Rise of the Argonauts Review

By Tom Bramwell Published 2 February, 2009

Fleeced.

Version tested: Xbox 360

Devoted followers of all things role-playing have been well served by the long-running battle between good and evil, and Rise of the Argonauts frames its re-imagining of Jason and his quest for the Golden Fleece in the starkest of traditional contrasts: Jason, already king and faithful protector of Iolcus, is set on his path by the murder of his new wife, Alceme, on their wedding day, by the suitably putrid, Hecate-worshipping Blacktongues.

It isn't long, however, before proceedings are sprinkled with welcome ambiguity. Jason seeks the Fleece not to serve the usual notions of loyalty, honour or selflessness but simply to resurrect Alceme, and soon finds himself in league with the gods Ares, Hermes, Apollo and Athena, all of whom will see their own interests served by his decision to abandon his people to the regency of Pelias, whose manner and dress sense are enough to illustrate Jason's rather daft decision, even for players who aren't aware of his role in the original Greek mythology from which Rise of the Argonauts borrows most of its cast.

After a fevered introduction to combat, Jason is initially consigned to trotting through the vast halls of his palace and the surrounding village passing on news to the bereaved families of guards killed in the initial Blacktongue assault, in-between listening to fortune-tellers, conversing with servants, noblemen-and-women and his guards about his duties to Iolcus (the ones he's not bothering with for the next ten hours), and the virtues of the gods and their various dominions. Apart from some sparring, there's little besides running around and talking for over an hour, before Jason finally takes delivery of his ship, the Argo, and sets off on a course to recruit the gods' descendants so he can locate the Fleece.

'Rise of the Argonauts' Screenshot 1

Jason's quest takes him to some interesting places, but he would have done better to stick around and keep his own house in order.

Conversation, which owes almost as much to BioWare in structure as it does to Greek mythology in content, does at least feed back into combat, as do the trivial tasks Jason performs before his departure and throughout the game. At certain points in conversation you're given several possible responses, and each choice represents a minor tribute to one of the four gods. Completed tasks - whether story-specific, incidental or combat-related - are recorded as Achievement-style deeds, which can be offered up to your choice of god as well. You can then invest the spoils of worship in more powerful attacks, passive bonuses and special "god powers".

Combat intensifies as Jason's quest takes him to the lands of Mycenae, Saria and Kythra, and while you're often flanked by your choice of two companions from the heroes you recruit along the way, they do their own thing, leaving you to concentrate on slaying Blacktongues, Ionians, minotaurs, satyrs and occasionally worse, using a mixture of sword, spear and mace, ever-blocking with your big golden shield. Along with the gods' boons, there are new versions of each weapon, which you receive at intervals (and can switch between back on the Argo), as well as new armour to uncover. However, your unlocks are linked to pivotal conversations and story events, rather than any overarching system. Your deeds constitute experience, and there's nothing else in the game to gather.

'Rise of the Argonauts' Screenshot 2

Despite increasing numbers of enemies and enemy types, it's never necessary to consider your attacks except in boss fights, several of which are simply repeated once you move past the initial three quests.

Simplification isn't always a bad thing, but sadly the result here feeds into a bland combat system, where despite the impressive towers of boons and god powers available to consider in the menus, the majority of conflicts are decided by two medium attacks followed by a hard "execution" blow, or by two successive execution strikes. From beginning to end, the most considered thing you have to do is occasionally switch from your favourite weapon to one of the others to suit a particular boss, or activate a god power to buff your attacks or reinforce your comrades, the choice of which doesn't have much bearing on wherever you're currently carving up the enemy, apart from different quips and incidental conversation around about the place. There are no combos to work towards, or ways to cooperate with your pals, and most of your enemies' attacks are basic, while their masters simply follow scripted patterns.

Away from battle, the story becomes rather more endearing as you deal with the problems facing the people you encounter, each of whom is suffering at the hands of some local evil you need to uncover, and here the game is relatively successful at marrying its ancient inspiration to basic detective work. On the apparently cursed island of Kythra, for example, you find yourself seeking evidence to save the life of a condemned criminal, before exercising your judgement to decide the fate of his rather more tainted companion, and as you consider the failings of Medusa and Perseus you find yourself caught up in an absorbing, interactive debate with Phaedon over the right of the Golden Fleece to exist at all.

But these relative successes are marred. Phaedon's philosophical jousting, for example, is the other side of a crude memory game, and followed by a dull boss fight, while decisions about how to treat the people you encounter are often trivial. You simply pick the response that serves whichever god you're currently trying to get some powers out of, aware by this stage that the structure of the game is rather more linear than it lets on. Choice is generally an illusion, if it's even offered, as it isn't when you're invited to either bludgeon your wife's murderer to death, watching on from his perspective after ten minutes of playing, or stand there motionless and not play the game any longer.

Argonauts' illusion of scope is initially more successful, as Unreal Engine 3 is used to conjure a vast game-world, but this is also shattered, and quickly, by narrow corridors of movement, barricaded arbitrarily, and the lifelessness of the places you visit. Iolcus, Kythra and Saria are galleries of motionless non-player characters, only some of whom have things to say, and even the more invigorated Mycenae is stunted by its own immobile NPCs and the obligatory minutes of jogging around it to reach points marked on your map.

'Rise of the Argonauts' Screenshot 3

The Aspect system, where you devote your deeds to gods in exchange for new powers, is Rise of the Argonauts' best feature, but the combat it serves is too basic to take proper advantage.

In the absence of an on-screen guide, it's necessary to dive into the pause menu's map screen wherever you go, and regularly, to find the NPCs and locations of relevance marked along its prescribed pathways. Like the combat and conversation systems, it leaves you in no doubt where you need to go, and in no doubt of the superficiality of your orienteering between people and places designed to shunt the game into its next phase, despite the fact you often have more than one thing to achieve at a time.

For all this, Argonauts' premise might have been its redemption. Combat, exploration and conversation may be processional, but there's something intriguing about Jason's apparently unwitting selfishness, upon which the game builds its masks of virtues inspired by its principle gods. Were the game to realise this, it might make up for all the hours spent wading through long-winded, often incidental conversations, grimacing at the pauses between speech (even in spite of the ability to preload your chosen responses) and the vacant expressions of the stony-faced cast.

'Rise of the Argonauts' Screenshot 4

Dialogue choices are about currying favour with particular gods and have little impact on the way the story unfolds.

Given what a large number of Greek myths were meant to symbolise, Argonauts' cultural inspiration cries out for a measure of narrative justice. Surely Jason must pay for the decision he has made - to save himself from the certainty of grief and solitude - however noble the acts it has driven him to perform in service to that quest?

But if this is a cautionary tale, it's one of this player's misplaced, increasingly desperate hope to derive some greater meaning. There is only one path, and while you meet a few interesting people and solve a few worthy problems on the way, the fundamental paradox at the heart of Rise of the Argonauts is never explored or resolved. Instead, the game concludes disagreeably, as virtually everyone Jason is supposed to protect is left tortured and dead by his original departure, and he simply has a party because he got what he wanted. For an action RPG elevated beyond its serviceable components by the allure of rich mythology to end in such a desperate contradiction is comprehensively self-destructive.

3 / 10

Read the Eurogamer.net scoring policy
Picture of Tom.

About Tom Bramwell

Tom is Operations director of Eurogamer Network and Editor-at-Large of Eurogamer.net. He joined the company in February 2000.

Read more articles from Tom by visiting the Tom Bramwell archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (84) Latest comment 3 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • Darren #1 3 years ago

    Well it was a choice between this game and The Witcher for me (PC versions obviously) since both looked interesting and I fancied an RPG but, fortunately, I decided on the latter.

  • coastal #2 3 years ago

    ouch, these adverts won't pay themselves.

  • stevetuck #3 3 years ago

    3/10? how can you even make a game that bad?

  • Retroid #4 3 years ago

    /BLATANT LIE

    But... how? This looked amazingly great when I've seen it on TV...!

    BLATANT LIE/

  • butler` #5 3 years ago

    funny thing is with knowing nothing about the game and reading not a word of the review I knew it would be bad just from the artwork.

  • tnomad #6 3 years ago

    3/10 with ads across the top of the screen? Where are all the EG conspiracy theorists when it goes this way?

  • Slabbathepave #7 3 years ago

    Why did EG have to go and give a 3 to a game with so much advertising on here. Now i have to go deeper and work alot harder for my conspiracy theory's.....unless EG WANT me to do that....


  • riz23 #8 3 years ago

    If it wasn't for the ads it woulda been a 2?

  • Krelle #9 3 years ago

    Im sure this is better than 3/10. Just another case of EG underscoring games that did not live up to the hype.

  • BBIAJ #10 3 years ago

    Balls, was really looking forward to this one too.

    Ah well, I cancelled the pre-order recently due to lack of funds, might pick it up during the summer drought or something.

  • FenderMaster #11 3 years ago

    The interview seemed to have alot of positive in it too, seemed to read more like a 6 or 7. There didn't seem to be anything gamebreaking or any serious issues, sounds like a good idea with mediocre exceution, certainly not a 3 anyway...

  • Pastici #12 3 years ago

    Ah well I'm not going to buy it so bitching won't be on the cards for me! But then again, it never is!

  • darm #13 3 years ago

    3/10 is something no one can possibly enjoy - yet I liked this game. Some(not all, but still) of the dialogue here is well above the average. I think it deserves something on the lowest end of the "playable" range, like Viking last year - if you play for some time, you get used to the flaws and even start liking the game.

  • Aretak #14 3 years ago

    People whinging about the score in a review comments thread? Unbelievable, Jeff!

  • evild_edd #15 3 years ago

    Edge also gave a terrible score (and review) for this one.

    Strangely OXM came out with an 8/10 and raved about the story and the title as a 'slow burner'.....?

    TBH, sounds like if you want the setting/action, go for GoW, if you want the RPG and NPC interation, go for Oblivio/Fallout/Mass Effect.

  • Quint2020 #16 3 years ago

    *sigh*

    /continue to wait for Sacred 2

  • Buztafen #17 3 years ago

    3 seems a little harsh....it annoys me when this is said, but it didnt 'read' like a 3.....more like a 6.

  • Dynamism #18 3 years ago

    Worse than Ninja Gaiden 2, then?

  • Redeye #19 3 years ago

    Pretty much worse than almost everything else, by the looks of it. ;)

  • UncleLou #20 3 years ago

    Ooooh, harsh. I've played this for quite a bit (don't ask why), and I would have scored it higher - a 5, maybe. There's nothing fundamentally wrong with it - the combat is quite fun and visceral (unfortunately, what initially looks like it could be a slightly more "tactical"fighting game soon turns into button-mashing), and some of the characters aren't bad. My main problems would be corridor level design, the lack of random loot and the (mostly) less than stellar art design. Why does Hercules have to look like a member of the WWF, for example?

  • miiiguel #21 3 years ago

    oooh such a low score, this reviewer must be good!

  • Trafford #22 3 years ago

    Oh dear.Big shame

  • JahB #23 3 years ago

    i played this back in december (it's out in continental europe for a while now), and i wholeheartedly agree with the score. was massively looking forward to this, and it was a pile of crap.

    if it wasn't for the skullcracking in slow-motion, a 2/10 would be justified.

  • Eraysor #24 3 years ago

    Nice to see EG is breaking out of the usual gaming review range that only seems to go from 6 to 10.

  • wizardcharlie #25 3 years ago

    For gods sake - although in the back of my mind I just knew this would be shit.

    Surely there is a gap in the market for a game based on the greek myths? Come on! Sprawling sandbox world, violence, intrigue, sex, side quests, unique weaponry and items, memorable NPCs/enemies/locations - its all right there! Why, it could even be GASP! educational?

    except the poor (financial) performance of this travesty will mean no developer will touch it with a bargepole. Numpties.

    Please dear god, will someone recommend a decent greek myth based game?

    I say we go on strike.

    Edited by 1 at 02/02/09 @ 10:00

  • andywilkie35 #26 3 years ago

    I'll probably still pick this up in the summer if its reduced heavily

  • ZuluHero #27 3 years ago

    I love how EG post articles about the recession not affecting the games industry, yet continuously under-score games…

    Ok, so by your own admission, the games industry might not be affected by the recession, but your continuing ignorance and low-score giving will affect it!

    How the hell can a game score such a wide and diverse range of scores?

    [link url=http://www.met acritic.com/games/platforms/xbox360/riseoftheargonauts?q=ris e%20of%20the%20argonauts
    ]http://ww w.metacritic.com/games/platform...[/link]

  • hiddenranbir #28 3 years ago

    Will EuroG make a decision to not advertise bad games as well?

  • schnide #29 3 years ago

    @butler

    Seconded. From the first preview I saw in Edge, I knew it wasn't going to be very good. Even the subtitle "Rise of the Argonauts" gave it away to me. Is there any kind of stock exchange where you can buy stock in a game you think is going to be good or bad? I'd make an absolute shitload.

    In fact, developers, why not save yourself a few millions and hire me as a consultant before your game launches? I'll be able to tell you ten things to change that even if I can't fix your game outright, it'll convince enough people to buy it anyway.

  • MENTAL1ST Verified Senior Software Engineer, Picsel UK Ltd. #30 3 years ago

    "Fleeced", what kind of pun is that?

    You wasted a perfectly good opportunity to use "Risible".

  • metalangel #31 3 years ago

    Shame, as this looked really interesting. I have to say, I think the score is based almost entirely on the reviewer's disgust at the ending!

  • scimitarDT #32 3 years ago

    I'm sorry but this is not a 3/10 game. They are just being ridiculously harsh probably based on the reviewers personal expectations.
    It is a very weak RPG game, and in fact is more akin to those Lord of the Rings action games or Conan than an RPG. However, the art is pretty decent though a bit cartooney but overall the production values alone would earn it a 5. It plays ok, and you would usually judge it as an 'average' game in the true sense of the word, 5/10.

    What annoys me most is the end of the review where the reviewer holds no regard for anyone who might be playing it or whatever and just basically prints spoilers, or rather - tells us the end.

    To me it's unprofessional and smacks of the kind of 'spit the dummy out' behaviour I'd expect from a spoilt teenage gamer.
    Edited by 1 at 02/02/09 @ 10:50

  • creepylizard #33 3 years ago

    so eg is biased if they give a high score and biased if they give a low score?
    anyone who thinks eg has an agenda is a muppet.

  • MENTAL1ST Verified Senior Software Engineer, Picsel UK Ltd. #34 3 years ago

    Surely there is a gap in the market for a game based on the greek myths

    There's a plug in that gap called "God of War".

  • UncleLou #35 3 years ago

    And Titan Quest.

  • captainrentboy #36 3 years ago

    3/10!!!
    But I thought when there were ads for a game splashed across EG they were then obligated to give them at least an 8.....
    Maybe that theory is absolute horseshit huh?

  • Meho #37 3 years ago

    Anyway, the score is a bit harsh, for those who care about those things. Didn't enjoy this game very much - combat is visceral but ultimately oversimplified, the level design narrow and constricting, the 'levelling-up' system too simple and even shallow and it also has certain technical problems on PC. But the narrative is actually above average and it keeps you going. As someone said, this is nearer to the quality of games like Viking than in the 'completely unplayable' category.

  • Mudo #38 3 years ago

    "Please dear god, will someone recommend a decent greek myth based game? "

    Age of Mythology !

  • Retroid #39 3 years ago

    OMG EG is biased!

    If this game had been on the 360 they would've-

    oh.

  • Silvervein #40 3 years ago

    Actually age of mythology is not that good. It does have, however, one thing going for it. The sound and visual effects of medusa unit petrifying gaze are best in any game I saw in last 15 years.

  • dirk_aircool #41 3 years ago

    Jason SLAIN by eurogamer . I dont see a problem . Eurogamer dont usualy score games this low ?? Thats probably because the companies know their game is a dog and dont give eurogamer a review copy . you also have to wonder why ( reading from the posts ) this game has been available for some time in europe and not in uk . were the publishers waiting for the usual post xmas game starvation to set in so the release would score highly among non existen opposition ?.

    zuluHero . why should any reviewer score games up just becuase we are having a small maroeconomicdownturnanomaly ? buy the game yourself . if you like it good . if you dont , bad luck for wasting £45-00 . its your choice .

  • Krelle #42 3 years ago

    EG always give indie-games and other games they want to hype a higher score than the norm.
    They also give games that do not live up to their expectations a much lower score than the norm.
    This does not go hand in hand with their policy that 5 is medum. It just makes us, the consumers, confused and personally I have a very hard to to "rate" a EG score. I never know if it will be close to my own thoughts about a game or not.

    If you take a look at gamerankings etc, EG often give either the highest OR the lowest score for alot of games.
    I dont think they have an agenda, nor are they biased, but they score like fukken attention whores.

    The texts themselves are solid and as good as ever, but, as much as I try, its hard to just ignore a number at the end that seems like the result of a dice-roll.

    I miss old EG ;c

  • Salt_The_Fries #43 3 years ago

    I played the game and finished it (check out my gamertag: XSaltTheFries0) and I personally would give it 6.5 out of 10, but I CAN understand why it got 3/10 here.

  • Salt_The_Fries #44 3 years ago

    If someone was interested in the game, I recommend still checking it outm though in all fairness it has numerous game breaking glitches and it's a technical mess. At least the 360 version is.

  • Starkillah_79 #45 3 years ago

    Not a great game but this review is a JOKE...

  • moggsy #46 3 years ago

    How's about you people bitching about the score just ignore it and read the review? These comments could then be about what the reviewer said rather than the number stuck on the bottom of the review.

  • UKGN_Zoidberg #47 3 years ago

    Unfortunately for me, the US version of this is region free and I bought it back in December. The review is spot-on, I was hoping for something like a 360 version of God Of War but instead got something that makes Too Human look like genius.

  • seasidebaz #48 3 years ago

    I took a look in these comments to scout out the "this game deserves more than a 3" crowd.

    I wasn't disappointed. Best laugh of the day ;)

  • UncleLou #49 3 years ago

    How's about you people bitching about the score just ignore it and read the review? These comments could then be about what the reviewer said rather than the number stuck on the bottom of the review.


    Not much bitching, is there? Mostly mild-mannered disagreement. Looks to me like most people read the review, too.

    I took a look in these comments to scout out the "this game deserves more than a 3" crowd.

    I wasn't disappointed. Best laugh of the day ;)
    ignore poster


    Er, unless it's a silly "9/10 or10/10" console-exclusive fanboy debate, I don't see what the problem with people disagreeing with a review or score is. In fact, it's the reason why I mostly check the comments to hear if a game might be worth trying out despite a poor review.

    I find the your knee-jerk reaction that doesn't fit this thread at all, but looks like it was copypasted from the Killzone 2 thread, a good laugh of the day, too, though. :p
    Edited by 1 at 02/02/09 @ 13:04

  • Salt_The_Fries #50 3 years ago

    @UKGN_Zoidber:

    Haha, I had the same feeling, though I liked Too Human to an extent I'd give it a 7.0 or 7.5, but it also annoyed me at times, but exactly playing Rise of the Argonauts made me appreciate Too Human even more. Too Human compared to RotA is an extremely polished game, and its combat system is miles better than RotA's.

  • seasidebaz #51 3 years ago

    I find the your knee-jerk reaction that doesn't fit this thread at all, but looks like it was copypasted from the Killzone 2 thread, a good laugh of the day, too, though. :p

    It's not really that knee-jerk, though. And I don't do copy-paste. And I'm probably not buying Killzone 2.

    I generally agree with EG's scores. So what if they gave this a 3? At best it would've got a 5, and even getting that score there are more and better games I can buy for the same price.

    The reason for my reaction is that every time EG give a game a low score people start saying "I've played this, it's worth at least a 7". For more proof, see Crash Time on the Xbox360.

  • scimitarDT #52 3 years ago

    I did read the review and my comments are not just based on the 3/10 score.
    EG reviewers are more and more like Edge reviewers every day - WANK.
    Pretentious, up their own-arse and sensationalist in their scores.

    This review ends with basically telling you the end of the game which is the action of a TWAT.
    Then the 3/10 score just to be a cunt.

    It's a mediocre game at best but to spoil the end is attrociously bad journalism. I bet he was dry wanking while crying when he wrote this

  • Aretak #53 3 years ago

    You come across as incredibly bitter, scimitarDT. Do you happen to work for Codemasters or Liquid Entertainment perchance? Of course I'm sure you're well aware that you're quite welcome to fuck off at any time if you dislike the site so much.

  • moggsy #54 3 years ago

    @ UncleLou

    Not much bitching, is there?

    Are you sure you are reading the same comments section as myself, or perhaps you have a lot of people on ignore?

    I wouldn't have commented about the bitching if there wasn't any now would I?

  • scimitarDT #55 3 years ago

    Hahahah! No I don't work for either.

    i just hate CUNTS, and you sir are a massive TWATTING CUNT as well.

    Bye!

  • Ajcandw #56 3 years ago

    Jesus who writes a review like this...

    "For an action RPG elevated beyond its serviceable components by the allure of rich mythology to end in such a desperate contradiction is comprehensively self-destructive."

    This is some of the most pretentious "journalism" I've read in quite some time.

  • metalangel #57 3 years ago

    Bramwell has spent too long in the cafe wearing a black turtleneck with Gillen and Whitehead, I think. Or he missed his vaccination against New Games Journalism.

  • moggsy #58 3 years ago

    @ Ajcandw

    What? Because he uses words of more than one syllable? I'll translate for you:

    'It could have been good but this game stinks.'

    That better? ;-)
    Edited by 3 at 02/02/09 @ 14:12

  • UncleLou #59 3 years ago

    @ UncleLou

    Not much bitching, is there?

    Are you sure you are reading the same comments section as myself, or perhaps you have a lot of people on ignore?

    I wouldn't have commented about the bitching if there wasn't any now would I?


    Just scanned the first page, I see two posts (of 50) that would qualify as "bitching". Sounded to me like you were painting everyone disgareeing with the same brush. Combined with the slightly patronising "read the review" - with which to disagree isn't that easy, because it's pretty much on the money. It's the conclusion, though - the score - people disagree with.

    I wouldn't have commented about the bitching about the bitching if there was that much, would? ;)
    Edited by 1 at 02/02/09 @ 15:16

  • JahB #60 3 years ago

    Jesus who writes a review like this...

    "For an action RPG elevated beyond its serviceable components by the allure of rich mythology to end in such a desperate contradiction is comprehensively self-destructive."

    This is some of the most pretentious "journalism" I've read in quite some time.

    play the game (if you can be bothered with playing this crap). you'll see the review is spot on. i bought this on launch day back in december, and the 3/10 is a perfectly justified score. and mentioning the end is perfectly fair, as it really is one of the worst ever.

    would you have preferred it if the reviewer had not mentioned that the end is absolute bollocks? and believe me, if you've ever read any greek mythology (ffs, even if you watched that crappy kevin sorbo hercules series) you're in for a shocker

  • scimitarDT #61 3 years ago

    To be honest, if i was bothering my arse to play the game and then found out the end - good OR bad- I'd be pissed.
    It's just one of those things you don't do. It's a review of a game. What about if you say an end to a game is so fucking amazing that you have to tell everyone what it is? Would that mean it is wrong to do that? But it's okay to tell someone a shitty end?
    It's plain wrong no matter how you look at it.

    The game may be shite, but lately EG has got on my cock. 10/10 for every game thats half decent (fable 2 = 10/10 - go fuck yerself, they can't even do a decent job of co-op on that game, and the 'immersion' is about as in depth as having a shit in a field)

    i dunno, I just think - no actually i KNOW that a fair few journalists are paid off for good reviews (I've personally witnessed such 'transactions') and while it's not the norm it does happen. I don't normally post anything about anything as I can't be arsed but in the face of such shoddy wank i had to say something, even though I thought the game was sub-par

  • Krelle #62 3 years ago

    scimitarDT:
    I actually agree with you about what EG has become, but your language is just horrible.
    Do you expect anyone to take you seriously, writing like that?

    "..sensationalist in their scores" is probably the best way to describe EG those days, but please, atleast try to be the better person and dont fall to being just sensational yourself.

  • peak_performance #63 3 years ago

    Sensationalist, wut? This is a pretty unhyped game, s'not like every gamer browsing the web will go "WTF SUCH LOW SCORE GOGOGO TO REVIEW" over it.

    I think the review reads well enough and has enough motivation for it's score on the accounts of "boring game".

    Quickedit: OTOH, I feel that most other game sites give way too bland scores, even giving bland shit scores in the 60-75 range just for working. Games are more than the sum of their parts, most often less, sometimes more. Not to say there aren't slip-ups on this site, a recent one would be Fallout 3 but I'll not even start on that one.

    Quickedit the twoed: Point is, I've never thought of EG:s reviews as sensationalist in the slightest idea.

    Slowedit the thirded: And believe you me, I have a huge penis.
    Edited by 3 at 02/02/09 @ 16:51

  • scimitarDT #64 3 years ago

    I think saying a game that is 60 - 75% in a review is a 'dull' review is a bit daft to be honest. if a game is above average and has elements that fans of a genre would appreciate, but as a whole the game is flawed in a few ways then a score of 60 - 75 would represent that adequately. In trying not to be 'dull' should they lower the score to 3/10 to represent the reviewers dissapointment that the game is not what it should be? or perhaps elevate the score to 7 or 8 to appeal to the fans of that genre and say 'hey in your world of interests - this is pretty ok and you may enjoy it'. There is room for any score if the guidelines are clear on what that score means - which they aren't on a constantly changing site.

    This is what I mean, when it comes to reading scores - people these days have to make a statement. A 10/10 implies perfection, which we all know is not achievable. If it doesn't then what does it represent? If the score means nothing then why have it? because we all need to be able to compare the score to other games so we get something to judge a game by? No, because unless they are all by the same reviewer who happens to be such an impartial person who loves every genre equally - then it won't work.

  • itsfuzzy #65 3 years ago

    Sweet jesus. And i was looking forward to this. . .
    Wonder if they will ever port Titan Quest to the 360 or PS3

  • peak_performance #66 3 years ago

    @scimitar, which are all reasons to skip the scoring system alltogether and let the texts speak for themselves. That's not going to happen though, is it?

    What I don't want a reviewer to do is play a game that he thinks is bad and then extrapolate the score to something else just because "some, or even the majority of, action gamers might like it but not me", that's just crazytalk - the score should be as personal as can be, unless extraordinary circumstances arise. This game does not seem that extraordinary since most gamers are somewhat versed in the action rpg genre.

    And of course I'm not saying a 60-75 game should be reviewed as anything else, but they shouldn't be put there just because it has average gameplay elements but if it on the whole deserves it. Most games that just does something right seem to end up there even though most players (incl. the reviewer of course) would not want to play them on the whole, because they are boring.

  • Krelle #67 3 years ago

    peak_performance:
    You seem like a douche, but I wouldnt mind your huge penis. Sometimes you just want MEAT.

  • bonker #68 3 years ago

    FFS!!!

    Yet another game that I was looking forward to for my 360 that turns out to be utter shite ...

    Honestly, I get to play only one game per year on my 360, if I'm lucky - OK my tastes are somewhat restricted but FFS, the only games getting 8+/10 are fucking shooters and Bethesda's output.

    Elder Scrolls V in 2010 for my next game then by the looks of it ...

    *yawn*
    Edited by 1 at 02/02/09 @ 19:02

  • rascoj64 #69 3 years ago

    3/10 is a piss take, it's a lot better than this! A definate 6/10 based on the review!

  • bonker #70 3 years ago

    "so eg is biased if they give a high score and biased if they give a low score?
    anyone who thinks eg has an agenda is a muppet. "

    They do seem to give out an unusually large number of scores of 4 or less (which means 'unplayable' IMO) and a ridiculous number of 9+ scores (like Fable II FFS).
    Edited by 1 at 02/02/09 @ 19:01

  • ZaammK #71 3 years ago

    Wait, did this just get a 3 instead of what, from the review, sounds much more like at LEAST a five because... the reviewer didn't like the ending? Errr, ok.

    Edit: Reading through the comments, I have to agree that EG scores seem to be very "LOOK AT ME!" Which is odd, as the text itself is generally pretty solid, except for an upsetting frequency of "HEY LOOK WE HAVE A GIRL THAT WORKS HERE" and "AREN'T WE SO BRITISH TEE HEE" jokes. I generally come to EG first for my reviews, but the description of their scores as "sensationalist" seems to fit pretty well.
    Edited by 1 at 02/02/09 @ 19:59

  • moggsy #72 3 years ago

    @ UncleLou

    Before my initial comment Krelle, FenderMaster, darm, Buztafen, ZuluHero, scimitarDT & Starkillah_79 all bitch purely about the score without mentioning much else.

    So I count 7 score bitching comments. I personally think it's time to abandon scores altogether. They serve no purpose other than to initiate knee jerk comments.

  • bonker #73 3 years ago

    "So I count 7 score bitching comments. I personally think it's time to abandon scores altogether. They serve no purpose other than to initiate knee jerk comments. "

    And extra hits ...

  • peak_performance #74 3 years ago

    Oh come on, extra hits for this game of all? Have some sense, people.

  • Grimrita #75 3 years ago

    The game isnt that bad. Probably worth a 5. Eitherway, after the Eurogamer 'lets lick EAs arse' Spore review, I never trust a review on here again

  • UncleLou #76 3 years ago

    Before my initial comment Krelle, FenderMaster, darm, Buztafen, ZuluHero, scimitarDT & Starkillah_79 all bitch purely about the score without mentioning much else.



    Exactly what I meant. Two comments that would qualify as "bitching", the others are politely disagreeing, making a few points why - which is exactly what the comments are for. That they don't all wrote an essay doesn't really matter.

    So I count 7 score bitching comments. I personally think it's time to abandon scores altogether. They serve no purpose other than to initiate knee jerk comments.


    Most people can cope with scores pretty well. Regardign "knee jerk", well, my point stands.

  • DanWhitehead #77 3 years ago

    Wait, did this just get a 3 instead of what, from the review, sounds much more like at LEAST a five because... the reviewer didn't like the ending? Errr, ok.

    Why is that a problem? If games are to have stories - and, in the case of a game like Rise of the Argonauts, a story that is central to the gameplay experience - then why shouldn't they be marked up or down depending on how well those stories are told, how satisfying they're concluded? A review of a narrative game shouldn't just be a question of grading its technical merits. Criticism of every other artform - books, film, music etc - places greater value on the creative element rather than mere technical adequacy, and I don't see why games should be any different.

    I really don't understand the persistent assumption that it's somehow pretentious to judge games as more than just abstract lumps of pixels that you can move around.

  • Quak #78 3 years ago

    3/10?

    The actual copy of the review was leading to something more along the lines of 6/10 or 7/10 I thought. There really wasn't much in the way of negativity, apart from 60% of the review moaning about the lack of real choice but since when is real choice something that we get in games?

    To justify a 3/10 I'd have expected a lot more information on what exactly is really bad about the game.

  • shotgun44 #79 3 years ago

    I thought that the reason A lot of games get hyped and score high is because the game is actually good? Just me?

  • moggsy #80 3 years ago

    @ UncleLou
    Exactly what I meant. Two comments that would qualify as "bitching", the others are politely disagreeing, making a few points why - which is exactly what the comments are for.

    I agree, that is what comments are for, and if it were true in this case then I wouldn't have commented. It's not though and I'm not the only person to say so.

  • Krelle #81 3 years ago

    "Anyway the point is that there is no consistency"

    Seems like mainly Dan and Tom scores with the EG "norm" in mind, while everyone else still score as if 7 was the medium.
    If EG could just try to confuse their readers less, theyd be back on the road of win ano EG 2005-ish

  • seasidebaz #82 3 years ago

    @jstar:

    How can you even say that?

    Trackmania DS is one of the finest racing games ever devised, on one of the finest consoles ever devised.
    Gears of War has some of the worst AI ever devised, coupled with Epic's truly stunning lack of post-release support. At least the graphics are nice.
    Halo was a technical showcase for the Xbox, further iterations have got progressively worse.

    If anything, Trackmania is easily the best of the three. It's more fun, lasts longer, and you can play it on the toilet.

  • spookyzombie #83 3 years ago

    EG put more people off shocker by clearly scoring a title way too low.

  • FortysixterUK #84 3 years ago

    Well. having just completed this game Rise of the Argonauts on 360 after approx 17 hours, I can say it was very entertaining.
    In no way did it deserve a 3/10. That once again, is EG and it's reviewers being total tossers. This game makes an easy 7/10 and if you like a game with a STORY, and like the STORY well told, with lots of violent combat in between then its a good-un.

    Recommended to all RPG fans with a brain cell. Graphics are perfectly fine ( not GOW 2 standard ) but not that far from it either.
    Gameplay is fun and the story is ages old and is told well. Yes there is lots of talking in the game. Did I mention...it's got a story ?

    EG, I keep coming back just to slate you off, you and Edge magazine really are the suckiest games reviewing organisations this side of something sucky.

    I'll be back to bemoan the poor quality reviews and inaccurate opinions in the near future.
    Edited by 1 at 15/03/09 @ 22:31