Advent Rising (Xbox) Review on IGN

[fitbabits]

From the review (http://xbox.ign.com/articles/620/620664p1.html):

A game that promised the galaxy falls a bit short.

Advent Rising is a perfect example of a game that falls into our 7 range. It has some first-rate elements along with some glaring flaws, but looking at the score alone does not do this title justice. If gamers are willing to adjust to the flick targeting system and forgive the poor framerate, it has a lot to offer in terms of gameplay, story, and sound. I was able to ignore these technical shortcomings in most areas and enjoy the excellent cut-scenes and character development. Hopefully this series isn't cut short and the next installment of Advent Rising will clear up some of the issues discussed in this review.

Final score - 7.8

Hmm, I guess I can cross this off my list until it drops in price.

[chronocrash]

Yep, I figured this would end up being a rental. Alas, I'm still excited about playing it.

[TrackZero]

Meh, I'll still pick this up anyways.

Edit: I'll probably grab the PC copy instead now.

[CaptStu]

Maybe they should've used the $1,000,000 Xbox Live prize for development instead. Cheap ploy.

[sebastard]

How about a link to the actual review?

[erasmus]

How about a link to the actual review?

Here you go:

http://xbox.ign.com/articles/620/620664p1.html

[Deadend]

I was thinking about doing the same thing, and not linking to IGN, as we all hate them.

From their review they indicate that AR is the perfect example of a 7.X game, which is intersting.

Oh well, maybe the PC version will be better, as it seems technical stuff is the problem, bad framerates and all.

[Phades]

I was thinking about doing the same thing, and not linking to IGN, as we all hate them.

From their review they indicate that AR is the perfect example of a 7.X game, which is intersting.

Oh well, maybe the PC version will be better, as it seems technical stuff is the problem, bad framerates and all.

I shed a tear after reading some of that review. This is one I was really looking forward to.

BUT, you have given me hope with your last sentence there. For that, thank you.

[SteveRage]

Why am I not surprised?
I gotta quit looking forward to games.

[Skookum]

Oh well, maybe the PC version will be better, as it seems technical stuff is the problem, bad framerates and all.

One can only hope, but after reading the review, it sounds like the camera control system is completely borked:

"Playing this game like a normal third-person shooter it will become immediately frustrating and gamers should be prepared for a period of adjustment."

Whether or not the framerate is good, struggling with camera control ruins any game for me. I'm used to being able to look around freely from the last 9 years of PC gaming. Any game that doesn't allow it now, just feels like a poor console port.

[Kamalot]

Whether or not the framerate is good, struggling with camera control ruins any game for me.

From what I read, the camera control isn't bad, only different. Other reviews also state the technical problems with the game such as framerate and actual crashes of the Xbox.

This does indeed give me hope for the PC version. The targeting system sounds unique and innovative. I'm up to try something different. GameSpy says about the targeting system, "This is amazingly intuitive and should be used in other games."

IGN says, "If gamers are willing to adjust to the flick targeting system and forgive the poor framerate, it has a lot to offer in terms of gameplay, story, and sound. I was able to ignore these technical shortcomings in most areas and enjoy the excellent cut-scenes and character development."

[Klade]

One more reason to buy go for the PC option whenever its offered.

[Furious Wang]

Question: Why make third person shooters? Why not first person? What benefits to gameplay does it provide to compensate for the trade off in controls that are more often than not poor and a camera system that is more often than not prohibitive?

For instance, could you imagine how great a first person Grand Theft Auto would be? Who do I have to whore myself out to to get a game like that?

[Sion]

I played this at last years E3 and at this years. I saw little improvment, so what were they doing all year?

This game sucks, it always has. Screens look cool, but in motion it looks horrible, the combat is very very bad. This only got a 7.5 becuase alot of ppl thought it would be good. IGN always plays to expectations, play it yourself and you will see that it's much worse than a 7.5 Imagin that shitty XB game Drake, but slightly more fun/polished and you have this.

[Thumbdrive]

IGNs reviews usually have inflated scores. Check Gamespys review, they gave it 2.5 out of 5.

[dark_inchworm]

Also consider that Gamespy's plain stupid. I'm gonna wait for someone reliable to cover this.

[if76]

Question: Why make third person shooters? Why not first person? What benefits to gameplay does it provide to compensate for the trade off in controls that are more often than not poor and a camera system that is more often than not prohibitive?

For instance, could you imagine how great a first person Grand Theft Auto would be? Who do I have to whore myself out to to get a game like that?


I think third person often has its advantages. It gives you a much better sense of where your character is in relation to the world. It's better for stuff like platform jumping and melee combat. Ever play Jedi Knight? It automatically switches to 3rd person everytime you pull out your lightsaber.

[MosBen]

From a more artistic position, putting the player in 3rd person makes it easier to get a feel for the character they're playing. Sure, in some games the developer *wants* the player to feel like they're the character in the game, and for that first person is better. Occassionally though, it's good to control a character through they're story.

[TrackZero]

Question: Why make third person shooters? Why not first person? What benefits to gameplay does it provide to compensate for the trade off in controls that are more often than not poor and a camera system that is more often than not prohibitive?

For instance, could you imagine how great a first person Grand Theft Auto would be? Who do I have to whore myself out to to get a game like that?

Because 3rd person lets me see the character. First person doesn't. That simply. What if Mario64 was first person? Would you really feel like Mario? (Obvious Answer: No.). That's why.

BTW, the contols are actually much better for movements and dodging, slightly worse for aiming. It's a tradeoff I'd accept for most games. There's enough deathmatch titles out there where I can go FPS as is.

[EGO]

IGN are a bunch of assclowns and I believe nothing they have to say. I'm with dark_inchworm, I'm going to wait for some place CREDITABLE to review this game before I pass judgement.

[MosBen]

That's a worthwhile point Trackzero; we don't really have to choose one or the other. We can have FPS and 3rd person games side by side with both exploiting the strengths of that style.

[Liquidize105]

OUR 7 range? Gosh IGN's full of inconsistent bullcrap.

[Lexicon]

Looks like Gamespot rated it pretty low as well. 5.7 http://www.gamespot.com/xbox/action/adventrising/review.html?q=1&tag=gs_xbox_flashtop_read

[Furious Wang]

I think third person often has its advantages. It gives you a much better sense of where your character is in relation to the world. It's better for stuff like platform jumping and melee combat. Ever play Jedi Knight? It automatically switches to 3rd person everytime you pull out your lightsaber.

I'm fine with 3rd person Platformers/Action games. But *Shooters* are a whole different story.

I'm also a huge fan of games that give you the option of switching to and from both perspectives such as Stranger's Wrath , Ratchet & Clank, and The Suffering.

But a game like Metal Arms, for instance, while good could have been much better as 1st person. The jumping around in that game was limited and the ability to more accurately hide, aim and duck without dealing with the messy camera would have been nice.

If your game is all about jumping then make it 3rd. But if your game is mainly about shooting, with jumping elements on the side then make it 1st. Metroid Prime and HL2 should prove beyond a shadow of a doubt this is possible.

[Skookum]

Question: Why make third person shooters? Why not first person? What benefits to gameplay does it provide to compensate for the trade off in controls that are more often than not poor and a camera system that is more often than not prohibitive?

For instance, could you imagine how great a first person Grand Theft Auto would be? Who do I have to whore myself out to to get a game like that?

3rd person allows you to see your character's body. Melee style combat and jumping are much easier. Can you imagine Max Payne without being able to watch him dive and shoot? Or FAKK2 without those rosy cheeks?

Good camera control - Jedi Academy

Annoying camera control - POP3, Psychonauts (but only some of the time, and forgivable with patience)