340°
4.0

Days Gone somehow makes the apocalypse aimless and boring | The Daily Dot

It’s the end of the world as we know it—and no one cares.

Read Full Story >>
dailydot.com
gangsta_red1872d ago

"All the familiar trappings of an open-world game are present in some form. There are towers to climb. There are bases to clear. There are weapons to craft. There are strangers to help, strangers to hurt. There are skill trees to fill, checklists to complete, stories to hear, and new regions to traverse. If there’s anything distinct about Days Gone, it’s the notable lack of a discernible identity. Systems and mechanics are ripped whole-cloth from better games, forming a stunted patchwork of ideas pertaining to survival, zombies, and exploration."

This seems to be the main complaint about this game. Something that was discussed in other recent open world games. The receptiveness of missions in a huge open world that just gets tiring after a while instead of more interesting.

NecrumOddBoy1872d ago

If that's truly the issue for giving this games such scores as a 3 or 5 then the double standard in the industry is completely garbage. HZD received a lot of these review negatives and was compared to Ubisoft games, while Breath of the wild was revered as the greatest thing since sliced bread. Also, Spider-Man didn't receive this type of commentary either, and as someone who love the story and gameplay to the point that I Platinum'd it, the tropes/side content what is very repetitive and to the point where it was a severe chore doing the crime challenges. just saying I think there is a severe standards issue when it comes to games journalism.

ziggurcat1872d ago

how dare a game have content like towers to climb, bases to clear, weapons to craft, strangers to help, strangers to hurt, skill trees to fill, checklists to complete, stories to hear, and new regions to traverse... 4/10

gangsta_red1872d ago

"HZD received a lot of these review negatives and was compared to Ubisoft games,"

That's not entirely true, HZD was pretty universally praised along with Zelda by critics and gamers.

But I do agree with Spider-Man, it definitely didn't...at first, but later there were stories that started to catch on about this. I played Spider-Man and that was my main complaint about the game. I also didn't understand why it got such high scores when it made you repeat a lot of the missions over and over again like most open world games do.

I think the fatigue is just starting to kick in. After years of playing open world games we're starting to see all the familiar tropes being used in these games and critics and gamers are starting to pick up on them.

Hardiman1871d ago

I wonder what they scored AC Odyssey because it didn't reinvent anything but it's fun. Lots of carry this, go kill this guy or find this, but it was fun! I don't understand the hate because by now most know what troupes will be in them.

The innovation may start next gen with bigger CPU but now it is what it is and you either like it or you don't but why one gets shit and another gets a pass is beyond me!

In depth Eurogamer breakdown and he said it ran and looked good and praised the game world and what was in it.

Germaximus1871d ago

Exactly.

Something similar has happened with both Mass Effect Andromeda and Anthem. They had issues but they're still really great games.

The internet only gets more stupid by the hour.

Imalwaysright1871d ago

Zelda? Zelda was nothing like most open world games of today that follow the same cookie cutter formula. It was a breath of fresh air in open world design. An open world game that truly gave a sense of freedom and discovery unlike most open world games that give us an illusion of freedom and that is one of the main reasons why it's so highly rated.

S2Killinit1871d ago

Seem to me like the complaints are vague and generalized. They dont know what they dont like about it, just that they dont like it. I guess im gonna find out for myself because im getting it regardless of reviews.

gangsta_red1871d ago

@S2killinit
"Seem to me like the complaints are vague and generalized. They dont know what they dont like about it,"

Seriously? They literally talk about in depth what they don't like about the game. Exactly what do you find vague or generalized about any of these reviews?

Gaming4Life19811871d ago

Hzd and zelda were praised and rightfully so but spiderman was overrated and given a pass.

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 1871d ago
RauLeCreuset1871d ago

I cancelled my preorder. Some of the later previews had piqued my interest. The impression I'm getting from reviews is that it's unremarkable.

LOGICWINS1871d ago

That's actually pretty smart. If you end up deciding to buy it down the line, you'll be getting the same game for a cheaper price.

Sekiro just came out and it's 45 bucks on Newegg with a promo code.

gangsta_red1871d ago

*The repetitiveness of missions in a huge open...*

Damn auto-correct!

Godmars2901871d ago

"just saying I think there is a severe standards issue when it comes to games journalism."

From the first game review magazine, Nintendo Power, being published by Nintendo to further gaming magazines being dependent on ad revenue from the game companies whose games they reviewed and to current times when ANYONE with a blog can call themselves a game reviewer, you're JUST NOW thinking there might be standards issues?

Really?

NecrumOddBoy1871d ago

Sort of rhetorical lol but I agree

1871d ago Replies(3)
rainslacker1871d ago (Edited 1871d ago )

And yet other open world games with the same trappings still get 8's or above. Complaints or not, the scoring systems of reviews is as jacked up as it's always been, and seems like most sites can't even maintain any level of consistency, or editorial standards. Let's face it, you could replace the "Day's Gone" in that paragraph with any other open world game and be none the wiser, because I don't know what a notable lack of discernable identity means. Does BOTW, RDR2, HZD, The Witcher, etc have a discernible identity when they do all those same things?

gangsta_red1871d ago (Edited 1871d ago )

How come journalists are called out when they don't praise someone's favorite game, but does that same integrity and journalist scrutiny apply when they're giving your favorite game a 10? It's to funny to read review scores come into question when that anticipated triple A game doesn't do as well as we hoped. But all is forgiven for the next game that scores perfect 10's.

"Does BOTW, RDR2, HZD, The Witcher, etc have a discernible identity when they do all those same things?"

Maybe those games did their open world missions better, maybe those open world games weren't wearing as thin when they released, maybe, just maybe Day's Gone just isn't that good of a game and the open world tropes that could be forgiven in better games you mentioned are way too apparent for this one.

Let's face it, if Day's Gone was getting good reviews no one would be complaining about journalist integrity or consistency. We would be celebrating another master piece of a game.

rainslacker1871d ago

Dunno. I haven't played Days Gone yet, so I can't even say if it's my favorite game. I'm talking about the vague explanation that you quoted as the reason why the review system is jacked up.

Maybe those games did their open world missions better....but then what metric is being used to say that this game is like all the others, but lacks an identity? I played all the other games that I listed, outside I didn't get too far in The Witcher 3, and I could apply the same trappings to them as well, and based on the quote, say that they have a notable lack of a discernable identity in broad terms like the quote used the phrase, because what all those games did weren't reinventing the wheel immensely.

Days Gone is getting good reviews. How come you aren't in those good reviews saying how it's a good game, or in the average reviews saying it's an average game, but will come in to the bad reviews and say how it validates your belief that it's a bad game, when you yourself haven't even played it, and even you can't say what the author was referring to with the quote he made, because there isn't any detail on why those trappings are bad for this game, but OK in other games. Or did this same reviewer also have criticize those other games in the same way? If so, the my comment about the inconsistency of reviews nowadays wouldn't apply to this reviewer.

gangsta_red1871d ago

You said an awful lot without saying anything at all.

If the game was good like GoW, Witcher 3, Zelda, HZD you wouldn't be here trying to systematically break down the mental fortitude of these low review scores and why a game is scored differently than others.

Why you're trying to break this down and analyse the mind of this journalist is baffling.

"..and I could apply the same trappings to them as well,"

And you would be wrong. God of War didn't reinvent the wheel either and yet it's a good game. The new Doom didn't reinvent the wheel and yet that was a good game by going back to it's roots. Those games were praised and yet none of those games did anything different than other and yet this one isn't getting that same critical acclaim. Could it be that it's just as plain and simple as the many reviews are saying including the quote I left?

One or two review sites that would say this, I could understand your concern but that's not the case. The positive reviews are now the minority for this game.

None of these games have to reinvent the wheel and this is where you keep getting hung up on with that notion. But these games at least have to keep that wheel spinning and in good condition. Because with better open world games out there the lesser ones stand out even more like this one.

rainslacker1871d ago

I can't speak to the quality of this game, because I haven't played it yet. I'm speaking to the trappings being talked about, and how that was used to downgrade the score apparently. If those trappings aren't a problem in other games just because they're good, why are they a problem in games where the game is supposedly not good? Either the trappings are bad or they aren't.

But, I have played the other games I listed, and while none of them were bad, I don't think all of them were as good as some of the reviews made them out to be. They fell into the same trappings, and had some of the same repetative and less than engaging game play that this game is said to have. Namely BOTW and RDR2 were not very deep in the game play department. Game play wasn't bad, but nothing really special.

I'm talking about the double standard, and I don't feel I'm breaking things down by being overly analytical, because I'm only talking about one concept, and breaking that down with an explanation. If you can't follow along with that, then I don't know what else to say.

gangsta_red1871d ago

"If those trappings aren't a problem in other games just because they're good, why are they a problem in games where the game is supposedly not good? Either the trappings are bad or they aren't."

Let me understand your question, maybe I mis-read it, you're asking why good games have trappings that are acceptable and not the games that are bad? It's obviously clear you are reaching with that extreme black and white statement and even I know you can't be serious with that. Besides I already answered that question.

You should really answer my questions and speak on my points instead of repeatedly dodging them and talking about topics that are irrelevant. You're not breaking anything down, you're making excuses, you're trying to drag down other games like RDR, BoTW and Witcher 3 to try and prop this one up and this is all the while admitting you never played this game.

There are no double standards for this game. The only double standards I see are from the comments in these low scoring articles. If this game were getting 9's and 10's across the board you would be congratulating Bend studios and Sony on a job well done and not questioning journalists reasons on why they would give this game a high score, nor would you be complaining about some bias agenda, and you definitely wouldn't be asking these reviews to explain in more detail why they liked the game and gave it a high score.

If you can't understand even that then I don't know what else to tell you.

rainslacker1870d ago

Yes, that's my question. Yes, I'm serious.

Why are these trappings used to down rate games if they're "bad", but not if the game is good?

Either the trappings are a problem, or they aren't. It's not rocket science. If you're OK with it in a good game, then you shouldn't be critical of another game that you think is not good, or at least downrate those games for it. If you think the game is not good, then base the review on that fact alone, and maintain a bit of damn consistency in your views. Otherwise, it's just people making up bullshit to find more reason to give it a lower score, because they can't think of anything better.

"You should really answer my questions and speak on my points instead of repeatedly dodging them and talking about topics that are irrelevant."

OMG. LOL. OK....here's another quote from you.

"This seems to be the main complaint about this game. Something that was discussed in other recent open world games. The receptiveness of missions in a huge open world that just gets tiring after a while instead of more interesting."

Sorry....this is what I was responding to. How exactly is talking about trappings, and the inconsistency by which games are held accountable to them, not relevant? You know...the thing that you quoted which you based your comment on.....

Do you even know what the hell you say when you say it, or do you just change the subject to try and win the argument? Seriously....I asked a simple question....you haven't been able to answer it. Asking me a question, and saying I missed the point isn't an answer. Trying to say that I'm clueless isn't an answer.

Stop acting stupid like you don't understand the question, and then saying that I'm somehow changing the subject. You started the subject. I'm not the one straying, and every word of my first two comments is based on what you started. I ignored your deflection to stay on topic.

Come on Red. Answer simply. Don't deflect.

Why is it OK for some games to fall into the same trappings and not be docked for it, while other games get brought down several points for it, with some other vaguely defined problems like it doesn't have an identity, or the game play is repetitive. Things said without explanation, and seem like more hyperbole.

I answered your questions.

Only question I saw you ask that I didn't was you asking if it could be as simple as what you said. I'd say, sure it could have been. My comment wasn't meant to be lead to so much discourse. You just took the opportunity to try and make me look stupid, and instead you come across as a desperate fan boy.

But, go ahead answer the question. Or are you just going to call me out again because you know you don't have a good answer?

ziggurcat1870d ago

"Let me understand your question, maybe I mis-read it, you're asking why good games have trappings that are acceptable and not the games that are bad?"

He's asking why those trappings are all of a sudden a problem in Days Gone, especially when they're being used to determine that the game is bad/not good/boring with no "discernible identity." What was it about those same trappings that gave those other games a "discernible identity" (and higher score) when they'd been used countless times over in previous games? Because the argument in the review (or at least in the block quote you've cited) isn't "it's a bad game that uses familiar mechanics", the argument is "it's a bad game because it uses familiar mechanics."

"There are no double standards for this game."

It's a double standard if you're using the mechanics/trappings as a criticism in determining whether the game is bad/boring with no identity, and not for any other game that uses identical mechanics/trappings.

gangsta_red1870d ago (Edited 1870d ago )

@Rainslacker
"Why are these trappings used to down rate games if they're "bad", but not if the game is good?"

Sorry, but this is one of the most ridiculous questions I have ever read.

It wasn't just the "trapping" that were being focused on in the quote but the over all experience of those "trappings" just emphasized how mediocre this game is especially when a good game does the same thing but better, as this quote literally says. That is why a GOOD game can have these trappings and get away with it and a BAD game can't.

From the quote:

"Systems and mechanics are ripped whole-cloth from better games,"

Better Games like RDR2, Witcher 3 and Zelda (even Spider-Man, which I didn't like) this is why they get a **pass** and not Days Gone. Also might I add, it's funny seeing you compare Day's Gone to RDR2, Witcher or Zelda's trappings even though you never played Days Gone and then ask why doesn't Days Gone get a pass.

"Come on Red. Answer simply. Don't deflect."

How about you read my very first reply to your comment..

***Maybe those games did their open world missions better, maybe those open world games weren't wearing as thin when they released, maybe, just maybe Day's Gone just isn't that good of a game and the open world tropes that could be forgiven in better games you mentioned are way too apparent for this one. ***

How about I quote a part of my THIRD REPLY TO YOU!

***None of these games have to reinvent the wheel and this is where you keep getting hung up on with that notion. But these games at least have to keep that wheel spinning and in good condition. Because with better open world games out there the lesser ones stand out even more like this one***

All of those answer your complete nonsensical, hilarious question of why a BAD GAME GETS DOCKED and not A GOOD GAME.

"You know...the thing that you quoted which you based your comment on....."

And then you replying with some tangent rant about editorial credibility, vague reviews, reviews not having some type of consistency...you're the first one to go off the rails.

Now Rainslacker why is it that you only consider the double standards for the low scoring articles. Why are you questioning these journalists and not the ones giving out high scores? Exactly how detailed is detailed enough for you as to why a critic didn't like the game especially when critics who gave this game a great score are even more vague as to why they liked it? Why aren't you in those high scoring articles asking those questions?

Do you have an answer for that, or are you going to come back and once again ask me why RDR2, Witcher 3 and Zelda gets a free pass?

@Ziggurcat
You're both are creating a unique fallacy by taking just a small portion of the quote to focus on and pretending that's the only issue this reviewer had.

The quote explains with examples in detail (even though Rainslacker conveniently doesn't see it) that Day's Gone rips all the familiar trappings from BETTER GAMES, there's nothing unique, nothing new, nothing to set it apart, there's NO IDENTITY of it's own because better games BEFORE Days Gone did it first and better.

rainslacker1870d ago

See....it wasn't so hard to just answer the question was it. If you had done that from the start, which despite your insistence, you didn't actually do, instead of trying to make me look bad, tempers wouldn't get flared, and you wouldn't end up looking like you desperately needed to win an argument which really didn't need to even become heated, because I wasn't even attacking your original comment or you with my original statement, but rather, the nature of current game reviews. You're the one that tried to make it into a console war thing with the hyperbolic, "If it was getting good reviews, no one would be complaining" thing, to which I can say that if this wasn't a Sony game, you wouldn't give two craps either way. But lets move on.

What you're saying, and what you're supporting, is that if the game is good in other areas, it's OK to ignore the problems, but if the game is "bad", then it's OK to make the extra point how bad it is by deducting more points? I, or we, as a player can take the overall experience and judge a game in such a manner, but reviewers should have a better editorial standard for the sake of their readers.

In other words, the review system is all jacked up and inconsistent. Hence, my original reply to you, and hence why many other games could be swapped out for the authors quote, and be just as relevant, because the trappings are a completely different aspect of the subjective part about if someone thinks the game is bad or not. A bad game is subjective, but the trappings of open world games can be measured using objective observation. People thought RDR2 was boring or bland. Some thought BOTW was boring or bland. So, wouldn't their criticisms be just as valid if those open worlds had the same trappings? To some they were. To me, not so much, because the trappings aren't what really concern me about open world games, and I don't downrate games because of it. But, when it comes to reviewers, it is important, because again....consistency.

And that's my point....a reviewer shouldn't put more weight on things in different games based on different aspects of what they're reviewing.

For example, A game with simple yet repetitive mechanics shouldn't be downrated for it's simplicity just because it's repetitive, while a game with simple, yet more varied mechanics doesn't get downrated for it's simple mechanics as well. You either like or dislike an aspect that you're reviewing, and judge it the same way, or you don't.

If the reviewer wants to judge the overall game and take it into consideration, then that's fine, but that's not what's happening here, or at least not in general, because I don't know what this particular reviewer usually feels about such things.

I'm not going into who gets a free pass or doesn't. It's not the point of my comment. I'm only stipulating that reviews weight things differently for different games, and to take off more for one game because they think it's bad, just to add extra weight to their score, is a bad way to review. It's inconsistent, and makes it so people can go around using these reviews for their idiotic fan boy wars, and makes the reviewer look more biased, than respectful. It's a problem that infects much of the review system, and it's not a problem contained to one console preference, as it can be evidenced by games from any console maker, or from any publisher.

gangsta_red1869d ago

Again, saying a lot without saying anything at all.

I asked you some simple questions and yet you choose to retread your previous statement with added fluff.

Again, why is it that you aren't asking for the good reviews for more details?

Where was your concern for double standards when reviews give a Sony exclusive a perfect score and not other games of the same genre?

I'm not trying to make you look bad, you're doing that job all on your own.

You claim I wouldn't be in these articles if this wasn't a Sony exclusive but the irony is you wouldn't either. In fact you never claim any type of journalist integrity unless it's a bad review for a Sony game.

Let's all remember The Order, where you were also on this holy crusade to prove to everyone that journalists were inconsistent, until the next month when they were giving great review scores for Bloodbourne that is.

The fact is if it's a bad game that does nothing but takes elements from other games but does nothing different than it's going to shine those "trappings" a lot brighter. Something this review and my replies have been telling you over and over again, but as usual you refuse to listen because of your own personal grudge and inability to accept the fact that a Sony game can be mediocre or bad.

No one is asking this game to reinvent the wheel, another statement I have read from you in other articles. What game this gen has? And yet you use that as just another excuse as to why this game is getting poor scores. Your complete refusal to just accept that this is just a mediocre or average game. Why this revelation fails you when we have had many of the same type of games this gen is what's hilarious, you going to bat for these Sony only specific games and then trying to call me out, as if I haven't also called other games that were bad or mediocre.

Instead you want to ask one of the stupidest question I read in a while, "why is it okay for a good game to have something but a bad game can't".
You're already confirming this is a bad game and then asking why can't a bad game be good...seriously. I really don't have time to explain that simple concept something any gamer should just instinctively have.

And this is coming from someone who has repeatedly wanted to convince me they're in the industry but doesn't know the difference between a good game and a bad game. All the while trying to compare this game to RDR, Zelda and HZD but never playing this particular game to even make that comparison fair.

This is a triple A game that didn't meet the standards of other good games. It didn't need to reinvent the wheel, it didn't need to be something completely different, no game this gen has and yet we still have had some gems, this isn't one of them.

No need to suddenly delve into the psyche of the journalist to figure out why, especially when you have been celebrating these same journalists when they conform to your views, bias and standards in the past.

rainslacker1869d ago

I think you just want to argue for arguments sake. As always, you twist around what I say, to try and change what I said, to try and make me look foolish. I wasn't even talking about this game specifically in my original comment, but you have to try and make it into more than it ever was meant to be.

There is no discussion with you, because I did answer your questions, you just ignored the answers, or changed the subject. I'll be 100% honest with you. I didn't even notice it was you I was responding to with your original post. If I had, I wouldn't have bothered, because it's been a couple years since you tried to have reasonable discussions about anything that involved exclusivity. Only reason I followed up is in the slim hope you might once again show you could be reasonable, but you've gone full fan boy more and more with each passing day.

But, if it makes you feel better, you're right, I'm wrong. Everything you said is so obviously 100% accurate, I'm a fool, I have nothing but bias, and all I'm doing is trying to defend this game.

Hope that makes you feel better. Oh, and since you haven't played the game yet, since you say you're going to gamefly it, I assume you already know if it's a good game or not, and aren't just applying your bias allowing all these bad reviews to reaffirm your predisposition to sh*t all over Sony's games.

Enjoy the rest of your weekend.

1869d ago
rainslacker1868d ago

@pork

Thanks for trying to have a conversation.

I'll get one thing out of the way though. The confusion isn't because my argument is fundamentally unsound, it's because Gangsta willingly acts like he's confused by the question, or outright considers it irrelevant in order to make a bigger case out of something, in a consistent effort to try and disregard whatever argument I may make. He's been doing this for a while now. First he'll ignore the question, then when I push on it, he acts confused by it, then he changes the subject, then he acts like i'm the one trying to ignore his argument when he hasn't taken the 2nd step to address what I ask, then it just devolves into personal attacks. That's why I try not to have these conversations with him, and eventually just tell him he's right, because he's not actually interested in any conclusion that may be against his own bias....which is predominately against Sony.

Anyhow, moving on.

What you talk about with Deck13 games is precisely what I'm talking about. Things that are used to knock one game, aren't even addressed in another, or the weight of such things are not as important. I do indeed understand the nature of overall experience playing a part, but in many cases with the current reviews, I see a lot of nit picking which isn't warranted based on the more level reviews, which in this case, call the game average. I also see many things which are said about this game which can easily be applied to any other game in the same genre. I listed a few, and while some of those do indeed make up for some of their deficiencies to make it not as much a problem, others don't. In the case of the Day's Gone negative reviews though, I'm seeing a lot of generalizing and hyperbole to make the point that the game is generic, often citing broad problems in other areas. Specific bugs can be mentioned, but there isn't a lot of elaboration on the other things which apparently bring the game down.

And this is a prevalent issue among many reviews, across many genres, and isn't even something contained to exclusives. Which is why my original comment wasn't about that, but rather the broader topic at hand.

If my original question wasn't clear, then I could have maybe elaborated. But I did that in follow up comments, which eventually became more bickering between me and Gangsta. Even when I did elaborate though, it didn't go anywhere. If the confusion was still there after that, it's either Gangsta being intentionly moronic to avoid having to answer, or he really isn't that bright. I know he isn't an idiot, so I'm going to go with the former. But, as I said, history doesn't support that he was trying to have a conversation, since he couldn't even recognize that I did answer his questions.:)

As far as if Day's Gone is improving anything, I ask why it has to? Should a game be downrated because it doesn't improve? Can't it just implement such things in a good way, and have a solid base to work off of? I detail a bit the difference between a good/bad game, and the differences to that in terms of what an average/below average game is in another thread if you care to get what I'm going at. Should be near the top of my comment history depending on when you read this reply.

+ Show (10) more repliesLast reply 1868d ago
1871d ago Replies(1)
1871d ago
+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 1868d ago
2pacalypsenow1872d ago

Days gone - Boring been here done thayt 6/10
Read Dead redemption 2 - Boring been there done that 10/10

1872d ago Replies(3)
DrumBeat1872d ago

I love your binary thinking.

AngelicIceDiamond1871d ago

RDR2 elevated the open world genre. Just like I hope Cyberpunk will. I personally would probably like Days Gone because I dont play many zombie games and probably have fun with it. Seems like the industry is tired of the Zombie hoard and the genre has been stale or had its ups and downs since L4D days.

Traecy1871d ago (Edited 1871d ago )

Agreed. RDR2 was completely boring to me to the point I couldn't get past chapter 3 that I ended the game & traded it in.Days Gone looks like a blast of fun,picking up my copy tomorrow.

ClayRules20121871d ago

I always find it interesting when I hear someone say they couldn’t get past chapter 3 or they couldn’t make it to chapter 3. I’m genuinely not hating on you. It’s okay that you didn’t like RDR2.

I have no issue with that. Sorry you didn’t enjoy it. But I was talking with my boss at work today about Red Dead and how we both loved the game, but we were shocked many didn’t like it or get past certain points of the game (chapter 3) and I had said I loved the realistic approach Rockstar went with (while not perfect, and I understand some criticism many had, which didn’t bother me, I get it tho) but in the end, I wonder what some people were expecting from the game, because I thought Rockstar was clear on the realistic approach they were going for with the game.

In terms of Days Gone, I can’t comment yet, but I’m really excited for it will, regardless of reviews. I never expected this to be to the level of U4, HZD, GOW etc... but I believe it’ll be very enjoyable and fun.

King_Noctis1871d ago

You are seriously comparing Days Gone to RDR2?

goldwyncq1871d ago

It's like comparing Suicide Squad to Endgame. Some of these people are just completely out of touch with reality.

2pacalypsenow1871d ago (Edited 1871d ago )

What reality? They’re both just video games.

One got average reviews because it does what every other game already does. While the other got praised for it.

And funny you mention endgame, another series that just keeps recycling the same thing and gets criticial a claim for it.

uth111871d ago

The Old West is more interesting as a setting because it's not as overdone as zombie apocalypse games.

goldwyncq1871d ago

Another chump who's only played the first chapter it seems.

1871d ago
+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 1871d ago
PhoenixUp1872d ago

Don’t call it a zombie apocalypse or you’ll upset some people

Lighter91872d ago

Aimless and boring... Like your review and your website.

RangerWalk2671871d ago

Unfortunately, his opinion is matching that of other reviews. I pre-ordered the deluxe edition. So I'm all in.

ClayRules20121871d ago (Edited 1871d ago )

Don’t let the reviews get to you. I find some reviewers do well & our informative “NOT ALL” but yea. And while I haven’t played the game, I’m still very excited to play Days Gone tomorrow. Everyone’s gonna have an opinion, and that’s totally fine. I do think some had their expectations a bit too high (hoping it was gonna be Uncharted 4,HZD, GOW level) But i know some also didn’t expect much either upon the original revealand it just didn’t deliver for them. It happens. I have friends for example who think The Last of Us is not very good (story & gameplay wise) I need better friends lol, only kidding. But that’s okay. Where’s that is the finest & best game I’ve ever played.

Also, Some are really enjoying the game while others aren’t (same with RDR2 here on N4G) with all the talk about how boring, slow, too realistic, and clunky that game is said to be. Which I didn’t have those issues with the game, I loved the game overall. But it does have issues that hurt the overall experience for me.

Either way, if your planning on getting the game, I hope you really have a really good time playing it.

DrumBeat1871d ago

See, I have some friends who feel the same way about The Last of Us; a game I cherish like members of my immediate family. Still, I'm able to see from their point of view, understand, and ultimately accept and appreciate their arguments, even though I personally think it's an unmitigated masterpiece.

Some of them said they found the simple area-to-area navigation boring; i.e. pushing pallets and dumpsters. Ok, I get it.

Why then, can't the people of this website appreciate my arguments about the emptiness of Spider-Man, or the limited types of side-missions, etc. Why are people so ready to cast aside objectivity and label me a troll for holding a different opinion?

You seem like a decent dude, so I'm asking you instead of someone else.

Storm Shadow NF1871d ago

Here we go again just like The Order another great game that people said sucked. LMAO. Days Gone is easily 8/10. I would say it’s a lot better than far cry 4 for sure. Sick of negativity and these journalists who don’t play the game. I’ve played for 40 hours and I can say it’s great. These same journalists give Zelda BOTW, an almost 10, and that has a lifeless world. Pick the game game up for yourself and then make an opinion. Opinions are like as@@holes and everybody seems to have a negative one. 🤣

ClayRules20121871d ago

I agree, The Order is a great game (which certainly has many faults that hurt the experience for me, here’s hoping for a sequel tho to fix what was broken and make something special) but I still very very much enjoyed the game & loved the story.

In terms of Days Gone, I’m glad to hear your enjoying he game. Very glad to hear that. I never did like the Far Cry games myself (not a fan of first person view) but I have played them, so I can make a fair comment on them lol.

I still am amazed that Zelda BOTW got all the praise it did. I didn’t like the game, and one of my friends who loves Zelda and was excited for the game didn’t enjoy it, and we both agreed that had it not been a new Zelda game, we didn’t think it would’ve gotten all 10/10’s and praise of being revolutionary etc... but I am genuinely happy Zelda fans very much enjoyed the game, regardless of my opinions on it.

I personally am looking forward to Days Gone, and am anxious to hear what gamers on here think of it when the game releases. Very excited for it. I do enjoy some reviewers out there, while others I don’t trust. But either way, everyone can share their opinions.

ClayRules20121871d ago

Lol, oh Crimson. I don’t know about you.

uth111871d ago

I defended The Order, but I can't defend this

ClayRules20121871d ago

Have you played Days Gone yet?

Show all comments (71)
510°

Days Gone Director Says Bend's Project Costs Over $250M; Says PS Co-CEO Doesn't Want 2 Zombies Games

Days Gone director claims Sony has already poured in at least a $250M in Bend's project; says Days Gone sold more than Death Stranding.

shinoff21839d ago

Well that sucks. Seems they want more online trash. I'd rather of had the sequel if it was single player

MrNinosan8d ago

What online trash games did PS Studios release last 10 years?

Notellin8d ago

The past has nothing to do with the future. This is such a terrible argument. Everyone knows about their current live service push.

_SilverHawk_8d ago

It's so tragic what happened to days gone. It is such an amazing game but bandwagoners trashed it and it underperformed in it's launch year. Days gone is the best open world zombie game released in the past five years. I was recently playing it on pc and I'm still amazed by it.

Games are very expensive to make and it seems like it's normal for a AAA game to cost over a quarter billion to make so if a quality game like days gone greatly underperforms then people shouldn't be upset when they see a lot of GAAS. I still remember a lot of bandwagoners calling days gone trash but years later it's now amazing when it's considered a failure by sony.

If a game isn't the best thing seen since hats with pockets then a lot of gamers who haven't played it automatically calls it rubbish and whoever made it should be incarcerated

Cacabunga8d ago (Edited 8d ago )

Co CEO prefers gamers to boycott.. so be it. I’ll never buy a gaas.
Just imagine buying a game you cannot replay in some years.. this shit must stop.

Days Gone did zombies in a very original way. The story was also so engaging. You actually only meet Zombie hordes later in the game. There are many more enemy groups to deal with.

MrNinosan8d ago

@Notelin
I am one of the few who bought Days Gone on release day and loved it completely.
However, "more online trash" is phrased like Sony has put out alot of trash online games.
We got what, 2 games? Helldivers 2 and GT7, 2 of the most sold Playstation games where both is loved by millions.

You, me and especially shinoff has no idea if Fairgames, Marathon and Concord will be trash.

Just because we (as in you and me) don't love or support online games, doesn't mean millions of other do.

And we don't know what Bend Studio is working with? We don't know if they're forced to make a online game or another amazing single player experience.

The only thing we do know is that it's not Days Gone, sadly due to poor sales the first 6 months.

shinoff21838d ago (Edited 8d ago )

More online trash wasmt meant how insee it comes across. I should've worded it different I was meaning the focus they currently have on it.

Anything online is online trash to me. How long did naughty dog spend on that dumba last of us multiplayer, how about Concord, or even the other couple we hear about. I fk with Sony because rpgs and their 1st party single player games. Been like that for years. I hate seeing them waste time, money, and talent on trash. I understand bot every game is gonna be for me but this focus they've seem to had on multiplayer is extremely disheartening. Even at the state of play the only things I was really feeling were Astrobot and silent hill 2 and I'm content with that, not everything is for me. It's just the online focus I hate. Ms bought up 3 to 4 wrpgs developers, Sony just ignores rpgs 1st party wise.

And a days gone 2 would've been much better then whatever online sht bend is working on. I do know sometimes I get very idk emotional. I do need to work on toning that down a bit lol

SimpleDad7d ago

Ammm let's see... That All-stars, Foamstars, Babilon 5 wass gaas...
Concord... can wait to play that...Marathon uuuu... Last of them gaas... U
Horizon Zero dawn has a project that leaked as a Fortnite lookalike.

They bought Destiny that is a dead gaas...people love ti.

Helldivers 2 was luck.

Jimbo was all in and pushed Sony single player games 5 years behind.

Spiderman gaas was cancelled... I mean every 1st party studio was doing gaas.

Bend had to pitch a gaas game... Open world coop something

I can't remember more... Of that crap.

tay87017d ago

@simpledad. Destiny 2 isn't a dead game. Its the number 5 most played game on steam. I dont play it, but alot of people do.

MrNinosan7d ago

@SimpleDad
You failed to mention a single PS Studios game that has been released last 10 years.
Either your reading skills are crap or you think Sony own every studio in the world.

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 7d ago
just_looken7d ago

I rolled my eyes at concord not only was it just yet another cookie cutter hero shooter but that qucik look for the hero select.

Already has a free section then paid section along with a they/them she/her dei crap top right.

Nothing like a day off of work to fire up concord to read about the new characters sexual identity and or preference then a paywall do you want o buy this character shit like no i just want to shoot my gun have fun.

-Foxtrot9d ago

It would be a shame if it was true that Hermen never gave the franchise a chance simply because he didn't like it and they already had a "Zombie" game with TLOU.

NaughtyDog are most likely moving onto a new IP next so it would have been the perfect time to do it.

ThinkThink8d ago

Here's where xbox steps in and releases state of decay 3 day and date on ps5.

shinoff21838d ago

I mean it's not out of the realm of possibility at this point.

Grilla8d ago

Days gone 2 was canceled before Herman was in charge. That happened like 4 years ago.

vfl5238d ago

4 years ago he was head of Playstation Studios. He would've probably had a hand in the cancelation.

Notellin8d ago

Man two seconds of research could have saved you from this comment. Amazing work Grilla you fit in with the uniformed N4G community who speaks before verifying anything that they say.

Redemption-648d ago

Maybe encourage people to buy the game at full price and not when it's heavily discounted or go on plus. If this game had sold well when it was full priced a sequel would have been in the works. They made a single-player game that most people didn't support until they dropped the price.

Cacabunga8d ago

The guy’s just a moron.. he should have stayed within game development. His choices will have a terrible impact on the brand in the long run.

tay87017d ago (Edited 7d ago )

Dude is pretty pathetic. Sounds like a guy who's girl left him for someone better. Always talking about days gone sequel that never was, even though he is no longer at bend and hasnt been for a while. I for one am not upset about the lack of a sequel. It is one of the worst 1st party games in recent memory. Completely jank, played like an xbox game. The only redeeming quality was the hordes.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 7d ago
excaliburps8d ago

Yep. Kind of weird since it wasn't a sales flop, no?

I know we have to take what Ross says with a grain of salt since we're hearing just one side of the story, but even so, the game wasn't bad at all. Heck, it's my brother's favorite last-gen game from what I recall.

The amount of zombies on screen, imagine that with the PS5 and SSD? That would be insanely fun!

Grilla8d ago

Most copies were sold on sale. Not enough ppl bought it at full price. I paid 20$ for it 6 -7 months after release.

Notellin8d ago (Edited 8d ago )

Yeah we should never believe the creators side until we hear the corporate/big business side as history has shown we should always believe billion dollar corporations.

What a bootlicker statement.

derek8d ago

@Notellin, of course you'll believe an embittered ex-employee with an axe to grind because it's evil Sony he's complaining about. You guys act like days gone was this huge success and somehow Sony hates easy money a sequel would have generated. The game was mid and so was the response to it. They're still supporting the developer who is making a new ip that could be great.

shinoff21838d ago

Days gone was fantastic. I bought day one but didn't get around to it for months. When I finally did I was pissed at myself for waiting so long lol

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 8d ago
P_Bomb8d ago

Well I don’t want 10 live service games, but they have no problem doing that lol. Ugh.

CrimsonWing698d ago (Edited 8d ago )

Oh great so we only get what the big wigs want… y’know, the people that really have their fingers on the pulse of what their consumers want. Faaaaantastic!

rippermcrip8d ago

Well consider they know the sales... they do know what the consumer wants.

It sold shit.

-Foxtrot8d ago (Edited 8d ago )

But if it’s true what this guy says it sold better than Death Stranding

Yet that got a sequel and Kojima aside out of them both DS didn’t really NEED a sequel compared to Days Gone which ended on such a cliff hanger twist.

Show all comments (75)
130°

Days Gone – Five Years Later

How does Bend Studio's underrated open-world survival title hold up after all these years, especially following its updates?

Read Full Story >>
gamingbolt.com
GhostScholar15d ago

One of my favorite games of all time. Hate that ain’t didn’t allow a sequel.

Cacabunga15d ago

This MUST have a sequel..
Enough said

GhostScholar15d ago

Sony didn’t green light a sequel and I hate it.

Psychonaut8515d ago

Yeah the director is still bitching about it 5 years later. Lol. It does suck though. Definitely plenty of room to do more with the IP.

got_dam15d ago

I'm with you on that. I lived in the bend area for a long time and it was nice to see that part of the country in a game. As noah Gervais said (in his negative review that I don't agree with mostly) "day gone is more oregon than far cry 5 was Montana, and far cry 5 was pretty damn Montana."

YourMommySpoils14d ago

I really enjoyed it too. Kept me coming back for more and the platinum.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 14d ago
SimpleSlave15d ago

The Motorcycle was actually fun and the idea and effects of the Hordes was actually great. Sadly, the zombies in the horde have no health bar so they drop like flies, even if you hit them like once or twice on the knee. Also, no Head Shot Only Mode in another Zombie game.

In the end, it was a very generic game, with terrible mission design and cookie cutter everything. And with terrible writing and terrible written characters, the whole thing was just an Asylum level bad. This was just Sons of Anarchy at home with Zombies but somehow worst.

But again, the motorcycle was fun though...

Tacoboto14d ago

Best motorcycle gameplay of last gen!

The writing though really was the worst. Deacon was one-note and overly bitter, everyone else was a trope. You could cut off the first 30-40 hours of the game and then it would actually be a great game.

GhostScholar14d ago

I couldn’t disagree more about the writing. I thought deacon, his wife, and his friend were all great. It’s one of my favorite open worlds ever to explore too. I had no interest in the game at launch but my friend loved it and kept urging me to play it and once I started I couldn’t put it down. One of my favorite platinums.

shinoff218315d ago

I really enjoyed it. Shame it never got a sequel. Unless that sequel was online focused.

Phantom6815d ago

Fixed long time ago. Shame there i no sequel

Psychonaut8515d ago

Need to play this again with the 60FPS update. Haven’t gone back to it since I beat it at launch. Definitely underrated, just sucks that people bounced off of it because the first several hours are a little bit of a slog. It’s worth it though.

GhostScholar14d ago

They bounced off of it because all anyone cares about is the last of us. It’s better in every way to the last of us for me personally. I enjoyed the first last of us game, but the second one was atrocious

Show all comments (16)
200°

Days Gone, 5 Years Later

Almost unbelievably, Days Gone has just turned 5 years old after launching on April 26th, 2019. What's changed in that time?

Read Full Story >>
culturedvultures.com
mkis00743d ago

Such a good game to me. Crazy how different peoples opinions can get.

Crows9043d ago (Edited 43d ago )

For me it wasn't that surprising. There was some bad press before. There's also the matter and element of a person's disposition when trying out a certain game. Sometimes you're just not really into the type of game that you're playing so you put it down because you don't like it. Not necessarily because it's a bad game but because you're just not up for something like this. Reviewers have a tough because no matter what they feel like playing they've got to play what's releasing.

I have many times gone back to games that I put down only to thoroughly enjoy them the second time around because either there wasn't another exciting game coming out around the same time or I just had no other games to play and haven't played that type of game in a while. I'm not the type of person that can just play a souls game through all this iterations one after the other without getting burnt out on the formula.

In my opinion this game was great from the start. Some bugs here and there but nothing worse than the most AAA releases during the same time after and before. All I did was wait one week and I had a phenomenal time with the game. No other zombie survival game comes close to how I thoroughly enjoyed this one

Cacabunga43d ago (Edited 43d ago )

game is outstanding. I was addicted to it until I got that platinum to pop.

i understand some people who find it thin in terms of content in comparison to RDR2 which released 1 year before it but DG has very fresh good ideas.

it has been my favorite PS4 game......until I played RDR2.
PS have one more gem in their crazy catalogue of exclusives...

-Foxtrot43d ago (Edited 43d ago )

Yeah I thought it was pretty decent, it had its flaws but for their first big console single player open world game it's a solid 8/10.

I have never seen an AAA "zombie" game feature as many enemies as the horde sections did, you really had to think about your surroundings and plan carefully.

I feel journalists had an issue with this game from the moment it was announced, they really didn't like the Biker characters and the overall Biker gang theme. If they were anything else I feel it would have had a better chance or at least they'd overlook some of the flaws like they do for certain other open world games. They don't mind waiting weeks or months for a patch knowing its coming but a game that has it Day 1 it's suddenly a big no no? Yeah this was one of those moments that showed you how they cherry pick who to suddenly decide to go harsh on when they want to.

mkis00743d ago

Ill never forget the reviewer who tried to claim the "ride me like you ride your bike" line was anything but a joke...they (sarah and deacon) explicitly call it a joke and the reviewer still misinformed the reader about it as if it was a literal thing.

Michiel198943d ago

the score on metacritic is 71 from journos, its 9 points lower than your review so stop making stuff up. They didn't hate it from the start, they on average just liked it slightly less than you.

-Foxtrot43d ago (Edited 43d ago )

@Michiel1989

I'm not making anything up, they held a grudge against it and made stuff up themselves like mkis007 has just pointed out. That 71 on Metacritic is why it didn't get a sequel.

Anyway how can I make anything up when I didn't even mention metacritic in my original post?

Michiel198943d ago

@fox it was maybe 2 outlets that made a stupid woke statement, not every journo. Not even close.
I think the director himself crying about that the game should have gotten better reviews might have had something to do with not getting a sequel. That was just a pathetic display on his part.

anast43d ago

Most reviewers are a certain type of person that won't allow them to explore those types of themes.

PhillyDonJawn43d ago (Edited 43d ago )

Nah the game is 7. The only good thing you even said about it was the horde/enemy count. If that's the only positive it's not an 8 lol

Crows9043d ago

As you can see...some are so blind because of fanboyism that they honestly can't see the writing on the wall. It wasn't just 1 or 2 reviewers...it was a lot of them. Some more direct than others ..just like with stellar blade.

They all coordinate with each other...especially evident seeing as they start submitting the same type of article over the exact same issues within 20 minutes of each other or nearly the same time..that's not a coincidence.

We all know it happened...some are just oblivious so feel free to ignore them.

BISHOP-BRASIL43d ago

Why are we pretending there's some huge difference between a 7 and a 8, don't both of them mean "above average/good"? On a 5 star system they would both be 4 stars, no? Heck, I simply put games on either of 3 cateorgies, it's either bad (don't play), good (play once if you can), great (make the effort to play and keep it), it's enough for me to make a logical decision or to recomend a game to someone or not... I'd say Days Gone was something between good and great but closer to good, so 7 sound fair to me anyway.

At the end of the day the reviews, be it journalists or users, on average or a punctual review, decimal or star based or whatever measuring stick we get... Reviews simply weren't the reason the game didn't get a sequel, it's performance on the market was. Reviews could say it was dogshit or the second coming, it wouldn't make a difference, or at the very least they are not the deciding factor, the game selling under Sony's expectations was the real issue... Heck, I'm sure the studio's issues and the lead director running his mouth figured way higher on the list of reasons for not making a sequel than any review ever was.

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 43d ago
Babadook743d ago (Edited 43d ago )

I concur. It’s main problem of frame rate slowdown is gone with a ps5.

Leeroyw43d ago

Second act of that game far surpassed the first. Which is why people felt it didn't live up to the hype of the trailers. Personally I loved it. But it was a slog to get your bike and weapons up to skill.

Pyrofire9543d ago

I hear it's big enough that it could have just been 2 games. Maybe that would have worked out better, with some changes to make it fit that mold better. Idk, I haven't played it much.

mkis00743d ago (Edited 43d ago )

Just the first section was a slog...but I never found it boring if that can make sense. You don't have much of an arsenal until after about 6 hours if memory serves. Some more half-step bike upgrades and a few more weapons could have filled the gaps.

Inverno43d ago

Was gonna post a brick wall of text but I'll keep it short. Pardon my French but f**k the media for the hate they gave this game. If you have a PC to play it on you can get it as low as 10 bucks, and if you have a PS then it's a no brainer. Totally worth a play.

phatak43d ago (Edited 43d ago )

I don't even comment here often but had to for this game, I still stand by my opinion that this was one of the top 10 games of the ps4 generation, I preferred days gone over god of war, horizon and last of us 2, the launch version was definitely piss poor and that messed up the reviews for this game, honestly some games deserve a re-review or post patch review as the metacritic score stays forever but the reality is its not even the same game anymore, the ps5 patch is amazing and the pc version which I play on nowadays is one of the best looking games ever, complete shame that we wont get a sequel, god of war got one, horizon got one, last of us got one, spider man got one,ghosts of tshushima about to get one but this game wont get one, sucks to be honest.

Ps3/360 era had some hidden underated games for me it was shadows of the damned, alice madness returns that deserved more sales and a sequel/ higher scores, and similarly for the ps4 era it was days gone, and dying light 1 that deserved much more love, dying light atleast got a sequel, everyone needs to play this game once and judge for themselves, for me its officially the most underrated game of the ps4 era, go play it if you haven't.

andy8543d ago

Awesome game. Just bought it for my laptop last week

Show all comments (46)