• 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.

The Witness - Reviews Thread

Chi3fster

Banned
If you can't use a 10, it shouldn't be on your scale.
Why not?

One day we may get a game worthy of a perfect score. 0s, 1s, and 2s are almost never used by the most honest reviewers, but they have every right to be on the scale as well.

10/10 means perfect. That's math - something that really isn't debatable, so you guys shouldn't even try.
 

Vol5

Member
Well done JB and all the devs. Have been looking forward to this since its reveal way back when. Can't wait to play it.
 

oti

Banned
I'm sold :p



Does the QL have any major spoilers?

Near the end it shows one surprising thing about the puzzles. But they are very keen on not showing too much and Brad says there's way more to the game than this small reveal. Just watch the first 10 minutes and you`re good fam.
 

Arozay

Member
I'm gonna go into the game fairly blind, I'm just hoping it's fun to play/explore and doesn't become some pretentious wank-fest.
 

PolishQ

Member
I'm sold :p



Does the QL have any major spoilers?

They show solutions to some very early puzzles (almost all of which have been seen in other preview videos).

They wander around the world and show some of the various "biomes".

They do NOT show solutions to any significant, complex puzzles.

The closest thing to a spoiler is that they show a "quirk" to the puzzle panels that was not previously known. And they also show an aspect to the user interface that has not been obvious and which may have vast implications.
 
It's unlocking worldwide coincident with tomorrow's store update, but Blow said he'll look into having the time moved forward to midnight (which I think Valve will allow).
Blessed. I think if Sony updates earlier then Valve will be cool with it.
 

GhaleonEB

Member
Giant Bomb

5/5 stars

Great review. A few quotes that touch on topics discussed a fair deal in recent threads:

It's just line puzzles:

But The Witness is much, much more than just a series of standalone logic puzzles packaged up in a pretty graphical wrapper. Ferreting out the nature of the many different types of puzzles that exist on the island--how their individual rule sets work and interact with one another, what effect they have on their surroundings, and in turn how their surroundings can affect them--is 100 percent of what there is for you to do in this game, and the extent to which you have to really work for many of the solutions can be exceptionally gratifying as you fumble and reason your way through the game's many hours.

It's $40:

On top of what's required to "finish" the game, there's also an almost baffling number of other puzzles to tackle in this game that seem to have no bearing on the main campaign, as it were. The game is constantly teasing you with other sorts of less conventional puzzles and hidden areas that don't fit into the familiar categories you've been working with, and frankly after probably 40 hours in The Witness I still don't know what the hell a lot of those puzzles do at all, nor how to solve them, nor how to open up quite a few of the optional buildings, caves, and passageways that I passed over when I first saw them. Without saying too much, the game also contains what might be my favorite take ever on the video game collectible. If you were to do all this stuff yourself without just looking up a guide to breeze you through it, I have no problem believing that 80 hour figure that's been floating around to be roughly accurate. The hindsight of having "finished" the game, and knowing how much more there is left to do, makes the recent hand-wringing about the game's $40 price tag seem especially absurd.

Very well written review, and totally spoiler free.
 
Eh, I don't really agree with that obtuse games are good games either. So if he couldn't finish it, or muster up the desire to do so, fair play to mark it down.


What??!?!

If he couldn't finish the game because he doesn't like puzzles then he's not reviewing the game objectively....

His review was terrible, he marked down a puzzle game because it has too many puzzles. He is in fact an idiot.
 
Does the QL have any major spoilers?

I was worried about this as well. It doesn't really have spoilers as it's Jeff playing through the opening bit for the first time, but Brad is there watching. He tries real hard to not to specifically spoil anything, but to some level I feel like his gushing over the games brilliance of the puzzles could be construed as spoilery in the sense that any discovery should be experienced first hand. If you're sensitive to these things, I'd avoid it just in case.
 
Guys, nothing can ever be perfect, let's admit it. If a game is excellent and raises the bar for what it tries to accomplish, we should give it a 9.9999999999999/10. I think that that is only fair
 

wildfire

Banned
The whole "using puzzles to teach a new language and rules to be used in other puzzles" is so Antichamber by the way. That game's also first person, only difference is that Antichamber uses block puzzles instead of line ones.

By the way, buy Antichamber, it's a gem.

Yeah and platformers are synonymous with Nintendo and time manipulation with Max Payne but until I played Braid I've never played a game that masterly transcends the god fathers of these mechanics. I already have and will eventually play Anti chamber but I'm sure it will fall very short of The Witness.
 
What??!?!

If he couldn't finish the game because he doesn't like puzzles then he's not reviewing the game objectively....

His review was terrible, he marked down a puzzle game because it has too many puzzles. He is in fact an idiot.

Name-calling people for people sharing their subjective experience with a game though...
 

Meaty

Member
Why not?

One day we may get a game worthy of a perfect score. 0s, 1s, and 2s are almost never used by the most honest reviewers, but they have every right to be on the scale as well.

10/10 means perfect. That's math - something that really isn't debatable, so you guys shouldn't even try.

That would work if reviews were objective tests with a checklist and correct answers.


Review scores are and should always be simply how much the player thinks the game deserves. Review scores are and should always be a subjective matter. This is not a fourth grade math test, a reviewer giving a game a 10 by no means implies the reviewer thinks the game is flawless.


If you decide to make a very simple game with simple mechanics, it could have no apparent flaws, and be perfect in achieving what its trying to achieve, tetris for example, and yet reviewers shouldnt be forced to give it a 10, because that score is subjective.

EDIT: The same way you can make a ambitious game like skyrim, a game so deeply flawed on so many ways, and yet deeply love the game and feel it deserves a high score
 
The GiantBomb QL doesn't reveal a LOT but I think it's better to not watch if you want to remain unspoiled. It reveals three to four really small early-game things but that would have been really cool discoveries too.
 

rezn0r

Member
Alright a gradual increase of hype over the past week has led to me pulling the trigger at release. Really excited to dive in to this unspoiled - which is why I've avoided reading any reviews. That leads to me to a question, which I apologize if it's been covered, these threads are moving fast. Have any mentioned any real difference between PC & PS4 version? I'd probably rather it on console, but I have a capable PC if it's superior.
 

Stoze

Member
Yer I'm going to skip the QL, going in completely blind.
I just listened to it to hear their impressions, didn't want to see any of the puzzles or environment. Brad sounds totally stoked about it (no surprise at the 5/5) and Jeff seemed to really get into it as well.
 
This is really unnecessary, and I'm sure you could have thought of better ways to express your frustration.

Was just reiterating what another GAFFER said, I'm too excited for this game to be frustrated. And maybe he's not an idiot but he certainly wasn't objective.
 
Top Bottom