Metareview: Endless Ocean

I went with choice #2, but I will not start it until I am farther into SMB Galaxy. But I may get this one when I find it cheap at GameStop in a year or 2.

Why settle for 4 reviews when you can see (at least excerpts from) 16 at metacritic? http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/wii/endlessocean

The game is relatively fun from what I have played so far. It's all about free explanation with no enemies and occasional goals. Think of it as an underwater Zelda with no weapons or enemies. Just explore and occasionally find treasures and enjoy the cool scenery. There's also an emphasis on finding fish, feeding fish, befriending fish, and photographing fish. Aside from this there are tourists who you can take on diving missions who want to see specific fish, or who want photos of specific fish. Accomplishing goals gives you access to new gear, abilities, and hairstyles.

The bottom line is that it's a nice laid back experience. It would be hard to recommend at $50 but $30 is not bad at all.

I've really enjoyed it so far, but you have to understand what you're getting yourself into with it. Its somewhere between a full-scope game and an interactive screensaver, occupying a small niche in a no-mans-land that unfortunately gets it some pretty paltry reviews from people who expect a total game experience. I would happily recommend it to anyone I thought might like it.

For a console plagued with shovelware and party games, Endless Ocean has taken a unique twist on the definition of "casual". Its not the next Twilight Princess or Super Mario Galaxy, but its not bad by any stretch of the imagination. Its amazingly well-polished. (I've heard some reviewers remark negatively about the control scheme. I've had no trouble with it personally).

If you "preordered" Brawl from Walmart and got the $10 online giftcard you could get this for $19.82 + SH. I'm debating about doing that or putting that $20 towards NMH.

Let me put it this way: it's not worth $50. But it's $30, not $50! This is a pretty good game, it's very relaxing. If you ONLY play hardcore games though.... don't get it.

It looks pretty cool... and for only $30. I'll still probably just pick up NMH.

It seems to me like a casual game in the truest sense of the word, a game that you do not have to play constantly to be very good at, or one that really requires any intense skill

It's a leisurely experience, and a game you experience more than you play (kinda like NiGHTS, except that the draw is even more on the environments)

i picked it up with No More Heroes, gotta get out of work now so i can play!!!

Ok, when did the Sony fanboys start to control the writing on this site?

According to Game Rankings, there are 19 reviews for Endless Ocean so far. From those 19 reviews, you picked the 3 lowest scores and 1 middle-of-the-pack score to highlight. The average rating is actually a respectable 74%.

source: http://www.gamerankings.com/htmlpages4/935591.asp

Now I know this game is very different and won't appeal to everyone, but shouldn't a site called "Wii Fanboy" at least tell the entire story instead of painting such a bleak picture?

*thumbs up for silly journalism*

wow.. this article made it look like this was rated terribly. in actuality those two sites who rated it in the 60's are the only ones that low. All other scores range mostly in the 80-70 range. it's gotten actually a lot of appeal.

what's next wiifanboy? suggesting we buy Rachet and Clank instead of Mario?

i really enjoy your articles, and I like that you update your stuff more than pspfanboy (we dont get a lot of love there >_>), but once or twice about every week you have articles that make me wonder which system you really are supporting here. While i understand your are gamers and like "all" systems, calling yourselves fanboys and fangirls as authors here might be fake advertising.

or maybe they didn't like endless ocean? or maybe this article was published while there were much fewer reviews, as is the case with many of these articles?

Dave Hinkle you failed big time in this post. The game is considered good by the majority of reviews. Not amazing, but not drudgery either. I think the GamePro review shows just how out of touch with reality GamePro is nowadays anyway.

Let me guess your NMH Metareview will feature only the reviews that gave it a 10, right?

"or maybe they didn't like endless ocean?"

The point of a "meta" review is to give an overview of what the general media reaction is, not to highlight a personal opinion. By focusing on the 3 lowest reviews available, this article fails to satisfy that point.

"or maybe this article was published while there were much fewer reviews, as is the case with many of these articles?"

You can see when the article was published, and when the reviews were added to Metacritic or Gamerankings. Sorry, but this defense just doesn't stand up. The only reasonable excuse would be if ALL Wii Metareview articles took reviews from the same sources. (I checked, and that isn't the case.)

Wii Fanboy is a great site, but this article missed the mark. Endless Ocean isn't a system seller or a spectacular game... but this article is still misleading.



On a separate rant, what's up with GamePro ratings? Their Wii reviews for a number of Wii games have been terrible - not because of the ratings, but because the reviewers are poorly informed.

With Madden, they ignored the Wii-exlusive family play and party features (which are the biggest reasons to buy the Wii version). With MoH:H2, they ignored online gameplay in the review. With Geometry Wars, they deducted points for control accuracy, without realizing that you can use the Classic Controller dual-analog sticks. Those are some of the worst inaccuracies, but list could go on much further...

Reviewers are perfectly entitled to stating their opinion, but shouldn't that opinion be based on more than passing familiarity with the game? Shouldn't reading the manual and *actually playing key features of a game* be required before posting reviews?

Sigh... Must've woken up on the wrong side of the bed this morning.

EGM did a quick review in the latest issue as a special very first Electronic Non-Game Monthly review.

What's next, a 'sandbox' game where you play with sand all day long?

Well, this article seems to have built up a lot of heat, but I would like to commend everyone on keeping it clean. Having a passion about this is good, keeping it clean is even better.

Thanks!

I have to agree, I think it was odd to pick the low scores when there were much higher available. Nobody's perfect though, so I forgive :) If you like the game, like it, if you hate, don't buy it.

only one screaming is the editor :)

"from the most recognizable outlets available"
"pull the scores from the most recognized online outlets"
"it's because those outlets are the most recognized"

Thanks for explaining (several times over) why those four articles were chosen. Readers like me have no idea why some reviews are picked over others, and typically jump to conclusions too quickly.

My previous post was written before seeing David's (very reasonable) responses, so take it with a grain of salt. Oh, and I wasn't joking about the wrong side of the bed thing... everyone has days where they are just a little bit too grumpy, right?

Sorry for coming across so strongly David - it really did come out much stronger than I intended. Sometimes I just tire of hearing blindly pro-PS3/360 comments from other people and places, so this site is my destination for pro-Wii pick me up. Unfortunately, you guys are usually much too fair and realistic to be real fanboys - too busy "telling it like it is", so to speak. Guess that's why I felt slighted when the low scores for Endless Ocean were highlighted.

So please don't take it personally. You guys typically do a great job here.

I'm really loving this games. Plays a lot like underwater animal crossing.

Collect fish, decorate your aquarium, run under water errands for people...

You can't rate this game on the same scale as you would rate super mario galaxy or No More heroes. It's not SUPPOSED to appeal to people in the same way that those games do.

That would be like giving Ratatouille an "F" because it didn't have as much action in it as "No Country For Old Men". They are aimed at different veiwers, so you can't rate the cartoon for children a low rating because it had a more simple storyline than cohen brothers action film.

In the same respect, I think giving a game that is supposed to be simple (because making it too complicated would do 2 things: 1 - It would make the game less relaxing and leisurely, which I think would defeat teh purpose of a relaxing diving sim. and 2 - It would not appeal to the casual gamer, who doesn't a want a complicacted game - and I think that is who this game was targeting.)

I know that video games are a relatively new media - but how long am I going to have to bring this issue up front? It's getting kinda old.

Anyway - fell asleep watching my girlfriend play this game. I woke up an our later, rolled over and she was petting a penguin and laughing. The dog was sitting next to her, watching her play. Fell asleep again, an hour later, when I woke up, she was exploring some cove or something.

She's a casual gamer and she loved it. The part where you could sit in the chair and admire the sky at different times of the day, she loved that. And collecting the data on all the animals was fun, and she said she learned a lot. My point is, she's a 28 year old who plays mostly casual games (except she likes Mario and World of Warcraft) and she LOVED this game. I asked her what she would score it out of ten, she said 9.5.

It doesn't have a number attached, but I think Penny Arcade's positive (text, not just comic) says a lot: http://www.penny-arcade.com/2008/01/21

So when did you guys get your $10 Wal-Mart SSBB credit? I was sent an e-mail saying they would send another e-mail with details but never got the second e-mail...am I just missing out on my $10 apology from Wal-Mart...Nobody loves me.

There seems to be some sort of resentment against the bloggers here at Wiifanboy lately

Holy Crap. Orion get your panties out of a bunch and take a midol. Geez...

YOU ARE ALL INSANE!

This isn't biased in any way.

i played a good chunk yesterday and found it refreshing, but maybe because i'm an explorer type of gamer. i like checking out every area a game has to offer and just the easygoing nature is nice for a change. plus it reminds me of my trip to maui last year so it's like a little happy place.

but it's true, this game is probably not for everyone. i'm 27 and it's so far a good way to relax after work.

well, i think its a great game.

Infact, on sunday, im gonna lug my Wii and endless ocean to my local dive center for SCUBA Rangers (its a scuba club for under 12's)
The kids are getting restless at not being able to swim with fish (by law, under 10s cant go scuba diving in open water, only pools) so, Im thinking that they are gonna really enjoy this. Plus im hoping its goning to keep them quite for at least 10mins.

I think a lot of the reviewers are confused as to the point of the game. The majority of criticisms I've seen are things I've known about the game for a year now, and it hasn't diminished my enthusiasm for the title. A nice relaxing scuba 'game'... sounds perfect to me.

NOW WHEN ARE YOU GOING TO POST ABOUT SPACE CHANNEL 5.0 FOR THE Wii?? :)

Maybe the gamer press isn't that impressed with Endless Ocean, but the LA Times certainly is:

http://www.latimes.com/technology/consumer/gamers/la-et-gameday24jan24,1,6747087.story?ctrack=1&cset=true

If it gets a few more reviews like that, I'm pretty sure those reviews will trump the "It doesn't have anything to shoot" stuff in the echo chamber.

I have been playing for a few months now (in Europe), and the game is strangely compelling. For me, it would rate a 9 or 10.

But that "for me" is important. Just because it is so unusual it is a difficult game to rate - it very much depends on the individual player's response to it, and this shows up in the reviews. Except for EGM and Gamepro, who really seem to have missed the point (and perhaps have not played the game in the way it was intended) the reviews are on the whole fair, but some of the scores seem odd.

Take Eurogamer. Their review pretty well nails the game and explains why I find it so fascinating, except for two things: the word 'boring' and the score of 6/10. The first is subjective at two levels deep - it's a reviewers view of how likely others might be to find it boring. The second is problematic. Do you rate the game for the people who won't like it or for those that will? Some games are so good or of such general appeal, or so obviously bad, that this doesn't matter. For EO it does, and judging from the very active board on Gamefaqs a whole range of people, including die-hard FPS players and certainly many non-casual gamers rate it very highly indeed.

It comes down to this: if you are at all interested in the game having heard a bit about it (whether for open-endedness, relaxation, interest in marine life, love of collectathons etc), chances are you will love it. It you don't think you are interested in it but want to try it - chances are you will like it. If you have no interest at all and dismiss it out of hand - don't even think about it, you will hate it.

So the reviews are sharply polarised between 8/9 and somewhere close to zero. But how come it scores all those 6s? It is reviewers (or their editors) hedging their bets. Not a good basis for a game score. Essentially it means not that the game is 60% good but that 60% of people will like it - which really doesn't tell you anything about whether it is a good game for you.

And the trouble with doing a meta review is you tend to select a quote that justifies the score rather than one that reflects the game. So EO comes out looking worse than it really is. IGN has it right.

Compare it with, say, reviewing ballet. You review a ballet for people who like ballet. You don't rate it low because football lovers wouldn't like it.

My Endless Ocean friend code: 6401-1928-7830