Lono and I have had our differences in the past when it comes to demos, and it appears that EA’s latest game FaceBreaker is no different, judging from his post yesterday. Having played the demo for about half an hour, I came away with a very different impression to Sarcastic Gamer’s resident blog editor.
Find out why after the jump.
After firing up FaceBreaker I was ready for some cartoon violence. I’d seen the trailers of the game showing characters eyeballs bulging out their sockets as blood ran down the face of the cornea and vitreous humor…
…oh right too graphic, sorry. Anyway, the game looked fun and was the first new IP to come out of EA Sports for 6 years, so you could say that the stakes were fairly high.
Let’s get the boring bit out the way first.
Upon firing up the game I decided to head straight into the character creator, Lono’s first criticism of the game. I honestly don’t see where he was coming from on this. You can take a photo with the Live Vision Camera and create a lifelike boxer, or you can start with a basic template character and start from scratch. One of these templates is Peter Moore. Yes, that Peter Moore. I set about making a very fat Peter Moore with spiky red hair, to much successfully. Like Oblivion, the game allows you to tweak sliders of every thinkable part of a person (oh grow up!). Want to adjust cheek height? Be my guest. What I saw as a pretty good character creator, Lono saw as a rubbish one, and I have no idea why.
Onto the good stuff!
Next up I decided to try the fighting so I picked a character and was away, fighting a male boxer who sported a bad haircut and dodgy shorts. I began playing and quickly got to grips with the game’s fighting mechanics, which didn’t take long since they’re so basic. You may well be thinking ‘Whaaaaaaaat!?! He said he had a different opinion to Lono. Why is he criticizing the game!’, but, if you did, then you’d be wrong. Saying that ‘the entire fighting system is very basic’ is not a criticism of FaceBreaker. Let me explain.
FaceBreaker is the first game in EA Sports’ new sub-brand EA Freestyle, which was created to provide fun sports games to casual gamers. The key word there is ‘casual’. Lono complained about the basic fighting system and limited range of moves, but that is exactly what this game is meant to be – a quick, simple pick up and play arcade style boxing game with cartoony characters. This game is targeted at kids and casual gamers. It is not meant to be a complex boxing simulation with real life boxing tactics and photo realistic graphics. The game is fun. It will make kids laugh. It’s like a Pixar movie where the violence is on the same level as Looney Tunes, so don’t go around complaining that it’s too dangerous for children to play. I personally didn’t enjoy the fighting: I thought it ended up being a button masher where you were easily locked into punch after endless punch, but then again, the game is not designed for me. It’s like complaining that a Shape Sorting Bus is boring and doesn’t provide enough challenge, but I’m sure everyone here would agree that that is completely unjustified – the toy was not meant for people over the age of 2. Or how about saying that Madden games are bad because they’re so boring? Well I live in the UK where American Football is rarely televised, so again, that’s unjustified as the game was meant for American Football lovers, not people who have never watched it. Games have target audiences, and if we don’t fit into them, then who are we to complain?
Fell free to post your thoughts in the comment box.
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
1st
I agree that Lono did perhaps miss the point, but the game has problems. The fact it’s for casual gamers does explain the button mashing, but it doesn’t justify a block and parry system that doesn’t seem to work and, as I noted in Lono’s story, the NaturalMotion still isn’t executed well.
Whether it was a fair criticism of a button masher or not, Lono was right about one thing, this game blows! I too thought I was dealing with the next Fight Night, not another crappy fighter clone. This is more of what I would think of if someone said they were remaking Shaq-Fu
Can we please ban people who say “first!”? It’s annoying. I wish you all much successfully with comment moderation. cl.
i cant wait to get this game when it hits the discount bin… shouldnt take long, but it was definitly fun the first couple tries…
No way, this was not a good game. At least not a good demo of a game. It is a button masher but not the good kind of button masher like smash bros. or N3. Saying it’s “for kids” doesn’t excuse the fact there is no depth or functional strategy in this demo. Smash bros. did it a lot better and I think they wanted to “cash in ” on that.
Only the target audience have the right to critisise the game since they are the ones that will be playing it.
@Eoco: So if the game freezes ever 5 minutes I’m not allowed to criticise it because I’m not “target audience”? Should we ignore every review of the game because the reviewer isn’t a casual gamer?
If I start a restaurant for women only and the food sucks, are you not allowed to say it sucks because you’re not a woman?
Of course the opinions of the casual gamer is important, but everybody has a right to criticise the game.
Nice review I like how you at least explain parts of the game and how things like the editor works with the slider like oblivion instead of just saying it blows with no proof and just a opinion on what you think it should be. Keep it up. =)
I think his review was spot on. The fact that you can find anything enjoyable in this piss poor offering actually proves the point that I value Lono’s reviews much more for their honest opinions.
I just played the demo and didn’t like it. Still liked the review. And micro I’d usually agree if Lono didn’t treat his review like the word of god and decides that giving the ending to a game(Haze) that some people might still play(not me).
Honestly, Eoco, saying that only the “Target Audience” can criticize that game is a bit like saying that people can’t criticize sports players cuz they don’t play the game. In my opinion, that statement is irresponsible, especially from someone that writes about games on THIS website. Furthermore, without defining what the hell the target audience for this game is, your statement has no meaning, which then ultimately renders your entire argument null.
Let me explain. Who is the target audience? Males? Check. 18-34 yr old males? Check. Boxing fans? Check… Ok, what demographic am I leaving out that could possibly exclude me from being the Target Audience for this game…
Second, a bad game is a bad game. Just because I didn’t go into painstaking detail about the “sliders” for the create-a-boxer mode, doesn’t mean it still doesn’t work well, or that Facebreaker isn’t a bad game.
Third, I’ve got to call you to the carpet for your ridiculous statement that non-target audiences can’t criticize a game that wasn’t made for them…
Guess what? We editorialize games and gaming culture here at Sarcasticgamer.com. To say that certain people don’t have the “right” to give an opinion is totally ludicrous and a bit irresponsible.
Anybody has the right to say whatever the heck they want about anything…
Especially on this website.
Disagree with me on the game? Fine by me. Say it and move on. Don’t chastise other people based on some made-up rule that you pulled out of your keister…
Bring the facts, bring your opinion, don’t bring BS.
@Lono
At what point did I say you cannot have an opinion on a game? I didn’t. We can critisise the game all we want, but doing so is completely worthless. As I said in the article, it is like me crtisising a toddler’s toy by saying it didn’t provide enough challenge. It’s stupid. The toy was not meant for me, it was meant for a 2 year old so while I may hate it, the 2 year old (the target audience) will love it. We can critisise things that weren’t meant for us, but that doesn’t mean the thing is bad.
You say that I don’t define the target audience. If so, then what does this sentence say? ‘This game is targeted at kids and casual gamers’
You only have to look at EA freestyle’s website to see exctly who they are targeting. Are you a casual gamer? No. You write about video games: of course your not a casual gamer. The game was not meant for you. You can say it sucks, but that doesn’t matter in the slightest as its target audience may think it’s very good. Does a vegetarian food critic review beef burger joints? No. They could if they wanted, and they’d probably hate every meal they served there. Doesn’t mean it’s bad food though. Non-vegetarians would probably really enjoy it.
If ‘Anybody has the right to say whatever the heck they want about anything… ‘ then I have the right to say this, and what I said in the article.
‘what demographic am I leaving out that could possibly exclude me from being the Target Audience for this game’ erm the most important one of all: the casual gamer demographic.
’saying that only the “Target Audience” can criticize that game is a bit like saying that people can’t criticize sports players cuz they don’t play the game’. WRONG! It more like saying: people know nothing about the sport, people who have never seen the sport and people who have never played the sport can’t critisise it. I think you’ll agree on that point.
Read what I’ve said in this comment.
You have got to be kidding me. I’d bet my house that if you asked Peter Moore who this game was for, he would not say… “the casual gamer” WTF is a casual gamer? Who knows? Every game company want’s their game to be for a casual crowd, that doesn’t mean that its any good.
I casually play Geometry wars, bejewled and UNO and games like that. Are those hardcore games because I play them and enjoy them? Are those games not “made for me?” Good grief. Just because I write about games like that, that suddenly means that what I have to say is pointless? Wow. That makes no sense.
I also like boxing and fighting games. What about this game makes it for a causal crowd? It’s lack of depth? Only having three attacks? Well guess what dude, Soul Calibur IV only has three standard attacks. Is Soul Calibur a casual fighting game? Some would say yes, because of the slick design and ease of use of almost any character in the game.
Is Facebreaker really a “casual” game? Would alpha moms and the elderly like this game, because that’s what you mean by the “casual” gamer… Right? Do you even know what you mean by that?
Your analogy that people that know nothing or have never seen sports is akin to me criticizing Facebreaker… is laughable. I’ve been playing games my whole life. Games like Mario Kart, games like Half-Life and Doom and Alex Kidd and Sonic the Hedgehog and Phantasy Star… I know a good game when I see it. This isn’t it.
wow… both of you need to stop. now.
Why Lucifer? I think that this is a worthy subject for debate. Isn’t that what these comments are for???
@Lono
Yes ok that last analogy was bad, but the food critic one is much better.
Contrary to what you say: ‘EA says that the Freestyle games will be playful, inclusive, casual, and easy to pick up and play for kids and parents, women and men, and casual and hardcore sports fans of all ages.’ While they do mention the hardcore, you can see how they are focusing on, what you describe as, ‘alpha moms and the elderly’. Particularly note the word ‘parents’.
‘I casually play Geometry wars, bejewled and UNO and games like that. Are those hardcore games because I play them and enjoy them? Are those games not “made for me?”’ It’s nothing to do with HOW you play a game, but WHO it’s made for. UNO probably was not made for you, but that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t enjoy it. Do you think Scene Tt was made for the hardcore? No, of course it wasn’t, but while most hardcore gamers would find it boring (me included), some may enjoy it, despite it not being aimed at them. Also no: every game you play does not immediately become hard core.
‘Well guess what dude, Soul Calibur IV only has three standard attacks.’ oh come on. You know SC4 has hundreds of attacks, don’t even bother going there.
I guess so. “Debate” ahead. I hope you both lose.
It might not be bad if its aimed for the appropriate market (casual/young). However, game reviewers are going to review most games as if they were supposed to be professional.
So I think that games which are supposed to be “casual” should be marked as such – that way, reviewers will know exactly what market the game is supposed to be aimed at. Casual players are very different to “non-casual” players – a game made for casual gamers will not hold up to professional expectations.
I don’t really understand this drive towards casual gaming – I don’t hate it, I just don’t understand why anyone would pay AUD$90 to AUD$100 for a casual game. Casual games should be priced at AUD$30, because it’s basically a very simple game.
@Korolev
I love you for that second paragraph.
@Korolev I sort of agree with you. Games like facebreaker may take as much effort and as much money as other games to make. That makes them get priced higher. I do agree that they should be lower priced though since it will make the consumer feel like they’re getting more bang for there buck. It would probably also help drive sells if they were lower priced.
I’m writing an article about this in community blogs in the next day or so so everybody whatch. For some reason it didn’t post my other comment, too long?.
I downloaded the demo last night, and gave it a try. I absolutely hated it. The gameplay was atrocious. Even if one takes into account that it’s a game for casual gamers, it was boring, repetative, and truth-be-told, the controls are just complex enough that the AI, which is relentless even on the lowest difficulty setting, will pummel any casual gamer before he or she gets a handle on things. I came to grips with it quickly enough, but if a casual gamer can’t jump in and feel like they’re accomplishing things, then it runs the risk of turning them off to the game. Moreover, I’m not sure that there’s much of a market amongst casual gamers for a boxing title in the first place, much less a middle-of-the-road boxing game like this one.
Casual gamers might be open to trying new things, but they’re not stupid. They’re not going to eat this game up just because it’s easy to play. Case in point, I bought my Mom a copy of Carnival Games for her B-Day, and she had me take it back the next day. Why? Because it sucked. She might not be a hardcore gamer, but she knows crap when she sees it, and it’s arguable that she’s not alone in that. Facebreaker might technically be easy to play, but a good game it is not. And it shouldn’t be given a pass because it’s being targeted towards casual players.