Teletext GC: inFamous Review

IN SHORT: Disappointing superhero sim, whose meagre set of powers prove to be far less exotic than you'd hope.

PROS: Jumping around an open world is always fun and the final hours finally start to hit the right notes.

CONS: Unimaginative powers, unreliable controls and bland design. Unremarkable graphics and repetitive enemies.

Read Full Story >>
Create Report !X

Add Report


The story is too old to be commented.
blitz06233434d ago

"CONS: Unimaginative powers"

lmao. that's what makes this game fun. I guess the reviewer likes realistic powers, like, say... hey what's a realistic power anyway?

3434d ago
SL1M DADDY3434d ago

"I tried it and sucked at the game thus found myself hating it."

Sorry, but this is just another poor excuse for a review. If you suck at a game, you should be the last person to review it.

Genesis53434d ago (Edited 3434d ago )

Well that was a completely unimaginative and bland review.

DarK-SilV3434d ago (Edited 3434d ago )

this is what they said about KZ2"One of the best looking games ever, but also one of the least ambitious in terms of anything else" " Not a single new idea but instead an infinity of cliches. Weak plot, no co-op mode and annoying ally AI."

these guys are not gamers,nothing please them,they have nothing to do with games

Why o why3434d ago

same guy who writes for Eurogamer, same dislike for all things sony (unless the game is made by british devs) same BS. I found out that whole 'team europe' were harsher on sony a long time ago but at least they're consistent in their BS.

Tito Jackson3434d ago

..I didn't find this game to be all that great either. But Its surely better than a 6. Its atleast an 8. Its a good game.

PrimordialSoupBase3434d ago

Oh chill out kiddos. He substantiates his opinion pretty well essentially saying that Infamous' toolset is a shooter with a skin of electricity. Which just so happens is why I love it, but if that doesn't sit well with him, so be it.

It's a different perspective on the game, at least it makes sense.

locos853434d ago

I was on this game for 4 hours last night. I couldn't get enough of it. Love it and glad I bought it. I am taking the evil road!!!

Why o why3434d ago (Edited 3434d ago )

thats fair enough BUT the dude is consistently around and writes for sites/publications that always seem to give lower than average scores to sony games. He mentions that the story is similar to prototype as if its copying that game and not every other super hero game cliche. His review is just full of dislike where it counts for a reader to be informed. I mean I can make the sun seem unimaginative and its power meagre with the correct 'vocab' Its just an agenda behind great wording plus ive completed the game on the hero arc and the ONLY thing he nails is the same things the kotaku (dislike site, appreciate their reviews) + others sites say and they were that the graphics are the best for a sandbox game but not as impressive as other sony games and that getting down from places can be annoying. This guy is just full of gaming hate. When was the last time he actually enjoyed a game. What about the many great things about the game.

To the ones that scream averages but want to cling to the scores below it.......unlucky because this is a great game to play especially when you consider the competition that's come prior

xwabbit3434d ago

Hmm, all the sites i have never heard of give infamous a bad review lol

Downtown boogey3433d ago

Genetically enhanced supersoldiers, like Master Chief.
(I actually like Master Chief, but whatever...)

PrimordialSoupBase3433d ago

@Why o why

Offer me proof that he has it in for Sony published games. Otherwise it's like anything else that goes on in these ludicrous threads: Rabble.

TheRealSpy023433d ago (Edited 3433d ago )

your comment doesn't make any sense. unimaginative doesn't mean unrealistic.

and this review NAILED IT.

To the PS3 fanboys: you don't have to auto-love every ps3 exclusive. it's not blasphemy. this game is very average and looks like a ps2 game.

@darkzilv: yeah, they nailed kz2 as well. nice to see some honest reviewers out there.

EDIT: Just to preempt the inevitable accusations that i am a 360 fanboy or don't actually have this game or a ps3; if you don't believe me, just send me a message on here and i'll give you my psn name and you can see for yourself.

sumguy823433d ago

"i'm a huge ps3 fanboy who thinks everyone should blow a load at the sight of every ps3 exclusive. and if they don't, i'll attempt to take away their credibility by making completely false accusations."

Why o why3433d ago (Edited 3433d ago )

ill flip it around for ya. Bias exists in the gaming media period. Some in favour of a console, some in others. Check the websites i mention above scores for all of the codemasters games this gen and you'll notice that they are ALL above the average. Some who are quick to say things like 'but LBP got game of the year + high scores blah blah' I just say the devs are also from the UK, almost neighbours JUST like codemasters. Now look at all of the nitpicks that get labelled at games like killzone 2, Drakes, Ratchet and Infamous and tell me why these standards aren't applied across the board.

How some games have got the scores they have this gen just stinks plus sites like Eurogamer have been exposed just like gamespot and gametrailers so maybe you should be a little more open minded. Dont be conspiracy driven but at least open your eyes to the faults with the gaming media. Im sure you have ZERO proof that gamespot fired Jeff over his review because there is no proof you just have to rely on intuition and gut instincts influenced by the information available. Notice the trends towards talk of marketing, sales, attach rates etc and understand that manipulation of scores, reviews, opinions is almost as important as the product they trying to promote/downplay I mean it wont take long for me to find a comment by someone here on n4g that states something like halo or games.....wait for it..... 'having a higher metascore' than killzone 2. Its almost like the score is better or more important than the actual gameplay, quality.......sheep. Explain why some sites have more credence/weighing than others on metacritic, why they can allow film magazines affiliated to big players within the gen to affect averages yet omit dedicated gaming sites especially ones outside the US. Explain how a reviewer may write a review for 2 different sites and both scores may count towards the average. Too many flaws. Anyhow the game is great, not perfect by any means but great and that seems to be the consensus by the sites i trust. 'euroteam' sites fell off that radar a long time ago. Their scores are on average below the average for ps3 games. Ive provided the link above and if you do a little more reading you'll find that this reviewer has worked with both edge and eurogamer which is why i say they share the same opinions

PrimordialSoupBase3433d ago (Edited 3433d ago ) He hasn't reviewed anything on Eurogamer.

Listen brother, there are problems in the media, yes, but the majority of the fervour surrounding supposed "negative" reviews is because the score and tone don't indoctrinate presupposed opinion. In other words, people who get angry and call "bias" (the large majority of N4G users, and beyond) are the ones who solidified their opinion about the game months before it was ever even close to release.

Games are not hardware, reviewers can't do benchmark and stress tests, it's far more subjective than that. If well written and substantiated, a negative review is food for thought which offers a new lens to view things from. The game is the game, you don't need a preacher to tell you how spectacular it is... which seems to be the only thing that people ever want.

Why o why3433d ago (Edited 3433d ago )

already completed the good karma arc. The game is far from perfect and I am not here telling you its the best thing since slice bread.
The lack of consistency and double standards is what annoys me 'consistently' about the sites I mentioned. Lets face it, these guys all know each other and that can interfere with objective reviews.
just as he is entitled to his opinion I am mine and it seems like ive played this game for longer/or more conclusively than he has. I asked you to look at the scores of the codemasters games, you've said nothing, i mentioned the jeff sacking, nothing again, I mentioned the scandals that have hit the sites ive mentioned, still nothing. Anyway just look at the games that have scored higher then maybe you can understand my critique of this dude and the sites ive mentioned Look at the scores for the codemasters games. You're right about people disagreeing with reviews without actually playing sh!t which is the silly side of n4g but when the general consensus is 'good to great' and somebody hits us if an 'average to good' then we're allowed to say something. The sites ive mentioned have consistently been harsher or have nitpicked on games and ignored those same 'flaws' on other games and im not buying into this whole 'hype' sh!t neither as reviewers are meant to leave that crap at the door. If they cant then they have failed in their primary job and thats to give us information. Long before these reviews came out the general consensus was that edge, euro'g even teletext (by me personally) would score this lower than the average. Ive already been through this teletext site with my close friend (we're from the UK) and i have shown him their inconsistencies and shown him that more than one person has affiliations with some of the others mentioned. All i ask for is consistency..... If the graphics are sub par for 'x' then they should be for 'y' where on earth did halo 10 graphics come from....honestly If its multiplayer is 15 out of ten that shouldn't boost its graphics score now should it. This goes both ways i might add, Ill point to the slight clunky controls of LBP and it still got 10's. Im not blinded by my preference, my eyes and ears are open.


raztad3433d ago (Edited 3433d ago )


I need the ps2 you are using. I buy a 360 for you and you give me that awesome ps2. I want to play DQVIII in full HD. Gotta a deal?

Let me add, everybody is entitled to his own opinion. I for one think Halo is a very average fps (I still remember when I begun to play Halo:Evolved some years ago, just in the middle of the game I found something called CoD, Halo wasnt played anymore). GTA4 could look polished (though it runs at 640p upscaled, and its engine isnt capable to do what inFAMOUS's achieve easily) but is boring as hell. Those two games are really high ranked, what means that for me nothing. inFAMOUS is an amazing game dude if you dont like it, its cool, move on.

FamilyGuy3433d ago

Strangely i guess thats true but somehow that doesnt stop this from being the most fun game ive played this year. Single player wise it's one of the best this generation.

Eddie201013433d ago

inFamous is a very good game that deserves a much higher score than a 6, anyone with half a mind can find many flaws in this review, one being that the reviewer says he was not able to play the game because of the controls (the controls are very good and intuitive in infamous) seems that bitccching about the controls in PS3 exclusive games is a running theme these days, you have to be pretty inept at gaming to say that games like inFamous and Killzone 2 are hard to control, kind of like comparing pixels in third party multi-platform games, when in reality those kind of differences are only noticeable if you are sitting two inches from the screen. Half the people making game comparisons don't even know what they are talking about to begin with.

As for bugs and technical issues, this game has a few, none of which are game breaking or interfere with enjoying this game. Games like Gears of War 2, Fallout 3, and Fable 2 had bugs and technical issues, but media barely mentioned it and was not reflected in gaming scores and Gears Of War 2 was broken.

It is clear that these small site reviews are designed to get hits and to lower overall scores for games.

Fanboys seem to rally around these excessively low scores especially when they think it further increases there favorite consoles success, the only thing you do is hurt the gaming industry and the community that enjoys gaming. I enjoy gaming not name brands.

This game has gotten at least four or five perfect scores from sites that are more reputable than the this site or at least as reputable, and I don't see those scores on Metacritic, What is the deal.

TheRealSpy023433d ago (Edited 3433d ago )

you kidding?

go back and play san andreas again and tell me the npc character models aren't nearly the same as the ones in infamous. no only that, but the character animations in infamous are horrible.

then, you constantly get caught on invisible corners, fall through walls (i've actually fallen through the roof of a few buildings).

i'll admit, that parkour element is fun, but that's this game's only redeeming quality. when it comes to combat, graphics, sound, music, etc, the game absolutely fails. and the side quests have all the imagination of assassin's creed without the interesting setting or impressive graphics. in fact, the only really fun part of the game and well implemented element is searching for the hidden blood shards.

the game is a 6-7 TOPS. and it's the concept and parkour that make it that. if it came down to just graphics, sound, and animations, and creativity this game falls far under your average this-gen game.

+ Show (19) more repliesLast reply 3433d ago
xabmol3434d ago

I'm on the second island right now. I've been playing for over 8 hours and this game is way better than a 6. I'll have to agree with the 18 other reviewers that gave it a 9 or more. 9 seems about right for this game.

BTW who the heck is Teletext GC?

PirateThom3434d ago

They're an obsolete TV service.

vasilisk3434d ago

I cannot understand how this is a credible gaming site and is listed on metacritic.
They also gave Killzone 2 a 7/10 and they gave fable ii a 9/10. They have NOT reviewed Halo 3, Uncharted, Ratchet & Clank, Mass Effect and so on. And yet, according to metacritic they are a credible gaming site. They seem only to appear when they want to attribute a low score to a PS3 exclusive...

locos853434d ago

This is a reason why Meta is also flawed.

ThatCanadianGuy3434d ago

Metacritic does sneaky stuff all the time..

Yet, somehow gets away with it..

deadreckoning6663434d ago

look guys, uncharted 2 is comin in september,INFAMOUS has gotten a lotta 9's and alotta 7's. It got mixed reviews, get over it.

raztad3433d ago (Edited 3433d ago )

Guys I did a small research about inFAMOUS in metacritic (this is posted in another thread)

TOTAl number of sites: 42

The number of 90/100 is larger than any other score. There are 14 sites that think inFAMOUS is a 90/100 versus 6 thinking 85/100 is a fair score and versus 4 giving it a 70/100. This is very interesting cause it means that 90/100 is the most frequent score, so far, in the sample. If this was a pool the candidate 90/10 would be the clear winner by far.

The actual average is 85.76 so is being rounded up to 86.

The number of sites ABOVE the average is 25 (88+/100). That is more than half the sample.

Those 75-/100 reviews are a distortion of the sample, they are too far from the average and even more from the most frequent score. If you remove them, the average will be much closer to 90/100.

In conclusion, IMO, at least average and most frequent score should be used as a reference in any game ranking.

What do you think? make some sense?

BTW, dude above is lying. There arent a LOT of 70/100, just FOUR out of 42, that is about 10%.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 3433d ago
Cyrax_873434d ago

What's funny is I've seen 4-5 perfect reviews for this game in the last 2-3 days and none of them have been added.

joydestroy3434d ago

i know, wtf!? this game is easily an 8.5. i played it for 8hrs straight and was still having lots of fun. unlocking/upgrading powers is addictive haha

Struz3434d ago

How was that up in like 2 seconds? Also, what's up with the lack of high reviews. Meta is worthless.

lh_swe3433d ago

But reviewers should nontheless be more objective with their reviews, from what I have played this game deserves no where near a 6, it has a couple of flaws, like pop in, but I'm loving the story so far and the gameplay is solid once you get the the hang of it. And saying the city looks bland is a retarded statement, the city looks great with many sights and beatiful architecture, I really couldn't disagree more with this review.

DMason3433d ago

Do you guys not get the concept that some sites are weighed heavier on Metacritic than others? If some random gaming blog gives it a 100, and say Gamestop gives it a 70, it will weigh Gamestop's score heavier because it is a more reputable site. If you look on the "How We Rate Stuff" page, you will find this:

This overall score, or METASCORE, is a weighted average of the individual critic scores. Why a weighted average? When selecting our source publications, we noticed that some critics consistently write better (more detailed, more insightful, more articulate) reviews than others. In addition, some critics and/or publications typically have more prestige and weight in the industry than others. To reflect these factors, we have assigned weights to each publication (and, in the case of film, to individual critics as well), thus making some publications count more in the METASCORE calculations than others.

Got that?

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 3433d ago
GamerPS3603434d ago (Edited 3434d ago )

Huh, Does this guy even know what video game is ?
"Unimaginative Power" haha

zenosaga043434d ago

Wow... sites like this are exactly the reason I always look at gamerankings over metacritic.

Too_Hyped3434d ago

Clearly websites like this one are the reason why metacritic scores are completely meaningless.

That's not even a real website, there's just the Infamous review on it right now... -_-

It's probably paid by MS to put bad scores on PS3 reviews.

DMason3433d ago

That's like me saying that your opinion doesn't matter because you aren't a recognized gaming journalist that has been writing video game reviews for 20 years.

Metacritic will not weigh this review as much as it will weigh IGN's, 1up's, or Gamespot's. Metacritic is a perfectly fine site to gather reviews. Just because you disagree with their opinion, doesn't make their review any less unjustified.