Giantmushroom
A bad remake of a great game. I'm not surprised, just disappointed.
Severe performance issues hold the experience back. The framerate frequently dips below 30 and it's very noticeable. A remake of a Game Boy game shouldn't be struggling to run at half the framerate of the original. It's completely unacceptable that this was never patched. The graphics aren't nearly impressive enough to warrant anything less than a stable 60 FPS.
The new art style is overly chibi and the egregious use of motion blur is distracting. They don't let you disable the latter...
The remade soundtrack is also a massive letdown. A lot of the songs lack the "oomph" of the original. The new rendition of Tal Tal Heights is a great example. They could've at least offered the option to use the original soundtrack and graphics. The original version is locked behind a subscription service and lacks the few desirable features of the remake (16:9 HD and less tedious inventory management), so that doesn't count as an option.
The new dungeon maker content is one of the worst additions I've seen added to any remake. It's a tedious, repetitive slog and adds nothing of value to the game. Does anyone actually enjoy this?
Grezzo has remade three Zelda games and only one of them has turned out well. I don't want them touching this series ever again.
Severe performance issues hold the experience back. The framerate frequently dips below 30 and it's very noticeable. A remake of a Game Boy game shouldn't be struggling to run at half the framerate of the original. It's completely unacceptable that this was never patched. The graphics aren't nearly impressive enough to warrant anything less than a stable 60 FPS.
The new art style is overly chibi and the egregious use of motion blur is distracting. They don't let you disable the latter...
The remade soundtrack is also a massive letdown. A lot of the songs lack the "oomph" of the original. The new rendition of Tal Tal Heights is a great example. They could've at least offered the option to use the original soundtrack and graphics. The original version is locked behind a subscription service and lacks the few desirable features of the remake (16:9 HD and less tedious inventory management), so that doesn't count as an option.
The new dungeon maker content is one of the worst additions I've seen added to any remake. It's a tedious, repetitive slog and adds nothing of value to the game. Does anyone actually enjoy this?
Grezzo has remade three Zelda games and only one of them has turned out well. I don't want them touching this series ever again.
2019
It doesn't seem like anything has improved over Gears of War 4. The Marvel-style writing is still awful. The game feels bland in general. The only strong points are the graphics and controls/basic combat.
The predatory monetization (lootboxes and microtransactions galore in a full-price game) is completely unacceptable. I also died once because the partner AI couldn't figure out how to navigate around an object. This was less than an hour in.
The predatory monetization (lootboxes and microtransactions galore in a full-price game) is completely unacceptable. I also died once because the partner AI couldn't figure out how to navigate around an object. This was less than an hour in.
Review in progress:
A disappointing follow-up to Chrono Trigger. Chrono Cross's low difficulty level means that you barely even need to engage with the intricacies of the combat system, which makes most fights feel shallow and repetitive.
They took the Suikoden approach where you get a million party members, but most of them barely get any character development. This is a significant downgrade from Chrono Trigger's memorable and fleshed-out cast.
The story is overly convoluted and feels utterly incoherent at times. It does a poor job of connecting to the events of Chrono Trigger until the infodump at the end and is borderline disrespectful in how it handles the world and characters of its predecessor.
The soundtrack is good outside of the battle theme, which was also underwhelming in Chrono Trigger. It's unfortunate that you'll probably be hearing that more than any other song. The artwork is well-done given the PS1's limitations. That isn't enough to salvage the rest of the experience, though.
A disappointing follow-up to Chrono Trigger. Chrono Cross's low difficulty level means that you barely even need to engage with the intricacies of the combat system, which makes most fights feel shallow and repetitive.
They took the Suikoden approach where you get a million party members, but most of them barely get any character development. This is a significant downgrade from Chrono Trigger's memorable and fleshed-out cast.
The story is overly convoluted and feels utterly incoherent at times. It does a poor job of connecting to the events of Chrono Trigger until the infodump at the end and is borderline disrespectful in how it handles the world and characters of its predecessor.
The soundtrack is good outside of the battle theme, which was also underwhelming in Chrono Trigger. It's unfortunate that you'll probably be hearing that more than any other song. The artwork is well-done given the PS1's limitations. That isn't enough to salvage the rest of the experience, though.
1999
I prefer the Radical Dreams edition. I haven't run into any issues with that version after the latest patch. Either way, this is one of the most disappointing sequels I've ever played.
I played for two hours. The story isn't as engaging as Persona 4 Golden. I was able to win all of the fights by mashing X.
The PC port is a lazy cash grab. It looks horrible at resolutions beyond 1080p.
The PC port is a lazy cash grab. It looks horrible at resolutions beyond 1080p.
I skipped the story because I didn't want to spoil Dragon Age 1, which I intend to play someday.
The combat is incredibly dull based on the hour I played. It feels like a watered-down MMO. Hotbars with cooldowns are boring as hell. Giving the player only two abilities at the start makes the beginning feel shallow and repetitive. I'm getting traumatic flashbacks from Final Fantasy XIV.
The texture pop-in on the ground is distractingly bad. There needs to be a way to increase the distance on PC.
The character customization options are incredibly limited. You only have a few preset options to work with, which is a huge drawback in an RPG you're supposed to immerse yourself in.
The character models are ugly. I expect there to be some ugly and average-looking characters in a fantasy world, but literally everyone looks hideous. At that point, it's clearly a technical issue.
The combat is incredibly dull based on the hour I played. It feels like a watered-down MMO. Hotbars with cooldowns are boring as hell. Giving the player only two abilities at the start makes the beginning feel shallow and repetitive. I'm getting traumatic flashbacks from Final Fantasy XIV.
The texture pop-in on the ground is distractingly bad. There needs to be a way to increase the distance on PC.
The character customization options are incredibly limited. You only have a few preset options to work with, which is a huge drawback in an RPG you're supposed to immerse yourself in.
The character models are ugly. I expect there to be some ugly and average-looking characters in a fantasy world, but literally everyone looks hideous. At that point, it's clearly a technical issue.
Review in progress:
I found the story and gameplay in the single-player to be enjoyable, but I could've done with less tedious busywork (e.g., slowly picking up planks of wood and ladders). If that's supposed to hide a loading screen, it isn't doing a good enough job. The graphics are excellent for 7th-gen standards.
Putting OP weapons behind paid DLC for the multiplayer mode is completely unacceptable. I'm not sure why Naughty Dog magically gets a pass from people when greedy monetization practices in gaming are brought up. The single player being the main focus isn't an excuse. The pay-to-win aspect essentially makes this mode unplayable. I'd give The Last of Us Remastered four stars if it wasn't for this scam.
I found the story and gameplay in the single-player to be enjoyable, but I could've done with less tedious busywork (e.g., slowly picking up planks of wood and ladders). If that's supposed to hide a loading screen, it isn't doing a good enough job. The graphics are excellent for 7th-gen standards.
Putting OP weapons behind paid DLC for the multiplayer mode is completely unacceptable. I'm not sure why Naughty Dog magically gets a pass from people when greedy monetization practices in gaming are brought up. The single player being the main focus isn't an excuse. The pay-to-win aspect essentially makes this mode unplayable. I'd give The Last of Us Remastered four stars if it wasn't for this scam.
2012
I haven't played any other Halo games. I can't comment on the story because I skipped it to prevent myself from spoiling the original/well-received ones, which I hope to play someday.
I wasn't very impressed during my hour of gameplay. The soundtrack and the general aesthetic were bland (at least for the opening level). I thought Halo was known for having a great soundtrack and art direction.
The level design is uninteresting. It felt like a bunch of enemies were placed around haphazardly.
The enemy AI is some of the worst I've seen in a modern FPS. You can hide behind a wall 10 feet away and enemies won't even throw a grenade toward you. They're laughably passive.
The inability to carry multiple weapons (besides a little pistol that's also used up in two seconds) greatly limits strategy and feels frustrating. The issue is compounded by how little ammo each weapon has; I've never played an FPS that's this stingy with it. Even with good aim, I often had to backtrack to find more weapons, which hurt the pacing.
The nicest thing I have to say is that, on a purely technical level, this looks very good for 7th-gen standards.
I wasn't very impressed during my hour of gameplay. The soundtrack and the general aesthetic were bland (at least for the opening level). I thought Halo was known for having a great soundtrack and art direction.
The level design is uninteresting. It felt like a bunch of enemies were placed around haphazardly.
The enemy AI is some of the worst I've seen in a modern FPS. You can hide behind a wall 10 feet away and enemies won't even throw a grenade toward you. They're laughably passive.
The inability to carry multiple weapons (besides a little pistol that's also used up in two seconds) greatly limits strategy and feels frustrating. The issue is compounded by how little ammo each weapon has; I've never played an FPS that's this stingy with it. Even with good aim, I often had to backtrack to find more weapons, which hurt the pacing.
The nicest thing I have to say is that, on a purely technical level, this looks very good for 7th-gen standards.
Like the original, but with worse level design and a higher difficulty level.
I wasn't a fan of Crypt of The Necromancer, and this hasn't changed my mind. Roguelikes and Zelda don't mix.
The best DLC I've ever played. Peak Dark Souls.
2019
The story and gameplay didn't grab me. I can't think of a more dull setting for a video game than an office building.
2016
Gears of War 4 is still a Windows Store exclusive on PC. Please bring the game to Steam so I never have to use that piece of shit software again. The install size is ridiculous as well.
I had difficulty getting past the splash screen without it crashing. I had to do a lot of troubleshooting to get it to work. Having these issues in a 2016 game is completely unacceptable.
The game itself is nothing special. Based on the hour I played, it's an incredibly bland and generic third-person shooter. The gameplay is serviceable, but nothing more. There was nothing in the way of creativity or originality. The only good thing I can say is that it's graphically impressive.
The character dialogue is asinine. It feels like they were targeting the Marvel movie audience but somehow failed to reach that low bar of quality.
The monetization is disgustingly greedy. On top of the $60 base game, you have a $50 season pass, microtransactions and lootboxes. This isn't OK.
It doesn't feel like any love was put into this product. This was clearly just an easy paycheck for Microsoft.
I had difficulty getting past the splash screen without it crashing. I had to do a lot of troubleshooting to get it to work. Having these issues in a 2016 game is completely unacceptable.
The game itself is nothing special. Based on the hour I played, it's an incredibly bland and generic third-person shooter. The gameplay is serviceable, but nothing more. There was nothing in the way of creativity or originality. The only good thing I can say is that it's graphically impressive.
The character dialogue is asinine. It feels like they were targeting the Marvel movie audience but somehow failed to reach that low bar of quality.
The monetization is disgustingly greedy. On top of the $60 base game, you have a $50 season pass, microtransactions and lootboxes. This isn't OK.
It doesn't feel like any love was put into this product. This was clearly just an easy paycheck for Microsoft.
2003
Call of Duty is nothing special. All of the problems I have with most post-boomer/early 2000s shooters are present here. The AI is primitive, the level design is simplistic, and it's restrictingly linear. Combat mostly revolves aro und waiting for enemies to poke their heads out and immediately murdering them.
It's hard to see how this spawned a mega-franchise. It doesn't seem like an improvement over Medal of Honor.
It's hard to see how this spawned a mega-franchise. It doesn't seem like an improvement over Medal of Honor.
2012
Still a great game, but I prefer the newer version.