User Avatar Image

IGN's Review

posted by KingHorror on - last edited - Viewed by 1.9K users

First Let Me say Telltale, You are Awesome, Being a huge Jurassic Park Fan You guys Really took me back into the Movies and I really am enjoying it so far. (almost done with Ep.2, no issues so far ether) I tell what I really think of it once I find time to finish.:)


IGN on The other hand...Not so much apparently

http://ps3.ign.com/articles/121/1212843p1.html

P.S. It does seem like looking back at the previews that Greg(whom I normally like and agree with) Didn't like the game's direction to begin with which is a shame. Anyway Hat's off to Telltale you did a Good Job.

89 Comments - Linear Discussion: Classic Style
  • @sockableclaw said:

    The fact is, everyone REALLY wanted a free-roaming sandbox type of Jurassic Park game where you actually get to roam wherever you wanted in the park. That's my dream Jurassic Park game.

    No, not everyone. Having had free roam in the "limited" world of Fallout 3, I really don't want the ability to roam all over the island. I honestly think that free roaming in an island where dinosaurs could jump out of nowhere and rip your head off before you blink just wouldn't be fun.

    There is probably a happy medium somewhere between what we have here and free roam but the screen scrolling really isn't any worse that just moving Guybrush around exploring. It doesn't make the game more exciting as you have to wait for your character to walk from x to y for the umpteenth time.

  • IGN is definitely biased. So is GameSpot, GameSpy, GameInformer, etc. and more than likely a majority of gamers who read those sites. And they're biased all in the same direction, to wit: modern video games (in stark contrast to movies) are judged on the extent to which they allow the player to define his or her own experience.

    This is the ultimate root of just about every non-graphics-related criticism of JP:TG I've seen, whether coming from gamers who boil it down to the word "sandbox", or those who favor games with deeply-branching plots, and even those adventure gamers, such as myself, who relish the experience of exploring an environment rich with mysteries to solve -- rather than shit-easy, one-at-a-time, escape-the-room type puzzles -- no matter how good the story is.

    Open-world environments and Heavy Rain-style non-linearity are not just fads or the province of the immature and shallow; they're the current pinnacles of the direction video gaming has been heading since its inception, the very thing that distinguishes video games from movies -- increasing the degrees of freedom players have to meet whatever challenges are embedded in the gameworld and thereby flesh out the story with their own actions.

    Moreover there are plenty of games that don't go so far as open-world or branching plotlines yet still offer players opportunities to tailor their own experiences. The supposed dichotomy between "sandbox" and "story-driven" is not only false, it's absurd. You're kidding yourselves if you think that substantive, flexible gameplay has to be sacrificed in order for a Jurassic Park game to have a high-quality, true-to-the-franchise story. Anyone who says that sandbox games skew the "pacing" of a story could only be approaching gaming as an exercise in consumption. In contrast, most non-casual gamers see themselves as participants, not consumers, and as the source of all manner of details in the writing of the story, including its pacing. Who's to say that your or my telling-by-playing story would be less faithful to JP than Telltale's?

    So to all of you casual gamers, JP fans who are happy to just "be there", and adventure gamers who believe story is more important than gameplay: Suck it up. Stop pretending that negative reviews are about genre or any other kind of bias rather than widely accepted standards. The gaming press knows when it sees a title that falls far short of what most non-casual gamers are looking for in games -- including so-called story-driven games -- these days.

  • How would you open-world a Jurassic Park game without including a hit-point system or make it a shooter(ugh)? Have the dinosaurs stand in one spot while you roam around? While I agree there could have been free-roaming portions such as sealed rooms or parts outside, I disagree with the feasibility of wandering around when there are dinosaurs right there.

    (I'll also add, which I haven't mentioned... IGN gave it a 5.5 where I said I would have given it 6 for general gamers. My problem wasnt with the facts in the article or the score..but with how the article was written. It really didn't seem very professional to me)

  • @thom-22 said: IGN is definitely biased. So is GameSpot, GameSpy, GameInformer, etc. and more than likely a majority of gamers who read those sites. And they're biased all in the same direction, to wit: modern video games (in stark contrast to movies) are judged on the extent to which they allow the player to define his or her own experience.

    This is the ultimate root of just about every non-graphics-related criticism of JP:TG I've seen, whether coming from gamers who boil it down to the word "sandbox", or those who favor games with deeply-branching plots, and even those adventure gamers, such as myself, who relish the experience of exploring an environment rich with mysteries to solve -- rather than shit-easy, one-at-a-time, escape-the-room type puzzles -- no matter how good the story is.

    Open-world environments and Heavy Rain-style non-linearity are not just fads or the province of the immature and shallow; they're the current pinnacles of the direction video gaming has been heading since its inception, the very thing that distinguishes video games from movies -- increasing the degrees of freedom players have to meet whatever challenges are embedded in the gameworld and thereby flesh out the story with their own actions.

    Moreover there are plenty of games that don't go so far as open-world or branching plotlines yet still offer players opportunities to tailor their own experiences. The supposed dichotomy between "sandbox" and "story-driven" is not only false, it's absurd. You're kidding yourselves if you think that substantive, flexible gameplay has to be sacrificed in order for a Jurassic Park game to have a high-quality, true-to-the-franchise story. Anyone who says that sandbox games skew the "pacing" of a story could only be approaching gaming as an exercise in consumption. In contrast, most non-casual gamers see themselves as participants, not consumers, and as the source of all manner of details in the writing of the story, including its pacing. Who's to say that your or my telling-by-playing story would be less faithful to JP than Telltale's?

    So to all of you casual gamers, JP fans who are happy to just "be there", and adventure gamers who believe story is more important than gameplay: Suck it up. Stop pretending that negative reviews are about genre or any other kind of bias rather than widely accepted standards. The gaming press knows when it sees a title that falls far short of what most non-casual gamers are looking for in games -- including so-called story-driven games -- these days.

    Thom-22, I don't know why, but I consistently find myself wanting to stand up and applaud your posts. Very well said. Bravo!

  • One reviever wrote this I am not gonna say which one

    No hold on, Jurrasic Park is not some game that was obliterated by competition, or the building of a larger gaming industry. Jurrasic Park, uh, *had* their shot, and the gamers *selected* it for extinction!

  • User Avatar Image
    pgr

    @KingHorror said:
    IGN on The other hand...Not so much apparently

    I disagree concerning the characters. This is over the top quality as used from Telltale. Great camera work and somewhat filled with suspension. Feels like some professional movie screen-play...

    But what about gaming? Pressing buttons in the right moment does not qualify for a game. This is more like an interactive movie (Dragon's Lair anyone??)

    I hope, that Telltale is not losing the adventure element like I did start noticing with BTTF (waaaay too easy). Sam and Max or TOMI is the way to go...

  • @WARP10CK said:

    No hold on, Jurrasic Park is not some game that was obliterated by competition, or the building of a larger gaming industry. Jurrasic Park, uh, *had* their shot, and biases website reviewers *selected* it for extinction!

    fixed

  • @lordvader900 said: I knew IGN would do this - they only give good reviews to the hyped-up games.

    That is patently untrue.

    Orcs Must Die, Bastion, Blocks that Matter, Machinarium, and a lot more. Those are all indie games (not blockbusters, not hyped-up games) that scored 8.5 and above in the last few weeks. IGN may not be the best gaming site out there, but they're nowhere near as bad as how you paint them to be.

  • @thom-22 said: modern video games (in stark contrast to movies) are judged on the extent to which they allow the player to define his or her own experience.
    Open-world environments and Heavy Rain-style non-linearity are not just fads or the province of the immature and shallow; they're the current pinnacles of the direction video gaming has been heading since its inception, the very thing that distinguishes video games from movies -- increasing the degrees of freedom players have to meet whatever challenges are embedded in the gameworld and thereby flesh out the story with their own actions.

    That is why fallout 1&2, arcanum, system shock 1&2 ultima series and similar games are surpassed by the majority of modern games when it comes to the extent of defining your own experience.... oh wait, no they're not. ;) And i'm sure older gamers could point out even older gems that make skyrim fell like call of duty of RPG's in comparison.

    The pinnacle of the direction of mainstream modern gaming is graphical presentation,ease of accessibility, and franchising, definitely not the extent of interactivity.

    I would say that JP is getting low scores because its exploring the medium in a way that mainstream critics aren't equipped to deal with. The medium is not accepted as an art form yet, and in such a position you really can't expect the mainstream critics to be qualified to judge works outside the scope of their limited understanding. JP reviewed by IGN, is like having Einstein's paper submitted for peer review at some college fraternity.

    I ended up sounding as pretentious as you, didn't I? :p oh well it is a discussion after all. ;)

Add Comment