RockyRan Posted May 10, 2011 Report Share Posted May 10, 2011 First review (to my knowledge) is up. Doesn't say very nice things about it: http://www.joystiq.com/2011/05/10/brink-review/ Thoughts? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
staySICK Posted May 10, 2011 Report Share Posted May 10, 2011 Going to pick it up in a few minutes. I'll see some of you online next month. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enervation Posted May 10, 2011 Report Share Posted May 10, 2011 First review (to my knowledge) is up. Doesn't say very nice things about it: http://www.joystiq.com/2011/05/10/brink-review/ Thoughts? The things someone said in the comments section sums it up very well... Just a small example of what I'm talking about. The preview says: "During my time with the game, I found the AI to be brilliant, and often preferable to playing with human characters." Then, in this review, it turns to: "It's not that the game's artificial intelligence is inherently bad -- it just never seems to figure out how to cooperate with the human element." Also, the review seems to focus more on the shortcomings of the single-player and lack of features from the multiplayer, while making ABSOLUTELY NO MENTION of the multiplayer experience itself. Shame, I actually though Joystiq was a decent site. But I guess like any other review site it falls flat on its face in certain areas. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MetalCaveman Posted May 10, 2011 Author Report Share Posted May 10, 2011 Going to pick it up in a few minutes. I'll see some of you online next month. I don't think I have you on my friends list on PSN, but anyway, see you in a month! Or whenever PSN online play is back! As for reviews, some of what I've seen seems to indicate some reviewers were expecting another Call of Duty game or something. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enervation Posted May 10, 2011 Report Share Posted May 10, 2011 Well obviously if that's what one was expecting, of course the game will feel like crap. Also, it appears a slew of reviews came out, ranging from very low to moderate. Lots of complaints going up about questionable optimization and bad processing. I guess the Joystiq review wasn't so far off after all, though they could stand to review the multiplayer a bit more. I hope Bethesda does something about this. =\ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pirandello Posted May 10, 2011 Report Share Posted May 10, 2011 From what I read in the communities, Brink's been horribly optimized out the door. Again, like the Black Ops incident: how the hell can you not have this thing optimized on an engine we know should work perfectly fine? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gyaruson Posted May 10, 2011 Report Share Posted May 10, 2011 Yeah, I just saw the Joystiq review. While agree with Enervation at the total lack of online pros and cons, the biggest setback for me was seeing that people were able to max out everything in just a few days. Play the Challenge Mode for 45 minutes: unlock every piece of equipment. Max out characters and abilities in three days. Ugh. That is sooooo disappointing. I might not even pick it up now, but what the hell will I have to play for the next few months? God dammit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faiblesse Des Sens Posted May 10, 2011 Report Share Posted May 10, 2011 The Witcher 2. Anyways, since when were games solely about unlocking things? Fucking Modern Warfare mentality Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pirandello Posted May 10, 2011 Report Share Posted May 10, 2011 Anyways, since when were games solely about unlocking things? Fucking Modern Warfare mentality At least it isn't hats. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enervation Posted May 10, 2011 Report Share Posted May 10, 2011 Personally I'm just waiting for Guild Wars 2. Will probably bounce around until it finally comes out. And I got my paycheck today too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Posted May 10, 2011 Report Share Posted May 10, 2011 That review posted above was terrible. It mostly dealt with the lack or inclusion of certain features and hardly at all mentioned the core gameplay. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorgi Duke of Frisbee Posted May 10, 2011 Report Share Posted May 10, 2011 (edited) I'm surprised you people actually expected a quality review out of Joystiq, especially since A)They are run by AOL, the same geniuses that bring you The Huffington Post B)They're from the same family that hosts Engadget, and Engadget is GARBAGE. I was personally looking for Giant Bomb's review, which was supposed to post around midnight (not that I stayed up for it), but Dave, site's down. Let's also look at the number of positive vs. the negative; Positive: 13 Negative: 2 Edited May 10, 2011 by DukeOfPwn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hot Heart Posted May 10, 2011 Report Share Posted May 10, 2011 (edited) I remember Joystiq loved Section 8: Prejudice seemingly because of all the stuff you got for the price. Now, maybe I've been spoiled by Halo or it was just the demo, but the gameplay itself just felt very lacking. Eurogamer aren't one to pull their punches and they seem to like it: http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2011-05-10-brink-review Edited May 10, 2011 by Hot Heart Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gyaruson Posted May 10, 2011 Report Share Posted May 10, 2011 Anyways, since when were games solely about unlocking things? Fucking Modern Warfare mentality I don't care about "unlocking things" necessarily. I do care about having things to do in the game, though. If I beat the game in days, then that's pretty much it. And I've never really run into a situation where I said to myself "Joystiq is so full of shit." I mean, Engadget is not that bad - better than fucking Jizzmodo. Being run be AOL only means you have asshole bosses, not necessarily that the site itself is crap. I am surprised that Eurogamer gave it a 8/10. They are usually the most hard on titles. At this point, I'm not even most disappointed by the divisive scores, it's entirely the lack of content for the money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SomTervo Posted May 10, 2011 Report Share Posted May 10, 2011 (edited) Yeah, the general consensus seems to be: if you rate the multiplayer and singleplayer seperately and focus a bit more on singleplayer (as almost every mediocre/bad review of the game has done), it's not a great experience. If, however, you play the game as it's meant to be played, online with good teams, it's a great experience and a fair success. Apparently almost all of those out-the-door bugs have been patched up on 360. They say it was a string of bad code that was messing up a lot of the networking code. Anyways, since when were games solely about unlocking things? Fucking Modern Warfare mentality Damn straight. I remember when Multiplayer parts of games used to be far more fun, and there was literally no unlocking of ANYTHING. Though to an extent it's good, for customisation etc. Edited May 10, 2011 by kenshi_ryden Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorgi Duke of Frisbee Posted May 10, 2011 Report Share Posted May 10, 2011 Well, it looks like Joystiq really did shit the bed when it came to their review. http://ve3d.ign.com/articles/news/60202/Brink-Reviews-Are-A-Mixed-Bag-Some-Thoughts Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SomTervo Posted May 10, 2011 Report Share Posted May 10, 2011 That is bad like. Especially seeing as it will have dragged down the aggregate site's rankings, which is just so not cool. Still, I reckon Brink will sell alright regardless. Good publicity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted May 10, 2011 Report Share Posted May 10, 2011 I have an idea: how about people actually play the game before deciding if reviewers know wtf they're talking about? And I'm not even interested in it... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SomTervo Posted May 10, 2011 Report Share Posted May 10, 2011 I'm not interested either- it's clear the guy barely played the game though. If you're reviewing something, you should play it a lot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted May 10, 2011 Report Share Posted May 10, 2011 Agreed. I meant the reviews generally, not the Joystiq one specifically. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yantelope Posted May 10, 2011 Report Share Posted May 10, 2011 (edited) This harkens me back to the Neir review. I think Joystiq's reviews are losing all credibility. Gametrailers gave it a 79 though so I may have to give this game a shot. I will say that I don't like games that reward mob mentality. I generally don't have 5 or 6 friends to play games with so I would end up getting whooped repeatedly by people who do have friends. Edited May 10, 2011 by Yantelope Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted May 10, 2011 Report Share Posted May 10, 2011 Even if you have friends apparently there's no easy way to join up with them for the freeplay multiplayer, only for the campaign. Also, though I like GT reviews, I usually ignore the numbers. The number at the end often (to me at least) seems to have little or nothing to do with their description of the game during the review itself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yantelope Posted May 10, 2011 Report Share Posted May 10, 2011 Hmm... Some of the GT review echoes the Joystiq review excatly. GT: "Bots fill in as moving targets online but prove to be enormous headaches when playing offline, and they're woefully inadequate as squad mates if you go it alone. Trying for some of the more difficult campaign missions solo is an exercise in futility, so you're best advised to keep your game open to visitors, invite some pals, or stick to freeplay altogether." Joystiq: " There's no way to coordinate with your computer-brained allies, usually leading them to run mindlessly towards the objective, where all eight of the opposing team's AI players sit and wait, a field of landmines and turrets between the two forces. Even on the easiest difficulty, single-player Brink is a fruitless exercise in Sisyphean frustration." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hot Heart Posted May 10, 2011 Report Share Posted May 10, 2011 I have an idea: how about people actually play the game before deciding if reviewers know wtf they're talking about? Says the guy who waits for GT reviews. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted May 10, 2011 Report Share Posted May 10, 2011 I wait for GT reviews before buying a game that I'm unsure about, because I don't want to pay $60 for something I might not enjoy. But I don't argue with other people about whether the GT review is accurate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.