Official PS mag gave the game a 5/10. This concerns me because OPM is often not very critical. I haven't read the article, so I don't exactly know why it scored so low. I am hoping the review just didn't see anything original, and thus gave it a low score. I mean from what I heard it sounded like he was frustrated at the invisible platforms, and bored with some of the other platforming. I just hope it is comparable to the first game, and that the first game isn't plagued by issues now that it's been ported. I also am hoping the game is just lacking originality, because I knew that, instead of actually broken in terms of mechanics, gameplay, graphics, bugs, glitches, etc.
Controls on the first game I remember being less than ideal. But the story and premise was good enough that I'm playing through this one even if it still has some of the same issues. Beside for $45 for both this and a port of the original even if it's not a AAA game I feel it'll be worth it.
I hope you're right M. Benjamin. I wont really be concerned until I actually read a review. If there is something really wrong with the game, a review will be what tells it. I don't really care what the scores are as they are so subjective, I just want to know why it was scored that way.
Looks like I'm waiting until this game drops to $20 at least. Shame. I'll be lurking Gamefaqs a month after release and see if any users have released reviews yet. It's unfortunate, it looked pretty good from what I saw on Youtube. Oh well.
Here is the thing... This game is a sequel to the PC game 11 years ago. That game does not have the best controls or platforming. But the art and overall psychological feel to it is what makes the game so good and popular.
I think the console crowd will tear this game apart. Because the console gamers are OBSESSED with every little control and platforming issue in a game. While traditional PC gamers are more forgiving in that area and care more about feel and visuals. The way this review is written (and it's badly written with spoilers), it sounds like this guy never played the first game. Because the things he complained about are the same things that are in the first game. The first game does have some jumping puzzles. And you do need to develop a little skill to be good at it. He also bashed the game because he doesnt seem to like the idea of a dark Alice in Wonderland.
It would be my guess that the console gamers will rate this in the 4-6 area out of 10. While the PC people will rate it 7-9 on it.
Gamespot and IGN are terrible sources of reviews on any game; especially when they rated Godhand a very poor score of 2 (something that's actually fun and controls perfectly a bad thing yeah that's right) yet years later tout some strange shovelware title on the Wii with a score of 9.0... I'm still amazed they'd (ign in particularly) have a habit of getting some guy that hates jrpgs to review jrpgs, where's the logic in that? I still remember how Nier got terrible reviews but when I actually played it, I couldn't help but wonder if the so-called reviewers actually played it or just watch some one else play it for a review. Even I'd find something boring to watch when I'd rather play it.
Similarly to what the other guy said, the only review that matters is our own. I remembered American Mcgee's Alice being an enjoyable experience despite some wonky platforming. The music was and still is fantastic and the game play overall still holds up. Graphically, considering it's using the Quake 3 engine, makes me wish they did an HD upgrade on the original. I'd still play it again though when it comes along with Madness Returns; the game that Tim Burton's "Alice in Wonderland" film should have been as far as I've seen...
Also as much as I love Duke Nukem, I'm not expecting content that goes past anything post-Goldeneye007 on the N64 era except for graphics and humor.
Just like Splatterhouse I could care less about reviews on Alice:MR. It's about the story, music, and atmosphere. Gameplay is the last thing I care about. I got it for $45 during the promo but $60 is still a good deal for the original being included.
It's funny you guys are talking about getting Duke Nukem rather than Alice: Madness Returns because I'm doing the opposite.I just recently tried the Duke Nukem Forever demo on Xbox 360 and I felt like I was playing on the original Xbox.I was sorely dissapointed with the quality of the demo.I felt it was very bland and the controls were horrible.Perhaps they were going for a old-school feel but it was too old-school for me.Anyway,I decided that I'll be happier with Alice: Madness Returns as I'm sure it will be a much more enjoyable experience than Duke Nukem for myself.I'm also happy that I got a $10 off coupon by playing the Ipod Touch free interactive storybook for Alice:Madness.I won't get the soundtrack from where I have to order it from (EA Store) to use the coupon but I will still get the additional first game for free.I remember really enjoying the first game so at least I know if I don't like the sequel I can go back to the original.Even if the game is scored low on game reviews I'm betting it will still be better than Duke Nukem.I hate to say it because I was really looking forward to Duke Nukem.
I get the whole "reviews don't matter" thing, I really do. At the same time, I have a hard time believing that a truly good game could score a 5/10 . Say what you will about the 1-10 scale being a fraud (with what seems like 80% of games scoring in the 7-9 range), but that's even more to the point: 5/10 is a truly awful score reserved for some of the very worst games. Good luck, Alice. You're gonna need it.
i hope it turns out to be a good game but if ign and gamespot give it reviews lower than a 7.5 or so, i'll probably cancel my order... 60 bucks is just too much and i could pre-order some better looking games
I'm still getting it. I'm also glad that it has the original although my laptop is capable of running it at max settings with 40-90fps so if the PS3 version can still achieve those stats and it has trophies then I'll restart on the PS3 (not far on the PC version anyways).
That review throws up a few red flags for me, mostly because they've published a review so early and I can't find a text of it anywhere. A lot of new games have an embargo on reviews until a couple of days before or even the day of release. Plus this doesnt seem like the kind of game you buy for gameplay, you buy it for the art and story. If they're complaining that the gameplay seems familiar its probably because the makers knew that formula worked and it allowed them more time to work on the art, design, and story elements. Games like Darksiders and Kingdom Hearts borrowed well-used gameplay elements from past games but were still good because they brought good stories and unusual design to the table. Still want this game and the original copy that comes with it, always loved psychological stories like these.
I'll be reviewing this game the second that it reaches me door-step. Having played the first game I know exactly what to expect, and I'm really excited to play it. If the game can live up to the first then its good for a minimal of 6/10. I really don't see how it could be so bad to receive anything less than that, and if I were to review the original game I would give it a 9/10. Amazing and unique game, but its controls can be clumsy and imprecise at times.
I read the OPM review the other day and then seen who wrote the review. ;) My pre-order will not be cancelled. Since I pre-order most of the games I buy I dont read many review until after I have played some of the game and most of the big time reviewers are way off. But I do like to play different types of games and not just shooters LOL :) If I dont like Alice oh well it is just $45 dollars. Much less than what I have wasted on other games.