Theres been some new games that have been put out. Theres a problem that no one is talking about. We’ve seen reviews getting argued about, but we need to discuss it.

If there was a game series that was known for one thing and they took it in a new direction, people would be divided on it. The game started off decently for sequels to be build off. They took what was built and changed it. In previous times this would’ve been a big debate, but now it gets a pass.

The game is Control: Resonant, and we don’t understand how no one is talking about it. The first was a unique shooter with  misleading marketing, and level design that should’ve been better. We gave it a 7.5 and were interested in another. Then we saw the changes and didn’t get why they did this

It went from a third person shooter to third person hack and slash. The combat gets repetitive quick. The same people who are giving this game high scores, said that the original God of War games were just button mashers. This is worse, it has worse gameplay,  platforming, level design, and enemies. It’s worse than the first Control.

The level design is just sections that take you through these platforming  parts with combat to get to the next part of the story. There’s sections indoors and they try to do new things with outside world, but it just New York. It feels like a generic New York.  It feels like an indie game with good graphics and some cool visuals.

The gameplay feels like a generic hack n slash.  You still have the psychic powers but now you’re using melee weapons. You can also upgrade your powers like in the first one. 

The story is about Jesse’s brother who leaves FBC after something killed everyone in it. It’s escaped into the city and have to find out what’s going on. You meet FBC agents around town and can do missions for them. Jessie was an ok character from the first game, her brother isn’t. He’s just generic guy with powers that escapes the government facility. Stories Remedy does get praise for being good, but most aren’t. They have pacing issues and have this mysteriousness. It mysterious because it can be hard to follow, lacking substance or random stuff will be happening that doesn’t always get explained. 

Where did the money go? The first game was around half the cost. The game doesn’t look like it cost more than the first. You could’ve kept cost down by keeping the gameplay and facility you had in 1. You could make what escaped has torn through the facility, changed how it looks, and had new areas with some outdoor sections. Then just upgraded the parts of the first that needed to be. Now the new game is lacking it what made the first unique.

For us this is another game that changed itself to appeal. Red Faction 2, Fear 2, Deus Ex IW, Watch Dogs: Legion, and  Condemned 2 are games where the first one was unique, good, or a good starting place, then the next changed to appeal to a wider audience. Why is it when this came out people were saying how good it was, and no one is talking about it a week or so later.

There’s certain developers who get higher scores no matter what they make. We feel that high scores aren’t the biggest issue. It’s  reviewers not being consistent on what takes and adds to a game. Some games we feel are both 6/10s for the same reasons, will have varying scores. If you gave one a 6 and the other a 7 we understand reviews will vary between people. But one game will have a 6, and the other will have an 8 or 9. The 8 or 9 game will get awards and that’s where we see bias.