StarDestroyer.Net BBS

I had no idea this game existed until Spoony did his Let's Play a while back. Honestly, the game looks like your average no-budget mediocre horror title that gets released on various platforms from time to time. What caught my attention, however, was that the game didn't get universally panned. In fact, some people say it's fucking awesome. "The Troll 2 of Videogames", one person said.

First of all, the game looks awful. The following shots are indeed running on an XBOX 360.





What the fuck is even going on in that last picture? Anybody who's watched footage of the game also knows that it looks decidedly uninspired and boring to play.

On the other hand, it has some pretty (unintentionally) hilarious cutscenes, and is so fucking odd that you can't help but be charmed by it. Oh, and it's $20 dollars, clocking in at 15-20 hours, so you can't accuse it of being too short lived.

Here's what Destructoid had to say about it:

Destructoid wrote: When we judge a game like this, how do we do it? Do we judge simply on gameplay? If so, the repetitive combat and long drives around town may very well mark it as a mediocre title. Do we judge it on story quality? If so, then we have a game that makes no sense and frequently makes light of murder and sexual deviancy. I say a game needs to be judged by how often it made you happy, how much you laughed or became excited, and how long you spend thinking about it after it was finished. If we judge it by those standards, then Deadly Premonition, my friends, is simply stunning. No other game has made me laugh so hard, laugh almost to the point of tears, laugh just by thinking about it. Deadly Premonition may well be the first game reviewed almost purely for its comedic value, but for a game so funny, it has to be done.

Deadly Premonition is beautiful. No, not graphically. Graphically it's atrocious. It's a beautiful trainwreck, and it's well aware of the fact. Despite this game being quite like everything ever made, there's nothing quite like the game itself. There is absolutely nothing in this industry that can compare to how weird and wonderful the whole experience is. Judged as a piece of entertainment, as a game that consistently surprises and amazes and leaves jaws hanging, I have no choice but to say that Deadly Premonition goes above and beyond. This game is so bad, it's not just become good. It's pretty close to perfect.

So says Mr. Stewart!

Score: 10 -- Flawless Victory (10s are as close to perfect as you will get in a genre or on a platform. Pure, untarnished videogame ecstasy.)

Has anybody played it? Is anybody in North America willing to take the plunge for $20 to see if it lives up to the anti-hype?

Smells like elaborate marketing ploy in light of how resistant the populace has become to traditional hype generation. A game is not a movie. A bad game is nigh unplayable unlike a bad scifi channel movie which can be enjoyed because of its terrible production values. Onscreenshots the game does not look that bad at all. Any attempt to evoke memories of watching poorly made flicks for fun and MSTKing seem like a clever way to make hapless geeks feel like part of the in crowd by pretending to be some hipster who critiques vidoesgame like art pieces.b

I'm not entirely sure how you arrived at the conclusion that Spoony, dozens of NeoGAF regulars and several reviewers are all part of some conspiracy to market a poorly localized Japanese budget title to the extremely niche demographic that is the MST3k loving American 360 gamer.

Unless your signature is finally telling you the truth.

Talking about MST3K; Unskippable did a two-parter on that game a couple of weeks bac:
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/ ... ion-Part-1
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/ ... ion-Part-2
Which should give you a good idea how terrible the storyline will be. I think they comment on the game-play somewhere in the related forum thread as well.

Talking about MST3K; Unskippable did a two-parter on that game a couple of weeks bac:

Yeah I saw that.





Some of the GAFers chiming in on it:

PepsimanVsJoe wrote:I think what makes Deadly Premonition genius is that the developers set out to make a bad game and succeeded. Don't get me wrong this isn't something like Two Worlds which is just hopelessly broken and terrible. Instead it's like the developers sat down and made a list of everything that people complain about in games and found a way to include it.

-Insta-death QTEs.
-Uncanny Valley
-Cheesy cutscenes, music, etc
-Awful graphics to the point of hilarity(I mean really now look at those freaking trees! They're like four polygons each.)
-Controls in general kind of stink. They're serviceable if you're into older Silent Hills and pre-RE4 but otherwise seriously.
-Budget as fuck even when it doesn't have to be. That hackjob of a titlescreen looks like something out of an indie game for crying out loud.

The great thing is these guys manage to make it all work and create a very good game. Not a single element is out of place really. It'd be one thing if the game had all these flaws and looked like Heavy Rain or some shit but it's quite clear that everything is perfectly executed for maximum badness.

This is definitely in the running for being one of my favorite games of this generation.

MightyHedgehog wrote:This game knows it's low budget. It knows it's cheesy and crazy as hell. It knows it. This isn't some statistically impossible happy accident of epic proportions...it's too overt to be unintentional and that's ever more clear as you move further into the experience. The original Japanese developer who made this knew it was gonna be nuts. They were gunning for this. Perhaps it is the way it is, overall, because of the input and changes suggested/made by the localization team...but whatever the case, it works if you are receptive to its unique qualities. They may not have wanted it to be as rough around the edges as it is, but the instant transitions to a vibe of practically non sequitur and starkly comedic tones act as a blunt-force palate-cleansing effect during or right after straight-up dramatic and horror-based moments of cinematics and gameplay. There's no way these aren't intentional. It works, too. It keeps things from being so on-edge that it prevents the usual problem with 'survival horror' games from cropping up and stopping people in their tracks...that feeling of things being too one-note horror-themed for too long and, basically, oppressive to the point that it goes too far beyond the line of tolerance turning fun-scary into no-fun-scary. This game is as it was intended. And it is glorious.

Did griffo just learn reviews are useless, again?

I'm not sure what about those shots is supposed to be 'awful', it doesn't look that much different to Alone in the Dark. Then again, I'm not the one who made a thread to parrot their hilarious clique, and considering the amazingly ignorant posting in the AP thread this is all very funny.

That last shot looks like the slumped guy has his thumb in the other guys mouth. Thats about the only amusing bit.

Fuck people thinking games can be so bad they're good.

Its not 'bad its good', its 'bad its perfect'.

I kind of wish I was so uncritical as to take all my opinions from the Internet without having to think.

Man, what a bunch of tools. lol "unique qualities".

"manage to make it all work and create a very good game" followed by "perfectly executed for maximum badness."

Christ.

The goal of being cheesy and over the top might work... except apparently the controls and gameplay suck. I'm not seeing how it can be so bad it is nearly perfect if playing the game is a chore as well.

The best part for me is that these doyens of couture think RE is scary and eventually become oppressive.

I can feel their body weight from here.

Can't have horror games being too scary, now can we?

It's part of the game's perfection that it can't sustain a mood.

If you think about the nerds who would find some horrid movie at the video store and declare it 'better than coppola' this is just the Internet version. They're pretty cool to love this game, very clever.

In other news Alone in the Dark was nowhere near as bad as people say. Poor old griffo and his reviews.

If you have a lot of time to kill and and want to see the game played out almost fully, the guys at Giant Bomb did an endurance run with two teams playing the game in simultaneously. Each run is about 40 videos ranging from 20 to 60 minutes each. If you only want to watch one run then watch the VJ run since its 3 or 4 videos shorter and watching the BR run was very frustrating due to the gameplay stile. Both ERs completed the game but did not attempt to do all of the 50-something optional missions.

I watched the endurance run while the videos were being posted daily and even though the game has some interesting highlights, most of it is really bad with uninspired dialogue and voice acting, extremely repetitive combat with extremely weak guns or very effective melee weapons which break after two hits and a plot that is unintelligible.

So you're saying that the game is so bad it's.....bad. SURPRISE!

Perfectly bad maybe? Who are we to judge! We probably just don't "get it".

I think its clear we can't understand the true joy of this game without watching 20 hours of the game being played by fat people.

But hey, we can save up the 'bad on purposed = good' logic for the next game nerds decide to hate (like Alpha Protocol lol).

Did griffo just learn reviews are useless, again?

If any critics disagree with each other, they're useless. Unless they all agree, in which case they're still useless. Stark will truly be remembered as one of our generation's greatest thinkers. His opinions are all irrefutible facts, and anybody who disagrees on any count is just a fatty nerd. Fat was long thought to simply be the result of excessive eating or inadequate excercise, but this is not correct.

I'm not sure what about those shots is supposed to be 'awful',

Those shots are actually quite flattering of the game, but if you take a moment to draw your attention to:

- Anything that isn't the dude

Then you should start to notice some things, like the police officer's hilarious, PS2 era hair, the blurry textures fucking everywhere (the second shot is from a cutscene), the low quality car interior, and the wouldn't-make-a-wii-sweat foliage. The third shot's floor is practically entirely white.

If you had watched some footage of the game in action you'd notice that the game more often than not doesn't even look like it's running on a current gen console with the exception of some OK lighting on the main character.

But I'm sure the game looks great, and is an awful experience that no joy can be extracted from. Because those useless reviews say it's bad. They're useless, but Grif is presenting the possibility of it being fun, so they're right about it being an awful game, even though I, Stark, have never been within five hundred kilometers of the game or even watched gameplay footage.

Fuck people thinking games can be so bad they're good.

Yeah, fuck em! Your bare assersion is a well thought out position!

Can't have horror games being too scary, now can we?

You think horror games are scary?

It's part of the game's perfection that it can't sustain a mood.

Actually that was one of the things specifically mentioned as providing the comedy, so quite possibly, yes.

Now, you kids be quiet for a second while I discuss something with the grown ups.

The goal of being cheesy and over the top might work... except apparently the controls and gameplay suck. I'm not seeing how it can be so bad it is nearly perfect if playing the game is a chore as well.

People singled out the driving controls as horrible. The player character controls like Leon in RE4, which isn't "horrible". There's some contention about whether the gameplay actually does suck, as well. The GS guys claimed that the gameplay wasn't "so bad its good", it was just "good". Lots of folks have been making similar claims about the actual gameplay itself.

In theory, even a game that doesn't have "Good" gameplay could still be enjoyable as long as the gameplay isn't frustrating or boring. Those two things are counter to the bad-is-good enjoyability factor, but a game can be "bad" in a lot of different, entirely distinct ways, some of which can be hilarious.

I mean, I've pushed through some games that play like a complete turd because I enjoyed other aspects of the experience. Mass Effect 1 is a horrific shooter, but I still enjoyed it despite that. Vampire: The Masquerade has dreadful combat (the guns especially), but I still managed to like it.

So I'm pretty open to this being enjoyable without actually needing to be a great game. Something being hilarious is just as good a potential motivator as enjoying a story for it being good, so long as you're into that kind of time. Batman & Robbin is one of my all time un-favorite movies, so I'm definately one of those.

Shame it isn't coming out in PAL regions till september.

The game is amazing. Videos and descriptions do it no justice. It really must be experienced.

Isn't that right, Zach?

Grow up. This is a *clear* example of people just making shit up for reviews; declaring a game 'perfect' and 'excellent' and other amazing plaudits because it's so terrible. This subverts the ENTIRE PREMISE OF REVIEWS, and thus demonstrates that they are useless. It's not MY fault you have to my knowledge never formed an independent opinion, and will instead troll other people's game threads by ignorantly repeating the totally false statements of your favourite reviewers.

The fact you're too much of a pussy to defend your OP, can't read english well enough to understand that YOUR BUDDIES CLAIM HORROR GAMES BECOME OPPRESSIVE THROUGH FEAR - not me, and strawmanning the position in those quotes as 'game being enjoyable' where they ACTUALLY say that the game is 'near perfect'.

When reviews and fat people declare 'near perfect' to mean 'shit controls, shit graphics, shit story, shit everything' and then get cross when someone points out reviews are useless, it's a fucking party thread.

If you, Griffo the Idiot, hadn't started a thread with quotes claiming the game was perfect through it's horribleness, you wouldn't have to back down to more sensible statements like bad games can still be fun. Everyone knows that. We don't need legions of poseur morons giving a game like this 100% to prove how TRUEFACT reviews are. But don't say anything good about Alpha Protocol or Griffo the Review Troll will repeat complete falsehoods to put people off it.

If you have a lot of time to kill and and want to see the game played out almost fully, the guys at Giant Bomb did an endurance run with two teams playing the game in simultaneously.

Oh man, I'm up to part 3 of the BR run. This game is a riot

Grow up. This is a *clear* example of people just making shit up for reviews; declaring a game 'perfect' and 'excellent' and other amazing plaudits because it's so terrible. This subverts the ENTIRE PREMISE OF REVIEWS, and thus demonstrates that they are useless.

The destructoid "This game is perfect" is obviously a joke, the every-other-review giving it 7-8 / 10 calling it a flawed but entertaining game is obviously not. The 2/10 from IGN is an anomolously low score compared to the 16 other reviews counted by GR.

Your logic is so painfully childish. One review is clearly joking, therefore reviews are useless? That's fucking hilarious. By that logic, one example of anything that is counter to it's purpose invalidates everything of that type from being useful?



Man, you're an idiot. I can't wait to see how you backpedal on this one.

The fact you're too much of a pussy to defend your OP, can't read english well enough to understand that YOUR BUDDIES CLAIM HORROR GAMES BECOME OPPRESSIVE THROUGH FEAR - not me, and strawmanning the position in those quotes as 'game being enjoyable' where they ACTUALLY say that the game is 'near perfect'.

Ooops. It was just the Destructoid review that said that. Everybody else just called it "great" or some variation of. And the game can't be "nearly perfect"? Why? Is there an objective standard for graphics, gameplay etc? If a game is trying to be campy and cheesy and succeeding flawlessly, can the game not then be considered flawless? Or do we judge based on how entertaining it is, how many times it made you laugh, or how much fun you had? Once again, it can be considered thus.

You're as we say, "full of shit". You accusing me of being a troll here is utter hilarity.

LOL Nobody can comment on reviews that are 'obviously a joke', even when supported by a series of breathlessly overawed quotes, because... something. Clearly this game that is so awful in every way it makes fat people hard recieving both a 100 and a series of ~80s is not an indictment of review usefulness AT ALL! OBVIOUSLY THEY WERE JOKING!

Remember, there are no 'objective standards' for graphics or gameplay... but reviews aren't useless. Remember, game that makes you laugh = GREAT MUST PLAY OMG THE ART IS SOOOO BAAAAD AND THE DRIVING SUCKS SO AMAZING 10/10!!!!

Please snip all parts of my reply you don't like to demonstrate you're not just an idiot, you're a coward too. I'm sure one day you'll form an independent opinion.

LOL Nobody can comment on reviews that are 'obviously a joke', even when supported by a series of breathlessly overawed quotes, because... something.

Oh good. You directly claim in no uncerstain terms that ALL REVIVEWS ARE USELESS because THIS REVIEW IS A JOKE, and then you act like I'm the one being unreasonable.

Clearly this game that is so awful in every way it makes fat people hard recieving both a 100 and a series of ~80s is not an indictment of review usefulness AT ALL! OBVIOUSLY THEY WERE JOKING!

Except that they aren't joking. Go fucking read them. They criticize the games flaws, but praise it for its merits. You know, like reviews?

Remember, there are no 'objective standards' for graphics or gameplay... but reviews aren't useless.

I'm glad you're finally catching on.

Oh, you're serious?

Reviews are useful. They have utility. They tell you about a game, they explain what the reviewer felt was good and bad about it. It's up to the person reading it to decide whether they think the praise and criticism are justified or not. They are tools, not objective measures.

Remember, game that makes you laugh = GREAT MUST PLAY OMG THE ART IS SOOOO BAAAAD AND THE DRIVING SUCKS SO AMAZING 10/10!!!!

The only arguments I've been making are that the potential exists for "so bad its good" games to plausibly happen. Just keep shouting instead of making rational arguments.

Please snip all parts of my reply you don't like to demonstrate you're not just an idiot, you're a coward too.

Like what? You want me to reply to both instances of you saying the reviews are a joke independantly? Or did you miss where I wasn't even quoting you with regards to the "you think horror games are scary" line?

Your contributions to this thread are useless and trolltastic. It's plainly fucking apparent that I wasn't trying to say this game was a flawless masterpiece in the original post, since I was, you know, quoting other people? Then I asked people if they had played it or were willing to play it to see just how good/bad it really was?

Does that strike you as something somebody who has already formed an opinion about the game would say? Of course, this is all irrelevant, since you're just here to troll. You're not interested in a real discussion.

I'm sure one day you'll form an independent opinion.

And I'm supposed to demonstrate that I have come up with opinions independant of other people... how? Were you planning on mind melding with me perhaps?

adam_grif wrote:Oh good. You directly claim in no uncerstain terms that ALL REVIVEWS ARE USELESS because THIS REVIEW IS A JOKE, and then you act like I'm the one being unreasonable.

Quote me saying that or eat a dick. I know you're a review slave, and these reviews are so obviously bunk that it's hilarious to see you touting them as exposing this 'hidden gem' of a game.

Except that they aren't joking. Go fucking read them. They criticize the games flaws, but praise it for its merits. You know, like reviews?

So you accept that a game with shit everything gets 80% reviews then? Is this what we are to expect from 80% reviews that aren't by hipster nerd idiots bandwagoning? If you bought a game based on an 80% review and got this apparently terrible game would you be happy?

I'm glad you're finally catching on.

Oh, you're serious?

Reviews are useful. They have utility. They tell you about a game, they explain what the reviewer felt was good and bad about it. It's up to the person reading it to decide whether they think the praise and criticism are justified or not. They are tools, not objective measures.

Unless they tell you it's complete bullshit and then give it 80%. Like people have been saying for years, the review score is the least useful part of it. Regardless all the reviews you linked are gonzo bullshit about how AMAZING THE EXPERIENCE IS WHEEE and anything objective in it is negative.

The only arguments I've been making are that the potential exists for "so bad its good" games to plausibly happen. Just keep shouting instead of making rational arguments.

Right, you're defending obviously joking reviews about a terribel game you haven't even played on plausibility... except nobody has denied bad games are good.

Compared to the hilarious 'everyone who played AP and liked it is wrong because my review totem said it sucked' output you have this is a fabulously hilarious attitude.

Like what? You want me to reply to both instances of you saying the reviews are a joke independantly? Or did you miss where I wasn't even quoting you with regards to the "you think horror games are scary" line?

Yeah, the part where you lied about ME claiming games are 'scary' when your own quotes where fat people gush over how much they enjoyed playing a shit game actually said this.

Your contributions to this thread are useless and trolltastic. It's plainly fucking apparent that I wasn't trying to say this game was a flawless masterpiece in the original post, since I was, you know, quoting other people? Then I asked people if they had played it or were willing to play it to see just how good/bad it really was?

Does that strike you as something somebody who has already formed an opinion about the game would say? Of course, this is all irrelevant, since you're just here to troll. You're not interested in a real discussion.

Not interested in real discussion = does not instantly accept review results?

And I'm supposed to demonstrate that I have come up with opinions independant of other people... how? Were you planning on mind melding with me perhaps?

It's easy as not refering everyhting you think to the 'authority' of THE GAFFERS and SPOONY. Its just particularly amusing to me becaue you rate your favourite reviewers over actual facts, which is amazingly broken.

But yeah, people giving shit games 'joke' ratings of 100% might maybe suggest reviews are pretty useless, because you never know why it got the rating it did (just like with RDR getting 100% in revews full of criticisms).

So yeah, one day you'll experience something and critically analyse it without having to be told what to think first, and you won't even have to lie to defend it.

Quote me saying that or eat a dick.

Grow up. This is a *clear* example of people just making shit up for reviews; declaring a game 'perfect' and 'excellent' and other amazing plaudits because it's so terrible. This subverts the ENTIRE PREMISE OF REVIEWS, and thus demonstrates that they are useless.

Ta-dah!

So you accept that a game with shit everything gets 80% reviews then?

Depends on a lot of things. If it really is fun and amusing, then that's completely justifiable.

If you bought a game based on an 80% review and got this apparently terrible game would you be happy?]

I don't buy games just based on the score, and you'd be an idiot to do so. You READ the reviews. But yes, as long as I enjoyed it, I wouldn't give a shit whether it was enjoyable because it's campy and trashy or whether it's enjoyable because it's a high quality, well made game.

Especially since this game cost $20 at launch. The definition of a budget title.

Unless they tell you it's complete bullshit and then give it 80%. Like people have been saying for years, the review score is the least useful part of it. Regardless all the reviews you linked are gonzo bullshit about how AMAZING THE EXPERIENCE IS WHEEE and anything objective in it is negative.

See, again, straw manning me. Even back in the other fucking review thread, I carefully explained that you use reviews as follows:

- Examine scores to get a general impression of how well recieved it was.
- Read the text of reviews to determine whehter you think their conclusions are justified or not
- Look around for dissenting opinions, likewise examine them
- Check out gameplay footage if possible

And then based on this information, you have a very solid basis for whether you're going to like the game or not. If you're borderline then check it out, because you can return it if it's a turgid shit.

NOBODY ever said in here or anywhere else on these boards, that review scores were the be-all-end-all. Reviews as a whole are useful, the scores on their own are not.

Compared to the hilarious 'everyone who played AP and liked it is wrong because my review totem said it sucked' output you have this is a fabulously hilarious attitude.

The AP thread is still on page one. Take it to there if you want to whine about it some more.

Yeah, the part where you lied about ME claiming games are 'scary'

No, dipshit, I asked if Artemis thought horror games were scary, because that was a direct quote from him. Or is he a sockpuppet of yours?

Not interested in real discussion = does not instantly accept review results?

No, Not interested in a real disscussion = ignoring the actual thread topic and instantly decending into mindless review bashing / trolling.

It's easy as not refering everyhting you think to the 'authority' of THE GAFFERS and SPOONY. Its just particularly amusing to me becaue you rate your favourite reviewers over actual facts, which is amazingly broken.

So if I'm making a thread about giving a budget title a chance because other people liked it, I shouldn't bring up the fact that... other people liked it?

adam_grif wrote:
Oh man, I'm up to part 3 of the BR run. This game is a riot

I found the BR run to be very frustrating to watch as the player seemed unable to do some very basic things but some the blame can be placed on bad controls. I used to watch the VJ run and then listen to the BR run for the commentary while doing something else.

Overall, the thing that really shows how low the budget for this game was is the sound. Music-wise, it is the same 3 or 4 shot music loops playing over and over and over. The voice acting was rather mediocre and there are many lines, often in the middle of a cut-scene, that are not voiced. On top of that the sound mixing is absolutely horrible. The music often drowns out the voice acting in cut-scenes at the sound default levels.

Something Awful also did a front page article on the game for April fools which included videos of some of the more interesting parts. I think that linking to SA is still frowned upon so here is a broken link: http: //www. somethingawful.co* /d/news/ deadly-premonition-review.php