-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
LittleBigPlanet 3 reviews
- Thread starter Loudninja
- Start date
I haven't found a "Download all" button, but it is easier that it was on PS3. Instead of going through the download list, you can open up the list of packs inside the game and download from there. At least, that's how it's supposed to work. It has been a flaky experience for me so far. Only a very small portion of my DLC is available to me so far.
9.2 from Gametrailers....daaaamn
http://www.gametrailers.com/reviews/rgxow7/littlebigplanet-3-review
http://www.gametrailers.com/reviews/rgxow7/littlebigplanet-3-review
Shadow_FFVI
Member
The score is great, but the praise it receives in the review are even better. Always held Gametrailers reviews in a bit higher regard than most sites, since they are very in depht and well made.
VideoGamer 8/10
http://www.videogamer.com/reviews/littlebigplanet_3_review.html
Canadian Online Gamers 8/10
http://canadianonlinegamers.com/review/little-big-planet-3-review/
http://www.videogamer.com/reviews/littlebigplanet_3_review.html
Canadian Online Gamers 8/10
http://canadianonlinegamers.com/review/little-big-planet-3-review/
Some really high praise.
Acquiescence
Member
Just out of curiosity, are CVG not recognised as a Metacritic publication anymore? I've noticed that their reviews don't seem to be included in the review listings as of late.
John Bender
Banned
CVG and PSNation = nope
Acquiescence
Member
But as far as I know, PSNation were never on Metacritic. CVG on the other hand used to have their reviews posted on Metacritic, and they're still included in the publications list here. So what the hell happened?
Rogue_Ledr
Banned
These low ass scores look friggin ridiculous now that the consensus clearly has high praise for the game.
BrokenIcarus
Member
Edge and their 9 review aren't on there either. Oo
Another flaw of Metacritic - missing publications. Just another reason why you shouldn't judge a game based on its Metacritic score - but unfortunately many will.
Besides, congrats to Sony + Sumo for the great reviews!
9.2/10 from GT
9/10 from CVG
9/10 from Edge
4.5/5 from Joystiq
4.5/5 from CCC.
Besides, congrats to Sony + Sumo for the great reviews!
9.2/10 from GT
9/10 from CVG
9/10 from Edge
4.5/5 from Joystiq
4.5/5 from CCC.
1) Somebody(meaning the same person) scoring one game an 8 and another a 7 means *they* felt the game with the 8 was the better game. They cant objectively say which is better, obviously.
2) Sometimes a site uses more than one reviewer. Again, since objectivity is impossible, all anybody can do is score a game what *they* thought it was.
3) Standards and biases change over time. Between two releases of a franchise, another game might have come in and stepped things up and raised that person's standards of how good that sort of game could be. Or maybe a game shows little change from the past and the old 'franchise fatigue' has set in a bit for somebody.
You're basically asking for reviews to all be these objective, static scoring systems that are mathematically chosen purely for the sake of providing an analytical buyer's guide for others. And that isn't possible. And so judging reviews or reviewers based on these expectations is not reasonable.
travisbickle
Member
Edge keeping it real.
You've nicely summarised why the use of scores for reviews - in any medium - are inherently silly even if popular for the masses.
Using objective numbers - 7,8,9 - to try and summarise an subjective review is just silly, particularly as people do use them to compare as of course the numbers lend themselves to that.
In reality they might as well simply use single word summaries as numbers.
As you can tell I cordially dislike use of numbers as a "score" for subjective reviews.
DrDamn
Member
Can you clarify if you are talking about online or local co-op here, because you start with online and finish with local co-op. Thanks.
I've always struggled with the concept of review scores. I'm very glad I'm not a reviewer. For example, how are you meant to display a huge gulf in quality between something which is still very good and something which is actually great?
Let's say Uncharted 2. When that game came out, it was universally acclaimed, and for good reason, it was such a leap in that 'cinematic action' thing, so it was plastered in 9s/10s, and those seem well earned, but then how do you distinguish TLoU which I think makes UC2 seem pretty much crap? If you've given UC2 a 9, the best you can give TLoU is a 10, indicating to some an incremental improvement in quality.
It's the same with film, any scale which uses the best films at 10, and the worst a 0, and equally distributes quality estimations is going to put any big Hollywood release nearer the bottom of the score range at best I imagine.
Let's say Uncharted 2. When that game came out, it was universally acclaimed, and for good reason, it was such a leap in that 'cinematic action' thing, so it was plastered in 9s/10s, and those seem well earned, but then how do you distinguish TLoU which I think makes UC2 seem pretty much crap? If you've given UC2 a 9, the best you can give TLoU is a 10, indicating to some an incremental improvement in quality.
It's the same with film, any scale which uses the best films at 10, and the worst a 0, and equally distributes quality estimations is going to put any big Hollywood release nearer the bottom of the score range at best I imagine.
John Bender
Banned
Yeah, that's weird.
I will talk with them again.
Will keep you updated.
They haven't received the latest Edge issue yet.
(EDGE won't publish their reviews online anymore. Magazine-only now.)
So it will take some time until it's covered by Metacritic.
Dr_LucienSanchez
Banned
I still think that the Eurogamer review is particularly funny. 'Now let me start this review out by saying that I've never liked LBP games' is an interesting way to approach a review for the fifth game in a series.
I think I've read you saying something similar before, but you seem a bit preoccupied with this idea that 'numbers = objective', when that's not the case at all. They are another completely subjective component of a review in this situation. There is nothing about numbers that says they have to be 'objective'.
CVG and Edge might take it up 80 on MetaCritic.
But I'm sure we'll still see people talk about it getting "disappointing" reviews like I've seen with Infamous SS.
I'm saying majority of people take numbers as being objective not that they have to be - although technically I'd say if they're not you're not using them right, as in review scores. And it's the fact they are treated as objective rating is the issue given they're arbitrary.
I'll have to look around, pretty sure I remember some film reviewers grumbling sensibly about having to give a "score" and finding the idea ludicrous.
Review scores *cannot* be objective. It is not possible. That doesn't make them useless, it just means you are misunderstanding what they are and what they mean.
They are simply the subjective overall representation of how good they thought a game was on a scale of whatever to whatever(however one defines their scale).
Absolutely agree - R1 is completely overused. And it isn't like there aren't any spare buttons on the controller
Couldn't you just set up 3 guest accounts that friends can sign in as if they don't have their own accounts?
Its still hilarious to compare that ISS thread with SSO thread. They have pretty much the same MC but reactions are a bit different.
Sorry, I mean playing local co-op on online levels.
That's what I plan on doing. Still a hassle, but I'll deal with it.
Rain City Gamer
Member
They will conveniently change the score after Black Friday. Need to keep the negative reviews up through then to persuade fence sitters to buy Xbone instead.
This only ever becomes an issue when you come across a game that is simply better than you could have imagined any game to be. So, not that often. But fair enough, it might happen, so what does that mean? Well it means that your standards have been raised. I suppose you'd then ask, "Well does that mean a game you previous gave an 8 to is suddenly no longer an 8?" And the answer would be a 'yes', basically. But only if you were to re-evaluate a game. The only thing you can ever do is rate a game based on how you feel *at that time*.
You might say that makes the whole system messy and in a way it does, but I've said before that people shouldn't take reviews so damn seriously. Some people seem to want and expect reviews to be something they aren't and *cannot* be. People trying to poke holes in reviews by saying, "Oh well they scored this game this and this other game that, so they cant be taken seriously" are treating reviews as if they are based off some perfect metric analysis whereby all games can be categorized neatly and objectively based on quality.
What usually happens after this is that people then claim 'so reviews are meaningless'. Basically, because they cant all fit into some perfectly objective system, then they serve no function whatsoever. Which I find ridiculous. Yes, it does mean that reviews shouldn't be considered the end all be all of how one should view a game obviously, but that doesn't mean they have no utility or value at all. I like reviews because the people writing them are *usually* better able to express in words what they think of something than your average 'user review' can. I appreciate that kind of thing.
Do people really think like this?
IndoAssassin
Banned
I believe Greg and Collin said that they were going to be much harsher on their PS4 game reviews than everyone else, from one of their podcasts around PS4 launch or was it the announcement?
They do criticize Sony and its studios almost every podcast. Sometimes they go overboard with it. So all these low scores are not surprising.
Made me want to go pick it up. I was already planning on doing so, but GAF impressions + this makes me want to pick it up.
Hendrick's
If only my penis was as big as my GamerScore!
Quick question for someone not too familiar with the series. How kid friendly is it? And by that I don't mean content-wise, but rather can an 8 year old grasp the controls and reasonably play through at least some of the levels?
Pankratous
Member
8 year olds are more than capable of playing any game so I don't see why not.
Well, can't blame people for being wary...
There's been a "feeling" lately of a general anti - Sony/ PS4 vibe, both on Forums and the media.
Evolution didn't help with the botched release of Driveclub, or Sony itself with the hiccups in the 2.0 patch, but it goes far beyond that.
Case in point, Driveclub was torn to shreds (mostly deserved when relating to online performances) but not even for its actual problems, but for "Lack of Soul". Thing is, Driveclub was almost the story of a predicted failure all year long, as it seemed that most media outlets had already writen it down as a failed "corridor" racer ... cf Giant Bomb.
OTOH IGN had a month long coverage of MCC. The whole frickin' month of October was all Halo, all the time (or so it felt).
Other exemple, Shareplay should have been celebrated, but as soon as a hiccup showed up (not even Sony's fault, it -had- to have a clause for Publishers to opt out), many apparently started to report it as a failed experiment.
Eurogamer's Digital Foundry has had a very interesting way of reporting, particularly lately. Halo's problems were mostly brushed over, while they really reported a LOT it seemed on the AC:U "parity". For GTA V, same, they seem to want absolutely to have both versions to be mostly the same "overall".
One of the most damning comparison was COD: AW. There's no two way around it, read the text, in between lines, and the PS4 version is clearly vastly better.
But read sumaries/ conclusions? Not that big of a difference according to them.
Still about Eurogamer: Where is the PES 2015 comparison? Far Cry 4 is a comparison PS4 / PC, no mention of the XB1. No mention of the Dragon Age: Inquisition tech stuff either.
Instead of that, and while they missed the lack of vegetation detail / quality of shadows/ lighting the first time around, let's make sure to run an update that emphasizes that, in spite of the PS4 version advantages in GTA V, everyone should know that there are some intersections in town that sometime drop a little more fps on PS4 than XB1. Nevermind that at some other points in the city the XB1 drops actually more (pointing out to a lack of optimization). The unmissable sub text: Tech differences -unlike in the PS360 era- aren't that big of a deal, even if "technically" they are actually bigger.
Current week?
LBP3 was demolished in some medias (before day 1 patch) for bugs that were (mostly) solved day 1, while MCC (which is also buggy, and still is) enjoyed a far better reception before it.
6.8 from IGN?
For them BF4 was 8.5. What about Sim City (2013), borderline unplayable at release? 7.
Long story short: Can't really shake the feeling that some media outlets (it's expected from Xbox fans) would like to take Sony down a notch this Holiday.
Not putting it out as fact. It's all about the feels.
Acquiescence
Member
Easily dude. Kids generally do love the LBP series, and they're pretty forgiving games platforming wise, so an 8 year old should have little trouble progressing through the campaign..
TheRealTalker
Banned
lol at the new reviews compared to the rushed ones
they gave the game some time and low and behold
Sadly I am still sick.... got like 4 days off but it means nothing if I can't play my preordered copy
they gave the game some time and low and behold
Sadly I am still sick.... got like 4 days off but it means nothing if I can't play my preordered copy
Hendrick's
If only my penis was as big as my GamerScore!
Awesome, thanks.
Shadow_FFVI
Member
From what I have seen, 8 year olds absolutely LOVE Little Big Planet.
Patapwn
Member
I don't really know if we can assert with certainty that the game reviews are due to bias, I mean some people don't like LBP, the IGN reviewer was just shit no question but most people gave the game props. As for Driveclub, it had an air around it that was very unhelpful from a critical reception prospective...
On the MS camp, some love halo so reception makes some sense with rose tinted glasses and all that.
The DF stuff is bullshit though. That staff needs to be kicked to the curb.
Shadow_FFVI
Member
The Digital Foundry stuff does look pretty damning.
Monty Mole
Member
Disappointed at a 4-5 hour campaign considering this is a £40+ game on PS4 in the UK. I've no interest in the level building side of LBP, so this quickly becomes a decent rental for me.
You can still enjoy the levels other people make though.
There is some amazing stuff out there like people remaking Final Fantasy 7 and Gradius.
Absolutely, and you can always play coop which is always fun with your kids - like the lego games.
If you are the kind of person that will take their time exploring and trying it get all the prize bubbles etc it'll take longer than that. You'll need to revisit levels wih the different characters as areas are blocked off unless you have their abilities.
And I get quickly overwhelmed with the building part, but the Poppit Challenges sound like a good way to extend the length of the game, setting you puzzle levels to solve using create mode.
And then all the different community levels to play
There's a caveat, though.
The campaign is shorter, but it's different. In lbp2 and lbp1 you were forced to play through levels linearly like A to B to C to complete a world.
Here the game gives you several levels, like 7 and says you only need to complete 2 or 3 main ones to complete the world and move on.
So there are lots of levels, it's just that the majority are optional now, which is how I guess most people power through the campaign.
I have personally taken much longer than 4-5 hours because I've been playing the other levels and trying to collect and ace all the content.
Acquiescence
Member
All eligible for the Critics Reviews section on Metacritic, none of them included.