Ni No Kuni 2: Revenant Kingdom Review - IGN

Revenant Kingdom delivers in pacing and scope, but is let down by a lack of character development and challenge.

The story is too old to be commented.
-Foxtrot214d ago (Edited 214d ago )

There’s always one

Character development and challenge? I could think of a few certain 9/10 or 10/10 games they’ve let that slide on 🙄

forevercloud3000214d ago

According to the Dualshocker's review, NNK2's character development comes largely from doing the side quests....which I am assuming IGN did not do much of. I think when they realize that saying that outs them as just speed runners they will be forced to change their score.

r2oB214d ago

I just went and re watched IGNs Zelda BoTW review and Mario Odyssey review, it’s so obvious they have different standards for certain games.

-Foxtrot214d ago


Yeah exactly I mean BotW...wheres the character development after 20 or so years

BigWan78214d ago

7.8 is basically a 8/10...

8 out of 10 is a very good game to me...

rainslacker214d ago

IGN hasn't been favorable to most JRPG's since the media decided that western RPG's were better last gen. A 7.8 is actually pretty high for them for a JRPG.

notachance213d ago

the reviewer said "evan's story was well developed and interesting" in the middle there, but at the end he said lack of character development... what?? what???

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 213d ago
BigWan78214d ago ShowReplies(6)
hench07214d ago

Glad I scrolled down N4G though this flopped for a second. But looks like it got mostly 9-10s

Eonjay214d ago

Yeah IGN doesn't see eye to eye with everyone else... suprising. In this case majority rules. We aren't going to ignore everyone else just to indulge IGN. They got paid for sea of theives promotion so I bet tomorrow when reviews go up they will be opposite of everyone else again.

rainslacker214d ago (Edited 214d ago )

IGN tends to be very inconsistent with their review scores, and what they consider important in one game, doesn't even get a mention or uprate in another game....even if it's in the same genre. It's strange because IGN actually does have editors which seem to have an editorial standard for everything except reviews.

While it's easy enough to ignore one oddball review score....and in this case 7.8 isn't terrible....IGN is still one of the largest gaming sites on the internet, so a lot of people will only see this score, and not the others. For a game like NNK, it's unlikely to fall into the problem of having biased reviews for hits...although I'm sure there will be one or two here or there.

TomatoDragon214d ago

IGN just doesn't get Japanese games.

Lighter9214d ago

Most fans probably don't get Japanese games much either. LOL

rainslacker214d ago

Most people who like and play Japanese games don't go to IGN for reviews.:)

Studio Gibli is enough for the average Otaku gamer.

michellelynn0976214d ago

Is that what they are based on. I know which game you are giving a back handed slap to. Stop it.

Aceman18214d ago

No one pays attention to IGN opinions anymore. Honestly I knew they would be the lowest scoring amongst the top gaming media sites.

Lighter9214d ago

"No one pays attention to IGN opinions anymore."

How many comments have you read? Looks like most are triggered or are jumping on the hate bandwagon.

SuperSonic91214d ago (Edited 214d ago )

Dude, this is a PS4 console exclusive. That means its click bait season for IGN. Expect more when God of War, Spiderman and Detroit launches.
They are luring in traffic by negative know tabloid journalism.
And the target is the huge PS4 install base.

xPhearR3dx214d ago

Did you happen to play the first game? Because I can tell you right now that first game was something special. I don't care about reviews, I'm getting this game day 1. But each game is reviewed differently, especially when it's part of a series. Are you gonna dock Monster Hunter because there's no character development and a weak story? No, because that long lasting franchise over the past decade has never put forth a real story or character development. While Ni No Kuni hasn't been around as long, the first game set a high standard for expectations. So if this person feels the lack of character development compared to the 1st game, that's a perfectly acceptable criticism to have.

-Foxtrot214d ago

If the side missions offer a ton of character development and you skip it to rush your review then sorry but it’s not valid criticism

xPhearR3dx214d ago (Edited 214d ago )

They are exactly that. "Side missions". They're there for people who want to further expand their gameplay after the credits roll. Character development should be done in the story, not optional quest. Xenoblade Chronicles 2 did this SAME exact method and people bitched about it. For people like me, I don't care. I'm a completionist, so I'll do all those missions. For a review, you don't need to 100% a game to form a valid opinion. If they beat the story and did some side missions and felt the character development wasn't enough, then yes that's still valid criticism. Especially in a game where the characters (at least the first game) were extremely likable and story/character development were a focal point.

Edit: For the record, I haven't read/watched IGN's review, nor anyone's. I'm staying spoiler free, just interested in conversations people are having about the game. But if a review doesn't do all or even half of the "optional" missions for the sole purpose of character development, I'm not going to blame them. Especially when I've heard people say NK2 has a lot of "fetch quest".

rainslacker214d ago

Depends on if the character development is central to the story or not. Not all character development is.

For instance, the mass Effect series had almost no character development for anyone except Shepard....which was based on player choices...outside of the side quests.

For a lot of JRPG's, the side quests are where they build the side characters, and often times, add in new insights or development for main characters as well. It's nothing new. So long as the characters develop to build the story itself, then it's what is expected and typical.

The first game was much the same way. Character development was mostly built through optional stuff. The first game also suffered from some oddities in the game play...which apparently aren't present in the sequel.

notachance213d ago

that's a reasonable argument if not for the reviewer's inconsistencies when he said "evan's story is well developed and interesting" in one sentence and "lack of character development" in the other.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 213d ago
badz149214d ago

I've called it since the release of BoTW last year. they will find ridiculous reason to shit on NNK2.

"...delivers in pacing and scope, but is let down by a lack of character development and challenge."

SO DUMB! if it's a Nintendo's game, nothing else matters but gameplay! hypocrites!

Old McGroin213d ago

Christ, so a website marked down your new toy because they have an opinion, grow up and get over it.

Obscure_Observer213d ago

Not a bad review, anyway. They gave Persona 5 a 9.7 though.

Polygon gave Nino Kuni 2 a 9. :)

UKRsoldja213d ago

Who cares? It's a crap game.

Obscure_Observer213d ago


Yeah, i´m pretty sure you bought it and played it. S/

+ Show (10) more repliesLast reply 213d ago
DreadGara214d ago

Your wrong if you really have any other doubts.
IGN is a pay to win disgusting hypocrite website, and so biased when it comes to certain consoles.
Still surprised many people actually still take them seriously....

Pancit_Canton214d ago

Automatic 2.2 deduction for being a PlayStation Console Exclusive.

IGN has the most ****ded rating system ever.

SpringHeeledJack214d ago

Correct, we all know why they gave it a lower score.

EmperorDalek213d ago

Yes, that's why they've given plenty of high scores to PlayStation games over the years.
This sounds like a bad, rushed review. It's not like IGN are even IGN anymore, they've lost most, if not all their core staff. But I don't think this review was biased, as bad as it is.