554
rate

IGN Gives The Last Remnant It's Lowest Score Yet

November 25, 2008 in Reviews comments 22

With the latest Square-Enix game not doing so well in terms of review scores, IGN today published their review giving it the lowest review score we've seen thus far - 5.3/10 and for good reason too.

The Last Remnant is a technical mess, but it's also behind the curve in so many ways. While games like Fallout 3 and Mass Effect use voiceovers for every conversation, The Last Remnant doesn't even voice every main story sequence. While games like Eternal Sonata offer immaculately detailed environments, The Last Remnant often tosses you into cookie-cutter battles in repetitive bland caves or barren fields. And while games like Blue Dragon and Lost Odyssey deliver towns to explore and secrets to find, The Last Remnant skimps and gives only a few points worth visiting in each small town. I can't think of one aspect of The Last Remnant that is even on par with other recent titles, let alone leading the charge.
Krunal via uk.xbox360.ign.com »
Favourite this article Add source
| More
Report!
News story attached to:

Comments

Register as a member to subscribe comments.
  • 1
    Deathsythe Nov 25, 08
    Damn that sucks, I really liked the way this looked. Oh well - I'm too busy with Fallout 3 and L4D anyway.


  • 2
    DystopiaSticker Nov 25, 08
    Haha happy happy joy joy, right?

    I didn't feel good about the game anyway. Plethora of RPGs out on the 360 now though, so I'm more than satisfied. Still need to try Fable II.
  • 0
    phowell23 Nov 25, 08
    it looked very Enchanted Arms to me instead of Final Fantasy. They should have busted out the Crystal Tools/White Engine.
  • 0
    Krunal Nov 25, 08
    I was really hoping to get the game, but now I'm doubting if it's even worth getting unless Square-Enix fix the PS3 release of the game, and unless it gets 8's and above, I honestly will not be bothering to get this game...
    • 0
      Newcloud Nov 25, 08
      the ps3 version should have more content since sony doesn't allow games that have been delayed on the ps3 without something exclusive
      • 0
        phowell23 Nov 25, 08
        as someone who bought ps3 for FF13 and Versus13 it makes me feel a little better that SE's games for the ps3 might turn out better than the 360's.
        • 1
          Krunal Nov 25, 08
          Thing is, you can't say for sure if these issues aren't going to effect the PS3 version or not. The problem is pretty much the unreal engine. The PS3 will be using the same one, so unless they fix all the bugs, I doubt the PS3 version will be that much better.

          But then again, if they DO fix all the bugs... what will the score be for the PS3 version.. that's something to think about.

          It's also good to see the use of two discs, it means content was not sacrificed for disc space.
      • 0
        Slumpy monkey Nov 25, 08
        ? There has been loads of game delays on PS3 without exclusive content.
        • 1
          Newcloud Nov 25, 08
          theres always something extra: bioshock got extras... eternal sanata got extras...alone in the dark got extras... lost planet got extras... and the red alert game for ps3 is getting extras. there are more that i cant remember
      • 0
        DystopiaSticker Nov 25, 08
        Uh the problem here is poor gameplay, bland environments, stupid characters and little to nothing for players to explore in towns.

        The PS3 version getting a new bland, boring environment to barely explore excites you guys? Or you think it'll fix the game?

        They'd have to revamp the game to fix the score. It's just going to be the same thing with a tiny addition. I'd rather play a game several months early than play a tiny new quest anyway. Not that it matters, cause the game blows.
        • 0
          Krunal Nov 25, 08
          Truth be told, I most likely will get this game, simply because of the fact that it's an RPG on the PS3. Whether the story is good or not, the battle system to me at least looks quite interesting.

          Would you rather play the game several months early with bugs, or several months later, with bugs fixed and a few additional items? That is however IF Square-Enix do the right thing and fix the bugs.

          It'd suck that due to the abysmal reviews they decide not to port it to the PS3.
      • 0
        Krunal Nov 25, 08
        I didn't realise that was a "must have" for sony. I just thought it was the developers being kind to us...
        • 0
          Newcloud Nov 25, 08
          its a good idea must people dont like buying one year old ports but with the extras some will

          on topic: this could be good news for white knight storys and its sales
  • 0
    kik36 Nov 25, 08
    Well interesting read, but seems like the reviewer may be coming at it from a FPS point of view.......not that that's wrong. If the game has technical issues, than it's definitely not going on my list. I will reserve my judgment until the PS3 release, and hopefully by then there will be a patch that cleans up the tech mess.
  • 2
    TheDream Nov 25, 08
    Reviews Make me laugh, i actually was thinking the same thing as most people on here im not getting it but in the end i ended up getting the game and enjoy it, i understand the whole technical issue but it's not so bad its better than IU well in my opinion it is all im saying is if your intrested in the game rent it and see for yourself if u like it or not the majority of the reviews i read or hear are terrible anyway
    • 0
      Krunal Nov 26, 08
      Thing is these are reviewers, but I've also seen on some forums and people have been again complaining about the various issues - mostly to do with the fact that battles at times sometimes feel like slideshows due to the lag.
      • 0
        Final Blade Nov 26, 08
        Yes but IGN isn't credible for taking their word for gospel. Not even gamespot. Its fine if you want to take the reviews for consideration, but i've come to realize majority of the games that ends up bad score, I end up liking anyway. Matt Addison has started liking the game, so maybe its not as bad as the review says. I found Lair, Haze and Kane and Lynch to be very good games worthy of 7.7(a little more to lair actually) scores. This I'm going to get, not to mention LR is going to have trophy's.
  • 0
    McClubbin Nov 26, 08
    Phew, I saved myself 60 bucks. I almost bought this game day before yesterday without reading any of the reviews and just going by the hype generated by previews and hands-on articles. The last time I did that was with Infinite Undiscovery and I honestly became really frustrated with it. At least I'll be saving the time and stress of having to play through another new half-assed SquareEnix game.
    • 0
      FFrpgAddict_09 Nov 27, 08
      dude if your really a rpg fan you should play LR coz at first im confuse too if im gonna buy it or not coz of the bad reviews but i bought it to see if its really bad but the reviews are wrong because this game is really good.at first im confuse at the batle system but as after you play it for like 5 hours its not that hard...im telling that its worth to buy it..believe me im only playing rpg and LR is a good game..dont forget to install your CD to HDD so that it will not have the technical flaws that they are talking about..
  • 1
    Big A2 Nov 26, 08
    Um... there's been far worse games reviewed than this. I recall someshovel ware games getting a 1/10 on IGN.
    • 0
      Krunal Nov 26, 08
      I mean that IGN have given The Last Remnant the lowest score so far out of ALL the reviewers that have reviewed The Last Remnant. Everyone else gave it in the 6.8 region, IGN gave it 5.3. I wasn't comparing it to all the games, but all the reviewers scores
      • 0
        Big A2 Nov 26, 08
        Ah, I thought you meant that it was IGN's lowest score. Sorry.

This news story is archived and is closed to comments now.