IGN Reviews Genji, verdict: passable
Ouch! For those of you who thought all early next-gen games would get high scores simply because of the "oooh, pretty" factor, think thee again. IGN posted their review of Genji and in contrast to the slightly higher scores issued by Famitsu a week back, the verdict is... well, passable. Here's the reasoning behind the meager (but not unsavory -- remember a 5.0 is average) scoring:- Beautiful graphics, beautiful presentation, and pretty good sound, but meh voice acting (big surprise...)
- The gameplay suffers through repetition, not long-lasting appeal since game can be long... and repetitive
What always surprises me about IGN reviews is how the breakdown never really adds up and they don't supply a weight scale to see what is measured as more important. Genji received an 8, 8.5, 8, 6, and 7 for presentation, graphics, sound, gameplay and lasting appeal, respectively. Divided by 5, that's a 7.5 -- yet it receives a 6. We're thinking gameplay and lasting appeal are weighted far more heavily, but then, why break it down? Oh well, if you liked the first Genji, you will enjoy this one too. Any questions?
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Lion @ Nov 9th 2006 4:03PM
It doesn't matter what the game is rated. People are going to play it if they find it interesting. If a game sucks, people will say it sucks. And, if a game is great, people will say it sucks.
.. @ Nov 9th 2006 4:46PM
Well I loved the first one, and I will get this no matter what IGN says. If i'm not wrong, the first Genji did not get a high score either, about 7-8 I think. I'm gonna go with Famitsu's score and just ignore IGN's unbiased review ^^.
joe @ Nov 9th 2006 6:00PM
the game is barely passable and they say that its not weighted and is not averaged in the review, most of the individual ratings are opinions along with the rating anyways...
Marco C Jr @ Nov 9th 2006 8:12PM
I agree, its not the greatest game in the world but I enjoyed the first game, and if this game is like its predecessor, then I'm going to pick it up.
These reviewer my be tired of games that doesn't innovate and play exactly like other games like it but I'm not.
I think these people get a bit jaded because they play so many games but then again who can blame them, playing that many games does that to you.
Ritchie Nolasco @ Nov 9th 2006 11:26PM
Genji is not really a great game and there's no point blaming IGN's reviewer.
Try this one
http://www.gamebrink.com/playstation-3/1857-Genji__Kamui_Souran-reviews.html
"This camera is so badly placed in some spots that from time to time you’ll be lost wandering around levels because of it."
"the motion stuff feels tacked on at the last minute and only works part of the time."
"Oh and don’t forget that there’s no rumble in this advanced piece of hardware so you’ll never feel one hit you deal out or take through the entire game."
"While the art isn’t exactly of Final Fantasy quality, the high polygon models and lush environments are a nice showpiece for the PS3, which I’m afraid is all Sony meant this title to be. Although, at times these visuals will turn into a virtual slideshow as the framerate dips and effects gameplay towards the negative side of things."
Try defending Genji with that.
Canuckle @ Nov 10th 2006 10:36AM
Lion, the point of reading reviews is that people who don't want or can't afford to purchase and play every game get a chance to read a professionals opinion (these guys and gals are professionals you know). If everyone blindly purchased games and played them to see if they "suck" or not then the video game market would be undeniably HUGE.
Same goes for interest. If people find that style of game interesting but find out it plays very poorly then a majority are going to wait for the next title to come out. I trust reviews on IGN and other sites, so much so that this would land in the "not gonna play" to "rental" category.
Yung @ Nov 10th 2006 4:51PM
dont ya just luuuuuuv reviews