Too Human

this game could have been so good i just hated the controls.

I think the storyline was ok

I played the demo and loved it. Especially when I figured out how to kill the trolls w/ the mounting sequence. That was awesome. When Diablo II came out, it also got poor reviews and for the same reason. Play the game, put the word out, and let the sales and LIVE activity show that this game was wrongly justified in reviews. Critic reviews put it at about a 7 average while gamer reviews have it average around 8. And one thing I must disagree w/ OXM about is how they condescend the game for having to repeatedly play it for the enjoyment and casual gamers won't do that. Ummmm, xbox will never be about the casual gamer, no matter what M$ tries. They get a few more in the same house to play it who wouldn't otherwise play, but certainly not the core audience, and casual gamers don't read reviews, they just buy games b/c of certain gimmicks, favorite characters, or shiny box art. Isn't "replayability" an important aspect of any $60 game purchase?? Even ppl who aren't connected to LIVE can enjoy this game for 80+ hrs. You want to know who would buy the Too Human 2? Sign me up. I want the trilogy.
------------------------
DaddyPlace.com
[url=http://profile.mygamercard.net/Aftrthought051][img]http://card.mygamercard.net/lastgame/Aftrthought051.png[/img][/url]

Giving games like Halo 3 and Mass Effect a 10? Epic fail. Halo lacked story and multiplayer balance, and ME just lacked... fun. I had been waiting for this game for a long time, I was glad that the 360 would finally be blessed with a great dungeon crawling RPG. So I played the demo, and I loved it, and eventually I purchased the full game, and I am loving it too! The mix of action and deep rpg elements works great, and co-op is awesome, even with only two players. Sick of the 20 second long death sequence? Stop sucking. Some say the game doesn't punish you for dying, ever stop to think that maybe having to wait 20 seconds before getting back into the fight is punishment enough?(also your items take lots of damage, and high level players will know the sheer agony of dying multiple times in a level). Also, I've got beef with the people who complain about the 10 hour long story, let me put you into perspective. Diablo 2 was a great game right? No, it wasnt great, it was amazing, and it clearly influenced this game. But, if I recall, if you took all the shortcuts, you could beat diablo in about 5 hours if you were determined, and yet you replayed the levels over and over to buff your character, through both loot and experiance. AND THAT WAS FUN. Now im not saying that this game is long because even I admit it could have had another level or two, but replaying levels at higher levels throws in new monsters and fight setups you may not have experienced your first run through. Some say the boss fights are lame, but I can clearly remember my first encounter with Andarial in D2... and how I 10 shotted her...
The camera is automatic, but you still get some custimization in terms of distance from/to your character, and all it takes to re-center the camera is a tap of a button.

So listen, if you dont like RPG games, dont play this game, because thats what it is. And if you are let down with this game and you are an RPG fan, either accept that you dont like it and return the game or get over it, its just a game, you are not forced to play it, go play halo or something else that's overrated. However, for any true action-rpg fan, you will find this game very fun and entertaining, dont let the verdicts of magazines tell you what you will like, because these are just opinions. Play it for yourself, dont let the people that gave ME and H3 a 10/10 tell you what's good or not.

P.S: I do actually buy the oxm magazines and read them, and most of the time I find their reviews accurate. But like I said, its just one persons opinion, just this this comment, take it or leave it.

P.S.S: To the guy who said it took too much effort to go from the right stick, to the A-Button, back to the right stick, you are wrong. It doesn't take too much effort, you are just the laziest person on Earth.

i disagree also about mass effect i like 1 person shooters like everyone else but theres people that like to play rpgs like fable,mass effect,star wars knights such as myself i guess u cann say we all have different taste

Although, I don't agree on what f0xtr0t said about Mass Effect. It was a good game. They could have done better, though.

f0xtr0t, I agree. This game was great and addicting. Level 42 and no end in sight for me. How was the storyline confusing, OXM? And what small issues? Besides the death sequence, that is. It's a great game. Only a 6.5? With only those few problems? You gave Halo 3 a 10. I don't get that. The storyline on it sucked horribly. This one's story, on the other hand, about an Aesir who lost part of his memory in an accident that I don't want to talk about, because it's a spoiler, and he goes off to fight GRNDL-1, a mysterious machine that drinks human's blood, is surprisingly like the legend of Beowolf. Not the movie, that one sucked horribly, but the actual Norse legend. Everyone that I've talked to at my school has agreed, Too Human is a fantastic game! Not as good as Mercs 2, but it is great!
Twi's rating: 9.0

I though this game was fantastic. I'm starting to think that the game industry is bias against certain game types.

Im sorry but everyone seems to want first person shooter games and there are other games out there besides fps.

You guys gave Mass Effect a 10, LoL, story was good, but the game was boring. Side quest stunk, inventory was terrible and myself and a lot of my friends, had to force our selves to just finish the first walk through of the game. Then you give Lost Ody. a 7.5, complaining of load times, are you kidding me? The load times weren't that bad at all and the game was much funner to play than Mass Effect. So I wasn't surprised to see this low score on TH.

Maybe people who actually like those these types of games should do the reviews. It isn't perfect by no means, but it is at least a 7.5 maybe 8 for a dungeon crawler.

And 4 people coop? How many other RPG type games even have a form a coop? So two people really aint that bad and we had and are currently having alot of fun with it still.

OXM's review :(

Waited forever.
Only to get this piece of shiat.
dang
=(
XBL Gamertag:
K3rmitdafrg

Kermit's here
Any1 up for Gears?

I personally happened to enjoy this game. While I do agree that there are shortcomings (mainly the camera acting up), I felt that they could be overlooked. I've heard and read about how people hated the control scheme. I, on the other hand, thought it worked very well with the design of the game. While targeting was sometimes an issue, I don't think that it is something worth complaining that much over.

My biggest complaint was that the story itself was too short. However, running through it again with the same, leveled-up character has its appeal. In regards to the death sequence taking too long, here's my advice: stop dying so much. Think of it like paintball: yeah it hurts, but it's an incentive to not get shot.

I would have given this a 7.0 or 7.25: It's an entertaining game worth checking out, but can't be raised up to the levels of other amazing games out there. If you play the demo, you need to get through the whole thing once before making a decision.

I've been loosely describing it as a mild cross between the customization and RPG style of "Knights of the Old Republic" and the battle-themed combat and storyline of "God of War."

wow u played this game 6 1/2 times? I think the real reason u think 4 player co-op is too much is that u dont have 3 friends to play with.

is a plot really that confusing just because it's not about space aliens? Look at gears of war - not about space aliens ((they're locust ground monsters - so not the same thing) but it had some confusing plot elements. Meanwhile, mass effect managed to have a deep plot without being confusing. And, sorry to say, halo is starting to look like the lowest common denominator in terms of plot.

My point is, if these guys say they found the plot confusing, then I believe them. If you didn't find it confusing, then I applaud you.

I do believe they did mention something about the right analog stick...

Overall I'd probably agree with the rating, I was waiting forever to play it and well, it was quite an upset in the end.

I feel like the games I like the most are always given bad reviews. You score on gameplay and graphics and other stuff, but what about a games uniqueness? Too Human takes an RPG and makes it into something new and cool. I like the whole right analog attack system, how many other games have it? it takes getting used to, but when you do it's very fun to use. And the review didn't even say anything about the plot!!! I too admit it has a lousy camera but, so what! it doesn't change much. And four player co-op, that's too much, you don't need it! You are a god and so you get to pown lots of enemies, if there are four players and each had his fair share, the screen would be piled high with enemies, 2 feels just right for co-op. Too Human should have AT LEAST gotten a 7.5. So far I have replayed it 6 and a half times and am still not bored with it.

The thing that probably ticks me off more than anything is seeing these reviews which state that they're reviewing Too Human for what it's supposed to be - a AAA game with a ton of hype surrounding it. Hype?! Are you kidding me? The only hype this game has gotten prior to release is negative hype. I've never seen a game get smashed so hard by the general public way before anyone could get their actual hands on it. It's really a sad thing to see. And the fact that people believe Too Human has been in "development" for a decade gets under my skin. It's had an actual development cycle on the 360 platform for about 3-4 years. And it's almost like these critics' reviews already had the idea pre-set in their minds that Too Human was going to be a flop. It's like that was their first instinct and no matter what, they were going to play through the entire game with that first instinct in the back of their mind, refusing to let it go. Every little thing that they could find wrong with the game, they blew it out of proportion. I don't think it would've turned out like this if the pre-release "hype" was actually positive, not negative. And heaven forbid, it doesn't have a storyline revolving around space marines and aliens, but rather a much more unique and interesting tale compared to most games on the market. I guess we're at that point where a game's story is considered "confusing" if we stray too far from space aliens. And this is coming from an alien-nut whose favorite games revolve around just that, not to mention that I don't know jack about Norse mythology. Yet I'm intrigued by the storyline. Go figure.

No I didn't. OXM just stated that the score number they give is a collaborative effort. They all agree on a number. I'm holding them to their word. OXM gave KUF:CoD an 8 and this a 6.5

Same people, vastly different scores for fairly similar games. Interesting thing is the majority of people gave the KUF game VERY average scores while OXM looks like the standout. KUF is just a prettier version of Baldur's Gate: DA. Doesn't deviate from any kind of dungeon crawler formula or try anything new.

You may not like Too Human or how it plays but you can't deny that it at least tried to innovate. Most of the time jaded critics like that since they're tired of playing the same old games, but very rarely does Silicon Knights get credit for trying. It just doesn't make sense.

um...you completely missed my point...

I call foul on the collaborative review scores. I highly doubt you all agreed that KUF:CoD deserved an 8 while this gets a 6.5

This at least tried to blend more kinetic action into the RPG scene other than the typical button mashing. Added the combo meter which rewards skill in the gameplay rather than a typical mana meter slowly refilling or replenished by potion-spamming. There are plenty of flaws that do need to be fixed for the sequels but this game deserves much more credit than it is receiving from most of the critics. If you were going to weigh pros higher than cons like with Circle of Doom, at least do it with a game that actually tries to innovate.

hey...guys, guys - I've figured something out! Y'know, about why some of us think the game sucks and others like it. The Metacritic score, too - it all makes sense!

The problem is that none of us are telepathically united by a single set of opinions! OMG, it all makes sense now!

Wow. For a while there I was actually really looking forward to playing this game. I just heard about it recently but it seemed to be generating alot of buzz. I looked into and thought it looked like a game that I might enjoy plus it was being developed by a Canadian dev so thats a plus. Then came the demo and that totally destroyed any hope of me ever wasting my money on this stupid game. I absolutely hated it. The camera was annoying (seriously its 2008 enough with fucking bad camera shit already!). The combat sucked. The dialouge was tired and lame. I went and bought Bully:Scholarship Edition for half the price instead. It was a very wise choice.

lol...

ok...i posted my comment...and it's not longer than the review...

Hey TommyBomb...

Here's my personal review...

I actually enjoy the game...yes...there are definately quirks that need to be fixed...it does not deserve a 10 or a 9...the camera has moments that a just plan goofy...sure you can hit LB to center the camera, but that does not always work. You can also hold the LB button and use the rt stick to manually look around...again, it does not always work!

You can't (or atleast I do not know how 2)skip the annoying death scences...and yes there is a penalty for dieing...your armor gets damaged everytime that you die...if you do not repair it before 0...it breaks...that means all of the bonuses do not work.

Having said the bad about the game, I loving the lightning fast moves of the berzerker! I love the customizing! The story (so far) is interesting. The graphics are pretty solid. Once i got used to using the right stick, I really enjoyed the change...though I would still rather button mash, and rt stick camera.

Bottom line, I'd prob. give it a 7.5 or 8...but hey it's just my opinion, if you don't agree, that's ok...i just wanted to give a longer review for those who wanted to know.

"Dan OXM: "FWIW, over on Metacritic, the industry average and the reader review average are exactly the same. Go figure"

Boo,
FWIW that is not really the point. "Go Figure" the lowest scores drag the average down.

I feel that 6.5 is a little low although The OXM review is pretty fair. I do not believe that the few problems cause it to be less than a 7 which OXM has stated on several occasions is a Good Game. Too Human is just that, a Good game. It does a lot of things well. The broken or clunky elements were simply weighed too heavily mostly from other sites.

Give TH a try it is a fun game. Recently OXM has been a little tough, see bionic commando rearmed. Check other sources you trust similar to OXM. Aggregate sites frequently give an inaccurate reading highlighted by many over-marketed triple-A titles coming away with undeserving scores in the high 9s.

http://www.kevinpereira.com/?p=71
Kevin's comments are funny (mild language)

@PaulOXM

Paul I understand doing two reviews is silly and redundant. It is just very disappointing to see that some of the Rock Band DLC gets a longer review than a full game.
I also understand that you guys got the game late.

I completely agree with the score. I played the demo and thought the game itself was going to be better. I find myself skipping all of the cutscenes and why do they have health bar if you die and come right back with nothing changed except your combo meter. This game probably suffered from the issues with the unreal engine liscences. Too bad this game sucks.

Played the demo, it was ok, the controls gave me the nostalga of grabbed by the ghoulies(a better game and demo)

If anyone is still debating on whether or not to check out this game you should take a look at
http://kotaku.com/5039667/too-human-review-dyacks-human-too
It'll give you a much better look at how the game is.

For everyone complaining about the shortness of this review, please understand that we can't do separate (and longer reviews) for the website. This is a reprint of the review that's running in our November issue, and whenever we can, we post the magazine reviews on the website on or near the day a game comes out. This review is smaller because the November issue won't be out until late September, and that late means less relevant, and less relevant means smaller. We tried to get Microsoft to give us the Too Human reviewable for October, where it absolutely should've ran & would've gotten more space, but no dice.

Dan OXM: "FWIW, over on Metacritic, the industry average and the reader review average are exactly the same. Go figure.

That has nothing to do with Too Human's quality, mind you. I just wanted to cite my source for disagreeing with the statement."

Fair enough, but ironically I've never even visited Metacritic's site up until reading your response. I always hear it brought up on the podcast, but I usually just go to gamerankings.com. Either way, I was more or less referring to posts on various gaming forums that I frequent on a weekly basis. I don't particularly have any beef with this review, but I was honestly looking forward to a beefier (pun unintended) and more informative review considering the stature of Too Human. I trust OXM's reviews more than any other publication out there for my 360 games and I was bummed after such a short read...like OXM Report short :P

Nevermind I misread your post. My bad.

Off the topic, Cronos where did you get that OXM gave Unleashed a 4. In the new issue they gave it a 7.5.

tommybomb, I hated the camera, controls and voice acting but i will admit the story is interesting and could have been much better.

(sigh) if nobody is open to my suggestion, then that's fine...it would just help to know that I have a voice around here...

I KNEW IT WOULD SUCK WHEN I FIRST HEARD ABOUT IT ON PLAYSTATION 1!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I don't see why everybody has to make this bigger than it is. This review is just one guy's opinon. If you really like it and looked forward to this game when it was announced then one guy's opinon shouldn't matter. For example iam really looking forward to Force Unleashed, i think it looks game of the year material, but if the OXM guys gave it a 4 it is not going from buying this game.

X-play is a joke... on topic the review was right on the money, I've played the demo hated, left it alone for a couple of days and played other games, went back and played it again thinking maybe its one of those "you have to let it grow on you to like it" kind of games. well to make a long story short, I still hated it..this game needs some help in many ways and when it comes down to it there are better games I would like to be playing/spending my time.

tell you what, I'll buy it a year from now when we are in a slow period and I'll only spend $29.99, then it will be worth my time and attention.

-Mox

@ Dan OXM:

However if you look at GameRankings.COM you'll see that the user average is signficantly higher than the critic average. Go figure.

"That has nothing to do with Too Human's quality, mind you. I just wanted to cite my source for disagreeing with the statement."

Just like anything that is dependent on statistics, you can always find numbers to support your theories. You just have to know where to look and, more importantly, what to leave out.

I don't necessarily have a problem with the actual review score, but for such a hugely hyped game you'd think they'd write more than three paragraphs.
I'm a bit biased on the game as I go to university in the city where Silicon Knights is located (St. Catharines, Ontario), but even so I think the game deserves more thought put into the review if not a better score.
I saw some article on review scores (may have been by you guys) that said you shouldn't just pay attention to the score, but rather read the entire review and form your own opinion on it. Well by reading through this review I don't think that you are allowing readers to form their own opinion on the facts laid out by the writer. It seems more like the review in this case was just a means to an end to get to the poor review score.

iThomas: "I've been browsing a ton of general user reviews / impressions for Too Human and they're much more positive than what I've seen with the critic's reviews."

FWIW, over on Metacritic, the industry average and the reader review average are exactly the same. Go figure.

That has nothing to do with Too Human's quality, mind you. I just wanted to cite my source for disagreeing with the statement.

um...I scrolled to the middle of the page and read my way up, so I have no idea who started this - and I prefer it that way. But if some of you don't like the reviews, then let me make the proposition that you write your own.
I'm serious. You're allowed to go on just the demo if you haven't already bought the game. Explain what you liked and if there is anything you disliked. How about it?

I am on the fence in this argument. Axe went a little crazy with the intern thing. Even if it wasn't an intern, they aren't going to let someone just post anything about a game and just publish it. As they said, it is a freelancer they trust.

However, it was only a 3 paragraph review, if that, which is awfully weak. Even reading through it, I wouldn't really be able to tell why it is getting a low score.

And you guys really think that Avatar and Bee Movie game is a better game....Come on.

Well I almost let reviews make the choice for me but decided to make my own choice and buy the game. No matter what I will enjoy it even if it's not the best. Hell if I listened to all reviews I would never have enjoyed the hell out of say 1942 or Army of Two. You should never let somebody else make decisions for you people. If you're not sure rent it.

Gotta say that I was tremendously bummed when I started seeing the reviews pop up for Too Human. I played the demo about five times and really enjoyed it.
It's really quite odd, because I've been browsing a ton of general user reviews / impressions for Too Human and they're much more positive than what I've seen with the critic's reviews. It seems like most people really are enjoying Too Human, which I was glad to see, especially after reading TeamXbox's review, OXM's review, GamesRadar's review, Gamespot's review, etc. I'm not sure what to make of it all. It seems like this game was destined to have mediocre reviews simply because of all the pre-release negativity. And too many got hooked on that and fed off of it, which is quite sad and unfortunate for those who worked their arses off on this game. Who knows? All I know is that'll I'll be getting the game within' the next week or two and I sure look forward to playing it regardless of these completely mixed opinions.

And if the demo was any indication, I'll end up in the same boat as many of the general users on these various sites as opposed to the big time critics who make it sound so horrible.

I too am disappointed in the scores, but so it goes. The one bad thing I was afraid to hear about was "camera issues" and look what comes up. I hate that in this industry full of growing support and bigger budgets, the same old problems still annoy in games today.

Word up Paul.

Sigh. Alright Axe, I'll make on last stab at sanity here. To your points:
Doubt all you like. Review scores are OXM scores that we arrive at collectively, not individually. We have a rigorous process for vetting scores that we're confident in.
Second point: It got 3 paragraphs because it's getting a small review in our Nov issue...because Microsoft wouldn't give us reviewable in time for the Oct issue, where it should've ran. (We don't do separate web reviews.)
Last point: Those other games got better scores because -- ta-da! -- we think they're better games.
Dude, if you like the game more than we did, that's great. Go play it and have fun!

If you go to Metacritic, there is a good amount of green-level reviews, and if you read their reviews, they got into the deep elements of the story. This review barely even touches the story.

So, Axe...if they agree with you, it's a good review? C'mon, dude.

And if you're really upset by the scores, you're gonna have a lot of ranting to do to counter all those fair-to-middling scores I see on Metacritic. I guess we're just one stop on your tour!

FWIW: The camera drove me bonkers when I played it co-op.

Fair enough Paul, but here's something that I never understand. What is the coincidence that every one at OXM whole-heartedly agree with this review? I can understand if you said, "Everyone played it, and we can understand his review decision.", but everyone has a different opinion. I doubt that EVERYONE had the same opinion on the game.
Another thing. How could you possibly give this game three paragraphs? Five seems simple enought, but giving this short of a review makes the game seem generic like some movie-based game.
Another thing. Explain to me how games like Too Human and Crackdown get scores like 6.5 and 7.0, yet generic, movie or cartoon-based games like Avatar and Bee Movie got scores like 7.5 and 8.0. If you ask me, that doesn't seem right to give crap titles like those higher reviews than unique gems that have some shine in them.
If those issues are small, like the cons say, it would've at least received a 7.0, but 6.5 just seems harsh.

Hey Axe, look before you leap: Andrew Hayward, the reviewer of this game, is a freelancer and a highly respected one. But all of us on staff have played Too Human and wholeheartedly support this review and Andrew's score. That process takes place with every review we do, regardless of the author.

And thanks Saturn for being the voice of reason. Remember, interns aren't just people too -- they're editors-in-training that we work with closely. Their work is a polished and heavily researched as any of the editors'...or we wouldn't publish it.