Conker: Live & Reloaded Comments by Kristan Reed

will this finally stop ppl asking about in other forums?

/sigh

@kalel

Good point, but I'm still convinced that if you are going to parody/hark back/whatever something, for chrissakes do it well : )

Maybe I'm still just sore about having to redo the Teddies level with the laser corridor EIGHT MILLION TIMES!

Ahem.

HA HA HA frickin' HA!

Beautiful, blissful irony!

Rare have been exposed as the delinquent filchers I always suspected them to be!

Rowling, you're next...

bought it, hated it, took it back.
good review.

/hugs Rare fanboys who refuse to admit they're going downhill

@Kalel, exactly which bit in OoT? I can't think of a part that isn't memorable!

^_^

only way to dispatch most enemies is the "hit, back-off, hit, back-off" technique.

Actually if you do a hit-hit, hit they die very quickly, no backing off required, its a pain, but once you get the timing right the enemies are not an issue..

Tho it is totaly stupid adition to game, they were not in the orignal, and part of me thinks they were just added to up the dificulty level, which has been reduced from the orignal. I found the Xbox version stupidly easy compaired to the orignal.

This is what happens when fanboys beg for a review of a game, eh?

Best non-PC graphics evar.

Not played the new xbox version, but i liked the n64 version.

I'd have given the n64 version 7/10, maybe 8/10. Sounds like it'd be better getting that instead.

4/10 - pwn3d

Been looking forward to this for literally years. Bought it. Played 2 hours, took it back in disgust. Single player is 4/10 tops.

Review nails it. It's a game of guess what the designer's thinking.

Frustrating, puerile nonsense. Play Sly Raccoon instead. It's loads more fun and loads funnier.

Hehe finally the review. I agree in most points. If they ever make a sequel do not use any of the old voices. They are so bad. the hud in mulitplayer is beyond a joke too.

Hands up who asked for a Conker review? Are you pleased with the score?

Kristan lost the plot with this review Im sure he did judt to piss off everyone that moaned about the wait. I personally thing the live game is beautifully balanced and is second to only top spin in the time spent online and that includes halo 2. I agree the single player hasn't aged well but I still loved it since I played only a little of of the original. 4/10 takes the piss really.

/puts hand up

yes i asked for a review,
yes i own the game,
yes i enjoyed the single player,
yes i enjoyed the xbox live stuff
yes i've read the review, thought the review was ok, bit harsh in places

I enjoyed the n64 version and was pleased when i got this, didnt take the game seriosuly, it's just not worth the full asking price, £20 yes.

It's an N64 at it's heart.

Rare have totally lost it. Are they aiming for 0/10 with the next PD?

No kidding?

And tell me, when were Rare supposed to become "good" again?

Oh. Should we hold our breath for PDZ? That will surley become an amazing game - like a Halo:CE of 2005, right?

Oh sure it will.

I've said it once before and I'll say it again, Nintendo selling rare was a stroke of genious. Rare has *not* made a single worthwhile game since their Nintendo 64 days. And frankly, am I the only one who's wondering just how big an input Nintendo actually had on "Rare's" games back then?

Sure, they've lost a lot of good people, but still. Is this the best they can do? And how many years have they been working on this one again? Two, Three years, or even longer?

Oh. Well maybe that will at least warrant Kameo a 6/10 score since that game has been in works for the past four, five years. Great work guys.

IMHO its worth getting this game for the ending alone! *lol*

/agrees (if that wasnt being sarcastic!)
The ending is very enjoyable (and also sad)

"@Kalel, exactly which bit in OoT? I can't think of a part that isn't memorable!"

True. The bit I was thinking about came about halfway through when everything changed. Don't want to spoil it for the madmen that still haven't played it, so yuo should know which bit I mean now.

Thinking about this, I never did get past the laser/teddy bears bit in conkers. Might be time to revisit.

I liked the matrix bit first time thru.. but that's now been done to death.

Ah... that bit ;-)

Yeah, I don't think ever a game has evoked such a genuine emotion from me as then, or indeed that game. But that bit I remember particularly.

After all the hype about this rare and this being one of their most famous games, I gave it a whirl. Must say, I think I agree with the review. It's a crap game with pretty graphics and limited humour.

I often wonder at MS decisions with games and sometimes get a feeling they havent a clue what their demographic is. I love my Xbox and got if so I could play more PC like games with a fewgood console games for a bonus. THere's a ton oif fantastic titles out there.

Really, just think how many good titles could have been developed with the 350,000,000 spent on rare. Very few cost more than 12,000,000 and most less than half that. Crazy!!!!!

Oh well.

Good review. The game bites.

So did Grabbed by the Ghoulies and It's Mister Pants though.

X3rx3s - other (mainly american) sites have given it a high score because they find british accents absolutely hilarious, whereas to us a southerner trying to put on a liverpool accent or an american accent is just painful to the ears.

Mr. Brown - that's a silly argument. The game played like it did back then because of limitation already set in place, and the newer techniques and ideas we have today were not around then. However, that was then and this is now. And, as the review said, such dated gameplay mechanics do not warrant being sold at full price. Would you buy an ancient VW Golf for the same price as a brand new Jaguar right off of the assembley line? Of course you wouldn't.

Finally, the incessant requests can stop.

A very quick scan of the comments above seems to suggest that all the people who were crying out for this review are going to buy the game anyway (or even already own it).

I've now invested 40 seconds of my life on this thread, and thats about 35 seconds too much. Goodbye Conker.

Don't know the game, don't care about the game - only thing I care about is the lamers who have such boring lives that they need to get their kicks from typing "Hahah! Told ya!" on internet forums. Get over yourselves.

Oh come on. That's way too harsh, Kristan you seem more keen to sticking the boot into Rare (and encouraging others to do so) than giving a balanced review.

Why are you judging the single player by today's standards? It ws released in 2001, and at the time I reckoned it was one of the best platformers out there. They've only included it as a bonus with an updated graphical engine.

You haven't mentioned how much variety the game has, and how Rare have streamlined the experience to do away with collect-a-thons, and more on objectives, which is indeed 'rare' a platformer, especially one originally released in 2001.

I must admit, I don't really like the multiplayer, but I thought the single player was so much fun in 2001, and I must admit still is now. You may have a different sense of humour to me, but this is one of the funniest games ever.

4/10 is OTT, and I know its only opinion, but a lot of other websites have given it decent reviews (8's and 9's), and not for nothing. even EDGE Magazine can say this about Conker:

'As a complete game package Conker: Live & Reloaded is tremendously good value. Significantly, it also shows a company finally back on form'


Oh well, different strokes for different folks.

I'm actually a long term Rare fan, back to the dawn of time when games like Cookie, Pssst, Jetpac and Atic Atac were hogging my gaming time and convincing me to buy a Kempston joystick and interface.

Even recently; check my reviews for the GBA titles of theirs: It's Mr Pants and Sabre Wulf - both classy titles that I personally really got a lot out of. Grabbed By The Ghoulies was a commercial disaster but I appreciated it for what it was. But this? This? This is just a travesty.

And for the apologists that keep harping on that the single player game is just a "bonus" - are you nuts? Both elements get equal billing, and Microsoft knows only too well that about 99% of its audience aren't even using their Live service in Europe. It won't publicise that fact, but their figures don't lie. The single player is probaby worth a 2/10 on its own, the multiplayer about a 6/10. That's where the 4 comes from.

People claiming the single player is being deliberately obtuse; that's the funniest thing I've read in ages!

I love Eurogamer!

I've read a few reviews of this around the web and I couldn't quite understand why they praised the humour aspect of Conker, when it was quite clear that the voice acting and writing was pathetic once I saw some cut-scenes. Eurogamer is a bastion of honesty in a corrupt part of the media.

So every reviewer (and I asuume every gamer) who likes the game and the humour is corrupt?

I think we should let this one rest. This thread is getting crazier and crazier!

This just, once again, shows how much input Nintendo had in rare games.

Nintendo was holding their hand all along...

As someone said, Rare don't know how to make good games without Nintendo holding their hand, THAT'S what took three years.

Microsoft is welcome to them I say, they sure know how to back a loser... as usual.

despite the single-player campain being slow and tedious most of the times, there are some good points that go overlooked in this review. the whole point of the game is to get the player stunned about what to do next: often there's a good solution which at first doesn't seem logical at all. the effect it creates is a first in gaming, it's genius like in a good thriller, and very rewarding, when first feeling amazed and stunned and then solving it. there's a whole new gameplay style in this game. but very often you just don't get enough information; you see multiple solutions and they all don't work because the game first wants you to do something like find an object or something. so in the end, the gameplaystyle has very few but very high highs among a whole whole lot of lows

and about the battlesystem, it is very simplistic, but it does offer enough challenge and is fair. getting on the right distance of the enemy is pretty hard and hitting him is to, because you need a certain rythem. in contrast there are a whole lot of action games that let you do all kinds of cool moves, but just don't offer a challenge or are just too unhandy because you have to use too many buttons. the battlesystem isn't great though

"I love Eurogamer!

Eurogamer is a bastion of honesty in a corrupt part of the media."

Steady on there, bronco.

Finally a review of this game that I can relate to.

So, anybody want to buy an as good as new version of Conker for Xbox? :P

@ Tengu: Just... drop it. Only thing you're doing is making a fool of yourself.

*Meh!* KIDS GAME!!!! :-)

Another kids game for the xbox.. go figure :-)

Well, I'm enjoying it. 4/10 is way too harsh.

phAge, man, lighten up a little.

Since when can't people comment in a Comments thread?

Well, I really enjoyed the N64 game.
Back in the day it was one of the best, most polished platformers out there - the ammount of dialogue they crammed into that cart was pretty darned impressive, and there were some really funny moments, like the first time you die, the poo song, and the Liverpudlian dung-beetles.
Never had any issues with the controls, never got hopelessly lost or stuck, never had a problem with the fetch-carry quests.

Since then, I've played the Sly, Jak and Ratchet games, so I dunno how Conker would compare nowardays.....

'The game is being sold today, at today's (full) prices - thus it's only fair that it be judged by today's standards. If the singleplayer is only a bonus then the game should've been priced accordingly - i.e. as a (limited) multiplayer game. So I think Kristan's point that it should've been released on budget was spot on.'

I don't see why though. Rare themselves have always stated it was a bonus with redone graphics, they actually didn't have to include it if they wanted to. Unreal Championship 2, Battlefield 2 and others are sold at full price despite being primarily multiplayer, why can't the same apply for Conker?

Unlike the Driv3r fiasco, its still refreshing to see that many people in this thread are sticking up for conker and like it no matter what anyone says. At least it polarises opinion, so dismissing it easily, isn't as easy, or something.

@ Prf. Lesser: He can comment all he like - I just wish he'd post something that isn't blatant MS-hating shite. There's enough tards doing that, without regulards joining the fray too. But, like you say, this is a comments section, so I spose I should accept the inevitable.

Actually, I have played the game, so I'm perfectly justified in saying it's bollocks if I want to, which I do, because it is... so THERE!

As for you Phage... you visit the forum, so I'd think you'd know what I'm like by now, so do lighten up a touch, eh?

He he.. Fur Fighters is great, Conker isn't. Stroll on Kameo and PD, surely they're both better than this mess.

For gawd's sake, any game where you're rolling giant lumps of poo around can't be taken at all seriously, right?

Can't wait till the Black&White 2 review then. ;)

This sounds utterly awful, especially compared to the fine efforts of Naughty Dog and Insomniac on the Jak and Ratchet trilogies, plus Sly Racoon natch.

And it's no excuse to say "it's a remake". When Nintendo did a Gamecube remake of Metal Gear Solid, at least they had the good sense (1) to pick a top class game to start with, and (2) to actually put a bit of effort into the update and add something to the game. Yes, I know there's the Live content, but none of it sounds all that innovative considering every game that's been released since Conker first appeared on the N64.

Blimie wasn't expecting a score that low.

Anyhew played the demo and hated every last minute of the damn thing so wasn't really expecting much. Definately one not to own.

Have MS bought a turkey ... certainly looks like it doesn't it.
Pity really they used to be great.

Oh well ....

So not as good as Halo, then.

Hi there all. Long time Eurogamer visitor, first time registered. I'm really surprised by this review. I was never a big N64 player, but I do remember playing Bad Fur Day a few years back and finding it funny. Maybe because since then other games have tried to copy the style it isn't as appealing to some? It sure as heck kept me interested (C:L&R) despite some frustration in finding my way around.

The multiplayer isn't bad for a couple of hours every week either. My problem with it though is the majority of the company I'm in when I play this game. It seems to be those who have great anger seeing their backsides handed to them on a plate when they are beat at Halo 2 (For the record, Halo 2 is a great and under-rated rather than over-hyped game IMO. Bet you'd never heard that before :D). So that really sours it.

Overall, I'd give it an 8/10. The parodies kept me happy during the Bad Fur Day remake, and the online features have a bit of meat on them.

>As someone said, Rare don't know how to make good games without Nintendo holding their hand, THAT'S what took three years.

Actually their best games are from before Nintendo got involved.

Tengu: I have a hard time with names, so forgive me if this was simply a light-hearted go at MS - but without "..." or ";)" I couldn't tell... Mea culpa.