Rayman Pirate-Community

Care to expand on that idea?

I'm not saying literally that the Origins formula should be given a Twinsanity spin, only that it could be given new life by doing that which Twinsanity did to the Crash Bandicoot formula, it retained iconic gameplay while also making a few changes here and there while also adding in some new concepts, which made the game fresh.

The Origins formula could also do with such a spin to prevent it getting old, retain its iconic gameplay style, but also change and add things to it to make it seem fresh again.

True, true. Yet what can possibly added to formula that would make another entry seem fresh?

I recall discussing with Brawler and some others about giving the formula a Metroidvania spin, I'd elaborate, but I'm heading off now.

I'm pretty sure the team has enough ideas to make the next Ubiart Rayman game unique and even better. I mean, after the crazy RO, they improved a lot with RL, and I don't see why should there be a limit as long as the gameplay mechanics keep being innovative and fun. Just look at Mario, everyone thought 3D World would be a repetitive mess, and, well...

Thanks for reminding me I still want a 3D 4 player co-op Rayman game.

I like how whenever IGN gives a shitty review everyone cries about them not being a good source for reviews and how they get payed for them but when they give a (Possibly payed for) good grade everyone's reaction is "Whoa man this game is good IGN likes it!".

Keane wrote:I like how whenever IGN gives a shitty review everyone cries about them not being a good source for reviews and how they get payed for them but when they give a (Possibly payed for) good grade everyone's reaction is "Whoa man this game is good IGN likes it!".

The thing with them being payed off only happens with games like Call of Duty. From what I've heard, Ghosts is a terrible mess with non-fuctioning co-op and terrible textures, but according to reviews it's great. While I would expect a company like Activision or EA to do something like that, I don't think a big company like Nintendo would stoop that low.

And besides, all the pros in that are, from what I've seen, things I can agree with.

...but my point still stands that people only hate IGN when they don't give high grades to games they like. It seems pretty fucked up to me to praise them for this right after everyone got done mass ranting about Lost World. Is IGN still that awful, worthless company when you watch this review?

I still think IGN is one of the most biased and inconsistent reviewing sites out there. Sure, some of their reviews may be fairly on-target, but just as many you can't even take with a grain of salt.

I hate IGN regarding the good reviews they made. There are so many bad ones.

I can ensure that Gamespot isn't quite trustworthy either. They gave a mediocre score to Rayman Arena (M) for PC by accusing it was a super glitched game while I swear for god that I never found glitches in this version and is much more smooth than on PS2.

Gamespot just did a review of Knack and their review was terrible. It made me very mad. Do they even know how gameplay works with beat' em ups? Plus they did not even beat a half of game. I understand it's not a type of game for everyone but they can't judge it negativly because of that. It would be the same if I was to review some FPS game and yet I am not big fan of them.

What I do when I want to see reviews is go to metacritic and search for reivew that gave game best score and compare it with bad ones.
Game Informer is the only one who gave Knuck a true review.

Good thing i don't check reviews about the game, because my opinion may differ greatly from theirs ( in some cases it does ). I only watch trailers and parts of walkthrough videos, and if i enjoy the game I play it for sure.

In case anybody's interested, i started to upload videos of my challenge records, so you can check them out ( these are Tuesday's challenges ):

Hm, while I know that some websites can be rather...inept at their reviewing, some games just aren't genuinely good, I'm not saying that Knack is bad and these reviews are justified, but I would definitely assess the material and knowledge regarding it to obtain a more clear and rational opine.

Keane wrote:...but my point still stands that people only hate IGN when they don't give high grades to games they like. It seems pretty fucked up to me to praise them for this right after everyone got done mass ranting about Lost World. Is IGN still that awful, worthless company when you watch this review?

That's because their review on Sonic Lost World (Wii U) was objectively terrible.

It wasn't the score that bothered people, it was the completely shallow review they gave.

Sonic Lost World is not a mediocre game 5.8 game, it's a "love it or hate it" kind of game. IGN neglected to mention many things about the game - including it's REAL flaws ("IT'S TOO SLOW" and "IT'S TOO HARD" are not good points to make about the game, especially the former). I know this because I played the game, and the points made by the IGN reviewer lead me to believe he hardly touched the thing.

It also doesn't help that the reviewer got into an argument with Cobanermani456 on Twitter, and was very inflammatory towards Cobi whenever he made an argument (keeping in mind that Cobi himself does not think this game is perfect).

Sonic Lost World is one of those games that you won't truly see the excellence in if you don't spend time and practice with it. I can think of other games like this (I initially did not like F-Zero GX, for example - but when I learned how to play it properly, it became one of my favourite racing games of all time). The IGN reviewer clearly was not willing to do this. He clearly stated how much he loved the boost mechanics and what not from the previous three main Sonic games - which were much easier to pick up and play (though this is in part because those games had much better teaching tools than Lost World - a very noteworthy flaw about Lost World on Wii U is it's terrible tutorials, which the IGN review never brought up).

So yeah, people are only annoyed at these mainstream reviewers when they are clearly ignoring a lot of things. People thought the GameTrailers review of Lost World on Wii U (they gave it a 7.5 out of 10), was much better, as it actually addressed way more things about the game.

And for the record, a lot of people thought IGN were too easy on the 3DS version of Lost World.

OldClassicGamer wrote:Gamespot just did a review of Knack and their review was terrible. It made me very mad. Do they even know how gameplay works with beat' em ups? Plus they did not even beat a half of game. I understand it's not a type of game for everyone but they can't judge it negativly because of that. It would be the same if I was to review some FPS game and yet I am not big fan of them.

What I do when I want to see reviews is go to metacritic and search for reivew that gave game best score and compare it with bad ones.
Game Informer is the only one who gave Knuck a true review.

Knack has been getting generally "eh" reviews around the board. Nobody is really saying it's bad (Except for Gamespot), so it's mainly up to the people who play it to come up with their own opinions. Game Informer isn't the only one who gave it a "true" review, you're just saying that because they're the only people who gave it a really good score. Nobody is really saying it's bad, they say the combat is good, but the checkpoints are awful, and that the story (Which is one of the advertising points, the website says that there's 90 minutes of cutscenes right next to the gameplay stuff) is full of plot holes and unmemorable characters. Overall, from what I get, it isn't a bad game, just a flawed one.

Gonna be honest and say that Knack has always looked a little too generic to me.

I mean, the art direction is fantastic, but I feel like it would of been more suited as an open world super hero type game, rather than a kid's God of War game. And while I think that Katamari-inspired idea of collecting stuff to grow bigger is really neat, again, I think it would of been better suited to an open world type game.

As it stands though, the game feels like it's just meant to show off the PS4's power. Note how one of the tech demos for the PS4 had like, a million shapes in view at once, and the whole concept of Knack means there is always a ton of stuff on screen at once. Though, besides that, the game looks beautiful in general.

Knack is terrible. I just love how OCG is butthurt about it. It's the lamest exponent of damage control I've seen in a while. But when it comes to Pac-Man and the Ghostly Adventures? "Urr, it's terrible because the scores say so... and uuuh, MY CHILDHOOD, HURR".

I'm still extremely skeptical about Knack, however those who have played it on this forum seem to be enjoying it http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread. ... 36&page=11