Support NeoGAF

[Jimnymebob]

Hey if people can say Banjo-Kazooie is one of the best platformers of all time then we can certainly allow a statement like that

People say Jak & Daxter is one of the best platformers ever. I absolutely adore the game (it's one of my favorites of all time), but it's an open world walking simulator collectathon with constant vehicle sections until the last hub area.

 

[silva1991]

"Not enough content for those not inclined to replay levels."
"Not enough content for those not inclined to replay levels."
"Not enough content for those not inclined to replay levels."

What Am I reading?

Did he only play the first game without unlocking the secret levels? Oo

 

[Uno Venova]

81 on metacritic so far. Not bad.
http://www.metacritic.com/game/playstation-4/crash-bandicoot-n-sane-trilogy

Honestly with the tone of the thread I expected much worse. Isn't 80s what most people expected?

 

[Lifeline]

"Not enough content for those not inclined to replay levels."
"Not enough content for those not inclined to replay levels."
"Not enough content for those not inclined to replay levels."

What Am I reading?

3 games for $40.

Not enough content.

Ok.

Honestly with the tone of the thread I expected much worse. Isn't 80s what most people expected?

That 6/10 review being the first one posted probably screwed that up.

 

[TheMink]

The negativity really bums me out, these are some of my very favorite games.

I'm happy with the reviews

 

[JP]

I was really expecting worse scores than this, as much as I really enjoy the games, parts of the gameplay will have surely aged over the decades and I was expecting them to have reviewed worse because of that.

I really can't wait for my pre-order to unlock tonight!!!!!

I really do need some CTR though, by the end of the year, please. Thank you.

EDIT:
I'm going to be so bad at these games now, aren't I?

 

[Servbot24]

Honestly with the tone of the thread I expected much worse. Isn't 80s what most people expected?

People will see one bad review and get fixated on it. I think 81 is great given what the games are. Good enough for me to pick it up.

 

[ronaldthump]

3 games for $40.

Not enough content.

Ok.



That 6/10 review being the first one posted probably screwed that up.

yeah. hilarious. it'll be hours and hours of gameplay.

 

[Theslammer]

LOL @ reading the first page now that more reviews have come in.

 

[*Splinter]

Honestly with the tone of the thread I expected much worse. Isn't 80s what most people expected?

If you're referring to the first page of the thread it's because the first review was 6/10. I think most people will be happy with these reviews.

 

[HardRojo]

He didn't review ARMS

Oh, well then I guess it's not a problem with the reviewer, more like consistency regarding asking price and content.

Yeah, that's understood. Crash isn't close to top tier platforming imo. It's fine, I enjoy them, but nowhere near the best.

Of course I am fine with the reviewer feeling otherwise.

For you, of course, for many of us it is a trio of excellent games.
BTW did you also think SFV should've gotten great reviews at launch? The core game was and is superb, only thing wrong was the lack of content, like ARMS apparently.

 

[Yoshi]

GameReactor claims it does not have enough content? It's three short games, which amounts to at least 10 hours of gameplay if you just rush through the levels (and play it for the first time), which is plenty for a 40€ game where you deliberately ignore all optional content.

 

[Kickz]

Can't wait to pick this up on Friday.

 

[silva1991]

Honestly with the tone of the thread I expected much worse. Isn't 80s what most people expected?

People expected high 70 or low 80, so yeah.

The first game was always gonna drag the score down

 

[FTF]

6 from GS but 8.5 from IGN...that's a pretty big difference :/

 

[Equanimity]

That Crash doesn't have enough content. The nature of multiplayer games is that you get as much out of them as the core gameplay allows. So it sounds like the reviewer thought the core gameplay of Arms was pretty darn good. I see no issue here.

Well I guess we all have our ways of making sense out of nonsense.

 

[PsihoPerihelion]

This is probably the one game were I don't need reviews to decide. If you like the originals, what's gonna stop you?

Edit: also, you people REALLY need to learn the concept of mixed reviews. 5-10% of reviews being below 8 ain't mixed.

 

[Suburban Thug]

People put too much stock in review scores. Who cares if some random, pretentious video game journalist gives it a 6 or a 10? Play for yourself and have fun.

 

[Ivan 3414]

Honestly with the tone of the thread I expected much worse. Isn't 80s what most people expected?

Some folks don't give 1990s platformers any leeway, especially compared to 80s platformers.

I've said this before but MegaMan has had clear issues with relevancy and arguably dated mechanics but people will have your head on a fucking spike if you talk shit about him or his games.

 

[Lionel Richie]

This is probably the one game were I don't need reviews to decide. If you like the originals, what's gonna stop you?

Bugs or poor performance and shit like that. I waited for the reviews because of that and since apparently that isn't a problem I'm going to pick up my copy next week

 

[peanutbutterlatte]

The games feel dated if you've never played them before...

I mean what's a more sophisticated way of saying "No shit"?

 

[BumRush]

Reviews seem fine to me, yes, even a 6. People need to remember these are remakes of old platformers, and while they were great in their time there's a lot of new platformers that took the genre forward.

"Not enough content" is the eye-roller.

Yeah, how can you possibly have a trilogy priced at $39.99 not have enough content?

 

[PsihoPerihelion]

Bugs or poor performance and shit like that. I waited for the reviews because of that and since apparently that isn't a problem I'm going to pick up my copy next week

Yeah, that's the one thing I could see myself caring about. As far as I know, game's solid on both fronts.

 

[*Splinter]

Some folks don't give 1990s platformers any leeway, especially compared to 80s platformers.

I've said this before but MegaMan has had clear issues with relevancy and arguably dated mechanics but people will have your head on a fucking spike if you talk shit about him or his games.

I mean... There are people in this thread who will have your head on a spike if you talk shit about Crash. Over defensive fans are everywhere, best to ignore them and judge the games for yourself.

 

[GoodCoffeeJoey]

The reviews are very good considering the first game is by far the worst out of the three and that's likely the one where reviewers will start and spend the most time with.

 

[Darksol]

I suck at games and I don't want to play them - 6/10.

Seems fair.

Anyways, to be expected. From all accounts, the game holds up well and this is a lovingly crafted update of a much beloved trilogy. Game on!

 

[Lil'DigiOp]

2017...

The year when 3 full ass games are considered "not enough content"


I forgot... they should have added pointless escort missions, a bare ass fucking open world, fucking 40,000 pieces of garbage loot with 3 usable weapons, and collectibles towers that don't do a damn thing for you.

Yeah, that's what they forgot. "fucking content"

 

[paragonpro]

I mean... There are people in this thread who will have your head on a spike if you talk shit about Crash. Over defensive fans are everywhere, best to ignore them and judge the games for yourself.

Yeah pretty much, i get being excited over something you like but throwing a fit and telling people their criticisms arent legitimate just seems desperate

 

[VanCityGamer]

Is there any negative to playing the 2nd and 3rd game first and then going back to the 1st one later? This is a long weekend for me, and I'd prefer to avoid a brutally difficult or frustrating game.

 

[Namegoes_Here]

Seems like the only issue is that it's still a Crash Bandicoot game. So, if you just wanted the original formula, you'll probably be fine. If you expect a modern and up-to-date 3D plateformer, it might not be the best choice.

Agreed. VV delivered what was promised. The originals with a fresh coat of paint and some QoL improvements. Devs looking to modernize the formula without respecting the origins is how you end up with Crash of the Titans. These remakes gave VV a chance to study what made Crash a classic in the first place and can lead to a re fortified foundation for a new entry into the series with the same soul as the classics.

 

[AuthenticM]

2017...

The year when 3 full ass games are considered "not enough content"


I forgot... they should have added pointless escort missions, a bare ass fucking open world, fucking 40,000 pieces of garbage loot with 3 usable weapons, and collectibles towers that don't do a damn thing for you.

Yeah, that's what they forgot. "fucking content"

indeed

 

[sloppyjoe_gamer]

I mean... There are people in this thread who will have your head on a spike if you talk shit about Crash. Over defensive fans are everywhere, best to ignore them and judge the games for yourself.

My issue was with Gamespot's half assed review, not someone's disagreement or agreement with my opinion of the Crash games. Expecting a well known game site to put at least some amount of effort into a review doesn't make me or the others here who have also criticized the review over defensive.

With all that said, i agree that the games themselves aren't everyone's cup of tea. Can't wait to pick this up this weekend, and (hopefully if i can find one) a Switch and Zelda.

 

[Sodding_Gamer]

Is there any negative to playing the 2nd and 3rd game first and then going back to the 1st one later? This is a long weekend for me, and I'd prefer to avoid a brutally difficult or frustrating game.

This is what I'm doing anyway. By ploughing through the first two you'll brush up those skills to tackle the hardest one after. That's how I'm looking at it anyway.

 

[killroy87]

Was it just me, or did that ACG review show multiple instances of the framerate just fucking tanking? Like, going into slow motion for a couple seconds?

I couldn't tell if it was the video, a stylistic thing in the game, or a genuine problem.

 

[Ivan 3414]

I mean... There are people in this thread who will have your head on a spike if you talk shit about Crash. Over defensive fans are everywhere, best to ignore them and judge the games for yourself.

That's fair

 

[Playsage]

Is there any negative to playing the 2nd and 3rd game first and then going back to the 1st one later? This is a long weekend for me, and I'd prefer to avoid a brutally difficult or frustrating game.

I guess it will be harder to enjoy it, especially after playing 2

 

[Kraq]

Is there any negative to playing the 2nd and 3rd game first and then going back to the 1st one later? This is a long weekend for me, and I'd prefer to avoid a brutally difficult or frustrating game.

2 is the best one so I recommend you leave that till last. Start with 3.

 

[Big Green Anus]

I'm saying that large install base does not automatically work out to more sales. Crash could have the advantage of 10x the install base, but Mario will still outsell it. Crash is "beloved" by an extremely small fraction of gamers compared to Mario.

Hell, I'm not even convinced Crash will sell significantly more than Knack 2.

Crash will sell better than Knack 2 due to people biases against Knack 1. As much as I want Knack 2 to sell over 5 million, I'm just happy that we are getting another one.

 

[silva1991]

Is there any negative to playing the 2nd and 3rd game first and then going back to the 1st one later? This is a long weekend for me, and I'd prefer to avoid a brutally difficult or frustrating game.

1 is is the weakest by a long shot and also the hardest. It's gonna be rough going back to it after masterpieces like 2 and 3.

 

[AuthenticM]

Is there any negative to playing the 2nd and 3rd game first and then going back to the 1st one later? This is a long weekend for me, and I'd prefer to avoid a brutally difficult or frustrating game.

not really, except that it'll be harder to enjoy. But if you play the first game first, then it might sour your experience of the whole trilogy. So I would be of the opinion that you should jump straight to the second game. Play the first game last. Stick with it if you like it; if not, feel free to not play it.

 

[Jimnymebob]

Is there any negative to playing the 2nd and 3rd game first and then going back to the 1st one later? This is a long weekend for me, and I'd prefer to avoid a brutally difficult or frustrating game.

3 takes place after the 100% ending of Crash 2, so there's spoilers there, but it's not a story heavy game obviously.

Starting with 2 is fine though, story wise.

 

[ZeoVGM]

Really? Why?

Anyway, Crash fans will love the remake i think.

Because it's an amazing game.

Not that confusing.

 

[Servbot24]

BTW did you also think SFV should've gotten great reviews at launch? The core game was and is superb, only thing wrong was the lack of content, like ARMS apparently.

It depends. I didn't play SFV, but from what I've heard it sounds like an excellent game that should have a couple points knocked off for not having much content.

An example I can use personally is MGSV. Maybe the best core gameplay ever in gaming, but was obviously missing content. However because MGSV's gameplay is so transcendent it makes up for that quite a bit and I can personally give it a 9/10.

In the case of Crash, it sounds like he found the content to be less than ideal, and also found the core gameplay to be nothing special. So 6/10 makes sense.

Well I guess we all have our ways of making sense out of nonsense.

Reviews are not formulas, they are feelings. You don't need to make sense of them, you need to use them as an opportunity to understand people.

 

[*Splinter]

Is there any negative to playing the 2nd and 3rd game first and then going back to the 1st one later? This is a long weekend for me, and I'd prefer to avoid a brutally difficult or frustrating game.

Not really, although the first is considered the worse so it might feel like a step down when you get to it.

(Personally I love the first game, although the controls take a little adjusting to and there are some definite difficulty spikes)

 

[mazillion]

Was it just me, or did that ACG review show multiple instances of the framerate just fucking tanking? Like, going into slow motion for a couple seconds?

I couldn't tell if it was the video, a stylistic thing in the game, or a genuine problem.

I noticed that too but he never said anything about it and Digital Foundry said the frame rate was a steady 30fps during gameplay with dips only in some cut-scenes (and none at all for the pro) so it might just be an issue with the video.

 

[Acquiescence]

Sorry, my bad, I thought the review that quote was from was Metro.

 

[oti]

"Three of the best platformers ever made" implies that there are other platformers within that category too, and are not necessarily from Crash. I agree with his opinion.

You can like them as much as you want, but calling them some of the best platformers ever made? Your opinion is your opinion and that's fine. For me there is a preeeeeeeety huge gap between Mario Galaxy and Crash though. Opinions. 🤗

Hey if people can say Banjo-Kazooie is one of the best platformers of all time then we can certainly allow a statement like that

Who says that? I need names. I need to show them the light.

 

[Chobel]

It's a fundamental game design issue. The Crash games simply aren't very good.

This take is HOT!

 

[Retro Edge]

2017...

The year when 3 full ass games are considered "not enough content"

Open world games as a service shit is brainwashing everyone it seems.

 

[FearlessBelgian]

Erm...what did you guys expect ? Crash Bandicoot Remakes in 2017...it never was going to get only +90 scores.

7-8 ok but 6 ? ...