dugdug
Banned
This. A million times.
-
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.
Killer is Dead Reviews Thread
- Thread starter LiK
- Start date
This. A million times.
I knew the game was going to bomb. SUDA 51 games are never good outside of style; the gameplay is always crap that doesn't mean I'm not a fan. It also doesn't mean that I'm extremely hyped to play Killer is Dead. I really liked No More Heroes and that game was basically crap outside of the characters. This seems to be following that pattern.
This is what you get with a low budget. It's not necessarily bad.
This is what you get with a low budget. It's not necessarily bad.
BumblebeeCody
Member
Maybe these two fit in here:
Matt Lees essentially saying
"I didn't like that one part of the game and now that hate as suddenly spilled into other areas of the game and now I just hate the game in general". ALSO saying that review scores of 5/10 are bad when really, it means it's worth playing but nothing special. Average at best/worst. A review of 2/10 then yeah, a piece of shit. But a 5 and up...keep up with that overexaggeratted hate and misconception of how all females are in a bar, dude.
Not one of Matt Lees's finest moments.
Alright, maybe the compression of the video made it invisible?
Thanks for telling me.
I will
It's also not hypocritical to point out that if the punchline is "lol, look there's boobs" versus a game with boobs in it isn't the same thing. The reviews I've read consistently mention that the humor is juvenile, which I don't mind as it's been so in other Suda games I've enjoyed, but that it doesn't fit well thematically into the game.
Moral grandstanding about juvenile humor in a game is a bit much, but if it's not the kind of humor that the reviewer likes and/or it doesn't work well within the game then they should be able to point it out without being part of some sort of conspiracy.
It certainly sounds like there's a lot of other reasons for the scores than just the mature content, so unless GTAV also suffers from those issues as well I would imagine that you're right about it getting a higher score.
SousedLouse
Member
A valid point, but I feel like you're giving them far too much credit. I've only seen three types of critiques from the gaming enthusiast press:
- Hamfisted, sloppy critiques that misuse or blindly quote concepts that they're preaching to the masses
- Ego-stroking, 'me-too' commentary that gets churned out at the slightest hint of a possible controversy, and willfully exaggerates or falsifies details in order to make their moral outrage more righteous
- Reasonable responses that expresses genuine feelings and impressions, ones which acknowledge alternate viewpoints when they feel that there's room to disagree and condemn ideas and concepts that they feel are harmful in a straighforward way, without condescension or cheap appeals for authority via approval by patting readers or other journalists on the back every 5 lines.
And of those three, the first two are far, far more common. For every genuine expression of bemusement, discomfort or contempt that games like GTA V might cause for their disposable approach to raunchy humor, or other feelings that games like Killer Is Dead might cause because of their clumsy, even predatory hook-up minigame (I'm only entertaining this notion because I haven't played the game, and in spite of the fact that the mini-game had TWO thorough writeups that skewer Lee's most notable criticisms), you're bound to get a ton of responses that match up with the other trends. Most journalists and bloggers will either cram their responses with references to feminism and psychology that are far beyond their depth, or just quote a bunch of other articles, yell out 'for shame, [developer], for shame' and call it a day.
And since gaming journalism is such an echo chamber, you're going to get a bunch of kneejerk reactions based on friendly accounts that are numerous degrees removed from the original story. Remember DmC? Or the Skyrim debacle? Remember how journos dug their heels in when they were called out on their mistakes, their generalizations, their flat-out lies? You honestly think they have enough respect for their readers, the art form, or the concept of social awareness or responsible criticism to use a delicate touch for this sort of thing, when they've proven in the past that they're fine with using a sledgehammer on everything?
I mean, if you don't think that shitty critiques overwhelm valid ones, that's fine. I mean, it's not like one or two bad articles invalidate a writer forever; unfortunately, even journalists that I respect and appreciate have posted the first two types of critiques from time to time, and I'm not going to try and undermine anyone's future critiques based on unrelated stuff they wrote in the past. But it's a pet peeve for me when people start namedropping Husserl and Levy like they know what they're talking about, only to embarrass themselves in the process, and I'd rather not see that behavior encouraged.
Analogy = Perfect
BumblebeeCody
Member
Does anyone actually know what the term misogyny means?
Spehornoob
Member
Vice City Stories. Earned my Mack Daddy title doing that shit.
ChetRoivas
Neo Member
I played through the Xbox 360 version of KiD and screen-tearing wasn't something that I noticed very much of. There were a couple of minor instances but it was definitely nothing drastic.
My print review will be in GamesTM magazine next month but here's my two cents in video form. I really liked the game, but I found it impossible to talk about without losing my shit a little about that horrific Matt Lees video from last month. I lose my cool at the 4m mark if that's your poison
http://youtu.be/VuuWRodHq8w
My print review will be in GamesTM magazine next month but here's my two cents in video form. I really liked the game, but I found it impossible to talk about without losing my shit a little about that horrific Matt Lees video from last month. I lose my cool at the 4m mark if that's your poison
http://youtu.be/VuuWRodHq8w
Burgess_101
Member
By no means does it ruin the game but it's certainly there, I really enjoyed it too though, looking forward to my copy on Friday.
More Fun To Compute
Member
Saints Row 3 had a lot of this stuff.
And what about that hilarious mission where you could raid a boat with women being smuggled into the country in locked shipping containers literally sitting in their own shit. And when you capture them you get to put them to work for you as prostitutes.
Nothing too bad there. All in good western humour no doubt.
Bravo. Took the criticism of Matt Lees to a higher level with some thought provoking comments. I agree completely.
I think your points really apply for people who are upset about the game "promoting" bad behavior. Is it you, or is it Mondo? Are we not allowed to ever have characters participate in unsavory things?
Moral Panic
Member
Theres a reason why MC in games don't go around murdering little kids and raping women despite characters in books and films doing so constantly. The lack of agency over the movie/book character means a great deal.
However violence is glorified in culture and often seen as a means to an end or some greater goal. Violence and killing is not seen as inherently wrong or evil, we construct certain scenarios in which such things are acceptable and where they are not. Killing the "bad guys" is OK, even if you are a Nazi or a USSR soldier.
This is something critics of video games fail to discern. Even if you are given a limited sense of agency. Using that agency to make you feel a certain way, even to make you feel bad should not be a reason to use objective numeral scoring systems to wrap their subjective opinions on playing characters that don't make them feel good about themselves.
Characters that you play should be able to be jerks, "people I don't want to be", and people that do bad things. It's a unique aspect of video games that no tother medium has.
Video games do not exist to solely fulfill your fantasies and to create worlds that make you feel powerful. They can also exist to make you think, to empathize, to see flaws and actual characterization in the people you control.
As for this game, I have no idea of what their missions did. I just want to say that you being a terrible person in a game shouldn't be some taboo worthy of derision. Video Games should be more than just objects built to pleasure you and maintain your world view. Films and books can artfully portray the most vile parts of society and critics will still approach them with an open-mind an eagerness to actually try to connect with the humanity trapped somewhere within the evils of the world.
I saw this in a lot of the interpretations of The Last of Us. People reviewing games should be able to approach stories and scenarios without letting their biases and worldview paint their appreciation of something. The people judging games still only capable of picking up on story elements and things that have been pointed out to them in the past two weeks.
I have noticed that the word "trope" has been included in so many evaluations over the past few months as if this was the first time games people have been faced with gender roles and character development. Everyone seems a bit green at the moment.
I want to reiterate though that I haven't actually played this game and experienced the way Killer is Dead handled subjects that seem to be drawing the ire of critics. There are many instances portrayed in different mediums that are worthy of being called racist or misogynistic for their intent and themes of their work.
Don't make a fucking pathetic point and take my comment, which was perfectly understanable under a context, and twisted to your own stupid agenda.
Lees is not even the reviewer for this bloody game. He only specified its main selling point which deter the the fact that its an awful game.
Next time you argue, make a good point and back it up with better comments.
partyphone
Banned
I'm pretty sure that both western and eastern developed games can be sexist. It's not mutually exclusive. So I'm not sure what pointing out Rockstar's poor depiction of women accomplishes, exactly. Aside from reinforcing what all these trendy-feminists are saying about video games.
SlasherJPC
Banned
I get that people don't like the mini games and what they represent and for all intents and purposes they just simple don't need to be in this or any game really. The same can be said for the God Of War mini sex games. Shit servers no purpose. Why God of War didn't get flack for basically spewing exp orbs out like man juice when completing the minigames and showing boobs but this does. no idea. I played the import of the game about half way through and getting the US edition. I enjoyed the game.
Also the idea that GTA has somehow been immune from controversy this whole time is hilarious
I was wondering the same thing.
Sessler slammed a trophy name in Acsension which was patched out. Sex mini games are fine tho.
OniBarubary
Banned
I just don't understand. We know Suda. We know what his games are and what to expect.
Why is anyone saying the game is a 6 or 7 out of 10 and screaming "Told you so! Told you it was a bad game!!!!" Dude. We know it's going to be fairly hit or miss or mediocre. It's Suda. That's the territory. No one waiting for this was thinking it was going to be 10/10. Being a fairly standard Suda mess that most people agree on doesn't mean it's proven some point about it being misogynistic or anything. It just proves...yeah, that's about what we thought it was going to be.
Suda games don't sell well and target a niche. Not sure what's wrong with that.
Why is anyone saying the game is a 6 or 7 out of 10 and screaming "Told you so! Told you it was a bad game!!!!" Dude. We know it's going to be fairly hit or miss or mediocre. It's Suda. That's the territory. No one waiting for this was thinking it was going to be 10/10. Being a fairly standard Suda mess that most people agree on doesn't mean it's proven some point about it being misogynistic or anything. It just proves...yeah, that's about what we thought it was going to be.
Suda games don't sell well and target a niche. Not sure what's wrong with that.
Wow, talk about a shitty reaction while missing completely the point.
The only pathetic post was your first post, don't be so mad when you made a stupid post like that. Nobody is twisting your own stupid agenda.
Matt Lees was not right, because his point wasn't about how good or bad the game was. Read the Neogaf where he posted, he got schooled.
Next time you argue, make a good point and back it up with better comments instead of filling up your writing with epithets.
btw I think Suda makes shitty and boring derivative games.
Dark Octave
Banned
"That's my job you muppet"
lol Whoever that guy is, love em.
lol Whoever that guy is, love em.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3jO8LJT1NLI
I liked this video by Rev3Games about this game. Actually it convinced me to buy it.
I liked this video by Rev3Games about this game. Actually it convinced me to buy it.
LiveFromKyoto
Member
Haha, okay, that was awesome.
SousedLouse
Member
Your comment didn't deserve anything better than that, but I'll come up with another point if you want it:
That tweet from Lees either contradicts the shitty admission he made earlier about the game being passable or exemplifies how absolutely inept he is at expressing himself within 150 characters. More importantly, it undermines the common response from Lees and his supporters - that the quality of the game has nothing to do with its messages, its implications, and the fact that it's just another game to toss on the pile of inept, socially irresponsible pulp that's been produced for the last 30+ years in video games. Apparently, KiD's quality does matter - when it's shit - because it give Lees a chance to crow about some misguided attempt at 'calling it', and to posture for vindication. And he's going to get it, because his little video - inept as it is - has completely overridden the actual game.
Your post was a prime example. Your sole post that preceded mine in this thread was a snarky reference to the video. The intent of that post, and the fact that it was steeped in NeoGAF Snark™, is irrelevant - you just came by to smear that attempt at wit on the screen.
And considering that comments like yours are the bog standard for posting in any thread on this forum, I don't see why I should have to put any serious effort into anything.
No one's said that. It's immune from criticism from the gaming press. Not from being called out, but from anyone with any actual pull taking a long, hard look at what the game has to offer before slapping a 10/10 on it and calling it GOTY. It will win accolades. It will be hailed as the new standard of online multiplayer, in spite of what it actually provides. And whatever unsavory content the game has to provide will be acknowledged long, long after the game sells millions, with journos wearing a mock (or genuine, some of them are only going to play for an hour) look of surprise and saying 'oh wow, I didn't see any of this! THIS is terrible! We have failed as gamers, allowing Rockstar to do this! Someone should have pulled them aside and told them that this sort of thing was unacceptable.'. Like clockwork, RS will apologize, throw in a few cloying statements about being more sensitive in the future, and lay off that stuff after the fact - which will be a genuine improvement, something that journos will scramble to take credit for long after their role in the tale is done.
Second Circle Pad
Banned
This misogynistic bullshit is getting out of control.
Now the more game caters to women, the better rating it gets.
Now the more game caters to women, the better rating it gets.
Ravensmash
Member
Well it also seems like it got poor ratings because the reviewers thought it was shit, don't forget that part.
I wonder what would happen if a reviewer decided to treat violence in video games as a measure of the moral value of playing a game. I'm sure you could find plenty of people to read a video game review and come to the conclusion that they are for blood-hungry brutes.
Would their views be defended by critics or would they be ostracized like the Jack Thompsons of the world?
Would their views be defended by critics or would they be ostracized like the Jack Thompsons of the world?
OniBarubary
Banned
Wow. You have a really good mind for how to do reviews. The flow of how you talk is great, you just lead from point to point in a natural manner. I quite liked your review (your guy's review, I guess).
His point was there was a stupid Minigame that was borderline sexist, and that game relied solely on that point since the preview of his co-worker proved to be awful. why would I need a comment to back me again? I made my point clearly which someone twisted it to point out that reviews are to be trusted. I never talked about reviews and score line.
Read the neogaf thread and it was simply filled with childish comments like yours where people were too damn offended that their love for stupid misogynistic minigame was offended by the simple fact that this game was stupid in the first place.
For me, it's a desire to see the games he works on actually get better in terms of gameplay. I think he's got some interesting ideas and choices in style - even if all of that feels horribly forced at times - but it baffles me how consistently bad his games are in terms of being games. After so many attempts, I just can't understand why he can't make something that hits the themes he wants to hit and is super fun and polished in terms of gameplay.
That's the problem I have with his project, the seeming lack in game creation maturity I feel he has. Make a bad game once, no big deal, you're learning. By the time you're on your fifth or sixth bad game, there's something wrong with you, not me. I know some might argue it's a purposeful choice to make his games the way he does, but saying it's a choice of style can only excuse so much.
I didn't get to that in Saints Row 3, actually, so I didn't know this! Same goes for Vice City stories.
I have to see how the SR3 things was handled, because I think they did an overall good job of being self-aware with their potentially-offensive humor. Often what crosses lines is the not the content itself but the way in which it is presented. (Off-hand example of this nuance: The loud, angry black meathead stereotype. There's nothing wrong with this character inherently, but the problems arise when they are lacking in depth or any other personality traits.)
Guess I will finish Saints Row 3 and think about it. I might be outraged.
Thanks for letting me know.+1 all around. I definitely was giving game journalists way too much credit. Chalk it up to hope I guess. I'd love a link to some of the articles you find to be the most egregious examples.
Chairmanchuck
Member
But isnt Killer is dead his "second" Game in like 6 or 7 years since NMH? As far as I know besides the 3ds-Eshop Game he didnt develop any more games and was more like a posterboy for Lollipop Chainsaw and Shadows of the damned.
But at least how I see it from the Videos it is also presented in a more satirical atmosphere in Killer is Dead and doesnt take itself seriously.
Guess I will finish Saints Row 3 and think about it. I might be outraged.
It is also just a minigame where you drive around women, being the pimp and pick off customers who f*** the prostitute in your car while you drive them.
I was not referring to the tweet but to the video he made about the stupid Minigame. He did point out that this game was previewed by his co-worker and indicated it was terrible. He preceded to say that this game relied on a stupid minigame to attract consumers, who by the defended this game in that thread, to sell the game, because the game isn't any good.
yes, my comment had a snark in it, but the fact you had to stupidly accuse and twist it, doesn't make you any better than many users here, who you say are dum and idiots. Well, good to see an opinion!
You went from "It's immune from criticism from the gaming press" to "it will get so much criticism from the gaming press that Rockstar will be forced to issue a public apology".
Though yes, several people in this thread have said that Rockstar gets a free pass on it's content, an idea that's pretty divorced from reality. No game company has received more outrage over it's content than Rockstar.
Also, I guarantee that this game won't win GOTY, will be less of a watershed title than GTA4, and will score 9/10's at best.
There are actually several review outlets that score games based on their violent content. Mostly parent-oriented guides and "christian gamer" websites, but still, those views have always existed out in the open much to the chagrin of absolutely no one.
If people keep buying Grasshopper games despite that, they're never going to get better.
Thankfully, people don't seem to be buying Killer is Dead.
Impossiburu
Neo Member
I'm a few hours in, and the game is fine. The gigolo missions don't come up as often as I thought they would based on buzz. As for the gameplay? It's a stupid hack 'n slash.
I'm not offended. I'm having some fun. The style is cool.
I'm not offended. I'm having some fun. The style is cool.
OniBarubary
Banned
I'll agree with that. I'm more tolerant of stuff like that though, to be honest, which is why it's just preference with me. I will always, 100 times out of 100, take a game that does something weird or different or tries something new or has a different or weird idea behind it but the execution is kinda blargh then a game that has perfected normalcy or genericness.
You actually probably have more of a point than I thought, as I quite liked Shadows of the Damned which was pretty solid in gameplay terms. Perhaps a bit genericy and RE4-lite yes, but it was fun enough that I was okay with it while I was enjoying the character and story and world.
I will always hope his games do have better gameplay like you, but at the same time don't care if reviewers like it or tons of people buy it. I've never seen popularity as the mark of a good game, that's a bit of a fallacy. I feel at this stage, while we still hope the gameplay sort of ups itself, we know what to expect from his games.
Rogue_Ledr
Banned
OH FOR CHRISSAKES!
That scumbag Arthur Gies is involved is in this discussion now? Wonderful! I guess he is trying to restore some of his pride after being butthurt on the DRM debate.
That scumbag Arthur Gies is involved is in this discussion now? Wonderful! I guess he is trying to restore some of his pride after being butthurt on the DRM debate.
nckillthegrimace
Member
That their aim is inconsistent and only targeted at the most surface-level depictions of sexuality? Look, I don't think what they're doing is necessarily a bad thing, I just think they're really shitty at it. I mean, it's pretty easy to call out a game from a minor publisher where you leer at cartoon breasts because that's obvious, but it's much harder to articulate just exactly why certain, less apparent things from larger publishers are far more disturbing.
I have an example that I've never seen called out anywhere. It's from Assassin's Creed II, right after you get the hidden pistol. Someone's been slashing the throats of the courtesans at the brothel, so Ezio, newly-armed man about town, leaps to their rescue. The madam implores him to chase after the scoundrel so that she can see "just how talented" he is. There's no immediate concern for the slain woman or the scores of other prostitutes milling around outside, which proves to be misplaced because the mission consists of clumsily chasing after this dude who keeps taking women hostage with his knife. If you get close, he kills them, so you have to shoot him with the pistol from far away. Messing up, however, doesn't trigger a fail state. Instead, he bounces to the next woman and puts a knife to her throat. Mess up, he slices them and bounces along to the next one. I have no idea how long this goes on, but I'm sure you could string it along for a very long time. I understand why they did it like that on a mechanical level; having to restart what is ostensibly acting as a tutorial for the gun would be frustrating. That said, however, look at the message that's sending: these women are disposable, there will always be another one ready to pop up and be in peril so that you can learn how to use your new, shiny toy.
That's just a complete clusterfuck of writing, mechanics, and structure reinforcing something so wretched. It's a situation unique to video games, so I'm not surprised people missed it. There's no analog to be drawn to another medium, so those ways of thinking about things just break down. It's tougher when you can't just prattle on about seeing breasts or stomping on someone's face, which are things immediately obvious to everyone with eyeballs.
Games' writers need new tools and new perspectives to deal with the actual interactive part of games instead of spouting off film tropes and analogizing to other mediums. It's been thirty fucking years. Step the fuck up.
OniBarubary
Banned
That's not really true. Most times under-performing games are not attempted to be made better, but more generic and appealing to a larger market. Rarely have I seen a studio sell it's games poorly because they're not particularly good and then the developer "smartens up" and makes "better games" that sell better.
hit the nail on the head on all that nonsense. Good review.
More Fun To Compute
Member
I didn't get to that in Saints Row 3, actually, so I didn't know this! Same goes for Vice City stories.
I have to see how the SR3 things was handled, because I think they did an overall good job of being self-aware with their potentially-offensive humor. Often what crosses lines is the not the content itself but the way in which it is presented. (Off-hand example of this nuance: The loud, angry black meathead stereotype. There's nothing wrong with this character inherently, but the problems arise when they are lacking in depth or any other personality traits.)
Guess I will finish Saints Row 3 and think about it. I might be outraged.
I guess that the difference between Saints Row and Suda's Killer games is that volition are desperate to do anything to get you to like these characters who are constantly doing really horrible shit. While Suda makes player characters who are creepy and then plays it up and tries to make you feel like a creep for playing them.
SlasherJPC
Banned
I just don't like the moral, high horse, white knight syndrome outlets are taking & their hypocrisy. You don't like these aspects of a game, that's your right to that opinion. When I go back and look at other games with similar sexuality issues (GTA, God of War, Saints Row, etc) and see no mention or a blink of an eye at those overtones in your previous written work/review. I just can't fathom that you suddenly found a moral back bone for games. Just seems a bit off and more for controversy purposes.
Stop calling other people childish when you're the only child here. Did you even read your own post? I was paraphrasing you, so thank you for calling yourself a child.
Matt Lees' point was that the gigolo minigame was sexist and misogynist, and he based this on wrong evidences:
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=635716
After he wast told about how his arguments were wrong and based on his own agenda he made another post generalizing about the issue. It was never about if the game was shit or not.
This was my first post in that thread
I was even ok with him criticizing the game for the stupid gigolo mode. But after learning about how this mode actually worked I changed my mind, because criticism should be based on factual things, and he didn't use factual things.