Is Too Human Any Good?

I know that one of the games (released today) has been on some of our readers minds for a while now. It’s just recently come up on mine. I’m actually in the process of playing through some 360 games so I can trade them in (NEW RULE: one game at a time—more on that later). I was even thinking of using the credit for Too Human. Things are not looking bright with the mainstream hardcore press.

From Gamespot—who gave the game a 5.5—a surprisingly low score for a AAA developer. Here’s their opening salvo:

Too Human drops a juicy plot development at the most inopportune time: its very end. It’s the obvious manner of setting up a sequel, the infamous “to be continued…” we’ve come to expect from television shows and, yes, even some modern video games. This isn’t necessarily a bad thing, but it exemplifies the core experience of this action/role-playing hybrid. Too Human is a game of false starts and unrealized potential that infiltrate almost every aspect of the game, from story, to combat, to balance. Its elements feel stitched together, making for a patchwork quilt of a game that’s fraying at the seams.

Probably of all the mainstream reviewing sites, I trust Gamespot the most. Only once or twice have they ever steered me wrong. This does not bode well. I had mentioned on other forums that the lack of pre-release reviews was not a good sign. It usually never works in the developer’s favor.

After playing the unispiring demo, and like I’ve mentioned to others, I’m not paying $60 for this game—in credit or cash. Unless there’s some hidden ecstacy or bliss that the reviewers are overlooking. Sites like Gamespot, Gamespy, and 1up are being the most critical. Metacritic seems to raise the average (67), but it doesn’t look promising.

Comments

  1. I have been playing a bit of it (and will go back to it shortly) but I don’t understand why it’s scoring as low as it does. I can understand people who were jaded by all of the ‘best game EVAR’ talk from Dyack but if you go into it relatively fresh (like I have), it’s a lot of fun. I’m not expecting a deep story or riveting characters. I want to smash robot monsters and steal phat lewt and from what I’ve played, it more than delivers on that front.

    There is some stuff that shows that the game has been in development for a long time. The cutscenes, while neat, do look like something from earlier in the 360’s life than comparable to more recent games. The animation and glazed expressions (for the most part) just look like first-gen 360 graphics.

    But I just can’t understand why the game is scoring as low as it is unless it really tanks by the end of the game or it is just a lot of grumpy game journalists taking a strip off of Dyack.

    The best thing is to play the demo. That’s essentially the first hour of the game. If you like that, you’ll probably like the game. If you didn’t like that, well, save your money.

  2. What I find to be interesting and I don’t direct this at Brock, but it seems that most low score reviews I’ve read don’t mention Dyack at all—let alone his personality.

    I think it’s a cop out by the game’s defenders to bring up his name when low scores are mentioned. Like Brock, I went into the game blind, but, unlike Brock, I did not come out impressed. I never said that I would not play it. It’s just that I will not play it for $60.

    I guess, not playing…er, buying games, for me, has become a matter of principle. In some ways, I am offended that a developer/publisher would charge me $60 for a game that is obviously not worth it.

    On the other side of the coin, I am almost ashamed to pay $10 for a game that I think is worth more. The difficulty is finding the balance.

    Here’s a little known secret: I have the power. The money is in my hand. It just took me 15+ years to realize that I don’t have to get every shiny new game, movie, CD, etc.

  3. Just a side note, if I would have had the $60 in store credit, I might have considered it. However, I’m holding out for a release next month.

  4. I thought the demo was just fine. Like Brock said it’s basically the first hour of the game. That’s why it’s called a demo.

    I personally was not too excited about the game, and then when the demo was released I was enthusiastic to get my hands on it. I played through the demo once and I can say that I was hooked, at the beginning of the demo they had the wonderful cycle in place of kill ton-o-monsters and get new awesome weapons. But that wore off by the end of the demo.

    However, I would like to add, the fact that someone else is trying to use the Old Norse mythology is pretty cool. That alone can generate a decent amount of interest in a game for yours truly.

    I would definitely pick this one up if there was a 4 player multiplayer option (that and if I had 4 friends that would buy the game). The multiplayer in a game is probably one of the things that would draw me in on a game with the style of Too Human.

  5. MysterioMP says:

    Yes its a very good game period! I would give it around 8.7/10. Hardcore gamers just wanted something so great, it would take away there pain of not having a girlfriend. SK are not stupid people and should be proud of this game for good reason. Its one of a kind, and there efforts should be rewarded.

  6. So the vibe I’m getting is that Too Human is a definite “put in the GameFly Q”. I want lots of loot, so I’ll definitely get my loot on. We’ll see how it goes after that.

    @MysterioMP – Could you elaborate a little more on how you came to your 8.7 score?

Trackbacks

  1. […] Thanks for visiting! You can reach the homepage here.Can a game that a blogger was so adamant against getting because of low “professionally reviewed” scores be any […]

Leave a Reply