It's because Enslaved kept (stupidly) getting compared to Uncharted 2's graphics at the time. Xbox fanboys were propping it up as the "Uncharted 2 killer!", so much like how the first Killzone got screwed by being dubbed the "Halo killer", Enslaved suffered the same fate.
Low scores and some hate probably due to it having excessive screen tearing and framerate drops galore. Could have been a fun, interesting and playable game if it weren't for those technical issues that annoyed me to the point of not wanting to play it any further.
Because it came after Heavenly Sword which was exclusive, so as it happens sometimes when a studio stops making exclusive, people expect too much. Also maybe because it used UE3 and has this distinctive UE3 look (though way more colorful than the average UE game back then...) that was also popular to diss back then.
I actually disliked the game. The combat was clunky. The story was cumbersome. But, I really liked the potential that was there and the setting itself. But, I don't think it was hated so much as just considered more like Days Gone, a mediocre new IP but something that could potentially get better with a sequel.
Played the game and it was solid but also not all that memorable to be honest. I beat the game and don’t remember much about it. So kind of forgettable. Combat was pretty clunky due to bad frame rate, something we saw a lot of during ps3/360 generation unfortunately.
I don’t think they even make the top 20 from most people or publications... They are a good dev though, I wouldn’t call them bad... but top 5 ??? Not even close.
There are a lot worse teams out there by far. But there are also a lot of studios out there that put them to shame. They have definitely had a bunch of opportunities though, and at one point I thought they would enter the elite teams out there but they fail short time after time...
And MGS3 and Heavenly Sword that released around the same time as the original Uncharted and those 2 were the games that kickstarted Sony's focus on 3rd person cinematic games.
Heavenly Sword came out 2 or 3 months, perhaps even less, before Uncharted so yes, they were released around the same time and I mentioned MGS3 because of how cinematic it was.
I loved this game, it was really good. What killed this game was people calling it an Uncharted killer. Another thing that killed this was NT's constant slander of Sony.
The game is okay. Good story but basic fighting. Has some exploration but overall I thought it was good just not great. If there was a sequel it could have fixed some of the smaller things and made it a great game.
Why is this game viewed as special? It strictly rode off of Ninja Theories work with Heavenly Sword. Pointing to this game in particular almost ignores the work Ninja Theory was doing up until this point. Especially regarding motion capture and cinematic takes.
Interesting one. Fascinated me enough to want to play it but couldn't because my potato pc couldn't handle it at that time. Now I still haven't played it because the graphics look kinda potato. (I'm not a graphic whore, I just don't like how the visuals of this game aged)
I don't know why the guy who said that the problem was the comparison with uncharted 2 got so many disagrees. He's completely right. When Enslaved trailer was first shown, Xbox360 fanboys started to pose it as the UC2 killers. And of course, Sony fanboys bashed it when it was released, and it was deemed a disappointment... due to a unnecessary comparison. You don't remember? Check the N4G posts from the year.
I remember but sadly most people forget things after a short amount of time. I for one don’t think that being comparable to uncharted is what killed it though. I have played it and got the plat for it... so obviously I thought it was a playable game, and I played it a bit. But at the end of the day, I just don’t think it was that great of a game. Really rough around the edges and at the time there where a lot of cool new games coming out that did it better.
That’s just my opinion though I know some people who loved it.
He's wrong and got the disagrees for an overly broad generalization. It seems true that low-tier journo site CVG started a "debate" about UC2 vs. Enslaved graphics for clicks, but apparently most users were calling this back then too.
Ninja Theory made a «a fascinating predecessor to the popular cinematic games of today», are you joking? It was released in 2010, there was a metric ton of cinematic games release in 2010 (Star Wars: The Force Unleashed II, Metro 2033, Mafia 2, Red Dead Redemption, Dante's Inferno, Darksiders, God of War III, Heavy Rain, Alan Wake, Mass Effect games, every Metal Gear Solid game, you name it) and earlier.
Personally, i didn't like Enslaved: Odyssey to the West and i bought the game on PS3. Camera was pretty bad, fighting was super basic and boring, story was ok, but it was mostly bits and pieces here and there and i remember issues with framerate and controls (they were delayed, but i might be wrong here). I did like the art style, though.
I read the whole article, actually. And my comment still stands. Game was ok, even bad, according to the author. And how he goes on some holy crusade, trying to «redeem» it (for some reason).
«They challenged my understanding of building the world’s end, that desolation can be dreamy instead of dreadful, drenching in jazzy vegetation rather than (again) jaundiced radiation.» «The displays of Monkey’s health, ammo, new items, and secondary commands are framed as interfaces of the slave headband, which Trip reprogrammed.» «The dragonfly revealing a level’s challenges doubles as a fashion accessory for Trip.» And why that matters, really? Attention to detail? Ok, i guess. Does any of that make a better game? No, not really. Also, «The game marked the first time I noticed developers going the distance to contextualize its mechanics, making a “game thing” less game-like in as organic a manner as possible» - and the game makes mechanics more organic by what, showing you a preview of what's to come, you know, one of the most popular game-like things you can think of?
All of those points are moot, you can safely remove 95% of article and it wouldn't lose anything worthwhile. «I didn't like this game when i first played it (graphics issues, repetitive combat) and didn't recommend it to friends at first. But after replaying it, i like the art and the world they build, same goes for attention to details, music, some ideas with pacing and actors performances. I want a sequel» - this is the whole article. But instead of making the article short and to the point, it's spread across 2 pages.
This game broke no new grounds. Game deserves praise for art (colors, locations, all look good) and motion capture performance (i don't remember the music). Games i provided are still much better in almost every way - graphics, story, cinematic elements, world building, HUD, attention to detail, you name it. And they actually don't require any sort of redemption articles.
P. S.: I want 30 minutes of my life back, thank you very much.
Damn that was a long reply lol, anyway the article it's just one opinion. Kinda pointless to try say it's wrong, when everyone plays different games and likes them differently.
I think the environment design of Enslaved influenced some games that came after. Sorry you wasted 30 min.
This game deserves a full remake. Good game but could be so much more on modern hardware.
Still a great game a sleeper hit to most people I so want a sequel to this game but I am not holding my breath.
One of the few games that I finished. I have actually finished this game on pc and Xbox.
We need enslaved 2