***it never properly engages with it or the half-hearted attempts at gender politics.*** Yeah, we totally didn't get that from the first camp where they enslaved people, the second where they were put in jeopardy due to massive betrayal, etc.
***where it begins to flirt with the traditional zombie theme about humans being the real monsters***
What? I can't see how anyone can say this. ***The plot remains frustratingly aimless *** What? Most of the story has shit all to do with Boozer, so how the heck is anyone supposed to "probably imagine" anything based on just that? How? ***For the first several hours the two have no particular goal, and once Boozer is injured early on, well… you can probably imagine the story and side missions already.*** I'll give you Kratos and Joel, but that's about it that fits that description. ***majority of the games are third person open world titles, often with an angry and/or depressed middle-aged man as the protagonist.*** Why would it? They didn't change the gameplay or story at all. And that fact is not changed one iota by this new PC version.*** ***Fans insist that they must be either the best thing ever or the worst, and Days Gone is neither. Look, I don't care about the score or opinions, but this is a bad review. Whatever they do next, I'm going to be interested. Days Gone 2 is definitely a thing I was hoping for after beating DG1, but this has bumped up Bend in my estimates, they're not up there with ND or Santa Monica yet, but it's a big step up from Vita ports. And also, I enjoyed popping headshots more than I expected.
When I finally played it this year, I was pleasantly surprised, it dragged on a bit too long, Deacon can seem like a schizoid when talking to himself on his bike that kinda seems outta nowhere and took me out of the experience and they waited a stupid amount of time before properly introducing the hordes as a gameplay element but they are worth the wait.ĭays Gone's hordes are the first time I've felt horror/fear for zombies in a game, that saw mill area had me surviving by the absolute skin of my teeth, it was exhilarating. I listened to reviews like this when it originally came out on PS4, that's why I didn't pick it up until it was on sale (also, from looking at gameplay, I thought the shooting looked pretty weak).
What's even worse is that the same guy gave the PS4 version a 6/10 as well, but says this version is better than that one? lol.ok The actual review portion of this article is barely 500 words in a handful of paragraphs whereas IGN's review (also a 6/10), to contrast, is five times as long and has much more thought put into what is said. Why is that even being addressed in a game review? Because it is just filler. Where is the part where this game is "bad"? It took the reviewer four paragraphs to actually start talking about the game rather than circumstances around the game such as petitions for a sequel. It does nothing especially well but at the same time it has no major failings and passes the time perfectly well." "Like a middle-of-the-road Assassin’s Creed, Days Gone is bland but competent. No idea what sales data the review is referencing but it sounds entirely made up. No, that would go to The Order: 1886 as far as critical reception. "When Days Gone was originally released in 2019 it had the worst critical reception, and the worst first week sales, of any modern, big budget Sony exclusive." Says the game is just "ok".Īnd then the review's first sentence is just inaccurate: What's really funny is that 6/10 doesn't reflect a "bad" game at all.