@Sharky I don't know how people try to criticize a game or discuss it without playing it let alone give it a score...3.4/10 how did you get that as a score for the game? Off of a video? Seriously? Atleast use round numbers. That being said Star Wars Episode VII is a 7.1/10, Halo 5 is a 7.4/10, GTA 6 is a 4/10, Half Life 3 is a 6.1/10 and Mass Effect 4 is an 8.2/10. So be that I said it thus hence forth it is law. Amen.

@Sharky

Here's a brief explanation for Analog Reviews' rating system

1-3: Unplayable, riddled with bugs, crashes with absolutely nothing unique or engaging.
4-5: Barely playable, tries to do something different or unique but fails on multiple levels.
5-6: Mediocre, does nothing to stand out.
6-7: Average game
7-8: Above average and an enjoyable experience in general.
8-9: An exceptional game that should be played by pretty much everyone but is missing something that makes it truly great (such as replayability or something unique/revolutionary.)
9-10: Masterpiece or close to it.


Yeah, the voice acting and facial expressions are top notch in Ryse. It really makes the characters feel alive.

@Sharky I wouldn't really say my rating system is the norm either. I'd say an average game would be in the 6-7 range. I thought Ryse was above average as a result of it's visuals and strong narrative. I actually enjoyed the gameplay but I can see how some people can find it repetitive. I've played through the game on the Centurion and Legendary difficulties which makes it quite a bit better, otherwise I agree that it's a little too easy. We also only hand out a few 9s a year and believe that not a single game in the history of man-kind deserves a 10/10. There are quite a few games that are close to that but everything has flaws or areas for improvement. 10/10 would imply perfection.

I wasn't criticizing your scale by any means, I just find it silly that the norm is to use a system similar to letter grades, where it just makes it harder to find the truth beyond the number, since nearly all reviews then get clustered between 7-9. 5 only seems low because it's so common to use this system. By QTEs, I would extend that the slow motion action is also included in making it painfully simple. I enjoy games with few QTEs, they're not a bad mechanic, just overuse is bad. I even enjoyed Shenmue, but because it also had investigation and exploration gameplay in it. Neat voice acting in this game though, that's something Shenmue can't say it had.

@RighteousNixon Thanks for your thought out response, you've pretty much hit the nail on the head in every regard. The Kinect is definitely an impressive piece of technology and I'm looking forward to seeing how it's incorporated in future releases. It does feel like a bit of a gimmick for Ryse but it's still a solid game.

@Sharky Yeah, I score games a bit differently than that. I treat 5 as a pass/fail system and is by no means average. Any game I've rated under a 5 is barely playable and should be avoided at all costs. The QTEs don't really have a major impact on the gameplay, but I do agree that the game is fairly easy in general. I don't really have a problem with interactive movie style games, I quite enjoyed Heavy Rain and The Walking Dead. Ryse is worth playing for the visuals and strong narrative. The Kinect isn't really a large part of the game and it's completely playable without it. It just allows for you to give the occassional voice command such as telling your soldiers to unleash a volley of arrows or fire a catapult.

Just to add, if Kinect does fail this time around, it will be 100% on developers. By making it as high quality as they have and including one in every box, MS has done everything they could have to make Kinect 2.0 a success. The rest is on developers. Hell, the voice controlling features alone should have a dramatic effect on many of the games being developed for XBox One. We have seen small glimpses of just how great voice control can be in games and I fully expect we will continue to see more and more options in this regard. MS did what they could. Its now the developers turn to take this tech and make some worthy gaming features with it.

Actually Sharky, if you would have actually played the game you would know that QTE's play VERY little role in the overall combat. They deal only with finishing moves. As for your thoughts on the review system....well, I couldn't possibly disagree more. A 5 out of 10 is only a 50% score. Nothing about that low of a score is average. That would be a terrible system for reviewing games. As for Kinect and making it matter, MS did the most important thing they possibly could have done in that regard and that is include one in every box. By making everyone buy one they have raised Kinect above peripheral status, which is basically the kiss of death in the video game business. Not to mention the quality of Kinect 2.0 makes the first version look like a 5 years old toy. The new version is one high tech piece of optical equipment. Things will without a doubt be different for Kinect this time around. Basically Kinect 2.0 is what the first version should have been.

Game ratings are always positively skewed by default, giving games we call "average" a 7.5 out of 10, instead of something reasonable like a 5.
QTEs make for child level combat gameplay, this looks more like an interactive movie, especially when compared to the initial kinect trailer they showed a long time ago. I'm not really a fan of kinect either, but at least it was a step in the right direction in making kinect actually matter. 3.4/10

@RighteousNixon Yeah definitely. It has a lot of flaws but it's still a solid, entertaining game. It should be in the 7 range for the visuals and narrative alone.