Metareview - Kingdom Hearts II
by James Ransom-Wiley 
{ Mar 29th 2006 at 1:28PM }
A
Final Fantasy and Disney Kingdom RPG mash-up? The idea sounded wack at first, but when the original
Kingdom Hearts debuted back in 2002, it worked, proving once again that Square Enix could do no wrong (at
least, in the RPG realm). Now, the motley crew is back and being heralded by critics — well, most of them...- Gaming Age (100/100) - "Kingdom Hearts 2 is a shining example of the "fix what's broken and improve what isn't" mindset. And though the game still has its flaws, they're relatively minor by comparison, a drastic improvement upon its predecessor in all regards."
- Game Informer (90/100) - "Kingdom Hearts II is a remarkable journey and another Square-Enix masterpiece" [April 2006, p.120].
- IGN (76/100) - "Don't get me wrong, it's a beautiful title with a great story and fantastic presentation, but because of its major combat flaws (and that fact that it turns its back on exploration and most RPG elements), it does the game a great disservice."
Get a WordPress.com Blog
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
pandlcg @ Mar 29th 2006 1:33PM
how can Gaming Age admit in a review that the game "still has its flaws" and then give it a perfect score?
xBigDanx @ Mar 29th 2006 1:35PM
So my question to Gaming Age is how can a game have flaws and still get a perfect score?
Jared Lubrico @ Mar 29th 2006 1:45PM
That's what I wanna know ... I'm still getting it anyways
theiloth @ Mar 29th 2006 1:45PM
What! IGN having the low score of the bunch!
A news post should be made of that alone
ck @ Mar 29th 2006 1:50PM
I read the entire review at IGN and his main complaint was that "it was too easy." I just bought the game last night and have played about two hours and I certainly don't know what he's talking about (I have it on the Proud setting, the most difficult). He must have put it on the easy setting, because it's challenging enough. And the RPG elements are still there, so I really don't know what his problem is...
This was a pretty poor review considering he spent 1 and a half pages talking about the lack of challenging enemies/bosses and RPG/adventure elements. I usually look towards IGN for good reviews, but this guy must have a hatred towards Disney or Square. He talks about button mashing, but I distinctly remember doing the same thing in the original and there were lots of improvement from the camera and how the game handles combat.
Mr.Snake @ Mar 29th 2006 1:53PM
You Forgot Gamespot's review....they gave it a 8.7
copa @ Mar 29th 2006 2:02PM
"What! IGN having the low score of the bunch!"
Looks like someone forgot to buy their advertisements this month.
Paul @ Mar 29th 2006 2:09PM
To #1 and 2, maybe it got a 100 with flaws because there's a grading curve. Gaming Age is just a T.A and has to pass a certain number of games, so all of them got bumped up a little.
Now if you'll excuse my unfunny joke, I would disagree with the assumption that Square/Enix "can't miss". In fact I think they "miss" a good deal of the time, but the Kingdom Hearts series has been really good so far, so I look forward to trying this one out. IGN't concerns do bother me, though, namely the lack of exploration, small worlds, and easiness.
The guy says he played through on normal mode and about 25 hours on proud mode, so that does sound disconcerting.
boots (former bd) @ Mar 29th 2006 2:35PM
Stop the whine. The fact that you get a 100 score on something it doesn't mean you are perfect, it means you did everything you had to in the right way. Nothing/Nobody is perfect except God (and that I doubt).
Besides, take in mind that 100 is the extreme score, just like 76... I mean, it's amazing how discrepant IGN wants to appear, regardless of the fact that most graded it above 90.
If Famitsu gave it a 39/40, and most reviews are better for KH2 than the ones for KH1, then this game is evidently better than the first one. It got a better average, but the variance of opinion is higher, so this means all RPG and KH fans in general will love it.
I guess I still can't say the ones that graded it below 80 are dumbasses because, aside from them being entitled to their opinion, I think Halo is a Mediocre game at best.
Rob Stevens @ Mar 29th 2006 2:44PM
Gaming Age did NOT give the game a 100/100. They gave it an "A", calling it "Superlative".
Paul @ Mar 29th 2006 3:07PM
Ah, so it's more like a 5 out of 5(if you consider A, B, C, D, F). Yeah, that is an important distinction.
boots (former bd) @ Mar 29th 2006 3:45PM
Well Paul, I've often seen 'A' adjusted to 95/100, while A+ being 100/100.
Both are great scores anyway.
Tatsuya @ Mar 29th 2006 4:34PM
I played anf finished the game on normal mode, spent about 52 hours on it and even if it's a great game I can't help thinking the exploration part has been completely dumped from this game. It could be great but because of this flaw I really don't think it can have a perfect grade. I guess when reviewers see Square-Enix on the box they tend to be a bit biased.
Anyway that's also true the game is easy until the final boss which I find very annoying and that most of the time you just have to mash a button to combat but for me who doesn't like too much difficulty (don't have much time for playing these days) it's a minor flaw.
symmet @ Mar 29th 2006 5:03PM
The people at IGN are obviously on crack.
ck @ Mar 29th 2006 5:28PM
"don't have much time for playing these days..."
"I played anf finished the game on normal mode, spent ABOUT 52 HOURS on it..."
~Tatsuya
Either playing 52 hours is considered "lite" by hardcore RPGers or I'm clearly not playing enough when I log in 5 hours a week gaming.
Kimosabae @ Mar 29th 2006 5:47PM
--DISCLAIMER--
**This is a direct attack towards Joystiq or its journalists. I think you all do a great job here.**
This game is a PRIME example of the problem with videogame journalism and its effects on the industry today. When the original KH was released in 2002, the amount of bitching among the journalist community in regards to the game's difficulty was deafening. ALL BECAUSE THE REVIEWERS WERE TOO EGOTISTICAL TO SET THE GAME TO "EASY" IN ORDER TO GET THEIR REVIEWS FOR THE GAME OUT ON TIME WITH LESS OF A HEADACHE.
The fact that the sequel has been turned into a veritable cakewalk is a great dissappointment, as the original's difficulty was what made the game so great and refreshing to me. That and it kept the game's button-mash-happy centric gameplay in check.
I winced at every review back then because I knew there was a great chance they would butcher the gameplay of the sequel and it looks as though I was right. I'M SO SICK AND TIRED of videogame journalists thinking they represent the voices of of the videogame community as a whole. NO WONDER games are so easy today. The most frusterating thing is, is that we're ALL gamers here and these whiney BITCHES are the only ones with a real VOICE in the industry.
Yes, I know this post seems angry. Yes, I know it seems fanatical. Yes, I know my passion seems to be misplaced -- you're probably right. My problem is, I don't get genuinely interested by very many games anymore. When a sequel to one of the few games I genuinely liked this generation gets butchered in a key area that made the original so compelling, simply because a tiny authoritative minority of the actual overall audience complained...PISSES me off.
-SynikaL
exo @ Mar 29th 2006 11:55PM
If its to easy, just put it on proud mode instead of normal.
not that hard of a concept to grasp.
Lagomorpho @ Mar 30th 2006 12:26AM
I was watching my girlfriend play this afternoon and I noted the fact that she was basically hitting the X button the ENTIRE TIME.
But seriously, the game looks really good so far.
Yumu @ Mar 31st 2006 10:24PM
I never bother reading the reviews from IGN nor from other places if I like the game, I get it and KHs are my favorites. My boyfriend asked me why girl gamers are so obsess with this game... I had no idea... haha.
Blake Ballard @ Apr 2nd 2006 12:10PM
I am now about half way through the game and it is truly amazing. The IGN review is really laughable it's so bad. First off, the game is not easy. Play it on Proud and you'll know what I mean. I've died more times than I can count, and I'm really good at the game. The reviewer for IGN said he beat it on Proud in 25 hours. That's total bull. Like I said, I'm not even half way through and I've clocked in 20 hours. Trust me, the shortest amount of time it will take on Proud is 45 to 50 hours. Not to mention the attention to detail in every aspect of game, it's nearly flawless. However, my only complaints is the lack of exploration in some worlds like Prideland and a few other disney worlds. Also, although the sombat is more varied and alot more fun, I see what he meant by just pounding on the X button. But, the first game did the exact same thing and I still loved it. These flaws still can't diminish the game because it's really that good. This game deserves nothing less than a 9.5.