Support NeoGAF

[kiphalfton]

Yeah I think it was trash. I could barely last 4 hours.
It's like they agreed to put in any idea they have on the daily meetings.
There is 0 curation here. It's a mashup of gameplay ideas that do not fit together.
On top of that, the constant alerts, spawning enemies, poor combat. I really don't understand the high scores. It's like if people only played the intro or watched the trailer.
You go underground for 2-3 hours and then when you emerge, it gets even more annoying. It's a really bad time for me.
On the contrary - Forspoken would be a big surprise for me this year. Fantastic gameplay, combat and best open world traversal in a long time. It is like if reviewers scored the game based on tweets and memes alone.

Cool catchy art + butt naked balerinas = high score
Game you actually have to play, to see if it's good = low scores

edit: The biggest surprise this year for me might be Hogwarts. I never expected to enjoy it as much as I did. Forspoken I kinda had some hopes for.

The irony.

 

[Drizzlehell]

I loved it.

Is it perfect? No. The dialogue is really cringey and a bit too frequent, this is true. The checkpoint system is abysmal. Some of the gameplay elements are a little undercooked, like most of the open world, but I found the combat and abilities to be very fun and different from most of what releases these days. The setting/world was extremely unique and fun to be a part of.

The game balancing is weird and I know it's a turn off for a lot of people. The opening hours of the game are brutal because you have no abilities, limited weapons/ammo and the enemies they send at you hit like a truck. Every fight is a struggle, but there's something I kind of liked about this. By the end of the game, you are so overpowered with upgraded weapons and abilities you can mow all of the robots down with ease, but it feels like you earned it because of how difficult the beginning is.

It's a really solid foundation, and I think a sequel that polishes some of the rougher edges could turn into something really special. I really recommend people at least give it a shot before dismissing it based on the negativity of others.

It eventually gets slightly less tedious as you progress but only because you're able to mow down robots faster. I wouldn't count that as the game getting good. Just less of a chore to play.

There are some occasional moments where I'm having a decent enough time but those moments are exclusively reserved to the linear missions that take place in one of those closed-off levels. Everything about the overworld is just a bitch to grind through.

The irony.

Nothing ironic about that. If the game requires you to grind through 10 hours of bullshit before you can get to a part that doesn't suck then it's not a very good game, period. I don't blame anyone who ditched this within the first few hours.

 

[Mozzarella]

Yes, it stands at very positive on Steam and it has a metacritic score in like high 70s. That's not a score that an "average" game gets, unless you're one of those people who considers 7/10 to be a disappointment.

Thats not how this works, if for journalists and their reviews 7 is the average then it is.
You rarely see a game scoring 50s so thats not the average.

Unfortunately thats how it works here, journalists scale is 0-50 trash. 60s is bad, 70s is mediocre/average, 80s is good, 90s is amazing 95+ is super amazing.

Same goes for Steam, games rarely get negative, unless its unplayable or something.

 

[GHG]

Looks a lot nicer than it plays.

If not for gamepass I think the reception would have been much harsher.

I paid full price for it at launch but only because I wanted to see how it looked/ran on my 4090 and I wasn't disappointed in that respect.

 

[Drizzlehell]

God damn, the fact that everything can knock you on your ass in this game makes this one of the most annoying first person shooters I've ever played. Seriously, even Sunday Funday on the NES didn't trash your player character around as much as this fucking game does.

Fuck this, all I want is to grab a god damned upgrade for my machine gun before I move on to the next linear mission, why does this game have to make my life a living hell, this is horseshit.

Thats not how this works, if for journalists and their reviews 7 is the average then it is.
You rarely see a game scoring 50s so thats not the average.

Unfortunately thats how it works here, journalists scale is 0-50 trash. 60s is bad, 70s is mediocre/average, 80s is good, 90s is amazing 95+ is super amazing.

Same goes for Steam, games rarely get negative, unless its unplayable or something.

That is some mental gymnastics you've performed there, lol.

 

[Hugare]

Game was great

Amazing art, gameplay better than any Bioshock game, great pacing, runs amazing on every system, incredibly polished (considering its the studio's first game)

What were you expecting? An AAAA release from a new, russian studio?

Blame yourself for building huge expectations for a game that never promissed you that much

 

[nkarafo]

Does the Russian audio fix the cringe dialogue/delivery?

 

[Drizzlehell]

AAAA release

There is no such thing, stop saying that.

gameplay better than any Bioshock game

There are about 10 thousand different ways to say how utterly wrong you are.

 

[Werewolf Jones]

If this shit came out in 2007 it would be listed in top games of all time.

 

[rofif]

The irony.

4 hours is a lot for his game. I made it to the open area above ground.
By that time, I knew what the game is and that I hate it.
With some other games that start very slow, you feel there is something there if you keep pushing. not here

 

[Abriael_GN]

1: part of the anti-censorship crowd decided that they needed to defend it because Ukraine wanted the russian game banned. "Censor" something and people will automatically invent that it's great no matter how shit it is.
2: Lots of russians picked it up as a pride flag for their awful gaming industry.
3: Some weirdos thought that the robot girls were sexy.
4: Lots of people genuinely like bad games

 

[Jboemios]

Good game, trash opinion

 

[Pelao]

In my case, to be fair, I never expected more from the game beyond "We have Bioshock at home," so I can't really call it a disappointment. I downloaded it from Gamepass, played it for a few hours, wasn't hooked, and uninstalled it. The end.
That said, from what I played, I do think the game had decent production values, so I'm at least interested to see what that studio does in the future.

 

[kiphalfton]

Nothing ironic about that. If the game requires you to grind through 10 hours of bullshit before you can get to a part that doesn't suck then it's not a very good game, period. I don't blame anyone who ditched this within the first few hours.

Why would I take anything you or anybody else says seriously, if you haven't even beat the game?

 

[Abriael_GN]

Why would I take anything you or anybody else says seriously, if you haven't even beat the game?

You don't need to beat a game to know that it's crap. That's an utterly disingenuous argument.

 

[Drizzlehell]

1: part of the anti-censorship crowd decided that they needed to defend it because Ukraine wanted the russian game banned. "Censor" something and people will automatically invent that it's great no matter how shit it is.
2: Lots of russians picked it up as a pride flag for their awful gaming industry.
3: Some weirdos thought that the robot girls were sexy.
4: Lots of people genuinely like bad games

Yeah, even in this thread I see a lot of people working overtime to conjure up weird excuses for this game's shortcomings, with "it's just a poor Russian studio making its first game" being the most recurring one. People who say this should honestly look into the history of this game's development and stop repeating this nonsense.

It's just a mediocre game, and no amount of mental gymnastics is gonna change it.

 

[Hugare]

- double post -

 

[Drizzlehell]

Why would I take anything you or anybody else says seriously, if you haven't even beat the game?

For the same reason that I don't need to finish eating a plate of cow dung with a side of cum gravy to know that it's awful.

 

[PacificNW]

I loved the game. I struggled through my first play through, got to the end boss wholly unprepared and restarted. The game clicked for me pretty much immediately. I loved it all. Once I understood the gameplay loop, I was able to focus on all the different parts of the game and I believe Mundfish did an incredible job.

I loved Mick Gordons work with the sound track.
the cinematic and thought they were filmed perfectly.
how weird some of the visuals were.
all the gun animations, their sounds and how punchy the gunplay was.
all the puzzles and dungeons and their look.
how much fun the devs had with rigging all the wooden dolls in the dungeons.

The game was a treat to play. I can't wait for the DLC.
Im sorry you were let down. I hope you find something that can make you smile.

 

[Eiknarf]

Thats not how this works, if for journalists and their reviews 7 is the average then it is.
You rarely see a game scoring 50s so thats not the average.

Unfortunately thats how it works here, journalists scale is 0-50 trash. 60s is bad, 70s is mediocre/average, 80s is good, 90s is amazing 95+ is super amazing.

Same goes for Steam, games rarely get negative, unless it’s unplayable or something.

Actually when I took a few 3D art (Maya) classes a decade ago they said that a game’s Metacritic score is important

When you work in the field, getting your next job could be as simple as making sure the game you previously worked on averaged in the 80s or higher, because an 80 average means it’s “good”

So an average in the 60s is subpar, an average in the 70s is mediocre. 80s is good. 90s is great…etc

 

[SmokedMeat]

Eh, I’ll form my own opinion. I never go into any game with set expectations.

If it’s a dud it’s a dud.

 

[Drizzlehell]

Oh god, now I'm in some lab-looking location that's filled with swarms of those zombies again (they keep knocking me on my ass every 2 seconds, naturally), and every time I enter combat the game starts playing this death metal rendition of a circus music...?

What the hell is this game, lol.

I muted it after about 5 minutes because it was just getting on my nerves. I never thought that I would ever feel relieved when muting an aggressive metal music.

 

[Arsic]

I’ve played worse

 

[rofif]

Oh god, now I'm in some lab-looking location that's filled with swarms of those zombies again (they keep knocking me on my ass every 2 seconds, naturally), and every time I enter combat the game starts playing this death metal rendition of a circus music...?

What the hell is this game, lol.

I muted it after about 5 minutes because it was just getting on my nerves. I never thought that I would ever feel relieved when muting an aggressive metal music.

That’s mick Gordon overrated noise for you. Not fitting the atmosphere at all

 

[AlphaDump]

I dropped it hard. It was kind of cool at first but just too clunky.

It probably reviewed well to not cut the legs out of a new studio, and the fact it was released during a massive game drought.

 

[Lupin25]

A 75 with a 7.5/10 user score.

On the new-gen scale, that’s the definition of a mid game (complete with stunning graphics to lure casuals)

And for once,
neither were foolishly deterred, as both critics and consumers aligned to judge this bimbo fairly.

 

[Redneckerz]

GAF really doesn't get bored of hyperbole threads does it. I know, nuance is not exciting, but everytime i read a thread like this i feel like someone's inner child is been let out, disappointed as it is with the fact it can never surface in the real world.

So all that's left for it are threads like these.

 

[Drizzlehell]

That’s mick Gordon overrated noise for you. Not fitting the atmosphere at all

Nah that was clearly a licensed song by some russian band because it had some shit screamo vocalist. Besides, Gordon only worked on parts of the soundtrack and all of his tracks are pretty recognizable since they bear the same glitchy electronic sound from Doom, and all of that is good stuff.

 

[Drizzlehell]

GAF really doesn't get bored of hyperbole threads does it. I know, nuance is not exciting, but everytime i read a thread like this i feel like someone's inner child is been let out, disappointed as it is with the fact it can never surface in the real world.

So all that's left for it are threads like these.

Clearly you haven't actually read what I wrote because then you wouldn't be bitching about lack of nuance.

 

[Redneckerz]

Clearly you haven't actually read what I wrote because then you wouldn't be bitching about lack of nuance.

I did. Its hyperbole and then you start to explain why it is. At the end of the day, its still hyperbole.

Maybe read your own OP and see how it come across. Spoiler: it sounds like a inner child is let loose.

 

[Drizzlehell]

I did. Its hyperbole and then you start to explain why it is. At the end of the day, its still hyperbole.

Maybe read your own OP and see how it come across. Spoiler: it sounds like a inner child is let loose.

It's called thesis that I expanded upon in my post, where I explained my experience with the game while also giving it credit where it was due. It's the complete opposite of hyperbole.

 

[Redneckerz]

It's called thesis that I expanded upon in my post, where I explained my experience with the game while also giving it credit where it was due. It's the complete opposite of hyperbole.

Okay lets see:

The only other game that has the potential to be an even bigger disappointment this year is Starfield, given the immense hype surrounding it. However, if that one turns out to be good, then Atomic Heart will likely end up being one of the most sour gaming experiences I've had this year. It may not be the worst game to come out, but I had exceptionally high expectations after watching the amazing trailers. Unfortunately, the flashy visuals are pretty much the only aspect I can compliment the developers for, and it's a bit baffling to me why so many people are being so positive about it...

Seems like all you give it praise for already at the beginning is just the visuals. In fact you are baffled that, in fact, people like this game.

The story simply falls flat, and I despise the dialogue and voice acting to the point where I constantly wanted to mute the audio to avoid enduring any more of that annoying drivel. All that exposition would have been better served as shorter text and audio logs. I mean, why not? The game already borrows every Shock-flavored trope under the sun anyway. If the developers truly wanted to innovate, they should have prioritized better writing instead of elongated and mostly aimless conversations between the most abrasive and annoying cunt on the planet and his pet glove.

This isn't thesis, and i have highlighted the words that make this sound like hyperbole, or inner child cryout.

The cutscene direction is also among the worst I've seen in recent years, as they are tonally inconsistent, poorly paced, and even the character dialogue feels rushed, often resulting in characters talking over each other—not in a natural way like people sometimes do in real life, but rather because the dialogue lines were too long, leading to the next one starting before the previous one ended. It was even more comical when the same character interrupted themselves.

This part is a lot less hyperbolic, and indeed, thesis. Not that i agree, but the bolded part is hyperbole.

Then there's the gameplay, which I just fucking hate with a passion. Every passing hour playing the game felt like running through a field full of rakes. Each step that I took off the beaten path was rewarded by getting slammed in the face with a stick. It's just impossible to focus on your objectives, which are already pretty obtuse, when you have to constantly look around for cameras and those annoying flying fuckers that resurrect everything that you kill. Plus the game is really stingy with resources so after a while, instead of trying to explore and engage in combat, I just started sprinting past everything just so that I could get this stupid shit over with. I don't know about you but that doesn't sound like fun at all. To top it all off, melee combat is awkward, and it takes an eternity to kill anything, making it a lousy fallback option.

Hyperbole, not thesis, and certainly not nuance. If this were the case of This game is just not for me, that would be a better fit. The majority of this is just emotional turmoil condensed into a wordly package. I get it, you don't like the game. You spend more time bitching about the game than being nuanced or realizing that you are actually bitching.

The entire experience feels soulless too, by the way. It borrows the aesthetic of 60s Soviet retro-futurism and boasts impressive visual and animation work that's well-polished, making for a really impressive spectacle sometimes. However, the further I progressed into the game, the stronger my impression became that it was merely a hodge-podge of various ideas that were nicked from different video games and science fiction works. There is no consistent, overarching vision or message behind any of it. It feels more like a "throw shit at the wall and see what sticks" kind of game. Let's just say that I couldn't feel invested in any of it, and none of the elements elicited any significant emotional reaction beyond the initial, "huh, that's neat... and also strange that it's here." Like those fungus zombies with their heads split-opened that look like The Last of Us rejects. I guess they look neat but what the hell does that have to do with the robot uprising?

You twice praise the game on its visuals and its animation, and then you cancel this out by saying its a hodge-podge of various ideas. That isn't thesis, that's you ranting emotionally without a layer of nuance wedged inbetween it. The more your thesis goes, the more emotional it gets. If this were a review i would grade it of questionable quality because you let emotions become the better of you.

Anyway, that's probably like 5/10 for me. Maybe it would change had I finished the game but it was so goddamned long and my patience can only last for so long...

Thesis, right? Or is it more that you felt frustrated/emotional playing this? Nah, its thesis. I believe yo.u

Oh and this isn't in your OP but i found it very amusing against your current stance:

This game isn't even worthy of licking dog shit off of Bioshock's boot soles.

Yep, you are making your point clear.

Please tell me where my initial impression falls short now that i have reviewed your OP. Conclusion: Its hyperbole and emotional in nature.

 

[LostInTime]

If this shit came out in 2007 it would be listed in top games of all time.

Same goes for Crime Boss: Rockay City. People back in the day loved goofy raunchy type games. Now days people shit all over these type of games.

 

[Hestar69]

game was very meh....Story was dumb,world was cool,the driving was ASS. Hopefully the sequel improves alot of things.

 

[Drizzlehell]

Okay lets see:


Seems like all you give it praise for already at the beginning is just the visuals. In fact you are baffled that, in fact, people like this game.


This isn't thesis, and i have highlighted the words that make this sound like hyperbole, or inner child cryout.

This part is a lot less hyperbolic, and indeed, thesis. Not that i agree, but the bolded part is hyperbole.

Hyperbole, not thesis, and certainly not nuance. If this were the case of This game is just not for me, that would be a better fit. The majority of this is just emotional turmoil condensed into a wordly package. I get it, you don't like the game. You spend more time bitching about the game than being nuanced or realizing that you are actually bitching.

You twice praise the game on its visuals and its animation, and then you cancel this out by saying its a hodge-podge of various ideas. That isn't thesis, that's you ranting emotionally without a layer of nuance wedged inbetween it. The more your thesis goes, the more emotional it gets. If this were a review i would grade it of questionable quality because you let emotions become the better of you.

Thesis, right? Or is it more that you felt frustrated/emotional playing this? Nah, its thesis. I believe yo.u

Oh and this isn't in your OP but i found it very amusing against your current stance:

Yep, you are making your point clear.

Please tell me where my initial impression falls short now that i have reviewed your OP. Conclusion: Its hyperbole and emotional in nature.

 

[Agent_4Seven]

Does the Russian audio fix the cringe dialogue/delivery?

Idk how it is in English, but playing with Russian audio is the best option, well, unless you really hate reading subtitles.

 

[Redneckerz]

Good thing knowing you aren't expressing desire to discussion yet made the expectation i should review your OP. So i did.

Enjoy!

 

[Flutta]

Nah you just got rekt.

 

[darrylgorn]

More like Atomic Fart amirite?

 

[Shut0wen]

Ive said this in numerous threads that this game was going to be average, its amazing how many people cant tell the difference between a fake demo trailer to actual gameplay, learned my lesson ever since watchdog e3 gameplay

 

[Edgelord79]

You should work in games media. At least you would get paid for these emotional dissertations you spit out weekly.

 

[Drizzlehell]

Nah you just got rekt.

That guy doesn't even seem to understand what "hyperbole" means so there's really no point in trying to argue with someone who has a third grade level education.

Wait, why am I talking to you anyway? Weren't you the guy who said gay people are perverts and pedos?

 

[Flutta]

That guy doesn't even seem to understand what "hyperbole" means so there's really no point in trying to argue with someone who has a third grade level education.

Wait, why am I talking to you anyway? Weren't you the guy who said gay people are perverts and pedos? Fuck outta here.

 

[MMaRsu]

Devs first game.. Yes let's be as harsh on them as we are on actual AAA devs..

 

[Drizzlehell]

Good thing knowing you aren't expressing desire to discussion yet made the expectation i should review your OP. So i did.

Enjoy!

What is there to discuss if you can't even understand what hyperbole means? Having a strong opinion on something doesn't mean that whatever I say is hyperbolic. It would be a hyperbole if I exaggerated any of those problems within the game but I didn't. Everything I say is literally what happened when I was playing it, and I merely expressed my frustration and disappointment by using some harsh language. Being frustrated isn't an emotion that's exclusive to children either so you can quit trying to insult me with this bullshit.

Anyway, nothing you said was really that insightful or smart and you seem determined to misconstrue and nitpick my opinion about the game. It's okay if you disagree but if your idea of a "discussion" is to simply bash me for it and misuse big words that you probably thought would make you sound smarter than you really are, then I've no interest in an earnest conversation with you.

 

[Hugare]

There are about 10 thousand different ways to say how utterly wrong you are.

Oh right, 'cause Bioshock gameplay was soo good. It was criticized even in 2007.

Its one of my favorite games of all time, but gameplay is clunky af. You cant use plasmid and shoot at the same time, for example. And deadzone and etc. while aiming was terrible. Shooting was ass.

So much so that they've introduced dual wielding (plasmids + gun) in Bioshock II and Infinite, for example.

Atomic Heart shooting is above average and dual wielding powers + guns is much better than any Bioshock game released.

 

[Drizzlehell]

A 75 with a 7.5/10 user score.

On the new-gen scale, that’s the definition of a mid game (complete with stunning graphics to lure casuals)

And for once,
neither were foolishly deterred, as both critics and consumers aligned to judge this bimbo fairly.

Well, that's what confuses me because there seem to be plenty enough people in here who don't seem to care about it that much or dropped it a few hours in, much for the same reasons as I did. And yet a 75 score is a fairly high one, definitely higher than I would expect for a game like this.

It's probably due to a number of reasons, but I think the biggest ones include that whole "censorship" controversy and people trying to prop it up for ideological reasons, and also a bunch of casuals who were just glad that it runs fine and looks pretty, but I doubt many of them even bothered to get very far into it. I'd love to see some stats that show what was the actual completion rate for this game. Somehow I get the feeling that not many players saw the end credits.

1: part of the anti-censorship crowd decided that they needed to defend it because Ukraine wanted the russian game banned. "Censor" something and people will automatically invent that it's great no matter how shit it is.
2: Lots of russians picked it up as a pride flag for their awful gaming industry.
3: Some weirdos thought that the robot girls were sexy.
4: Lots of people genuinely like bad games

Yeah, pretty much this, lol.

Anyway, I'm gonna get my fix for immersive sims when System Shock drops in a few days, so screw it.

 

[MMaRsu]

Oh right, 'cause Bioshock gameplay was soo good. It was criticized even in 2007.

It was?

"BioShock stands as a monolithic example of the convergence of entertaining gameplay"

From IGN review

 

[funkygunther]

If this shit came out in 2007 it would be listed in top games of all time.

no shit, it's 15 years later...if RDR2 came out in 2007 people would lose their minds and if you showed a caveman your iphone he'd shit his pants

 

[Drizzlehell]

Oh right, 'cause Bioshock gameplay was soo good. It was criticized even in 2007.

Its one of my favorite games of all time, but gameplay is clunky af. You cant use plasmid and shoot at the same time, for example. And deadzone and etc. while aiming was terrible. Shooting was ass.

So much so that they've introduced dual wielding (plasmids + gun) in Bioshock II and Infinite, for example.

Atomic Heart shooting is above average and dual wielding powers + guns is much better than any Bioshock game released.

Gunplay is the one thing that Atomic Heart does better, but the overall combat is a mess. It becomes glaringly obvious whenever you're forced to trek through the open world. Even with a decently upgraded arsenal, it feels like a never-ending gauntlet of trash, where every enemy type can randomly knock you down. There doesn't seem to be any consistent logic behind it. It would make more sense if, for example, only the heavy enemies could knock you back, or if only special attacks had that effect. But that's not how it works in this game. Sometimes, you'll get knocked back by a basic attack from the weakest enemy, while other times, a heavy attack from a larger enemy will do nothing. It's completely broken. To top it all off, if there's one mechanic in the entire first-person shooter genre that I would gladly erase from existence, it's the one where your character gets knocked down and you lose control of the camera and controls while they try to stand up. Which, as we've already established, happens in this game. ALL. THE. TIME.

Everything just keeps respawning within seconds too, which renders any minor victory utterly pointless, so ultimately all I did was to sprint to my next objective as fast as humanly possible and I didn't even bother collecting any of the optional upgrades unless it was on the way.

So yeah, you can see how I kinda hated the combat in this game. And that wasn't even the biggest reason why this game is inferior to Bioshock. Bioshock also has better story, characters, writing, voice acting, atmosphere, level design, presentation, clear and consistent vision in themes and gameplay... the list goes on.