Jump to content

Media feedback, reviews on KSP 1.0

LordFjord

By LordFjord
in KSP1 Discussion

 Share

Recommended Posts

LordFjord

LordFjord

Posted
Posted

Ahoy,

maybe it can't hurt to collect some feedback on the 1.0 release. So, what's the gamer press saying about it?

I'll start with 4Players, my favorite german online gamer magazine.

The test made a whooping 88%, which is pretty awesome!

It could have mentioned a couple of other great things about KSP (mods and stuff), but all in all it was a good test.

Any other media feedback or reviews that you folks came across?

Cheers,

Fjord

Link to comment
Share on other sites
EtherDragon

EtherDragon

Posted
Posted (edited)

I should point out that I just released an amateur review myself! I gave the game an 86 out of 100:

Game Play - SOLID, a solid and consistent experience (18/20)

Controls - EXCELLENT, but can't edit in game (18/20)

Challenge - HIGH, lacks guidance at times (14/20)

Presentation - SIMPLE, but good (16/20)

Unique Elements - ONE OF A KIND (20/20)

TOTAL 86/100!

Video:

Other review sources:

Gamespot User Score 8.5

Edited by EtherDragon
Link to comment
Share on other sites
klgraham1013

klgraham1013

Posted
Posted

Despite my reservations at going 1.0. I think the uniqueness of KSP will cover up the flaws in career mode. It will probably do alright at most of the mainstream review sites.

- - - Updated - - -

Also, people find explosions fun.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Robotengineer

Robotengineer

Posted
Posted
Masterpiece? Wow. Maybe my standards are just to high.

That's what I was just thinking...

96 out of a hundred? Isn't that what Consumer Reports gave Tesla?

The entire processâ€â€from failure, to revision, to hope, to euphoric completionâ€â€cemented for me why Kerbal Space Program is one of the best games on PC.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
r_rolo1

r_rolo1

Posted
Posted

I've read the PC Gamer review. While in general the tone is highly positive, the reviewer points out two things :

- The game does not help you a lot about how to build stuff. It expects you to blow things instead ( the reviewer points that as a positive point )

- Career has bottlenecks

Oh , and there is exactly zero evidence the reviewer actually played 1.0 . In fact he references the ol'"get vertical to 10km , then turn " method of pre-1.0 as the way he got to orbit :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Renegrade

Renegrade

Posted
Posted
It's a glowing review, but unless they changed their habits 96 doesn't mean that much from them. Don't they give an 85 score to a game that is basically a turd in a shoebox set on fire?

They gave Duke Nukem Forever an 80, so you're probably right. Oh, they gave Brokenfield 4 84%, so yeah, that kinda dials it in.

11/10 would buy burning turd shoebox again - IGN

Hey, lack of journalistic thoroughness in the gaming review media may actually SERVE our interests for once.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
moogoob

moogoob

Posted
Posted
I've read the PC Gamer review. While in general the tone is highly positive, the reviewer points out two things :

- The game does not help you a lot about how to build stuff. It expects you to blow things instead ( the reviewer points that as a positive point )

- Career has bottlenecks

Oh , and there is exactly zero evidence the reviewer actually played 1.0 . In fact he references the ol'"get vertical to 10km , then turn " method of pre-1.0 as the way he got to orbit :D

He went on to say that the first story he was telling was from his very first Mun mission. Two years ago, which is before I started playing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Temeter

Temeter

Posted
Posted (edited)

Yeah, indeed there are people have that much fun with KSP. Next to none of the small nitpicks actually damage KSP's core.

It's an absolutely brillant game. One of the few games which can bring setting, gameplay and presentation into a perfect balance. The latter might be a bit lacking at times, but the former ones really play to the strenghts of a videogame. There are few other games that reach that level of harmony between it's concepts, where exchanging any part would inherently damage the product. Dark Souls would be another example.

Awesome! Btw, in case you're not trusting that level journalism: The 7-10 scale is something which matters to well-advertised tripple a titles. If that guy plays KSP for years and gives it that rating, then it means somthing. Otherwise, if that doesn't mean much to you, the formerly mentioned 4Players is actually critical and excentric. Shot down Far Cry 3 for being to generic.

Edited by Temeter
Link to comment
Share on other sites
r_rolo1

r_rolo1

Posted
Posted
He went on to say that the first story he was telling was from his very first Mun mission. Two years ago, which is before I started playing.

Note that he says in the end that the Kerbal is still stranded in the Mun , with the company of other in orbit. If he started that game two years ago, I assume he hasn't played much in between ( that BTW was my point :D )

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Caelib

Caelib

Posted
Posted (edited)
Masterpiece? Wow. Maybe my standards are just to high.

I think the game fits that definition: a work of outstanding artistry, skill, or workmanship.

How would you disagree with that assessment? There some bugs and room for improvement, but that is the case with anything and everything. What makes a game good? At it's core, I think KSP delivers a far better gaming experience than 99% of games released in the last 20 years.

Edited by Caelib
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Renegrade

Renegrade

Posted
Posted
I think the game fits that definition: a work of outstanding artistry, skill, or workmanship.

Artistry? Yes. Skill and workmanship? Not so much. Granted, thanks to EA/MS/Sony/etc fracking the dog, the bar's been lowered rather severely on skill and workmanship these days. I don't accept this lowered bar though - if all these new-fangled, buzzword-laden languages and techniques are valid (and not just stupid pie-in-the-sky BS), then software should be BETTER, not WORSE.

What makes a game good? At it's core, I think KSP delivers a far better gaming experience than 99% of games released in the last 20 years.

Actually, the game end of KSP is kinda weak (goals, progression, story, etc). The ... experience though, is extremely strong. Amazingly so. And that's what's carrying the day for KSP, every time.

That and inflated review scores.

12/10 would have a second root canal - IGN

Guys can we keep this about the reviews themselves and less about the state of video game journalism?

Request denied.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...