Metareview - Kameo: Elements of Power

Cant wait to play it myself!

87 from Gamespot?!

I was quietly hoping the game would be getting even higher scores, considering how long Rare's been working on it. Seems to be doing respectably well, though.

Two things to note here, the way gamesrankings converts 4 out of 5 to 80% is clearly wrong. You can't practically relate one to another and I'd say 4/5 is probably closer to 90% in real terms. Second 1UP seem to have something personal against Rare, and specifically Kamo for a while now and after they gave PGR3 a 'perfect' 10 and now this I've lost what little confidence I had in them.

If you read the Gamespot/IGN reviews they are very postive and really the only gripe they have is that the game is short at 10 hours, but even then they addmitted they rushed through and that there were lots of side quests and challanges they didn't complete.

:)

I DEMAND ANOTHER 2-DIMENSIONAL DONKEY KONG COUNTRY!

It's Sudeki all over again!!!!

One would hope this game would at least get decent reviews, its been in development since the N64. Also with all the hype around it is it no wonder the reviews are good? I have a hard time trusting reviews from people who get paid to review games, I'll wait till I start reading real people reviews.

But I have a feeling this game may wind up being a Love it or Hate it type game. I played the DEMO at Wal-Mart this weekend and I thought the game reeeally sucked.

I think the only reason it's gotten as high reviews as it has is that they are impressed with the system that the game is on.

To put it into perspective, Oddworld: Munch's oddesy was a launch title on the Xbox, and it got good reviews... but the game itself is absolute garbage. The only thing that saved it was the newness of the system.

James:

"[since] the combat is mostly pretty easy, and since the puzzle solutions are always right there (courtesy of your talking hint book), you should be able to blow through Kameo pretty quickly…”

Nice way to pull the one negative comment out of what is actually an extremely enthusiastic review by Greg on gamespot.

Why not post both his enthusiasm of the overall game AND his comment about the game not being that long?

"Two things to note here, the way gamesrankings converts 4 out of 5 to 80% is clearly wrong."

That's funny, pretty much anyone who's passed seventh-grade math can tell you that 4/5 = 80/100.

And - GASP! - 4.5/5 = 90/100!

Considering that the vast majority of current games fall between 7 and 10 these days, an 8 is not much to get excited about. I'm disappointed, I was hoping it would be a real winner and not so "
ho hum" sounding.

Watership: sometimes reviewers say more in one negative comment than they say in thousands of fluffy, vague words in the rest of the review.

Realy not seeing graphics that scream "next-gen". sigh.

If this was a Nintendo game, you could bet your spouse that this game would be heralded as the new gold standard in adventure games that the whole family could enjoy.

The guy who reviewed for 1UP and IGN seemed to lack the appreciation for the possibilities this game offers, and you could see that the reviewer at 1UP clearly despises the character design while the gamespot reviewer positively lavishes praise on the same aspect. It would seem that the 1UP reviewer clearly lacked the imagination to see the possibilities, or he might not have played through the game to discover those possibilities.

The reviewers should be chosen according to the genre they are reviewing. If I were to review a Madden game, I would give it a dismal score, just because I am not at all interested in that genre. But a football enthusiast might give it a respectable review. Choosing a reviewer who is enthusiastic for the particular genre is paramount because the target audience of a game mainly consists of genre fans.

I picked it up, because there are practically no suitable launch titles that my young daughters would enjoy too.

It looks great and is completely enchanting for the non-jaded under-10 crowd.

"That's funny, pretty much anyone who's passed seventh-grade math can tell you that 4/5 = 80/100.

And - GASP! - 4.5/5 = 90/100!"

You missed the point, with a more limited scoring system such as the gamespy star system the scores are more skewed than when using percentages. A 3 star score on Gamespy would not necessarily equal 60% (I'd say 3/5 stars is worth more than 60% and its open to interpretation anyway)...oh and good luck with passing you 7th grade maths...

I've played this game at BestBuy and I would give it a 7. I see a lot influences (copy) from other games in it, but nothing new. The graphics are really nice to look at.

PS: I find hard to believe that any of the games that will be available at launch will be a 9+ (except GT3 and DOA4)

Ciao,

"You missed the point, with a more limited scoring system such as the gamespy star system the scores are more skewed than when using percentages. A 3 star score on Gamespy would not necessarily equal 60% (I'd say 3/5 stars is worth more than 60% and its open to interpretation anyway)...oh and good luck with passing you 7th grade maths..."

No, *you've* missed the point. Randomly applying your own interpretation of hard numerical scores completely negates the value of score-compiling sites like Metacritic, et. al.

On these same lines, I've always felt that scores themselves are completely arbitrary and useless, and I put much more stock in the reviewer's text and their findings regarding the game. I've bought plenty of 9.X games that have been no fun whatsoever, yet some of the best games in my collection have garnered scores only in the mid-7's. To each his or her own.

I can't wait to get my pre-ordered Xbox 360... so I can resell it! :D

LOL! Seriously, this writeup by Joystiq is ridiculous. They used the absolutely "worst" pull-quotes from all the reviews and completely missed the overall message from each of them: this is a good launch game and well worth buying.

The funny thing is, even after just reading this pot by Joystiq, I still wanted to buy the game! :D

"No, *you've* missed the point."

Really? I'm not 'randomly applying my own interpretation' at all. Look here:

http://ps2.gamespy.com/playstation-2/enter-the-matrix-reloaded/666152p1.html

2/5, according to you is 40% and yet they are saying its 'fair', now putting a value on 'fair' isn't really easy, but 'fair' is more than 40%, probably in the region of 60-70%, which is about the average for that title on gameranking...

Straight out of the gate, Kameo: Elements of Power sets a high standard for how stimulating, creative, and entertaining this classic blend of action and exploration can be on the Xbox 360.

(Last line of the GameSpot review)

Brandon:

No no no. Didn't you read the joystiq post?

"early consensus can’t be what Microsoft had hoped for."

No going to the 'actual' source articles and making your mind up for yourself. That's cheating.

I'll still buy the game. I don't base my purchases on reviews... Much.

Anything below 90% won't sell the 360.
Nothing below 90% will be a must-have title that will draw people to buy the new hardware.

There is no Halo this time around.

That 1up review was just horrible and non-sensical. It's like the reviewer had no interest in doing his job at all and half-assed it. Take a look at how in-depth the 1up review of PGR3 is and compare it to the review of Kameo. The Kameo review is sorely lacking.

""Two things to note here, the way gamesrankings converts 4 out of 5 to 80% is clearly wrong."

That's funny, pretty much anyone who's passed seventh-grade math can tell you that 4/5 = 80/100.

And - GASP! - 4.5/5 = 90/100!"


Right, but the 5 scale system, they usually use 1-5.
with the 10 point system, they bacily use from 5-10.

you rarely see anything below 5, and those games are just terrible (see: War Gods)

making 4/5 not really fair to be called 80

watership:

I'm sorry, you're right of course.

Let me try again.

The Xbox360 is disappointing and nothing next-gen will truly be impressive until the PS3 comes out.

Ignore that the IGN score on Kameo is actually labeled as "Impressive" or that albeit short most of the reviews are positive about the game.

Instead, gush about CGI Videos at E3 about a system that has no actual finalized hardware and won't hit the US probably until Winter 2006.

Ug.

I've noticed that every "Zelda killer" game in development ends-up being.. err.. less-than-murderous. Kameo appears to be fecklessly following in Fable's soon-forgotten footsteps.

As a fan of alliteration - and moreso as a Zelda fan - I must take this moment to gloat:
"Nyah-nyah-na-na-na-NYAH!"

:-)

"Really? I'm not 'randomly applying my own interpretation' at all. Look here:

http://ps2.gamespy.com/playstation-2/enter-the-matrix-reload…

2/5, according to you is 40% and yet they are saying its 'fair', now putting a value on 'fair' isn't really easy, but 'fair' is more than 40%, probably in the region of 60-70%, which is about the average for that title on gameranking..."

Griffon, you just contradicted yourself. While your applications of the scores may not be random, they certainly are from a certain perspective. If a critic gave it a 4/5, then their "7th grade ejumakation" allowed them to consiously arrive at that score. Don't try to apply some opinionated conversion to make their score mean something more that it really does. Your OPINION of what "fair" is has nothing to do with what someone else's scoring is. They scored it as x, you think it is y, and DJ Jazzy Syndrome thinks Z. Instead of trying to change the critic's score to prove the DJ wrong, just tell him "You are wrong and here is why." Or better yet, agree to disagree. For the record 4/5 equals brown.

Are you freaking kidding me...that has to be the most literally childish thing I've ever seen on a forum

The demo i played of this was horrendous. it looks like regular Rare crap. pity they went sour after the N64 days.

We've already established that Joystiq is biased against the Xbox brand. They damage control for Sony, sit on the fence on Nintendo but are consistently against Microsoft. Take a look at all their articles and see if I'm not right. They will say NOTHING of the perfect 10 for PGR but think any negative press on the Xbox is worth posting. For example, when the BC list came out and was 200+ games, they didnt note that it wasn't the Halo 1 and 2 that most people were predicting. Instead, they focused on what games WERENT backwards compatible yet.

Why are these games compared to Zelda? I am not a Zelda fan at all. I am going to play this game for what its worth. This is a good game.

I cant see PG3 earning a perfect score though :/

I played 1 and 2 on someone elses Xbox and found them to be boring, really boring...

High paced racing like Initial D Arcade Stage or serious racing with realism like Gran Tourismo or Forza (albeit I found Forza short on cars for realism, but that might be because I had so many RX-7 choices in GT4 when I played it)

PGR series doesnt seem to have either kind of racing, and it doesnt even try to find it, it isnt in between them to make a good racing game (no the NFS series isnt a good balance either ;))

Yes that last comment was in the wrong window, shift clicking windows and then using comments is a bad way to do things, we might forget what window we are in...

"Anything below 90% won't sell the 360.
Nothing below 90% will be a must-have title that will draw people to buy the new hardware."

No doubt. The Saturn learned that lesson in 1995. The GameCube launched with Luigi's Mansion (huh?). The PSP launched with SNES emulators. Each of these systems sold plenty of units, but perception is reality and there wasn't a single game at launch that moved those system. Xbox ports with slightly better graphics certainly don't sell me an Xbox 360.

XBox 360 OFFIcIALLY SUCKS!

this game will sell units...although when i played it at wal mart i thought it was pure crap with cheesy graphics...but i cud see plenty of parents ploppin down 50 bones on this for thier kids...

The game's graphics remind me of Conker: Live and Reloaded.

"We've already established that Joystiq is biased against the Xbox brand. They damage control for Sony, sit on the fence on Nintendo but are consistently against Microsoft. Take a look at all their articles and see if I'm not right. They will say NOTHING of the perfect 10 for PGR but think any negative press on the Xbox is worth posting. For example, when the BC list came out and was 200+ games, they didnt note that it wasn't the Halo 1 and 2 that most people were predicting. Instead, they focused on what games WERENT backwards compatible yet."

It's been "established"? O RLY?? =) At any rate, it would be nice to talk more about PGR3's awesome rating at 1UP, but wouldn't it be more interesting (and informative) to see how it stacks up against reviews from other sites as well? We'll treat it the same way we've treated Mario Kart (er, Nintendo) and Kameo, so please save the bias name-calling till we skew PGR's reviews or some such. Scores are scores, aren't they? If you don't like the angle we take, I'm not sure what we can do for you then.

I believe we can be fair while still reporting on average scores, right? (And Sony damage control? Where were you when people railed against us for reporting on the rumor that the PS3 losing developer support?) If I personally like the Xbox brand myself, does that even make a difference to you? Probably not, but we gotta report on developments whether they be good or bad. The sheer number of posts surrounding the 360 has to do with its impending launch, so you're gonna see more "good" AND "bad" posts right now. The same should be true when the PS3 and Revolution eventually come out. System launches simply stir up more newsworthy posts.

Hey Griffon, is MS (or Rare) paying you to spin Kameo review's?

I watched the full video review that Gamespot has (the HD version), and must say that the game looks really good. To judge the graphics based on "photo-realistism" or something like that is inappropriate here. Rare is going for an engrossing, but cartoonish world with bright colors and MANY different environments. I played the Kameo demo in store, and thought that textures looked really good, with the overall look being better than current gen. I'm sorry people, there's just no way 480p competes with the sharpness of 720P. The people who say the 360 is just an Xbox 1.5 are simply showing a severe bias that needs to be ignored.

If you look at this entire game (as Gamespot did), the varied environments and quirky gameplay add up to a unique and great title for the 360, and one that certainly diversifies the somewhat monotonous launch. I saw some pretty impressive looking graphics in the vid review, from flowing grass, to hundreds of on screen enemies, to crystal clear waterfalls, and a living breathing organic world where everything is swaying and moving and involved in the game environment. It all looked pretty darn good.

I know from the get go, that this game is NOT for the average Joystiq reader. The male 18-30 demographic is not the target of this game. As some have mentioned, this is a great game to target the younger generation, and will be for those older folk willing to branch out from their standard meat and potato genre of choice. I wouldn't mind playing it a little longer, but I doubt it will be on my list until it hits the bargain bin as it's just not my slice of pie (doesn't mean I can't appreciate it being a good game!).

I've been reading Joystiq since at least February, and I still get a chuckle each time some self-enlightened preteen comes to the iron-clad conclusion that Joystiq is biased for any console or company over any other. Check out that post where they introduce themselves and you'll see that there are several bloggers who write for Joystiq. Are you implying that these seven or so guys of vastly different ages, backgrounds, and mindsets could all come to a unified consensus to skew their perception in a manner exactly opposite to yours?

In the nine months I've been here, I've seen numerous people vehemently exclaim that Joystiq somehow is simultaneously biased for AND against every major company imaginable, as well as several minor companies. I've even seen individual writers make posts that blatantly glorify a company one day then turn around and indiscriminately bash the same company the next. At the very least, if you must make claims of bias, blame the bloggers, not the blog.

Just thorwing in this link. This guy at Kotaku was baised against this game, but played it for the sake of journalistic interest. Looks like he was won over!

"I had absolutely zero interest in the game through E3 and even leading up to the day I received a copy. I sort of saw it as another Bubsy: Too cute for its own good and not nearly enough play elements to keep me interested. Boy was I wrong."

Maybe I'll pick up a copy after-all.

http://www.kotaku.com/gaming/xbox-360/xbox-360-kameo-handson-137398.php

I agree with the comments here that say that JR-W has used the negative comments from some pretty positive reviews. For the GameSpot review, why didn't they use this part of the article:
"Nevertheless, Kameo is absolutely a great game for as long as it lasts, and it's made even better thanks to its state-of-the-art presentation, made possible by the Xbox 360's sheer muscle. "

Because they wanted to write an editorial with a negative slant. Journalism 101.

I've only read the IGN and Gamespot review's, but I think I can state that you certainly haven't represented the overall feeling of those articles. I couldn't say that it's because you have a slant against MS. Perhaps you just like to slant negative on many articles because you think it's good for business, just like any other news outlet.