Star News Review – Death Stranding

"Inventory management, encumbrance limits, ridiculous story, fetch quests galore, and never-ending cutscenes. The absolute inverse of everything I want in a game." ~ Star News

[NecrumOddBoy]

So it all makes sense now. The Canadians are the ones taking dumps on this game. 🤔

[BlackDoomAx]

Because life in Canada is already quiet and boring, they don't need this also in a videogame.

[Chaosdreams]

Hey now. We've got. Stuff.

[BlackDoomAx]

Just in case, I love Canada :)

[Neonridr]

sorry about that there eh

[AK91]

HAHAHAHAHA

[SyntheticForm]

I already know there are going to be things about this game I don't like, but I'm hoping the good outweighs the bad and I experience a great story.

I've got it pre-ordered so I'm ready.

[BizarroUltraman]

I liked this comment.

[TheGoodestBoi]

I've got your traffic to your site right here 🖕

[antarius]

The review seems legit. People are allowed to hate something. Still haven’t heard apologies from the Kojima cult followers who berated everyone that said this looks like a walking simulator. Guess what? It is !

[monkey602]

People are allowed to hate things! I for one can absolutely see why this game doesn't appeal to everyone.
However! People are also entitled to enjoy things and Death Stranding is still reviewing extremely well and there are many people still really looking forward to playing it. Myself included. Just because it wasn't suited to the minority of reviewers should the rest of us have to keep listening to others berate the game and call it a flop or failure ? Nope

Kojima fans owe no apology. They're going to sit down this weekend and enjoy a game that is still considered a fantastic experience regardless of how headstrong a few bad eggs want to get over a select number of bad scores and choice quotes

[Tross]

It's also a prime example of everything wrong with modern review scores. Most sites adhere to a standard where anything below a 5 is considered mechanically broken, but there are a select few where the criteria is a little different. It is true that arbitrary numbers assigned to subjective opinions and the arithmetic mean they contribute to are taken way too seriously though.

Besides, even if this were a walking simulator (and there are clearly more game mechanics here than in a true walking simulator), that's not actually an insult to the game. Walking simulators clearly have a cult following or they wouldn't be made. Calling something such simply denotes the kind of experience observed and not any kind of objective measure of quality or value.

Someone who likes apples can review a pear, but simply calling it a pear doesn't help anyone. The quality of a pear vs other pears might be what someone who likes pears is wanting to know, and someone saying it's not like an apple so it's not worth trying is kind of pointless as of course it's not like an apple since it isn't one. It may be pertinent to note that a pear is not like an apple and those looking for an apple should look elsewhere since not everyone may be aware of what kind of fruit it is, but that does not and should not factor into the rating a pear receives as none of that is any indication of how it shapes up to other pears.

My metaphor may be a bit outlandish as we do not live in a society where someone would take the time to write paragraphs about a piece of fruit, and videogames are also more complex than that, but the principle is similar. One problem that exists in this industry is that people who aren't into a particular type of game are often forced to review it, and that seems to very much be the case here. It's good that someone is employed and getting a paycheck, but it's not helpful in the least when someone who isn't in the right mindset to give a proper critique does so anyways, and it's certainly more like work than any actual fun for the reviewer so it's pretty much a lose-lose on both ends.

[generic-user-name]

A walking simulator where you drive vehicles in an open world, with stealth, combat and asynchronous online play?
I guess every game is a walking sim by your logic.

[rainslacker]

I'd probably classify it as an adventure game over a walking simulator. There is game play besides just walking around.

So, no need to apologize to you, or anyone else

[SolidGamerX]

"People are allowed to hate something"

I'll have to remember that one.

[SwampthingsSon]

Not on this site they’re not allowed to hate anything Sony of you get the Beyhive equivalent of Sony fanboys.

[MetalGearAlex]

Im on Kojima's side here, but bias aside... you are saying this is worse than Fallout 76 or Mass Effect Andromeda. Clearly CLICKBAIT! Dont add to their site traffic ad revenue!

[gamertk421]

It very well could be, tho

[Edgelordsupreme]

From what I can tell they didn't review either of those games, why are you so defensive?

[DaDrunkenJester]

At least Fallout 76 and Andromeda have gameplay...

I kid I kid

[TK-66]

Well, if we judge the content of multiple reviews we see a common trend describing the game getting boring, but the story kept them playing. If someone buys games for gameplay, then this one could genuinely be worse than ME:A and Fallout 76.

So while you're joking its possible that could actually be the case.

[Chronicle780]

Ok "MetalGearAlex"

Never played Fallout 76, but Mass Effect Andromeda - while it did have a slew of glitches when it launched - also has mission and gameplay variety and a story that makes sense.

[UnHoly_One]

Mass Effect Andromeda was a decent game.

Fallout 76 wasn't my cup of tea, but still is far more appealing to me than a game that is mostly about walking without falling over.

I hope those of you excited for it really enjoy it, but my god, it looks to me like the biggest AAA mess of a game I've seen in a long damn time.

[Harryvok]

I love the world of Mass Effect and played Andromeda from beginning to end. I would score it about 7.5 based on the level of enjoyment i got from it. I got through about 6 hours of Metal Gear Solid V and deleted it because i found it so incredibly boring (and i really enjoyed MSG 1, 2 and 4). I would give MGS 5 about 4/10 from what i played of it. All about what you're into i guess.

Having read the reviews, i have no interest in walking through a snow storm for 45 minutes in Death Stranding.

[MetalGearAlex]

I am amazed... by all the responses i got. Just meant to point out that kojima rarely has the level of unpolish and lack of storytelling that either 76 or ME:A had. I played MA:E
It was fun. I played MGSV. I enjoyed it. Tomorrow is in your hands... (finally). Just let sleeping dogs lie... and give the game a try... for yourself! Lots of people want kojima to fail, but more already are happy to try.

[Ratchet75]

Inventory management is the RPG side of things in today's gaming?it's in GOW, Horizon, Assassin's creed,days gone...etc.
Fetch quest are in 99% of open world games.
Long cutscenes and crazy stories are incremental part of every hideo kojima's games.
Makes me wonder what kind of reviewer works at starnews.ca
Lol

[Ausbo]

When he says inventory management, he’s talking about managing much you can put on your back and using the balance mechanics. So no, GOW, horizon and assassins creed aren’t like that

[Ratchet75]

Ok my bad.
But what about the other points i have made????
Don't you think that someone that review games should have some kind of knowledge about the previous work the game director has made ans based on that shouldn't he be the last person to review an hideo kojima game if you don't like long cutscenes or crazy stories???
If i was reviewing a miyamoto game and criticized it to be to colorfull or to cartoony most people would ask me where have i been these last 30 years or so.

[Nacho_Z]

Inventory management can be very boring and frustrating depending on how much there is to carry and how strict it is. I believe it's pretty strict in DS.

Fetch quests might be in every RPG but they're widely known to be by far the weakest and most tedious quest type so you can see why it might be an issue to some.

[Kribwalker]

especially when it feels like the entire game is a giant fetch quest

[SolidGamerX]

@Kribwalker

"especially when it feels like the entire game is a giant fetch quest"

"Based off reviews and what i’ve seen in trailers i know this games not for me"

So if its not for you and you clearly haven't played it how do you know what the entire game feels like?

[Chronicle780]

Read the review? Those are ancillary things in those games - they're the main mechanics here. In a 45ish hour game, there's maybe 4 hours of 'actiony' things. It's a total reversal of normal games balance.

[Edgelordsupreme]

By crazy stories do you mean surface level basic philosophy and being overly on the nose?

[Nikijih]

Inventory management and fetch quests are in most games. But they are not the core system of those games, they are a side-mechanics, complementing a more exciting gameplay. Here, they ARE the gameplay. Inventory management and fetch quests are not IN death stranding, they ARE death stranding. And since those are two of the most often-cited negative points about games, being considered by most to be the most tedious parts of a RPG, you can see how the entire game revolving around them might turn some people off.

Same with cutscenes. Lots of people dont like them, but even those who do... there is a difference between having a few cutscenes and having so many cutscenes that the ending is compared to a 2 hours movie. People play games to play, not to watch TV.

[TheProfessional]

The inventory and base management were the WORST aspects of MGS 5, I can't believe he brought those elements back and made them the focus of the game. Ugh, yeah he's a genius all right.

[DaDrunkenJester]

Well when you have a ton of review sites giving MGSV perfect scores even though it was far from it... did you really think he would learn from its actual shortcomings?

[FernDiggidy]

:)

[bluefox755]

After watching some videos that clearly explain the details of the gameplay, I'm sold. It looks so fun and interesting. It seems game journalism has become increasingly out of touch with the common gamer, either that or they're just lying to generate rage click traffic. Not sure which is more charitable.

[Chronicle780]

Or people like things you don't and don't like things you do? I mean....could be?

[rainslacker]

Sure...but some are really latching onto the negative things while ignoring the good things that are also being said.

At least the op based their opinion on their own frame of reference about what they may like, instead of making a blanket statement about the game being good or bad because they read it somewhere.

That's how everyone should treat reviews. Content of the review means more than the score, and the reviewer is responsible for presenting that information in an objective way

[DaDrunkenJester]

The common gamer typically doesn't want 75% fetch quests and walking sim...

[Tross]

Then why do games that fit either description sell, let alone get nominated for GotYs? There are clearly people who are into those kinds of experiences or, well...devs wouldn't make them. A game studio is a business at the end of the day and if something doesn't sell, it doesn't make money. That many of these types of games exist and continue to be made is a testament that they do in fact have a market.

[rainslacker]

Most games with quests are 75% fetch quests. Even the good ones. They may have story built around the fetch, but by far, the quest structure of games involve being told to go somewhere and do something.

What's important is if doing that stuff has more to it than just checking off some progress boxes, or picking up an item

[SolidGamerX]

Who made you the voice of the common gamer?

[DaDrunkenJester]

@Solid

By the Common Gamer Organization of America. I have a plaque.

[Nikijih]

I don't understand the comments calling this review a sham. And I definitly don't understand all the 10/10 reviews. It sounds like people are reviewing Kojima rather than the game itself!

This is a game that takes the most tedious parts of any RPG, the parts that generally make it into the CON section of any review, and makes them the core of the experience. Dislike fetching quests in most game? Well you MUST love them here, cause its Kojima! Dislike cluncky inventory management? Well you MUST love them here, cause its Kojima! Dislike stories with plot holes? Well you MUST love them here, cause its Kojima!

But why? Why have we spent the last 4-5 years using ''walking simulator'' as a pejorative descriptive for the most boring and tedious games only to now pretend an ACTUAL walking simulator is the achievement of the century? I don't get it. Are we all living in upside-down world?

[DaDrunkenJester]

Well, you explained it like three times already: "Well you MUST love it, cause its Kojima!"

[Nikijih]

Serious question to those who downvote my post: can you explain to me what it is I said that you have a problem with and why? I genuinely want to understand, because right now I am baffled.

[Christopher]

***But why? Why have we spent the last 4-5 years using ''walking simulator'' as a pejorative descriptive for the most boring and tedious games only to now pretend an ACTUAL walking simulator is the achievement of the century? ***

While I have no interest in Death Stranding and don't care about its scores, let me address this part specifically.

I. Walking Simulators are seen as a pejorative

Yes and no.

For people to lazily criticize any game that might revolve around what they consider "lesser" mechanics than FPS or RPGs, it's utilized a pejorative. By the logic what people are calling a walking simulator, many stealth games are also just walking simulators. That's a gross simplification of what is there to ignore the mechanics in the game that go beyond just walking.

But, as far as pejorative claims, that's kind of debunked by acclaimed games of the genre with way less mechanics applied to them but heavily loved by people on all platforms. Gone Home, Dear Esther, The Vanishing of Ethan Carter, Firewatch, The Stanley Parable, SOMA, Myst, etc. All labeled as such and many of them having way fewer actual real-time mechanics related to gameplay and mostly just puzzle fetch quests if anything else.

So, the pejorative use is by those who use it with a goal of discrediting a game but in reality people like "walking simulators" and they have won many awards.

II. Most Boring and Tedious Gameplay

You fall into the same role as mentioned above by people who use walking simulator as a pejorative by labeling the game as boring and tedious. That's a massively subjective connotation that can be affected by many factors.

Red Dead Redemption 2 has some great gameplay, but people find it to be boring and tedious. I myself included in that as I feel the "realism" elements drag down a game as well as try to throw too much at me so that accomplishing goals oftentimes feel like a chore as I'm bombarded with things that delay or distract. Many reviewers specify this part of the game but still rated it very highly regardless of that.

Breath of the Wild has some great gameplay and exploration, but people find it to be boring and tedious.

Racing and spots games are boring and tedious to me. I just don't get it. That's just my opinion. Others get a ton of enjoyment out of them for one reason or another.

So, citing a game as boring and tedious doesn't mean it's a bad game or that this is a general consensus of the game. It's just a subjective element the individual makes. But citing it as a fact of sorts and as a foundation of your argument as to why people would praise this game?

It's not different than any other game where some like it and some don't.

I don't agree with scores on a ton of games. I don't get it. I talk to people sometimes about it. But, it is what it is. Me complaining that people have different opinions on games isn't going to change how those people think about games. Nor does it mean I jump on the bandwagon and start claiming they're bad reviewers or bad gamers. I disagree with a ton of reviews, that's just life. Same way I don't play a ton of games that tens of millions of others do and enjoy.

[Nikijih]

First off thank you for the well thought out response. You make great points. That being said, I disagree to an extent with you

1) Walking simulator
All the games you mentionned have one thing in common: they are not, have never been, and never will be about walking.

People who use ''walking simulator'' pejoratively are not lazy, they simply don't like that type of gameplay. Even the titles you brought up are more about puzzles, investigations or survival, the walking being only a mean to an end.

Stealth games, for exemple, are about avoiding traps and NPCs in order to accomplish objectives, and more often than not they involve primary goals such as taking down enemies or finding hidden secrets. Again, the walking is a mean to an end.

This is even more pronounced in Death Stranding as it was marketed as an action game, with Kojima himself coining the phrase "Action/Strand Genre". Action RPG players expect the game to revolve around the action, be it fighting or using dialogues to get out of hard situations. Once again, the walking is a mean to an end.

This is why the term has become used widely as pejorative: it is something that tends to intrude on the main focus of the game. Its not that walking is bad, but when too much of it starts to distract from the objectives you are given, it becomes something that is widely disliked by gamers. That is specifically why fetch quests have almost always been considered as bad content: you arnt actually playing the game, you just move your character from one spot to another.

The closest thing to it is actually games like Trucking Simulator, and these are VERY niche games.

If anything, I find your over-simplification to be the lazy argument: "well if you have to walk in a game its a walking simulator''. It is a lot more complex than that. I guess you could say it like this: the problem isnt walking in games, its walking FOR THE SAKE OF WALKING. This essentially describes Death Stranding.

2) I did not label a game as boring and tedious, I said that those mechanics are generally considered the most boring and tedious parts of a given game by the vast majority of gamers and critics alike. Again, to go back to my previous point, they are seen in most titles as a form of mico-management mechanics complementing the base game. You dont play the game to mess with inventory, you play the game to survive/fight/solve puzzles/discover lore/etc.

I am talking about the closest thing to a general concensus you will find in video game journalism. These secondary systems can make or break a game, but are not by far the most exciting aspects of these titles. No one is excited about borderlands because of the inventory management system, no one plays Diablo because they enjoy bag tetris, etc.

This is where I feel you misunderstood me. I am not comparing different games based on subjective like/dislike ratios. Im comparing different elements within a single game and coming to the realisation that there is, indeed, an objective standard of what players enjoy most about a given game and what they enjoy the least. When these align over and over through hundreds of titles across many years in a given genre, you have yourself a pattern as close to objective as can be.

[Christopher]

***All the games you mentionned have one thing in common: they are not, have never been, and never will be about walking.***

Search for walking simulator in Google and it will tell you otherwise. These games are precisely walking simulators in that the focus is on walking from point to point and exploring a story along the way.

***People who use ''walking simulator'' pejoratively are not lazy, they simply don't like that type of gameplay.***

I agree that not all people who use it are lazy, I 100% disagree that they simply don't like that type of gameplay. As I mentioned, tons of people greatly enjoy games like Firewatch, but then complain about Death Stranding. My response to you was in your use of it as a pejorative, whereas people who call it a walking simulator and don't like them oftentimes aren't using it as a pejorative but a descriptor of the type of game they do not like. But, you will absolutely see people claim games as "movies" or "walking simulators" for the act of belittling what is in the game and not just that they don't like those games.

***Stealth games, for exemple, are about avoiding traps and NPCs in order to accomplish objectives***

Death Stranding has stealth gameplay in it, btw. The point of it to be avoid whatever those things are that will otherwise kill you.

But, what do you call the game then?

***This is even more pronounced in Death Stranding as it was marketed as an action game, with Kojima himself coining the phrase "Action/Strand Genre".***

He coined a new genre entirely and admitted that IIRC. There is some action in the game as far as gameplay I've seen, especially boss fights. But I have no clue as to their level of action-ness or the like. But, there is some there.

***This is why the term has become used widely as pejorative: it is something that tends to intrude on the main focus of the game.***

Death Stranding is one of those games that doesn't really have a focus, though. It's got elements of survival, elements of stealth, elements of action, and a shit ton of storytelling.

I feel like you might have wanted the game to be something else other than what it is with that statement?

***The closest thing to it is actually games like Trucking Simulator, and these are VERY niche games.***

And that's wrong how? Not that I agree with you assessment at all. But what is wrong with this game being like a trucking simulator game in the first place?

***If anything, I find your over-simplification to be the lazy argument***

Ah. Okay. So you really didn't want a discussion or to have your mind opened to other thoughts you brought up. You've made your mind up and my argument is lazy even though I provided evidence of other games that are absolutely within the "walking simulator" genre and explain how people use terminology pejoratively on purpose (especially knowing how people like to 'debate' on N4G).

I see you asked for more but really didn't want to accept more.

[Christopher]

***I said that those mechanics are generally considered the most boring and tedious parts of a given game by the vast majority of gamers and critics alike. ***

"This is a game that takes the most tedious parts of any RPG, the parts that generally make it into the CON section of any review, and makes them the core of the experience."

"Why have we spent the last 4-5 years using ''walking simulator'' as a pejorative descriptive for the most boring and tedious games only to now pretend an ACTUAL walking simulator is the achievement of the century?"

No, you called it tedious and boring. Trying to argue intent is an annoying game you can play with others when it's clear as day.

The game can't encompass the most tedious elements at its core and not be that itself.

Furthermore, why would you bring reference to the walking simulator as a pejorative and specify its relationship if not to compare that directly to the game immediately after it. Are you otherwise saying that a walking simulator cannot be an achievement in gaming or a well reviewed game? If you had no intent to compare it to being "boring and tedious" then you would not have mentioned it at all. You absolutely were drawing that comparison to the game, therefore calling it as such by your argument surrounding it.

---

I'll be done for now on this. I thought this would be a discussion, but clearly it will just be talking to a wall that doesn't realize they are doing exactly what they are complaining about themselves.

[MasterCornholio]

@Nik

"This is not about the game HAVING walking, its about the game BEING ABOUT walking."

I've seen plenty of reviews and read some of them to boot. This game isn't about walking. You obviously missed the point that it's a lot more complex than just walking from point A to Point B. I played games like that in the past and from the looks of this game is anything but that.

[MasterCornholio]

The game itself isn't really a walking simulator. Everybody's Gone to Rapture is alot closer to that than this game is.

I get it that people have a right to not like the game but don't call it what it isn't.

[Nikijih]

Can you actually explain that one to me? The entire point of the game is to walk from point A to point B. There is no other objective, other than ''avoid X to keep walking''. Your gear is designed to enhance your walking. The customization options are geared towards maximizing your walking. The mechanics revolve around balancing while walking. How in the blazes is this anything BUT a walking simulator? What would you call it if not that?

Don't take me wrong, i WANTED to love the game. I've been on the hype train hardcore since the first teaser. I've watched every piece of promotional material and every video review i could get my hands on, and im really bummed the frack out. This is one of the most anti-climactic release I have ever seen, and that leaves me completely baffled as to the fawning im seeing everywhere. Its one thing to say ''hey dont bash it it, some people may like it'', its quite another to call this a 10/10 masterpiece no?

[MasterCornholio]

@Nik

"The entire point of the game is to walk from point A to point B."

Almost any game can be called a walking simulator if you choose to only look at that part of it. However there's a lot more to it than just walking from point A to Point B.

"Its one thing to say ''hey dont bash it it, some people may like it'', its quite another to call this a 10/10 masterpiece no?"

Yet you bash it by calling it a walking simulator. It certainly may not be a 10/10 but it isn't a game where you run to a outhouse in the middle of a forest to take a dump in it.

[Nikijih]

@Christopher

Now you are just playing dumb, this is just semantics. You are the one getting hung on misunderstanding my intent. Listen to what I am saying:

I said particular mechanics are more tedious than others. In any given cathegory, be it puzzles, stealth, RPG, FPS, there are some games that are considered more boring and tedious than others by critical concensus, and if you take 100 reviews for those games, you will find references to these mechanics in almost all of them.
Walking that goes over the line of utility and becomes walking for the sake of walking is such a mechanics, that is why fetch and escort quests are universally disliked. Having to manage a lot of inventory is similarly considered a flaw in most games, hence the enormous push for inventory streamlining in modern AAA titles.

Yes, that means that as the first game to be built from the ground up around those mechanics in specifics, Death Stranding looks seriously tedious. Yes, I am saying *this* game looks boring and tedious. That is the very point I am making. Don't play dense, its unbecoming.

As for your other answer, I again disagree strongly. This is the first game where walking is the objective and not the means. You mention stealth element, but ask yourself: what is the goal of the stealth element? Is it to take out a target? To gather information? Or is it to keep walking? Answer: to keep walking. This is where this title becomes the first real walking simulator. Walking IS the goal of everything you do. This is the point of the game, not a feature of it. And none of these other titles come close to it.

Its not a bad thing per say, by the way. If its a niche product that some people enjoy, i have nothing against it. But when you then call any bad review a sham and give it 10/10 and call it a revolutionary masterpiece... im sorry, but that is just wrong on every level. This is where I take offense at the level of dishonest fawning on display. This is not a 10/10 game because it has exciting original gameplay that will appeal to the masses, its 10/10 because its Kojima, and that's the problem I have with these comments.

By the way, you might want to stop playing the offending virgins. You are the one who used the word lazy first in connection with someone else's opinion, so you might want to keep your sensibilities in check lest you be called a hypocrite.

@MasterCornholio
See my above response: this is the first game to make walking its objective as opposed to its mean. No, not every game can be called a walking simulator. This is not about the game HAVING walking, its about the game BEING ABOUT walking.

[rainslacker]

Because the term walking simulator is being inappropriately applied to this game perhaps?

The rest of the stuff may be tedious, but most of the naysayers seem to only focus on the negativity they want to see, and not the positivity that the vast majority if reviews say exist in the game as well

[Nikijih]

@rainslacker
In most games you walk somewhere to go do something.
In walking simulators, you do something so you can walk somewhere.

[rainslacker]

Sounds like your only distinction is a chicken and egg argument.

Either way, there is stuff to do besides just doing something to walk somewhere. I guess all the people saying there are fetch quests are saying that you aren't walking somewhere to go do something then?

I'm confused, because it seems that no one can really define what a walking simulator is, and the people trying to are ignoring the stuff there is to do besides walking places. Like the game play involved while walking.

[Nikijih]

It is easy to define. I already have. You seem indeed confused, but not because its some mystical definition no one can quite grasp, but because you so badly want to the label not to apply here that you are going through mental gymnastics to dismiss the argument.

Yes, its a chicken and egg argument. You have a core gameplay, and then you have complementing elements. A game is defined mostly by its core gameplay, with the secondary elements being what either supports the core gameplay or hinders it.

For exemple:
In a traditional RPG the core gameplay is questing and fighting monsters, secondary complement is the loot system and the world traversing system.
In a FPS the core gameplay is shooting people, a secondary complement would be gun customization.
In a stealth game, the gameplay will often revolve around accomplishing objectives without being detected, with things like tool selection being secondary systems.

And this is where the distinction lies. Think of a game as a form of quest. Yes, you walk a lot in other games too, but the walking is secondary, a means to get from a place to another, but not the object of the quest. The goal you are trying to attain is not reaching a particular destination, its what you have to do once you have reached it.

In death stranding, the core gameplay is getting from one place to the other to deliver packages. Thats the main gameplay towards which everything else is geared.

Supporting complementary systems like the tool system or the vehicles are in support of this core gameplay: they make going from one place to the other easier. There is no racing gameplay, no vehicular slaughter like carmaggedon or heavy emphasis on tools like Space Engineer. They are there to help you get to where you are going, nothing more.

In this scenario, BTs and Mules are also secondary gameplay element, as they are not an objective but simply obstacles to hinder the core gameplay, which is walking from one place to the other. You dont have quests to take out mule camps or find and kill their leaders, and you arnt interacting with BTs in any way other than to avoid them. They are there to make going to where you are going more challenging, and nothing more.

This is the line I draw. What is your core gameplay? This defines your game. As based on that line in the sand, Death Stranding is the first true walking simulator.

[rainslacker]

I think it's easy to define, and it seems you have to ignore a lot of game play aspects that have been reported about this game to be able to classify it as a walking sim. I don't consider myself confused about it, just pointing out that it's being classified as a walking sim inappropriately.

[Daniel2183]

Even if this game is a complete turd it will sell millions . I’m buying a physical copy so I can trade in! Which I’m guessing I will be next week .

[Chronicle780]

GameStop may regret putting Death Stranding in their 'Guaranteed to Love It' program.

[Tross]

Well, that's this author's opinion. It sounds like this is a game for people who want a focus on story and world-building over action-filled gameplay. Those looking for the former will likely get it in spades while those looking for the latter will likely not get what they bargained for. By the sounds of things this game is very much worth checking out but with the warning that it's clearly not for everyone.

[Chronicle780]

I don't mind world-building, but not when it's in cutscene after cutscene. If you want to make a movie, just go make movies.

[Ristul]

So please explain how games should be made, so that every developer out there can follow your preference of what is good. That way, every game can follow this template. Can't wait for all games to be the same.

* Rule number one, no cutscenes or focus on that aspect of storytelling, this is a medium that is not movies.

[lio_convoy]

This goes with what I was saying... Different strokes for different folks. Some are fans of action, others RPG, and others strategy or fighting games. I'm sure the score is a legitimate one, not everyone will like the same thing. Take the good with the bad and decide if the game's right for you. The 10/10 scores are just as controversial. How can it be perfect? There's a middle ground somewhere out there and it's up to us, ourselves, to see where we fall on that scale of 0/10 to 10/10. Reviews are just opinion pieces we need to treat as guidelines

[Smclaren1985]

People giving low score have an agenda wtf!!?? What possible agenda could a low score have ?! If you look at some of the high scores on meta critic there’s something seriously suspicious Going on there “the game is boring and repetitive 9 out of ten” That’s just one quote there is loads more we’re the review says the exact opposite of the score It’s like to avoid back lash look at the hastle ign got for there score there usually getting accused of giving deliberate high scores now it’s low there an agenda?! If u want a good honest review watch skill up on YouTube the game is simply one of those games were you love it or hate it it’s clearly the case some reviewers just don’t like it simple no agenda

[NotSoMad]

Why do people care about a site that barely does reviews that no one has really heard of?

[Chronicle780]

Because it doesn't agree with their ideas about how good a game they haven't played is.

[Ristul]

Its mostly xbox fans ignoring the good reviews and latching on to the few low scores. You should go with your own preferences of what you like and make up your own mind.

[oakshin]

"never-ending cutscenes" well yea like do you not know anything about the people that made this game having movies in the middle of gameplay is like water being wet you should of told your publisher you dont like cutscenes before you reviewed it and if you didn't know before hand why are you even reviewing games

[Chronicle780]

Great idea, you should only have people who like [X] game review [X] game so there will never be bad scores again.

There's a huge difference between having cutscenes and having movies in your game. A cutscene that's long enough you can run to the store and be back before you get to play again isn't normal.

[jimbost79]

I think that's a great idea.

If I reviewed a strategy game in which I have no interest then I would give it a low score simply because I have zero interest in that genre of game.

Now if you gave me, just for example, a racing game then I would compare it to other racing games, and rate it accordingly.
Fair?
And all this walking sim nonsense. It isn't a "walking sim". Games like dear esther, Edith finch, rapture etc are walking sims. If I bought this thinking it was one I'd be very disappointed. Aren't walking sims all 1st person?

I personally can't wait to play it. I understand why people will be put off by it, it's not to everyone's taste and that's OK. But to criticize a game for what it's not, is fucking madness

[Chronicle780]

That's kind of the point...if a game isn't for you and you don't like it, why would you give it a good score?

The whole point of reviewing is to let people know what you think, not what they'll think. If your tastes align with theirs, something they can see by looking at other games you've reviewed that they've played, then they can trust your opinion on this game. If they like games you don't, they'll probably go read reviews by someone who has the same taste.

[mkis007]

But to review a game in a genre you have no interest in playing otherwise, will leave readers with an incomplete picture of the game. Racing games are boring AF to me. The highest rated racing game is a 6 out of 10 to me. How am I supposed to know how to rate a great racing game vs an average one if I have no interest in them in my normal everyday life.

Objectivity doesn't work if you are inexperienced in the subject matter.

[oakshin]

Someone's never played metal gear solid lol it is normal I promise I find it hard to believe someone that likes gameing enough to to this kind of thing doesn't know what they are getting Into with this game complaining about cutscenes in this game is literally like complaining about guns in a shooter

[mastershredder]

Not everyone is okay with forcing themselves to like the game. It's okay not to like it.

[D__RAiL]

if you say its like Dark souls in some form that is not a negative thing to me because the souls series is in my top 5 series ever.

[SolidGamerX]

We here at starnews would love it if you just clickety click clicked that button.

[Chronicle780]

GiantBomb just gave it the exact same score, more or less the same reasoning. Must be clickbait, huh?

[oakshin]

Again how can you love video games and not know who hideo kojima is and what he's about he's the king of cutscenes

[SolidGamerX]

Must be but its probably the only reviews you believe while ignoring the 64 positive reviews which includes 15 perfect scores. Giantbum is just another click bait shallow review with the intention of lowering the overall metascore nothing more. Click revenue must be low over at Giantturd.

[Realms]

Reviews don't matter anymore specially from no name sites, the industry would greatly benefit from removing any numeric metric to reviews. I rarely listen to any reviewer if a game interest me I stay away from the internet to avoid spoilers. Once upon a time reviewers were needed since it was the only way to get information/context to a game but those days are long gone now and a simple search can yield you just about anything you would want to know about any game.
Anyone can be a reviewer these days even if you are not qualified, rarely play games or even care for them. My point is that given the state of how we receive information there is no curation to information that can be found online so you can say anything and you will find people that either agree or disagree with your opinion because that's all a review is.

[frostypants]

Encumbrance limits? In a game largely about transporting? HOW DARE THEY!!! /S

[Chronicle780]

There's hoverboards and magic internet...why is a dude carrying all this crap? Why doesn't he have access to a truck or at least an exoskeleton at the start? Oh right...gotta 'suffer' first.

[jjb1981]

I'm just intrigued by the story. I hope the gameplay doesn't suck but I'm willing to take the chance for this game.

[AK91]

Starnews eh? There ego is in their name

[zodiac909]

Rule of thumb, if your site is IN DESPERATE NEED of traffic and clicks, give a "Good/Great Game" a atrocious score, that's sure to bring attention.

[Artemidorus]

Really is best to watch someone play and judge for yourself.

[SixEye]

Finally real reviews about the game.