Genji has "tired gameplay" says first IGN PS3 review
by Blake Snow 
{ Nov 8th 2006 at 12:32PM }
IGN has reviewed their first PS3 game, Genji: Days of the Blade (think historically accurate crab battles), saying the title gets things half right and half wrong. The 6.0 review (half right, why not 5.0 then?) cites "gorgeous" graphics with gameplay that just doesn't live up to next-gen expectations. The assessment also reminds us that it takes more than graphics to "play beyond."You could read the entire review, but the first paragraph sums the game up nicely: "Next-generation consoles exist to deliver game experiences the previous generation could never deliver. That's their sole purpose in this life. So when a game comes along offering a strange mix of cutting-edge visuals but also tired gameplay, one can't help but feel a little cheated."
[Ed. note: Ooookay, now you can let out all those "MASSIVE DAMAGE" and "real-time weapon change" jokes you've been bottling up for the last thirty seconds!]
[Thanks, Matt]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Nicholas S. @ Nov 8th 2006 12:36PM
I'm not one to usually say something like this, but it's impossible to resist.
IGN attacked Genji's weakpoint for MASSIVE DAMAGE!
Inferno @ Nov 8th 2006 12:36PM
First I want to say, LOL.
Now, I disagree with the purpose of next-gen games. Games are made to enjoy. Regardless of when they come out. If it is a enjoyable experience it is a good game.
number40one @ Nov 8th 2006 12:36PM
first?
All your Giant Crabs are belong to us!
Mal F4cti0n @ Nov 8th 2006 12:36PM
Hahahahaha, historical battels with giant crabs you can flip over for massive damage. yeah, that game ain't gonna score not 9/10.
RD @ Nov 8th 2006 12:37PM
Riiiiiidge racer!
Oh wait, wrong joke.
Mal F4cti0n @ Nov 8th 2006 12:37PM
Hahahahaha, historical battels with giant crabs you can flip over for massive damage. yeah, that game ain't gonna score no 9/10.
lwelyk @ Nov 8th 2006 9:43PM
ZOMG! IGN HIT THEIR WEAK POINT FOR MASSIVE DAMAGE!
But who could take this game seriously after E3? I mean everytime you change a weapon you'd think REAL TIME WEAPON CHANGE and the giant enemy crab would be hard to fight withought shouting about flipping it over on it's back so you can hit it's weakpoint for MASSIVE damage.
J.Goodwin @ Nov 8th 2006 12:39PM
Remember that on IGN, a 6.0 is equivalent to a 3.5 on 1Up.
maximus @ Nov 8th 2006 12:45PM
"Next-generation consoles exist to deliver game experiences the previous generation could never deliver. That's their sole purpose in this life. So when a game comes along offering a strange mix of cutting-edge visuals but also tired gameplay, one can't help but feel a little cheated."
No they don't, next gen, as far as Sony and MS is concerned is all about bigger, shinier and louder than the last generation. That's all we're gonna get from them and that has always been the case. Gears of War gets 95% yet that's just another shootem'up with nice visuals.
It's evolution not revolution people.. well apart from the Wii :)
Pal @ Nov 8th 2006 12:45PM
Cutting-edge gameplay or not, is the game a fun game? Does every game have to change now? Will Final Fantasy have to be a fighting game for it to live on in this new generation? Dream on, IGN, dream on.
BlindsideDork @ Nov 8th 2006 12:50PM
If next-gen consoles aren't to give you something to play you haven't before..why even bother with them dishing out $600 for a game you have played already?
reguy @ Nov 8th 2006 5:11PM
damn it, damn it, damn it, Nicholas S beat me to it.
grrr
well i might as well say it.
ign attacked genji's weakpoint for massive damange!!
i guess the real time weapons change was all cgi and not actual gameplay no?
i mean cmon, real time weapons change? thats more of ps9 power to me. ;)
Geirskogul @ Nov 8th 2006 12:48PM
Flipping crabs over and hitting their weakpoint for MASSIVE DAMAGE only clogs up the internet tubes. If the internet were a truck, it'd be okay, because they could just haul off the dead crab, but as it is now, they need to send in some RIIIIIIIDGE RAAAACER through to unclog the tubes, along with some powerball...balls. They might as well clean up the poker chips while they're at it.
mykie @ Nov 8th 2006 12:50PM
Real-time weapon change is the reason it was 6.0, not 5.0.
Xavier Gill @ Nov 8th 2006 12:55PM
"The assessment also reminds us that it takes more than graphics to "play beyond."
But they practically gave Gears Of War full marks...or was that for the massively innovative 'shoot shoot shoot kill kill kill' gameplay that we've never seen before? or the gargantuan 6 hour completion time? or the cliched story and piss poor voice acting?
epluribus @ Nov 8th 2006 12:51PM
Gee, what a surprise. Blake "the Sony hatchet man" Snow (job) posts another informative dig at the PS3. Why isn't he the designated writer when it comes to picking apart the laughable mis-steps by Microsoft, such as bricking systems in true Windows patch-upon-patch style? Or perhaps further fracturing the 360 user base with content downloads only for some? Or pushing the bounds of how much cash they can bleed out of their online users?
"cutting-edge visuals but also tired gameplay": what, you mean like Kameo, Perfect Dark Zero, COD2, King Kong, and the large majority of other 360 titles to date? Oh wait, I guess these wouldn't exactly qualify for the "cutting-edge visuals" part.
jharr @ Nov 8th 2006 12:53PM
"Gears of War gets 95% yet that's just another shootem'up with nice visuals."
It is obvious that you haven't played Gears of War.
Skwurl @ Nov 8th 2006 12:54PM
Enemy Crab Song
http://www.funender.com/music/play.php?band_id=11527&song_id=30841&mode=song_hifi
Zingerhill @ Nov 8th 2006 12:59PM
I played this game at a Sony event in NYC. The game looked amazing (as did all games). However, I found it very boring. You have played this game before-- just not in HD. You can criticize the Xbox launch titles similarly, but that doesn't excuse Sony. Right now, 360 games are much farther ahead. Sony may catch up eventually, but right now you can't dispute that MS has the better games. Save your money.
epluribus @ Nov 8th 2006 12:58PM
"But they practically gave Gears Of War full marks...or was that for the massively innovative 'shoot shoot shoot kill kill kill' gameplay that we've never seen before? or the gargantuan 6 hour completion time? or the cliched story and piss poor voice acting?"
Don't forget the Tom of Finland art style, that kinda makes you wonder who the target demographic is...
Flit @ Nov 8th 2006 1:52PM
Flamers FTW, O rly?! The Massive Damage $ony is getting from the internet tubes makes chuck norris cry. Teh Wii60 will frag (unless the ring of death stops them) $ony. M$ pwns joos all. This is teh suck. RIIIIIDGE Racer will be better, with it's real time weapons change from giant crabs and historic battles. Uh, wtfbbqroflomg!!11!! Uh, half life pwns halo. Uh, and... well.. FF is the best series ever! Joystiq is the suckstiq for the industry! They hates the $ony! NERF joystiq! All your exploding batteries belongs to us! Blu-Ray shark lazer beams! It's time Wii came together. Nintendo is for teh kiddz. Next-gen roolz!
/thread. Nothing more will be added.
cubbiechris @ Nov 8th 2006 3:56PM
""
Not when you are spending 600 bucks on a next-gen system.
eric @ Nov 8th 2006 1:06PM
i once dated a girl with giant enemy crabs.
i used the shampoo and tiny comb for massive damage!
BlindsideDork @ Nov 8th 2006 1:16PM
#16
it wasn't shoot shoot shoot kill kill kill...
its:
run, hide, shoot,run, hide, shoot,run, hide, shoot,run, hide, shoot, wash, rinse, repeat, run, hide, shoot, run, hide, shoot, run, hide, shoot, run, hide, shoot, wash, rinse, repeat, run, hide, shoot, run, hide, shoot, run, hide, shoot.
DUH!!!!
(PS: to all you M$ fanboys...I am not saying the graphics suck or is the worst game of all time!)
All of M$ MAIN games are pointed towards 24 year old frat college guys that liked halo...
Pedro Van Faulk @ Nov 8th 2006 1:20PM
I would like to point out that Famitsu gave this game a HIGHER score. So I think we can all stop calling them the notoriously tough reviewer, and start referring to them as the Japanese equivalent to IGN.
Mullinator @ Nov 8th 2006 1:20PM
"So when a game comes along offering a strange mix of cutting-edge visuals but also tired gameplay, one can't help but feel a little cheated."
I'm wondering how many PS3 developers are going to be shaking in their shoes when they read that.
Todd @ Nov 8th 2006 1:20PM
I'm so tired of game developers thinking that high end graphics will making a game good. Sony is the biggest contributor of this fairy tale.
ScreamingSkull @ Nov 8th 2006 1:24PM
Hey I heard that new contra game is in HD, maybe MS should have added in the the bigger than life crabs too?
Metalmurphy @ Nov 8th 2006 1:27PM
Ok then... shouldn't most (if not all except for GoW) Xbox 360 had scores of 6.0 since they bring absolutely nothing new from the last generation except for graphics?
And since when does Joystiq highlights single reviews? Oh yeah right, when a PS3 game gets a bad grade. Joystiq came a long way down in these past months.
GeeT @ Nov 8th 2006 3:02PM
"Flipping crabs over and hitting their weakpoint for MASSIVE DAMAGE only clogs up the internet tubes. If the internet were a truck, it'd be okay, because they could just haul off the dead crab, but as it is now, they need to send in some RIIIIIIIDGE RAAAACER through to unclog the tubes, along with some powerball...balls. They might as well clean up the poker chips while they're at it."
Geirskogul just made me LOL and spit on my keyboard for massive damage.
rrenna @ Nov 8th 2006 1:29PM
Wow, I was really worried that if Gears of War was anything less then stellar that people would be using it as an easy target to bash the 360. I find it funny now that we've played the game and it's ACTUALLY LIVING UP TO THE HYPE people are bashing it anyways.
Steven @ Nov 8th 2006 1:29PM
What's the deal with the instant GoW hate? It's like Halo all over again. The fanboyism will never stop. Spend some time with GoW and then make a judgment.
C. Grant @ Nov 8th 2006 1:39PM
Metalmurphy: We highlight single reviews when they're GREATLY anticipated ... first PS3 game reviews, not valuable. We posted the first two reviews we found of Gears just hours before they all broke. Why? Because our readers really wanted to hear about it.
BlindsideDork @ Nov 8th 2006 1:38PM
#25...if Gears of War got a bad review you can bet it would be here. And if the first review of the Wii is BAD you can bet to see it online too.
#27...i never cared for Halo, it was overrated and just another generic shooter.
Jeff @ Nov 8th 2006 1:40PM
"So I think we can all stop calling them the notoriously tough reviewer, and start referring to them as the Japanese equivalent to IGN."
More like the Japanese equivalent to EGM, but with four times as many issues each year.
They've never been "notoriously tough". What they are is hardcore. They need to play *thousands* of games per year - their magazine comes out each *week*, and that's just the weekly one. Some of their reviewers also write for sister publications. It's like the Ziff-Davis/EGM thing where a lot of their reviewers work on other pubs too, and consequently their reviews tend to be short but sweet. But they are all pretty much hardcore gamers, most of whom have been in this industry for many years.
IGN is just a bunch of random fanboys that only cover one system each, work only for IGN, and refuse to edit their articles or reviews. It's almost in their vested interests to give games the highest scores possible because their very employment hinges on the success of the console they're covering. This is not the case at weekly famitsu.
Metalmurphy @ Nov 8th 2006 1:51PM
#28 Don't compare the hype of GoW with the non existence hype of Genji, infact the game actually turned out better then most expected, yet still not good enough. So GoW having a bad review WOULD BE a surprise, this is not, and defiantly doesn't deserve an highlight, the only reason it does get an highlight its because there has been a serious trend of Sony bashing around Joystiq in these past months. If Resistance had a 6.0 then hell yeah i would agree if it was posted here...
jojo29 @ Nov 8th 2006 2:25PM
But they practically gave Gears Of War full marks...or was that for the massively innovative 'shoot shoot shoot kill kill kill' gameplay that we've never seen before? or the gargantuan 6 hour completion time? or the cliched story and piss poor voice acting?
/agree yet it got a 10/10 according to 1up!!??? Ive said once and ive said again: MS' pockets run VERY deep, yeah GOW's gameplay has never been doing before Killswitch anyone??Brute Force anyone??
As for the Famitsu comment, i trust Famitsu WAY WAY more than freaking IGN. Everyone knows they are 'up fo sale', just look at their website, ad after ad after ad... anywhoo the only thing good going for IGN is that they have good game videos...
Ash @ Nov 8th 2006 1:47PM
you people are fucking stupid
I bet people who are dissing gears of war have not fucking played it
Go play that shit and tell me when have you ever played the shooter that plays like how gears does...
and secondly they said that the gameplay is boring...
if gameplay was fun they would have scored it higher...
gears of war is a BLAST... play co-op over xbox live... you will know what I mean
The Intangible Fact @ Nov 8th 2006 1:47PM
They are mad because the 360 is getting some bomb ass games and they are suck playing PS2.
Izuna Drop @ Nov 8th 2006 1:48PM
16 - "But they practically gave Gears Of War full marks...or was that for the massively innovative 'shoot shoot shoot kill kill kill' gameplay that we've never seen before? or the gargantuan 6 hour completion time? or the cliched story and piss poor voice acting?"
Ok, if you are going to say this, you need to be willing to except that there are very few "new concepts" for games and typically the don't sell very well --> Rez, Psychonauts...
When I first started playing GoW I was not too impressed, but after getting through the learning curve it started to get really fun. Once I teamed up with a friend on XBL it got much better (we kept getting killed in on section on Hardcore, but we even said to each other, "In most cases I'd be annoyed by now, but this is really fun"). As far as voice acting goes, it's nothing great, but I didn't get the game for its voice acting. Resident Evil 1 had the worst voice acting in history (in my opinion) but it was still an outstanding game. The point is GoW gets the most important thing right, and that's being fun to play.
20 - "run, hide, shoot,run, hide, shoot,run, hide, shoot,run, hide, shoot, wash, rinse, repeat, run, hide, shoot, run, hide, shoot, run, hide, shoot, run, hide, shoot, wash, rinse, repeat, run, hide, shoot, run, hide, shoot, run, hide, shoot."
This doesn't really hold much water since you can boil any game down to this. Is Final Fantasy (pre 12) walk, random encounter, level up - or maybe Splinter Cell is hide, sneak, kill - I don't even want to mention driving games... Games are ranked on their merit within a genre.
The fact is GoW happens to be an excellent shooter. Is it completely groundbreaking? No. But it is completely enjoyable and definitely has gameplay that is a little different than the norm.
Genji, according to IGN, doesn't do anything for the genre beyond looking great. You can marry a beautiful woman who's not very bright, but in the end she'll bore you and you'll be left wanting more.
The Dude @ Nov 8th 2006 1:51PM
AHAHA!
First! Suckers.
clo1_2000 @ Nov 8th 2006 1:54PM
Anyone who is bashing Gears of War and hasn't even played the game is a corporate tool. The game has a similar premise, with new tweaks. The graphics look better than anything I've seen coming out for the PS3. Seriously though, if you haven't played GoW, stfu.
gamerx @ Nov 8th 2006 1:54PM
"Next-generation consoles exist to deliver game experiences the previous generation could never deliver. That's their sole purpose in this life. So when a game comes along offering a strange mix of cutting-edge visuals but also tired gameplay, one can't help but feel a little cheated."
I think PS3's sole purpose is to shove the Blu-ray movie format down gamers' throats. But they, thats just me.
Nash @ Nov 9th 2006 5:18PM
#19...that's funny as hell!
#23...I'm pretty sure M$ fanboys were the one's screaming better graphics make better games on current gen systems (XBox vs. PS2). Now that PS3 threatens to have better graphics than X360, Sony has become "the biggest contributor to this fairy tale"? The whole Sony vs. Microsoft thing is tired. You want a 360, get one. You want a PS3, get one (if you can). Who gives a s**t what faults a system has except for the people who are stuck with the system? If Microsoft wins, they're not gonna send fanboys any money. If Sony wins, all they're gonna do is try to get out of debt and cover some lawsuits.
I went into a Gamestop to make my monthly payment on my PS3 reserve (it's like a mortgage) and asked the guy if they were taking pre-orders for the Six Axis. He didn't know what I was talking about because he "hates Sony". How the hell do you work in a game store and not know about that? I bet he knows what a Wiimote is.
And to everybody hating on GoW, if that game came out last year like I thought it was going to I would own a 360 with enough time to save for a PS3 also. It didn't, I'd rather have a PS3 right now, and I can't afford both at the same time.
jojo29 @ Nov 8th 2006 6:11PM
" Don't compare the hype of GoW with the non existence hype of Genji, infact the game actually turned out better then most expected, yet still not good enough. So GoW having a bad review WOULD BE a surprise, this is not, and defiantly doesn't deserve an highlight, the only reason it does get an highlight its because there has been a serious trend of Sony bashing around Joystiq in these past months. If Resistance had a 6.0 then hell yeah i would agree if it was posted here..."
Yeah so according to you, if the game doesnt have 'hype' then it must NOT deserve a high score?? yeah real genius there, if that was the case we'd miss out on gems such as:
Beyond Good and Evil
Psychonaughts
Those games were VERY well put together games that DIDNT NEED the hype to get HIGH scores. Im not denying that Gears of War is fun, i just dont believe its worthy of a 10/10, or even a 9/10 rating given its flaws, which are SIMILIAR if NOT the same flaw Genji has no? lets try this:
"tired" gameplay: GOW has 'tired gameplay' 1) its a shooter. 2) Killswitch, RE4, Bruteforce and some others have done this type of gameplay before, so sorry Cliffy and team are NOT NOT NOT the innovators you guys think they are.
bad voice acting: GOW has it too, yet it doesnt seem to deter from the game's high score.
Graphics: Genji has awesome graphics as does Gears of War hmmm..
So there you have it, two games of different genres give NOTHING new to each of their respective genres yet the one on the MS platform is HIGHLY praised because.....hmm because MS paid for the reviews thats why. Honestly, ask yourselves, does it deserve such a high score with it being 6 hours long, has bad voice acting? and if you do believe so, i fear the videogame industry will have a crash, not as bad as the 80s but nonetheless it will, becauset that would mean that MS has accomplished what it wanted to: Hype up a game enough (i.e spend enough money ) and make it look great and thats all that matters:(
BlindsideDork @ Nov 8th 2006 2:02PM
#31...doesn't killswitch have the stop, hide and fire from around the corner type of gameplay? Actually I think WinBack was the first but it was a VERY slow paced game and wasn't killswitch the first with more action feel to it?
#33...just a comment about the style of play. I know most games are played out but sometimes I feel developers don't even try. i haven't played any splinter cell since the first one, im not upset about it. and i am not defending genji..im just saying.
#34...yes i can compare them. why? cuz Gears of War is hyped up big time. PS3 is hyped up big time so the games will get some look at, especially the first ones you see and the first one review. so they were along the same lines. not quite, but close. but they are the same if you look at it.
I mean what you are saying is that if Halo 3 got bad reviews, it doesn't deserve a post on joystiq. BS! Gears of War is hyped up big time, it is in the eye and if a game deserves a post on site, then its review (good or bad) probably merits one too! :P
Thryon @ Nov 8th 2006 2:04PM
@ Flit
You forgot Badger Badger Badger Badger Badger Badger Badger Badger Masive Damage Badger Badger Badger Badger Badger Badger Badger Badger Arrgh a crab, Arrgh a Giant Crab.
Jack @ Nov 8th 2006 2:08PM
That paragraph makes it sound like Genji is the best of all games on the PS3 and they are dissapointed that its not the epittamy of Next Gen. How can you feel cheated out of Next Gen when there are soon to be 100's of games coming out that are sure to be better? As a professional writer for gaming you should know that the first generation of games on a brand new console arent going to demonstrate the full power of the system. Once again IGN fails to help the consumer in any way.
Javi @ Nov 8th 2006 2:06PM
This is funny in more than one way.....
I guess what IGN really meant to say with their review is that the game's score is 7.5+ as compared to other games.
What IGN also meant is that the games is 5.5 as far as spectations.
They just need to learn how to express their feelings in their reviews and contradict themselves.
> @ Nov 8th 2006 2:08PM
Would this game had been made better by using the wiimote? By, trading button presses for gestures? And, when the novelty (or physical tiredness) of using gestures wears off?
Oh, Blake has a wiimote up his a-hole.