Sonic Lost World Reviews

[Mando-Whirl-Wind]

Sonic 06 was that bad. Having played the game myself and watching Game Grumps play it, I can guarantee you that the controls of Sonic 06 have led to many fails of that nature.

Hey thats a thought, we should contact all the you tube reiewers and lets players we can, especialy those who love sonic, and have them help spread some positive buzz! anyone here in the mood to contact the game grumps for example

[Jovahexeon Jax Joranvexeon]

Sonic 06 was that bad. Having played the game myself and watching Game Grumps play it, I can guarantee you that the controls of Sonic 06 have led to many fails of that nature.

Don't get me wrong. What I'm saying is that as bad as the game was programmed, it wasn't that bad to the point where while pressing forward, you'd spontaneously turn around.

[Nepenthe]

I want to say: In a world where high scores and outlandishly exaggerated reviews have been outright proven to be financially backed by publishers, and reviews have left the editor's office that have shown a complete ignorance about the game mechanics on part of the reviewer to the point that they have had to be retracted, I don't see why it is suddenly conspiratorial to suggest that gameplay videos for games with mixed or bad reviews wouldn't sometimes be edited or done in such a way to make the controls worse than they actually are. With all of the stupid-ass bullshit we know the reviewing industry does, why do I have reason to believe that they would suddenly take an honest stand on the issue? "I'll inflate this score due to this sweet tote bag featuring Generic Female Protagonist's tits on it that I got, but make misleading gameplay videos? Surely you jest!"

[Narukami07]

I can say for sure that (obviously) any other popular game that gets 10's or 9s in score may not translate into a home-run with most fans that have played said-popular game. Skyward Sword (ugh), NSMB2, FFXIII, GTAIV, etc come to mind.

Edited October 20, 2013 by Narukami07

[WhoWhatMan]

Hey thats a thought, we should contact all the you tube reiewers and lets players we can, especialy those who love sonic, and have them help spread some positive buzz! anyone here in the mood to contact the game grumps for example

 

Game Grumps? They aren't even Sonic Fans nor I think they would go out of their way just to talk about a game they haven't played.

 

Unless someone send them a copy.

[turbojet]

I want to say: In a world where high scores and outlandishly exaggerated reviews have been outright proven to be financially backed by publishers, and reviews have left the editor's office that have shown a complete ignorance about the game mechanics on part of the reviewer to the point that they have had to be retracted, I don't see why it is suddenly conspiratorial to suggest that gameplay videos for games with mixed or bad reviews wouldn't sometimes be edited or done in such a way to make the controls worse than they actually are. With all of the stupid-ass bullshit we know the reviewing industry does, why do I have reason to believe that they would suddenly take an honest stand on the issue? "I'll inflate this score due to this sweet tote bag featuring Generic Female Protagonist's tits on it that I got, but make misleading gameplay videos? Surely you jest!"

Or give games a high score because it reflects your western culture sensibilities and giving lower scores to games that don't thus making every review of foreign made game that intentionally does not appeal to Western Culture somewhat suspect? Or criticizing games that are supposed to reflect social commentary of the decadent nature of American consumerism, entitlement, outsourcing, exceptional-ism, and sexism and then calling the game misogynistic for displaying the sexism that exists in real life as if to say, "Well I know the world is sexist/racist/trans-phobic/heterosexist, but I do not want it on my screen," without...I don't know actually commenting on the gameplay or the game itself? Or giving series such as COD, Madden, NBA Live a hand and not really criticizing them for lack of innovation while giving games that attempt to buck the trend or try something different a harder time because it does not play like the standard game of their genre?

 

What I am saying here(and I'm agreeing with you by the way) is that video game journalism is a fucking joke. People who enter this field are in no way experts on video game design. It is the complete inverse of movie journalism, who are more appreciative of movies that are different and well executive because they watch movies all of the time versus the general public who rather go to a cliche fest because most people don't really get obscure ass movie. However, unlike movie journalism, video game journalism is built on a medium that allows innovation that allows for various types of playing experience which a video game reviewer won't particularly care for mechanics that aren't presented immediately to them unless the stumble upon it by accident. This holds games like Mirror's Edge, Metal Gear Rising, anything made by Suda 51 or Platinum games back in reviews. These people have no incentive to explore the actual game if the game offers exploration within it's design. However, this also contributes to bottleneck campaigns that are almost synonymous with almost all First Person Shooters which have little exploration or innovation, or mainstream beat 'em ups which have veer into mindless button smashing and QTEs without actually appreciating just what in the fuck you are doing. 

 

I'm not saying this because I am a butthurt Sonic fan because I haven't played a Sonic game since Sonic Unleashed(I want to play Generations, but college). 

[Daisy-Fan]

I was doing to get Generation 06 and unleashed by now, get Lost world on 3DS will be a pleasure or Wii-U if there enough intrest games release. Also am sure the Sonic Cycle is pretty much over. i expected IGN of course.

[Tails spin]

I was doing to get Generation 06 and unleashed by now, get Lost world on 3DS will be a pleasure or Wii-U if there enough intrest games release. Also am sure the Sonic Cycle is pretty much over. i expected IGN of course.

 

Unfortunately in the eyes of the general public the sonic cycle is never over.

[Narukami07]

A Sonic game could get an 8 or 9/10 in general scores and it still won't stop people from bringing it up.

Sega can't catch a break.

[Autosaver]

Sonic himself, though, has become a rude, mouthy, rebellious teenager who treats his friends like garbage.

 

what

 

 

"The entire ring system is broken in a 3D world. The player is still allowed one hit, but it’s maddening to collect over 300 rings in one stage, only to lose them all at the end, and only be able to re-collect a handful of them due to the 3D gameplay.

 

..Welcome to Sonic?

 

http://www.gamerevolution.com/review/sonic-lost-world-wii-u

 

I honestly feel that scores like 1/10 or 2/10 should only be reserved to games that are completely broken. Sonic Lost Worlds is quite polished and looks amazing. Sure the gameplay can be dodgy, but that doesn't mean it's broken. Sonic 06, maybe? Sonic Lost Worlds? Definitely not. I understand it being average but TWO? Ehhh

[Narukami07]

I think this guy says it best when it comes to general positive or negative reviews affecting your judgment upon any game you seek. Hope it cheers ya guys up.
 

Even if he didn't put it completely nicely, I agree with JC when he said that we should just celebrate the game on its own merits when and if we've played it. Just enjoy the game.
 
Who gives a shit that it's critically reviewed well or poorly unless you're financially linked to a higher MC score? There are games that I dislike that reviewed super-highly like Ni no Kuni, and there are games that didn't review so well that I love like Arc Rise Fantasia. Just play the game yourself and make judgements on your own without trying to take into account what reviewers have to say or trying to "stick it" to them. Games aren't always going to be something everyone will easily pick up, especially if they've got mechanics or control schemes that might take a bit of exploration to completely get. It's not worth it, or mature even, to call them babies or children or ignorant because it just diminishes the point that you're trying to make, as you're being childish and juvenile by namecalling.
 
If they don't like it and you do, that's perfectly acceptable. Not everyone is going to have the same affinity or taste or love for a game. Acting like you're "better" than someone who just doesn't like the game based on their playstyle or taste doesn't really put you in the right. It works on the flipside too. Acting like you're better than someone who likes a game that isn't necessarily well-liked is just as bad.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=86697103&postcount=914

Edited October 20, 2013 by Narukami07

[Phos]

Hey guys, Polygon.  Not read the whole thing, but those taglines.  

 

This is inexcusable.

Man that's just B role some intern captured to go with his narration.  

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

Actually pretty fair review for a score of 6.

[Carbuncle]

The idea that gaming critics are paid off by companies to give certain games a good score is a massive conspiracy theory that has very little, if any, evidence to support it. Gaming critics are just like you and me and are employed to give their personal opinion about games, nothing more.

 

Oh, but I guess the positive reviews for Sonic Rush, Sonic Rush Adventure,  Sonic 4: Episode 1, Sonic Colors and Sonic Generations were just the result of Sonic Team paying off the critics. Shame they didn't pay the critics off with all their games! WHOOPISE!

 

The reviewers for Lost World tended to criticize the game for poor controls, being too slow and cheap level design. All of these points are true about the game and it's just denying the facts to disagree. And with that GIF, it's possible that the reviewer faked the death to try to get the point across about the poor controls. However, that's more to do with reviewer laziness and incompetence and does not equate to critics giving certain Sonic games bad scores because they aren't get bribed by Sonic Team.

 

That's not to say that people shouldn't make up their minds about the game, of course they should! I really like Lost World, but I can see why the reviewers, who aren't hardcore Sonic fans like us, found reason to dislike this game.

 

This whole conspiracy theory about game critics is fucking stupid and needs to die in a fire.

[MegasonicZX]

The idea that gaming critics are paid off by companies to give certain games a good score is a massive conspiracy theory that has very little, if any, evidence to support it. Gaming critics are just like you and me and are employed to give their personal opinion about games, nothing more.

 

Oh, but I guess the positive reviews for Sonic Rush, Sonic Rush Adventure,  Sonic 4: Episode 1, Sonic Colors and Sonic Generations were just the result of Sonic Team paying off the critics. Shame they didn't pay the critics off with all their games! WHOOPISE!

 

The reviewers for Lost World tended to criticize the game for poor controls, being too slow and cheap level design. All of these points are true about the game and it's just denying the facts to disagree. And with that GIF, it's possible that the reviewer faked the death to try to get the point across about the poor controls. However, that's more to do with reviewer laziness and incompetence and does not equate to critics giving certain Sonic games bad scores because they aren't get bribed by Sonic Team.

 

That's not to say that people shouldn't make up their minds about the game, of course they should! I really like Lost World, but I can see why the reviewers, who aren't hardcore Sonic fans like us, found reason to dislike this game.

 

This whole conspiracy theory about game critics is fucking stupid and needs to die in a fire.

But even if they did fake that death to get the point across thats still pretty darn bad because you as the reviewer are sending the wrong message to people about the controls and while I doubt too many people would believe it the IGN followers definitely will and it gives a very negative impression on the game.

[Sonic The Badass]

This is inexcusable.

Theres a run button... 

you don't walk on crumbling platforms... YOU RUN. they also showed a part where he failed to jump over to the next platform, its was a long jump, usually that means jump off the edge of the one your on, he jump from the BEGINNING of the one he was on to land straight in the pit.

[Carbuncle]

But even if they did fake that death to get the point across thats still pretty darn bad because you as the reviewer are sending the wrong message to people about the controls and while I doubt too many people would believe it the IGN followers definitely will and it gives a very negative impression on the game.

 

I've looked at the GIF, and I concede it's possible that the reviewer intentionally died.

 

However, that's not proof that the reviewers secretly hate the Sonic franchise, only that this specific reviewer was lazy and recorded a fake death that was meant to emulate a death he actually suffered through poor controls rather than record a genuine death.

 

The GIF can only prove that the reviewer is lazy and does not prove that the reviewer, and all other critics by extension, secretly hate Sonic.

[Narukami07]

I still think the "too slow" comments are pretty jarring. I don't want Sonic to be too fast, i just want him toned down just right to avoid boosting too much.

[Badnik Mechanic]

 

Man that's just B role some intern captured to go with his narration.  

 

How come you're the only one whose figured this out?

 

He's blatently written the review/recorded the audio for his review, then someone has gone on the game to try and shoot some footage to go along with it.

[Nepenthe]

The idea that gaming critics are paid off by companies to give certain games a good score is a massive conspiracy theory that has very little, if any, evidence to support it.

When a man tells the world he was fired for giving a game an average score despite the publisher in question buying out paid advertising space for said game, it doesn't lend credence to the argument that this never happens.

 

Gaming critics are just like you and me and are employed to give their personal opinion about games, nothing more.

No they are not like you and me because, unlike you and me, they exist within a professional environment saturated in mass media influences and opportunities. This is not an equatable situation to Average Joe on Message Board giving his opinion.

 

Oh, but I guess the positive reviews for Sonic Rush, Sonic Rush Adventure,  Sonic 4: Episode 1, Sonic Colors and Sonic Generations were just the result of Sonic Team paying off the critics.

Where did anyone say that all positive reviews are corporately influenced?

 

The reviewers for Lost World tended to criticize the game for poor controls, being too slow and cheap level design. All of these points are true about the game and it's just denying the facts to disagree.

So you actually believe a review is unmitigated fact and the average person's opinion is not? Didn't you just argue that reviewers are "just like you and me?" Besides, how do you reconcile this belief with mixed reviews? A game can't be amazing and trash at the same time if this is the case.

 

And with that GIF, it's possible that the reviewer faked the death to try to get the point across about the poor controls. However, that's more to do with reviewer laziness and incompetence and does not equate to critics giving certain Sonic games bad scores because they aren't get bribed by Sonic Team.

My particular argument is that "with the journalism industry saturated in so much bullshit and controversy, particularly with in-game trailers or entire demos coming out that were not actually representative of the gameplay and graphical fidelity of the final product (see: Halo 3 and Colonial Marines), it is not inherently conspiratorial to give credence to the idea that gameplay footage will sometimes played in such a way to demonstrate a point and thus be potentially misleading." You call that laziness and incompetence. I call it dishonesty. Either way, it shouldn't be done, not just for Sonic games but for any title. If the controls are genuinely horrible, you wouldn't need to deliberate die to showcase this. The game should speak for itself.

 

This whole conspiracy theory about game critics is fucking stupid and needs to die in a fire.

 

So does this insistence in sucking up to them. I haven't even played Lost World, nor do I care much for it, but I can't look at those gifs posted and convince myself that they are an honest demonstration of a flaw on part of the game, even if the game's controls are flawed. The player deliberately turned around and died in that gif with the crumbling platform. You can just fucking look at it and tell.

Edited October 20, 2013 by Necropenthe

[Carbo]

How come you're the only one whose figured this out?

 

He's blatently written the review/recorded the audio for his review, then someone has gone on the game to try and shoot some footage to go along with it.

If that footage would have been the best way to actually substantiate an opinion which is what video reviews generally ought to do in comparison with plain written reviews, then it's doing a terrible job in actually proving a point. A written review can say a lot of things but a lot of people will want to go watch footage and videos of the game to actually understand more how it works.

It doesn't matter who is recording the footage at what time, space and existence. In the end that footage is what is being chosen to be attached and associated to the written piece itself. The burden of proof is on the writer to make sure the claims are being supported properly. This is what according to the publication accurately represents "bad controls/level design", and it still makes the review look bad.

[JezMM]

What the fuck is everyone talking about conspiracy theories for, I thought the discussion was "he blatantly died on purpose here to backup his experience, which is still a form of lying that is unfair to the game", not "he blatantly died on purpose here because he hates Sonic and wants the franchise to fail thanks obama".

[Autosaver]

The idea that gaming critics are paid off by companies to give certain games a good score is a massive conspiracy theory that has very little, if any, evidence to support it.

You have much to learn, young grasshopper.

[Nepenthe]

What the fuck is everyone talking about conspiracy theories for, I thought the discussion was "he blatantly died on purpose here to backup his experience, which is still a form of lying that is unfair to the game", not "he blatantly died on purpose here because he hates Sonic and wants the franchise to fail thanks obama".

I assumed the argument took a turn when it was insisted that dying on purpose is something a game reviewer would never do on account of it actually being dishonest, because apparently game journalists are all perfectly honest. Me and turbojet essentially said that "the game journalism industry has done much worse than this; it's not a leap of faith then to believe that there is edited footage of games out there for their reviews, especially when one can visually discern it or back it up with their own experiences and evidence." 

Now here we are.

[jords]

 Man........I hope I enjoy this game.

9 more days.......

Edited October 20, 2013 by jordine