Post by: WindyMan on November 30, 2006, 08:47:45 PM
Red Steel doesn't feel like a complete game. It may be because the controls are harder to pick up on compared to other Wii launch games. It might be because of the buggy character animations and rushed cut-scenes. Whatever the reason, Red Steel can't help but be labeled a disappointment, even though the final product is still a somewhat decent Wii launch title...for people skilled enough to master it.
One of the things Red Steel gets right—eventually—is the shooting controls. Once you get used to it, it's remarkably easy to tag multiple people in the head very quickly, so much so that you'll prefer to use pistols over automatic rifles. The A Button, when held down, centers the camera on an enemy and automatically tracks his movement, meaning you don't need to move all over the place to keep him in your sights. If you have a steady hand you can kill half a dozen guys with as many bullets. Shooting at bad guys is the best part of the game, and I definitely prefer using the Wii remote to shoot people over a dual analog controller.
By design, most of the gun battles take place in corridors, hallways, and open warehouse areas, like a shooting gallery that shoots back. The deeper you get into the game, the more enemies you'll encounter, and the more accurate they will be. A run-and-gun style will get you cut down in an instant, so the use of cover is essential. You'll be crouching (Z Button) behind objects almost as much as you'll be reloading (shaking the nunchuck). The pointer aiming combined with A Button tracking makes it simple to pop out of cover, head shot someone, and then duck back to safety. When you're overwhelmed with enemies or you spot the boss of a room, entering focus mode (A & C Buttons) will freeze time, giving you a chance to shoot the guns out of their hands. That will knock them off balance, and by motioning your gun up and down, they'll hit the floor and surrender.
Focus is handy for getting through rooms quickly, but it's a feature that can be easily abused. Shooting at enemies fills up a meter which determines how long you can remain in focus mode. Because the aiming controls work so well, you can enter focus mode and shoot the boss's gun to make him surrender, all in the span of a second or two. The meter bonus you get for doing this puts back a lot of the meter you lost in disarming him in the first place. Basically, you can get through most of the large battles by doing this, and still have meter left over for when you get into a tight spot. It turns most parts of the game into a shooting gallery that doesn't shoot back, which is not as fun.
The shooting gallery design leads into the underlying problem with the game's controls. There's an immense learning curve for basic actions like moving, aiming, shooting, and slashing with your sword. For instance, at the times times where I had to get up close and personal with a yakuza member, making the large movements needed to get my aiming cursor on him totally screwed me up. I wound up spinning around and flailing my arm like a mad man. It appears that the game cannot accommodate gun combat at point blank range; and it's clear that the game's levels were designed to keep enemies far away from you to avoid this situation. (You do have a melee attack with the sword, but it's very slow coming out.) Turning in place isn't something you'd want to do in a hurry either. If you do it with too quick of a motion, the game will lose track of the controller and put the camera into a tailspin.
As such, the first two or three hours of the game made for one of the most disorienting gaming experiences I've ever had. I had to stop for a break a few times to make sure my lunch stayed down. It's understandable that the beginnings of the game are supposed to be of the tutorial type, and Red Steel's first couple of levels serve that purpose. But when it takes almost half of the game to fully adjust to how the controller works, that's a signal that the controls could have been more forgiving. Even after getting used to it, there were still plenty of moments where I found myself fighting the controls. Red Steel will take all of your gaming skills to wrangle the basics; if you're not experienced in the ways of gaming, you may never feel comfortable with how the game works.
The control problems are magnified during sword fights. Like you'd expect, the first handful of one-on-one encounters are designed to be easy. When using simple sword motions that aren't time-critical, the controls work well enough for you to get by. High levels of attention and reaction are needed to get through these fights, and you actually have a lot of options for disabling the opponent. You can slice up your foe until he submits, or you can break his sword by attacking it with a nunchuck shake after a successful dodge (C Button and left/right on the stick). Dodging is the only way to avoid damage from a heavy attack; though you can try and block it (twist the nunchuck), you'll still get hit with some damage. Towards the end of the game the difficulty ramps up tremendously, turning the battles into slugfests. Randomly swinging your sword will get it parried, so instead you need to dodge and look for an opportunity to deal back some damage. The best way to do that is with special moves and combos you pick up on your journey.
Here is where the sword fights take a turn for the worse. Combos and specials are essential for winning the advanced sword fights, but they never work when you need them to. It took me at least 10 minutes to “learn" one sword combo in particular, and while doing so it seemed that no matter what I tried, the game would not recognize a certain vertical controller movement. If the sword controls don't work well in training when there's plenty of time to think about your actions, you can forget about them working in combat, when you only have one chance. Because of how annoying and frustrating they are, you'll groan most times you begin a face-off. The sword fights happen at pre-determined locations along your travels, but to me they felt like the ubiquitous random battle in an RPG. I wound up exclusively using the only sword combo I could pull off with ease, one that's a simple right/left/right swiping motion. It was the weakest of the bunch, too, so I had to deal with some long and boring battles that just kept coming in certain missions.
You could make the argument that it's a little unfair to come down on the control scheme and learning curve so much. It's one of the first FPS games to use the pointer, and it uses the controller to act as a sword, also a first. Had the other Wii launch games been as unintuitive, that would be a sound argument. Of all the Wii games I've played, Red Steel is the least helpful of the bunch when it came to helping me learn the controls. It offered absolutely no help on what I was doing wrong or what I should have been doing to make it work right, as do some other Wii games (like Madden 07). Alas, I was left to figure out how the controls worked on my own, and even after completing the game I have still yet to get any sword combo down at a rate of 100%.
As if Ubisoft was adding insult to injury, many other parts of the game seem to be rushed and unpolished, especially the graphics. Though the game looks very nice in places where a lot of light is present and in certain other outdoor locales, the majority of the scenery is a washed-out, blurry mess. Character models are just a step above the basic level, and animation is glitchy and jerky. Models in gameplay cut-scenes have a noticeable white glow around them, making them look pasted into the frame. Scenes between levels use a poorly presented hand-drawn comic book style, which clashes with the rest of the game. Subtitles for those sequences are actually cut off at the bottom when running the game in 16:9 widescreen mode. High-end GC games can do better than some of the things I've seen in done in Red Steel; there should be no excuse for the mediocrity, considering this is a top-tier development team working in a familiar hardware environment.
Red Steel also comes with split-screen multiplayer. Unfortunately, it's very weak. It's not online—no launch game is, and it's not a strike against the game — but at the very least they could have included some multiplayer bots. Just having four people shooting it up in four maps and three modes is not enough compared to other modern offline multiplayer offerings. Ubisoft could have provided a wireless LAN mode to offer more, but it's not there. As it stands, there is nothing particularly noteworthy about multiplayer, other than it's another mode you can spend time with if you have extra controllers and friends to take advantage of it.
In my opinion, swords and guns don't mix. The overall gameplay in Red Steel would have been much better if it had just focused on the shooting part and dumped the swordplay. Most of the game's controls are not very intuitive. There's nothing special about the game's story or its gameplay, either. The only thing that makes Red Steel worth it is how great the aiming and shooting system is. The gun controls lived up to my expectations, but it took a lot of time for that to happen. It's enough to make Red Steel worth playing, but the rest of the game has so many problems that it might not be worth it to you. It's a promising start for FPS games with the Wii controller. Now all we need is a game that is as well-crafted as the remote.
Pros:
Cons:
Graphics: 5.5
Some areas look very pretty, but the rest of the game doesn't look as so. The worst of it comes in the form of character animation and animated cut-scenes. The clashing of the good and bad makes for a very inconsistent game, visually. Not enough for it to be on the bad side of the scale overall, but to be honest, the GameCube could have done things a lot better in places.
Sound: 7.5
The voice acting ranges from passable to terrible. The excellent music counters that. The sound effects are very good, especially those coming from the controller speaker. Every sound that comes from it is useful and doesn't overpower the thing. I especially liked the reload, gun empty, and sword clashing sounds.
Control: 6.5
Using the pointer to shoot at people is fantastic, and really saves this game from being a total waste. Realize that it takes a very long time to become totally comfortable with it, but the payoff is worth the investment. Sword moves don't work all the time, and with how the sword battles are set up, if a combo doesn't work when you want it, you usually die. Most of the time you'll be having fun shooting people up, even with the sword encounters that break up the gun slinging flow.
Gameplay: 6.0
Other than the controls, there's really nothing special about the game. It's a generic FPS title that feels as if it has the sword combat tacked on. There is nothing in the way of puzzles or branching paths, although the middle set of five missions can be taken in any order. The game is designed in a way to where you need to shoot at people from a distance, making close encounters rare (and disorienting when they do happen). Red Steel has some moments, but they tend to get lost to the rest of the game's problems.
Lastability: 6.5
It took me about 8 or 9 hours to complete the game—or at least, get to the “bad" 82% ending. There appears to be a hidden bonus mission, but I have neither the will nor want to figure out how to get it. The multiplayer, had it been more fully featured, could have made this game last for quite a bit while longer.
Final: 6.0
I must admit I was expecting greater things from Red Steel, but I'm satisfied with how shooting a gun works. Although I anticipated a large learning curve, I didn't expect it to be so steep or to get so little help from the game in scaling it. If you stick with it you'll get a decent Wii launch game,but I wouldn't make it one of your top two or three post-Zelda game purchases.
Post by: BlkPaladin on November 30, 2006, 09:30:12 PM
Post by: DAaaMan64 on December 01, 2006, 02:36:00 AM
Post by: UltimatePartyBear on December 01, 2006, 03:49:54 AM
I have low standards when it comes to graphics, I guess, but Red Steel impressed me more often than not. A lot of the complaints I've seen seem to be about Ubisoft's style choices, though, not just how well they pulled it off. I think that's fair, though.
I agree with all your complaints about the sword controls, but I still think I'd rate them a little higher. Sword fighting wasn't broken, at least. When I got killed, it was always my own fault, and when I won, I always felt like I had overcome a challenge. I never felt like a sword fight was just a long, boring slugfest. I'd like for them to be deeper, though, and being unable to use all the moves reliably definitely hurt that.
Red Steel could be the beginning of something wonderful. If Ubisoft takes the time to make the inevitable sequel perfect, it could be one of the defining games of the generation. If they just crank it out, they will squander an opportunity the likes of which may never come again.
Post by: Caliban on December 01, 2006, 03:55:04 AM
Post by: ShyGuy on December 01, 2006, 04:06:01 AM
Post by: SixthAngel on December 01, 2006, 04:31:18 AM
Reading his review he basically says you will like it if you can get over these problems, I did and so will others, but the problems are still there. More time and this game would have been awesome.
Post by: Robageejammin on December 01, 2006, 04:56:20 AM
Post by: WindyMan on December 01, 2006, 04:56:32 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Caliban
I noticed you were "complaining" about the more complex sword moves not being recognized, is it possible that in the options menu you had the sword sensitivity chosen as long movements, instead of short movements?
No, I was using the short movements option. The lack of assistance from the game was a real bane for me, because each time one of the sword movements didn't work, I got frustrated and moved the controller more forcefully each time, and I think that was part of the reason why things didn't work so well. Had I known that softer movements worked better from the start (the game made no indication of this), I would not have been so hard on it,
I still haven't perfected any sword combo.
Post by: Smash_Brother on December 01, 2006, 04:58:00 AM
My complaints would be that the game was too easy, more than anything. There were only one or two swordfights I ever died on but once I knew how those enemies would behave, I never lost again, ever, even in the final swordfights. I had two options: break their sword down to the hilt, then finish it with the strong downward thrust or parry-daze them and run their health down to nothing with the little scorpion. I loved how fast the ninjas were because it ramped the difficulty up to the point it needed to be at.
And did anyone notice that if you swung in rapid succession too many times that you got dizzy?
The AI was both good and bad. Bad when it glitched, but good when it immediately leapt for cover behind objects, peeked out to check where I was and tried to stay as hidden as possible while firing at me. I also thought it was good to see AI which ran from you while still shooting at you.
But it's accurate to say that Red Steel is a hit or miss title with players. If you're a fan of oldschool FPSes where sniping could be king and exploding objects littered the landscape for you to lure your hapless enemies into, then Red Steel will definitely bring back some of that nostalgia.
As for multiplayer, I think that, in order to get a REAL feel for it, you'd need two expert players squaring off to see how it goes. Red Steel is the first game I've seen in which speed and accuracy are truly rewarded.
Overall though, I'm not saying anyone should or should not like the game, but Red Steel played a VERY important role in the success of the Wii in the minds and hearts of teenagers everywhere. Zelda might not be the cup of tea of the average angstful teen male. In fact, I dare say the game is too deep with too much of a puzzle solving emphasis to be what they're looking for.
But for teenage males, Red Steel was basically made for them. You get to use guns, grenades and swords to annihilate your enemies, detonate cars and many other combustible objects. You can hold your gun "gangsta style" through the entire game, and after you beat someone in swordfighting, you can execute them brutally. Don't get me started on the pleasing "melon spoit" sound every headshot makes.
You don't HAVE to play it that way: in fact, you can attempt to kill as few people as possible, but the fact that you're given the choice to be as violent as possible makes it an ideal game for angry kids.
And sad to say, "angry kids" make up a healthy portion of the hardcore gamer market.
Post by: TrueNerd on December 01, 2006, 07:54:32 AM
CONFIRMED: RODRIGUEZ HATES DEVIL MAY CRY AND THE PLAYSTATION AND EVERYTHING ASSOCIATED WITH IT.
On a serious note, I own this game and have yet to try it because Zelda has taken permanent residence in my Wii.
Post by: Caliban on December 01, 2006, 08:09:28 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: WindyManQuote
Originally posted by: Caliban
I noticed you were "complaining" about the more complex sword moves not being recognized, is it possible that in the options menu you had the sword sensitivity chosen as long movements, instead of short movements?
No, I was using the short movements option. The lack of assistance from the game was a real bane for me, because each time one of the sword movements didn't work, I got frustrated and moved the controller more forcefully each time, and I think that was part of the reason why things didn't work so well. Had I known that softer movements worked better from the start (the game made no indication of this), I would not have been so hard on it,
I still haven't perfected any sword combo.
I asked because I was having problems when I had it in long movements mode.
I too think RS deserves a 6, a 7 at best. Hopefully RS2 will be alot better and have alot more multiplayer options (bots and online), and it should be better since they are cashing in on a game that has gameplay mechanics that aren't so refined, for RS2 they have no excuse.
Post by: Smoke39 on December 01, 2006, 08:51:43 AM
Post by: trip1eX on December 01, 2006, 09:44:14 AM
The problem is that the game was released at least 6 months too early. It lacks polish is almost every area. Even aiming doesn't feel as good as pointing does in the WiiMenu.
There is a lot of promise here. In some ways it reminds me of Geist. Good idea. Shows alot of promise. Needed alot of more polish. Geist though was more fun.
Post by: obscureownership on December 01, 2006, 12:17:02 PM
Post by: NWR_pap64 on December 01, 2006, 12:38:40 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: obscureownership
Having tried two first person shooters for the Wii, I have to say that, even though it's an unpolished port, Call of Duty 3 is a far superior game than Red Steel. Guys, I know we're all excited about first person shooters on the Wii, but Red Steel isn't going to be our Halo. Meanwhile, give credit where credit is due, and try out CoD3.
I honestly don't recall fans (or the media) calling Red Steel the Wii's Halo. It sure was hyped, but never to that extend. And Red Steel doesn't need to be. Ubi never meant the game to become the next Halo, they just wanted to create a new franchise that uses the Wiimote and despite the lack of polish they succeeded at doing so and hopefully will take into account these issues and fix them in the sequel.
Post by: Kairon on December 01, 2006, 05:18:43 PM
If you think about it, Red Steel would probably deserve a 5.0 if not for the Wii controls... and it looks like Ubisoft's bet really paid off with aiming an original FPS for launch. Lots of issue, otherwise mediocre quality, but GOD using the Wiimote to AIM! *swoon*
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: NWR_pap64 on December 01, 2006, 06:53:09 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Kairon
Yeah, Red Steel is at its heart really mediocre... But GOD! To just aim physically and pop a few enemies off at a distance... *sigh*
If you think about it, Red Steel would probably deserve a 5.0 if not for the Wii controls... and it looks like Ubisoft's bet really paid off with aiming an original FPS for launch. Lots of issue, otherwise mediocre quality, but GOD using the Wiimote to AIM! *swoon*
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
I think that's about right. Had this game been a normal, traditional shooter it would've gotten EVEN MORE crap.
I agree, its the new control scheme that adds charm to the game. But someone had to do it, right?
Post by: KDR_11k on December 01, 2006, 08:38:28 PM
Add me to that list. What a shoddy exercise at frustration. How are you supposed to hit crap if the camera won't let you see anything?
Post by: Kairon on December 02, 2006, 04:13:15 AM
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: WindyMan on December 02, 2006, 05:32:09 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Kairon
Yeah, Red Steel is at its heart really mediocre... But GOD! To just aim physically and pop a few enemies off at a distance... *sigh*
If you think about it, Red Steel would probably deserve a 5.0 if not for the Wii controls... and it looks like Ubisoft's bet really paid off with aiming an original FPS for launch. Lots of issue, otherwise mediocre quality, but GOD using the Wiimote to AIM! *swoon*
Bingo.
Post by: trip1eX on December 02, 2006, 10:12:29 AM
I think it just lacks polish. The frame rate needs to be tightened up.
Post by: Smash_Brother on December 02, 2006, 07:17:41 PM
I too wish the game had more polished. It's still enjoyable, but you can see what Ubi was really aiming for and it's a shame they didn't get there like they did in PoP and Beyond Good and Evil.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on December 02, 2006, 07:44:55 PM
Post by: Rhoq on December 04, 2006, 01:21:35 AM
The graphics aren't as bad as many people say. I think the Wii is being compared to the XBox 360/PS3, which is unfair but inevitable. Could 'Red Steel' have looked better, definitely. BUT - spending most of it's life on GameCube development hardware meant that the graphics wold have to suffer by default. The AI is a bit dumb at times, and the voice acting and repetitive vocal samples can be a bit irritating at times. Other than that, I find 'Red Steel' to be a pretty entertaining game.
Post by: Smash_Brother on December 04, 2006, 07:04:21 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Rhoq Maybe it's just me, but I am very forgiving of "launch" titles. With Red Steel, I truly believe that Ubisoft did the best that could, in the amount of development time they had in order to get the game in stores for the November 19th North American launch.
I agree and mostly because this game HAD to be initially developed on PCs and then ported to the Wii hardware when Nintendo finally got around to sending out finalized dev kits.
This is evident because Ubi had set their ambitions much higher than what I feel the Wiimote is as of yet capable of or at least higher than they had time to develop for.
Does anyone remember when finalized Wiimote dev kits were shipped to developers?
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on December 04, 2006, 10:12:38 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Smash_BrotherQuote
Originally posted by: Rhoq Maybe it's just me, but I am very forgiving of "launch" titles. With Red Steel, I truly believe that Ubisoft did the best that could, in the amount of development time they had in order to get the game in stores for the November 19th North American launch.
I agree and mostly because this game HAD to be initially developed on PCs and then ported to the Wii hardware when Nintendo finally got around to sending out finalized dev kits.
This is evident because Ubi had set their ambitions much higher than what I feel the Wiimote is as of yet capable of or at least higher than they had time to develop for.
Does anyone remember when finalized Wiimote dev kits were shipped to developers?
Wasn't it in June or May? Either way it was definately at the last minute. One thing I think people forget is that Red Steel has improved tremendously in visuals since the E3 demo, showing that they indeed cared about them.
Post by: NWR_pap64 on December 04, 2006, 10:19:12 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: VGrevolutionQuote
Originally posted by: Smash_BrotherQuote
Originally posted by: Rhoq Maybe it's just me, but I am very forgiving of "launch" titles. With Red Steel, I truly believe that Ubisoft did the best that could, in the amount of development time they had in order to get the game in stores for the November 19th North American launch.
I agree and mostly because this game HAD to be initially developed on PCs and then ported to the Wii hardware when Nintendo finally got around to sending out finalized dev kits.
This is evident because Ubi had set their ambitions much higher than what I feel the Wiimote is as of yet capable of or at least higher than they had time to develop for.
Does anyone remember when finalized Wiimote dev kits were shipped to developers?
Wasn't it in June or May? Either way it was definately at the last minute. One thing I think people forget is that Red Steel has improved tremendously in visuals since the E3 demo, showing that they indeed cared about them.
Which is ironic because the same people that said the game had vastly been improved since E3 and said the game had potential are now ripping it to pieces in its reviews...
Sheer honesty or journalistic hypocrisy? You decide...
Post by: Pryopizm on December 04, 2006, 10:29:00 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: pap64
Which is ironic because the same people that said the game had vastly been improved since E3 and said the game had potential are now ripping it to pieces in its reviews...
Sheer honesty or journalistic hypocrisy? You decide...
So if an F student works a little harder and finishes the semester off with a 70% (let's call that a C-) average, the teacher's a hypocrite for saying he's vastly improved but giving him a low grade anyway?
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on December 04, 2006, 10:30:18 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: pap64Quote
Originally posted by: VGrevolutionQuote
Originally posted by: Smash_BrotherQuote
Originally posted by: Rhoq Maybe it's just me, but I am very forgiving of "launch" titles. With Red Steel, I truly believe that Ubisoft did the best that could, in the amount of development time they had in order to get the game in stores for the November 19th North American launch.
I agree and mostly because this game HAD to be initially developed on PCs and then ported to the Wii hardware when Nintendo finally got around to sending out finalized dev kits.
This is evident because Ubi had set their ambitions much higher than what I feel the Wiimote is as of yet capable of or at least higher than they had time to develop for.
Does anyone remember when finalized Wiimote dev kits were shipped to developers?
Wasn't it in June or May? Either way it was definately at the last minute. One thing I think people forget is that Red Steel has improved tremendously in visuals since the E3 demo, showing that they indeed cared about them.
Which is ironic because the same people that said the game had vastly been improved since E3 and said the game had potential are now ripping it to pieces in its reviews...
Sheer honesty or journalistic hypocrisy? You decide...
Visually, Red Steel is a mess =D
The fluidity, modeling and animation is wackier than Geist's (relative consoles abilities considered), so in that sense, it's like it lives up to Agent Under Fire's throne of mediocrity (remember that game? one of the first FPSs to get early hype/hope last gen?).
Tho the advantage Red Steak has over Agent Under Garbage is it still seems fun.
Post by: UltimatePartyBear on December 04, 2006, 10:36:59 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: PryopizmQuote
Originally posted by: pap64
Which is ironic because the same people that said the game had vastly been improved since E3 and said the game had potential are now ripping it to pieces in its reviews...
Sheer honesty or journalistic hypocrisy? You decide...
So if an F student works a little harder and finishes the semester off with a 70% (let's call that a C-) average, the teacher's a hypocrite for saying he's vastly improved but giving him a low grade anyway?
Looks like the analogies have started. Too bad. It was a nice thread while it lasted.
Post by: Pryopizm on December 04, 2006, 10:41:49 AM
Post by: Svevan on December 05, 2006, 06:03:57 AM
Post by: NWR_pap64 on December 05, 2006, 06:11:31 AM
What I meant to say was that at E3, everyone complained about the controls, doubting the game's potential. Once the E3 demo was fixed and released onto the public, everyone said the game was better and had the potential of becoming one of the best titles at launch. Then when the final game was released, they trashed it as being one of the worst titles at launch.
See, the media was the one that hyped the game as being truly special (along with the fans). This is very common among the media, they praise a game greatly only to dismiss it as being average, or sometimes take a good game and overly exaggerates its potential.
There's no denying that some websites and publications are guilty of journalistic hypocrisy, and I think Red Steel is a bit of a victim of this.
Post by: WindyMan on December 05, 2006, 07:06:16 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: pap64
You guys got me all wrong...
What I meant to say was that at E3, everyone complained about the controls, doubting the game's potential. Once the E3 demo was fixed and released onto the public, everyone said the game was better and had the potential of becoming one of the best titles at launch. Then when the final game was released, they trashed it as being one of the worst titles at launch.
See, the media was the one that hyped the game as being truly special (along with the fans). This is very common among the media, they praise a game greatly only to dismiss it as being average, or sometimes take a good game and overly exaggerates its potential.
There's no denying that some websites and publications are guilty of journalistic hypocrisy, and I think Red Steel is a bit of a victim of this.
It's easy to say that from an outsider's perspective. Realize that there's a difference between what the publisher allows you to see and play in a limited demo, versus the full game. If we like what we saw in a pre-release build, then of course we're going to be positive about it. If the demo turned out to contain the only positive parts of the entire game, how would we know that until we finally get our hands on the full version and saw it for ourselves? It's like looking into a box through a pinhole and seeing a small part of some object that looks good, then needing to form an opinion on the entire object based only on what you can see, without knowing if the stuff you don't know about is as good as what's visible. We didn't do a 180 on Red Steel--we simply saw the finished product.
We're not hypocrites. We're limited to what game publishers allow us to see. Do you think someone like Ubisoft is going to show journalists all of the ugly parts of a game like Red Steel before it releases? Not when they've spent millions of dollars on it and need all the positive press they can get on it to ensure higher sales. We were all basing our opinions on an unfinished game before it was released. Sure, it had potential. After it was released everyone was of the opinion that it was still unfinished. There's no doubting that. Would the game been as good as we had hoped for had that potential been realized? It's a moot point, because Ubisoft released what it released.
The bottom line is Red Steel is not all that good of a game. It has plenty of awesome moments (there were lots of cool 'bodies flying' sequences), and the gun controls were terrific. Any review will tell you that. But the rest of the crap drags the game down so much that it becomes less worth it. If all I told you was "plenty of awesome moments" and "gun controls were terrific" before the game was released, wouldn't you be excited about the game? If yes, why are you blaming us when that's essentially all Ubisoft showed us in the Red Steel pre-release demos?
Post by: IceCold on December 05, 2006, 08:26:50 AM
Post by: UltimatePartyBear on December 05, 2006, 08:59:31 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Svevan
Analogies are the spice of life - live it up, PoopyBear.
There's nothing wrong with analogies per se. I just have a pet theory that analogies are among the more flammable debate tactics.
Post by: Smash_Brother on December 05, 2006, 09:17:25 AM
Best case scenario: they had 5 months with ACTUAL Wii remotes, from May to early Nov when the game would need to go gold and be printing and shipping, and even that's being generous.
The game scenario needed to be fleshed out to the point where they knew what the player would see, go through, interact with, etc. beforehand. Up until then, everything was being done on PC hardware.
Red Steel isn't like Halo or Geist which both spent 2-5 years in development prior to release (Halo was in the oven a LOOOONG time). At the very best, RS had 13 months time in development, and that's saying they started developing IMMEDIATELY after the Tokyo game show. Then, the aiming and swordfighting mechanics had only 5 months in which to be honed and perfected.
Given these circumstances, I think the same team that gave us PoP and Splinter Cell did the best they could, and despite its flaws, I still enjoyed the game to the point where I'd reserve a sequel right now if one was announced, especially considering that Red Steel 2 would be developed entirely on Wii hardware, with MUCH more time with the Wiimote, and will have access to the WiiConnect24 dev kits which Nintendo decided to withhold from all 3rd parties for some idiotic reason (Pokemon has online play so what gives?).
And I'm glad Red Steel was a launch title because it gave the Wii the extra edge it needed in the west. If I remember correctly, it's the top seller in the US after TP. Despite its flaws, Red Steel went over VERY well with the PS2 crowd, the same group who were quick to label the GC as a toy for children before this. Nintendo (at least Reggie for sure) must have also wanted it for a launch title because Nintendo worked with Ubi to get the game developed and they showed it at E3 as one of the Wii's feature titles, that and Reggie recently defended the game from critics, which is atypical for Nintendo (you don't see them defending Super Monkey Ball).
But the average PS2 fan is likely so used to sh*tty, glitchy games that Red Steel is still awesome in their eyes: it's flashy, violent and let's them execute their enemies after defeating them. What more could the angry teenage gamer want from a game?
Post by: Smash_Brother on December 05, 2006, 09:18:20 AM
Post by: IceCold on December 05, 2006, 02:24:18 PM
QuoteUbisoft Montreal makes those.. Ubisoft Paris made Red Steel.
Given these circumstances, I think the same team that gave us PoP and Splinter Cell did the best they could
Post by: Smash_Brother on December 05, 2006, 03:52:26 PM
Post by: vudu on December 06, 2006, 05:47:59 AM
Post by: stedaman on October 09, 2007, 09:08:45 AM
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on October 09, 2007, 03:15:28 PM
