title they shouldn't be graded as full priced games, they should be graded as DLC.

andibandit1091d ago

In my opinion price has no say in this...by your logic an awful game could be amazing, if it was free???

iamnsuperman1091d ago (Edited 1091d ago )

No because it is still an awful game. An awful game can be made worse by charging for it. Price isn't the top priority which means an awful game is amazing because it is free. Price is about value for money and should be apart of a score (look at Ground Zeros and that extortionate price tag). Pricing off a product is apart of the quality and value for money you get from the product

AndrewLB1091d ago

good comment. It's so ridiculous how fanboys try to handicap a game in order to justify a higher score.

ABizzel11091d ago

@andibandit

Why must people be silly and always try to use the most extreme example their immature minds can think of.

A bad game is bad regardless of price.

But a good game's price should reflect in its score. It's the entire point of having PSN / XBL games in the first place. They're smaller games that don't offer the overall full package of most retail games. In many cases that's graphics worthy of a next-gen game, in many cases that length, and other cases that's overall content and quality.

Take Shovel Knight it's a great game, would it have been reviewed as generous if it was a $60 game. Possibly, but more than likely not. At the end of the day, value is just as important to consumers because we're the ones looking at reviews to determine if said game/item/etc... is worth the asking price.

And to review a $15 game that the reviewer said was good, as if it were a chopped down $60 game without taking price into consideration, isn't a fair review for potential consumers.

It's the same thing in any other industry. Look at AMD CPUs, Intel is much better, and AMDs 8000 series is only on par with Intel's 3rd Gen i5. Logic would say well the AMD CPU deserve a much lower score for not keeping up; however, when AMD CPUs are $80 - $150 less than i5s and i7s, and still good enough for the majority of CPU task, value has to also be taking into consideration. The same as it should have been here.

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but value for the consumer is something that should be looked into while reviewing a product.

1nsomniac1091d ago (Edited 1091d ago )

I always stick by Eurogamer review scores as they're never biased & more realistic/harsh which I prefer. Their opinions pretty much always match mine as well so it's pretty much the only gaming site I pay real attention to.

ABizzel11091d ago

I didn't disagree with you, but using one sites opinion probably isn't the best way to get completely unbiased results.

I use Eurogamer as well, but I do a balance of 3 different sites/mediums and average their scores out for an unbiased multi-opinion review score (use to use 4, but Gamespot has become awful, and Edge is overly critical of everything).

Eurogamer, IGN, Game Informer = 7.2 / 10

After reading each, it's a good game, but for some reason the reviewers seem to be wanting a full $60 inFamous in this $15 DLC, instead of expecting something like inFamous Festival of Blood DLC.

I will say IGN and EG were consistent with their scores (they gave FoB the same scores), but their complaint back then was length.

1nsomniac1091d ago

What I meant was generally speaking Eurogamer is the only gaming site left with any merit IMO.

ABizzel11091d ago (Edited 1091d ago )

I agree with that. I use IGN for a fan of gaming opinion, Game Informer for a print opinion, and EU for a technological and sound opinion.

Average the reviews (score and article) and you get a real and generally unbiased score for a game from the perspective of a honest gamer.

cfc831091d ago

This game is said to last 4-5 hours. Basically it lasts similar or longer than a quarter of the actual infamous game,at a quarter of the price. It's not a rip off, because this content couldn't have been put in the main game anyway. It's ubisoft and co who withold parts of main game to sell as dlc. They're the problem, not sucker punch on this occasion.

snookiegamer1091d ago (Edited 1091d ago )

So, looks like a very capable $15 add on (not DLC) game is being treated like a full $60 retail release? Unfair, much?

Eurogamer & Gamespot score this awesome game a measily 6? Yet, Crimsonland & Mousecraft (who?...Exactly!) score higher than inFAMOUS First Light???

Can we get some like totally non-biased, real game Journo's, Writers & Editors in this Industry please? These guys make Adam Sessler look good!

Anyone else see what's wrong with this picture?

andibandit1091d ago

yes, Mousecraft and Crimsonland scored too high

WeAreLegion1091d ago

It's a great add-on! Put the difficulty on Hard though. Fetch is insanely OP. There are some glitches, but nothing game breaking.