JoystiQuitter: Velvet Assassin
by Justin McElroy 
{ May 4th 2009 at 1:58PM } 
So, we'd like to humbly introduce Joystiquitter, where we tell you what we thought, why we stopped playing and just how long it took for the game to break our spirits.
Velvet Assassin (Xbox 360)
Time Before Quit: approximately five hours
This week, we gave up on Southpeak's Velvet Assassin, a stealthy WWII game starring British secret agent Violette Summer, based on real-life agent Violette Szabo.
Things started out promisingly enough. The game looks good, and its presentation, which relates the game's levels as Violette's hospital bed recollections, is interesting enough.
Replay Studios' take on sneaking doesn't feel like anything we've played before -- let's call it "hardcore stealth." If you're discovered as you sneak to your clandestine objective, you're not going to shoot it out. You're almost always going to get killed by bullets. Fin. The one exception is if you have a dose of morphine, which you can use to warp Violette's memories (at least we think that's what's going on), slow down time and instantly kill a nearby enemy.
No, your best strategy is to hide unseen in the shadows, watching enemy patterns and waiting for the perfect moment to sneak up behind enemies and silently eliminate them. You're rarely ever rushed into a decision, as this is a game about plotting and waiting.
If you do well, your abilities (for example, the speed at which you sneak) can be upgraded with experience you gain for completing objectives and finding collectibles hidden throughout levels.
So, why'd we give up?
First off, the game's in desperate need of more checkpoints. Waiting and plotting is fine, but if you execute a strategy perfectly, you shouldn't have to continue to repeat that section. Far too often we'd artfully complete an area only to get offed and have to begin the sequence again. It takes the game from strategy and planning to rote memorization of actions and enemy paths. Negative fun.
Perhaps even more damning: it's hard to shake the feeling of deja vu as each level begins. You sneak up behind dudes, you off them, you repeat. There's little variety level-to-level and even less room for improvisation. After five hours it seemed from the Achievement list that we were only about halfway through the full game. Faced with five more hours of frustration, we bailed out.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 3)
Guzzy @ May 4th 2009 1:52PM
looks like a good feature to help keep me away from bad games. thanks alot joystiq
Vegnagun bwf @ May 4th 2009 3:21PM
Justin plays through some really crappy games. If he can't play through it then I can't even look at it, so I agree.
Latin_Trident @ May 4th 2009 3:30PM
You should have started this section during the Yaris game instead! Too late, now I have a game I don't like.
Sam @ May 4th 2009 4:53PM
thanks joystiq, I was on the fence with this one, you grabbed me and pulled me off the fence.
Urza @ May 5th 2009 11:45AM
I wish I'd read this first.. played the game.. after 2 hours I knew it sucked.
waves @ May 4th 2009 1:53PM
Quitters never win.
xtremeholymuffin @ May 4th 2009 1:58PM
Super Mario Br....onds?
MystileArmor @ May 4th 2009 1:58PM
Quitters do win. When you stop playing crappy games in order to make time for the ones you enjoy, you win.
FlamingEffigy @ May 4th 2009 2:39PM
Finally someone agrees with me! Now where'd my heroine go...
waves @ May 4th 2009 2:42PM
Users are losers!
Blank-Mage @ May 4th 2009 4:46PM
Ah, ragers.
Sam Diaz @ May 4th 2009 1:56PM
So basically what your saying is...Mr. T is missing from the game.
Duke @ May 4th 2009 1:57PM
I read the IGN review and they really seemed put off by this game too. I am impressed that you guys admit the game blew too much to keep playing. Good for you! Now, to make the article better you should find a picture of a cute cat and put a funny quote under it. That would make this perfect!
MystileArmor @ May 4th 2009 2:00PM
You should be more impressed IGN didn't give it a good review, if anything.
Joystiq reviews are always reliable and truthfull.
David Black @ May 4th 2009 2:19PM
@MystileArmor - I generally would agree with you but Joystiq's exceptionally poor Resistance: Retribution review comes to mind as one they really got wrong.
MystileArmor @ May 4th 2009 2:30PM
I didn't read said review, although wether or not a good review, Joystiq doesn't get under the proverbial table of developers to give it some oral pleasure.
IGN reviews are biased as hell.
*Here Mr. IGN reviewer, we give you a shit-ton of cool stuff for free if you, y'know..*wink wink**
Duke @ May 4th 2009 2:33PM
Oh, I forgot that I was supposed to hate on IGN reviews cause the cool kids do it. Forgive me, but I haven't access to the secret files that prove they're in everyone's pockets. My error.
Roofie @ May 4th 2009 2:42PM
@David Black
So you generally think that they do a good (and honest) job of reviewing games, but you don't think that they're fair because about the game that you really liked? Wake up, man! I really liked the Conan game, but I can understand why people shit on it.
MystileArmor @ May 4th 2009 2:50PM
@ Duke
I'm not hating on IGN because it's the cool thing. I stopped following fads when I realized installing skateboard wheels on my front-axl of my bicycle wasn't practical.
I don't like IGN reviews cause they just suck, period. And it's a well known fact IGN gets all kinds of swag from publishers. So does Joystiq, but they give it away to the readers!
Vidikron @ May 4th 2009 3:13PM
But do you actually have proof that their reviews are biased due to any of this swag?
Blank-Mage @ May 4th 2009 4:49PM
10 Shit-tons.
whylekat @ May 4th 2009 5:01PM
Do you people seriously think that IGN gives games better reviews cause they receive cheap junk in the mail? You honestly believe that a can of Infected Energy drink was what swayed their resident evil 5 review? Not the fantastic gameplay?
I gaurentee they get plenty of shitty shwag from terrible games and give them bogus reviews, deservingly.
Neuromancer @ May 4th 2009 5:11PM
I don't think IGN is corrupt. It's just that their reviews are worthless to me, their opinions never jive with mine so there's no reason to look to them for a recommendation.
Also their review scale sucks, they need to learn to round up. Can someone tell me the difference between a 6.9 and a 7.1, really?
Alex @ May 4th 2009 5:13PM
Blank-Mage;
Nice. Not sure if anyone else got that reference. Well they should! They are on the Xbox section of Joystiq.
Josh @ May 4th 2009 7:09PM
Uh, Alex, no I'm not.
Tired of your BS @ May 4th 2009 9:57PM
Actually IGN isnt biased or taking bribes. they're just in compenten morons with poor reviewing skills, they've been that way for 2 generations of systems, it's not like it's going to stop now.
Dowse @ May 5th 2009 2:03PM
@ Neuromancer.
Surely a 7.1 is a round down
NeopToIemy @ May 17th 2009 8:08PM
Look at IGN's Blitz 2 review, everywhere else gave it about an 8 but IGN bashed the hell out of it but its not because the guy that reviewed said game used to be a producer for EA Tiburon.
Alex @ May 18th 2009 5:54PM
Review scores are completely subjective. As are the way different people play games. It's the glaring flaw of using a numbered scoring system.
As for IGN, I'll defend them and say that review bias usually stems from personal preference(likes and dislikes) and not so much swag. Take Greg Miller from the IGN Playstation Team for instance. The guy gave Patapon 2 a 9.5(the highest score on metacritic last time i checked) and it's not because he's getting a blowjob from Sony, but because everyone know he's crazy about Patapon. Obviously someone who didn't care for the first one might give the sequel a 7 or 8 based on merits.
tl;dr. I know.
Jerkfish @ May 4th 2009 1:58PM
Sounds about like the same impressions I got when I tried it at the NY ComicCon.
I like the idea of Joystiquitter. If the game got bad enough to the point where you'd stop playing, why not share and report that? After all I'm not a paid reviewer so I certainly wouldn't force myself to finish a game I didn't like, so It'd be nice to know where that quitting point would play into it.
ZipCrash @ May 4th 2009 1:58PM
Nice idea for the new feature, I like it. I'm still going to try Velvet Assassin anyway. I've been looking forward to it for far to long to not atleast try it.
butaneko @ May 4th 2009 2:03PM
Can we get a picture of that dude with the hook from Showtime at the Apollo?
James @ May 4th 2009 2:06PM
Do you pronounce it JOY-stiq quitter or joy-STIQ-quitter. I think the second one rolls off the tongue better (pronounced to sound like non-sequitur)
butaneko @ May 4th 2009 2:16PM
I was thinking JOY-sti-quitter
Eoco @ May 4th 2009 2:07PM
What happens if a game really picks up in the second half, but you've already stopped playing and so don't get to experience it? All we would read about is the negative first half.
This often happens with JRPGs where the first 20% of the game is pretty dull, but it all picks up about 5 in.
Games don't always provide an evenly spread amount of fun -- quite often the pacing is off.
Eoco @ May 4th 2009 2:13PM
*but it all picks up about 5 hours in.
jeff @ May 4th 2009 2:31PM
Thats broken logic. You want to hook me in the front end. If the game sux in the front you need to fix it. Its not the players fault. If the last 2 hours are good but the first 5 are awful. Why trudge through it?
Eoco @ May 4th 2009 2:36PM
I agree, but what if the first 2 hours are terrible and the last 5 are great? Then it's worth slogging through, since there's more good than bad.
Vidikron @ May 4th 2009 3:04PM
"I agree, but what if the first 2 hours are terrible and the last 5 are great? Then it's worth slogging through, since there's more good than bad."
But that doesn't appear to be the case here. 5 hours is a long time to put up with a bad/frustrating game, especially of this type, in the hope that it will get better afterward. But regardless of how you feel about the 5 hours, Joystiq tells you that they quit after 5 hours and felt like they were roughly half way through. At that point it is now up to you to decide if you want to see if the last half is any good. Joystiq didn't care to see.
Eoco @ May 4th 2009 3:14PM
It's just a shame that these have to be used as companion pieces with reviews from other outlets. Otherwise I'll never know if the game gets better.
I hope they still mainly do the standard reviews, rather than these. I trust Joystiq's judgement a lot, so normally I just read Joystiq's review of a game, but with these I have to rely on other outlets as well.
thesimplicity @ May 4th 2009 3:14PM
I definitely agree. Right now, this article is basically saying "don't buy this game," which is terrible considering Joystiq's volume of readers and the fact that it's a struggling new title. If they keep this feature, I think it needs to be a bit more in depth than two paragraphs after a few hours play.
Vidikron @ May 4th 2009 3:17PM
But what if the alternative was that they didn't print this information at all? In other words, they started to play intending to do a full review and then stopped because they didn't feel like continuing, but never told us they attempted to do a review. I'd rather know that the games was poor enough to make them quit rather than no nothing at all.
Vidikron @ May 4th 2009 3:17PM
*know
Eoco @ May 4th 2009 3:22PM
Yes, I'd definitely rather have this than nothing, but for the sake of 5 hours, I would rather have full review.
OhJustSomeRandomGuy @ May 4th 2009 3:33PM
I can think of literally ZERO games that sucked two hours in, and then magically got better after 50% of the game.
If I ever encounter a game like that, it'll piss me off more than if it just sucked throughout because it'd be akin to the game developer saying, "Look, we knew we were doing a shit job, but we didn't care enough to make the entire game good. So here's half of a good game."
I wouldn't care if Joystiq wrote a full review based on 50% of the game, because that's all you'd ever need. Am I going to return this after being 5 hours in? Yes? Well, then why do I care if someone got to hour 10. It sucks. That's all I honestly need to know.
Eoco @ May 4th 2009 3:35PM
X-Men Origins: Wolverine is a bit boring to start with, but then they start chucking in things like the huge sentinel boss towards the end. Also, most JRPGs are pretty boring for the first 10 hours, but then they really pick up.
Stix Remix @ May 4th 2009 4:16PM
I agree with Eoco, in particular because of the games he is describing.
Ideally, we all want a game that we can play for at least 20 hours, be it a storyline, campaign, or general multiplayer fun. Gamers want something that will last and is worth the buck we pay for the bang (or at least we all should).
In the case of some 20+ games, cracking the first five hours is hardly reaching the greater portion of the game. Plus, the reviewer is not creating a "fair" review. "Fair" in that this review really only applies to people who would be turned away from this game.
Say someone is looking for a really cool stealth game and can put up with some monotony, repetition, and an unforgiving checkpoint system? This gamer is not given a full view of the game or an accurate measurement of the game's entirety.
Joystiq's Negareviews are better than this new column because it archives all the negative sentiments of a game into one place, instead of only highlighting the negative sentiments of one portion of a game.
Blank-Mage @ May 4th 2009 4:53PM
I have a disease that requires me to finish all things I start in the hopes it gets better. So far, this has only been the case with Mahou Sensei Negima. On the flip side, Kingdom Hospital was the most agonizing experience I've yet lived through. Basically, I agree with you, but the scales are radically in favor of terrible things remaining terrible.
Mr Khan @ May 4th 2009 5:10PM
It might just be my luck, but i've found that most games that start off poorly do tend to get better
I have never been completely dissatisfied.
Vidikron @ May 4th 2009 5:14PM
@Stix Remix
"In the case of some 20+ games, cracking the first five hours is hardly reaching the greater portion of the game. Plus, the reviewer is not creating a "fair" review. "Fair" in that this review really only applies to people who would be turned away from this game."
But, again, in this specific instance we aren't talking about a 20+ hour game. We're talking about a game that is maybe 10 hours... quite likely less. I'd be a bit more patient with a game, especially an RPG, that was expected to take 20+ hours. But even then 5 hours of frustration is pushing it for most people.
And speaking of frustration, let's not forget that that is indeed one of the main reasons they quit. This isn't that same as an RPG where the story may move a bit slow at first, they're were frustrated with the base gameplay mechanics. There's no real reason to expect that to change with the rest of the game.
IMO, based on the length of the game and their reasons for quitting I think they gave this game a fair shot.