Why is Black & White so disliked?

basketkase543

basketkase543

CAGiversary!
Feedback
2 (100%)
Before this game came out it had a lot of hype and it came out to good reviews (89% at gamerankings), but lately i've noticed animosity towards it in gaming magazines, websites, boards, etc. I've never played it but it's always looked interesting. So what's wrong with it?
 
I've been wondering this too, seems like a lot of people are bashing it even without playing it because it is the "in" thing to do now. I've played it and it is pretty good, not revolutionary or anything, but it is a pretty good and unique RTS. So i don't know why all the hate, but if you like that sort of thing you'll probably like the game and ignore all the bashers.
 
I've been seeing a lot of this lately - games getting good reviews when they come out and then getting trashed later. I just read a take on Prince of Persia: Sands of Time where they basically trashed it for repetitive enemies and bland fighting. Didn't it get Game of the Year from most places? How soon people forget...

Jeremy
 
Well, probably because it sucks ass? I couldn't get my fucking ape to do anything in that game. That was a game that truely felt like work.
 
I really liked the concept of Black and White, but could never really get the hang of the controls and just gave up on it. Too bad too because my evil cow would have been awesome.
 
Black and White was good at first but than the novelty wares off and with it the fun. The problem with LionHead Studio’s is that they create hype for a game they never plan on releasing; their final products are always radically different. Fable is an improvement for them, maybe one day they can release a game that actually lives up to the hype.
 
It wasn't that B&W was bad. It was frontloaded. In other w rds, all these reviewers played for a little bit of time and saw all this cool stuff so gave it great reviews. But all the "wow" stuff is gone in the first fifteen. The game almost seemed designed to give a better impression of itself in the first couple hours sopecifically to get a good review. Because a lot of reviews, the common reviews at Time or even major magazines, can only oput a few hours into a game before the review deadline is due.

The problem was, past the first few minutes it was nothing special. I think Greg Kasavin commented on this. Gamespot gave B&W a very VERY good review. But on looking back he commented that their review was way over mark and they had been seduced by the short term hype. After playing the game for a long period, even a week over a few hours or days, he said their review was way too generous.
 
My best guess.. first, it was way over-hyped, secondly, it was full of crash bugs, thirdly, the game got insanely boring after a few hours of play.
 
People couldnt seem to appreciate the new concept it was bringing in..So the 'logical' thing to do (A) is...trash it.

PoP is another example of a good game that was underappreciated.
 
I agree with what most people have said here about the novelty of B&W. Once you got into the game, it became very tedious. It was a great concept with very little game. And, as Cornfedwb points out, the game was WAY over-hyped.

I really liked Prince of Persia, however. I will admitt that the gameplay got repetitive, but the story was solid.
 
[quote name='Eclipse']People couldnt seem to appreciate the new concept it was bringing in..So the 'logical' thing to do (A) is...trash it.

PoP is another example of a good game that was underappreciated.[/quote]

Pop Was no where near underappreciated, you couldn't swing a dead cat without hitting a reviewer gushing over it.
 
So the main problem is that it didn't live up to the hype? Anybody think it is worth playing now? The concept has always seemed interesting to me but i might just wait for the sequel and hope whatever pissed everyone off so much is fixed.
 
I personally hated the mission based gameplay. I wanted a sandbox game, in which I could create a culture and have my creature watch over them punishing the wicked villagers and rewarding the righteous. Instead, I had to play a shitload of "Destroy or convert the other guys". I hope B&W2 fixes that. I want a more Sim City like experience. I don't want to win.
 
Part of the problem for me was that it didn't feel consistent. Almost as if they started out with a quality, God-themed strategy game and then realized they had more AI techniques left over so they added the creatures at the last minute.

The AI was quirky too. I'd struggle for an hour to get my creature to behave, then see him suddenly run off and start eating villagers. The controls were frustrating at times. Once second I'm rubbing the monkey's stomach as a reward, then my hand slips and I accidentally slap him across the face! Training undone...

Still, I admire the risks that Lionhead took. We need games like B&W and Katamari Damacy and Seaman to push the boundaries. I'm sure the kinks'll be worked out in the sequel.
 
B&W is widely criticized because it was new and innovative. It did have several major flaws (character control being the biggest issue) but that doesn't stop it from being an original game that is a break from the boring FPS and MMORPG's on the computer.
 
Biggest problem w/ B&W was that even though it's a great game the first how many hours -- but then, it really gets tedious and boring.

Especially after you pass through a few vortexes and start over your world from scratch.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top