Just Cause 3... How The Hell?!

[01189998819991197253]

How did this game get such stellar reviews from so many? I suppose I don't really need to ask $$$$$. Still, it's depressing when a game that loads like something from 1999, crashes at the drop of a hat, chugs high end PC's and drops to single-digit framerates on consoles gets high marks.

I don't really use reviews anymore, and haven't for years. I don't trust them, and I'd rather see bits of gameplay and hear from people I know share my taste in games. How about you? Does Just Cause 3 deserve high marks? Do scores in general mean anything anymore? Have we reached the point in games that we have with movies, in which the entirety of the associated media is bought and paid for?

 

[CritialGaming]

Just Cause is an odd duck. It has never really been much of a game, but rather a playground for explosions. It is a game designed in such a way that it becomes a huge playground of guns, grenades, planes, cars, and tons of shit that goes boom or makes things go boom. There is no story, well not really, I mean there is a story, but it has never been the point.

Just Cause is to violence what Minecraft is to blocks. I believe it is a game designed like Minecraft for people who want to blow shit up and destroy rather than build. So it is designed for you to jump in, shoot some stuff, and genuinely play around for a bit, then turn it off.

The question is, does that sound fun? Jump into a game, blow something up, and leave? If that is something you like, then yes Just Cause 3 is a good game. If not, then you probably wont have much fun with it.

Let's be honest, JC3 is full of very samey missions, and jack all else. It is merely an explosion playground. So if you expect holy jizz to rain on your face for playing the game....Then you are doing it wrong.

 

[happyninja42]

Just Cause is an odd duck. It has never really been much of a game, but rather a playground for explosions. It is a game designed in such a way that it becomes a huge playground of guns, grenades, planes, cars, and tons of shit that goes boom or makes things go boom. There is no story, well not really, I mean there is a story, but it has never been the point.

Just Cause is to violence what Minecraft is to blocks. I believe it is a game designed like Minecraft for people who want to blow shit up and destroy rather than build. So it is designed for you to jump in, shoot some stuff, and genuinely play around for a bit, then turn it off.

The question is, does that sound fun? Jump into a game, blow something up, and leave? If that is something you like, then yes Just Cause 3 is a good game. If not, then you probably wont have much fun with it.

Let's be honest, JC3 is full of very samey missions, and jack all else. It is merely an explosion playground. So if you expect holy jizz to rain on your face for playing the game....Then you are doing it wrong.

So it's basically the prettier version of the Goat Simulator phenomenon of gaming? Yeah I can see that.

 

[Something Amyss]

I haven't seen much in the way of reviews, but the coverage has pretty much been 100% LOLSPOSIONS! TETHERS! DICTATOR FACEPALMS! ROCKETS!!!!!!

Side note: I just checked Metacritic. When did a 75 average become the stuff of "stellar reviews?"

Back on topic: this is basically the kind of game a lot of people have claimed to want. I guess that could be why?

 

[Something Amyss]

So it's basically the prettier version of the Goat Simulator phenomenon of gaming? Yeah I can see that.

I'd say it's more the "logical extension of games like Saints Row and GTA."

 

[Adam Jensen_v1legacy]

I don't get it either. It looks way too much like Just Cause 2 only less unique. I expected JC3 to be much more, not more of the same. I'm starting to hate the games that are more of the same. I can still have the same kind of fun with Just Cause 2. More even because I love the desert area so much and there are no deserts in JC3 as far as I'm aware. Just boring Mediterranean island.

 

[happyninja42]

So it's basically the prettier version of the Goat Simulator phenomenon of gaming? Yeah I can see that.

I'd say it's more the "logical extension of games like Saints Row and GTA."

Those too, but it feels more, from the footage of it I've seen, to be more like Goat Simulator, in that it's specifically designed to embrace destruction+ the physics engine. SR and GTA always felt more like gangster simulators when I played them. Though there is that one mission in SR 3 & 4 where you intentionally get hit by traffic to try and get insurance money, and see how far you can ragdoll yourself.

 

[Daymo]

I haven't seen much in the way of reviews, but the coverage has pretty much been 100% LOLSPOSIONS! TETHERS! DICTATOR FACEPALMS! ROCKETS!!!!!!

Side note: I just checked Metacritic. When did a 75 average become the stuff of "stellar reviews?"

Back on topic: this is basically the kind of game a lot of people have claimed to want. I guess that could be why?

I've not looked at review scores in years but used to religiously. I started using them less probably since around the time of the first Kane and Lynch thing with gamespot and I was under the assumption as well that anything under a score of 80 was only seen as so-so by reviewers, 7.5 or so was for functional but derivative games or really good when it works, but doesn't work consistently games. I'm not sure if the wonky scoring scale has gotten better over time, but 75 seems spot on for a technically flawed but really fun game.

 

[Something Amyss]

Those too, but it feels more, from the footage of it I've seen, to be more like Goat Simulator, in that it's specifically designed to embrace destruction+ the physics engine. SR and GTA always felt more like gangster simulators when I played them. Though there is that one mission in SR 3 & 4 where you intentionally get hit by traffic to try and get insurance money, and see how far you can ragdoll yourself.

I mean, you're free to feel however you want, but Saints Row stopped being a "gangster simulator" in 2, and I'm hard-pressed to think of most GTA games as Gangster. And by the way, that activity existed starting in the first Saints Row. By Saints Row 2, Volition had figured out what players wanted, and marketed to that, pretty much saying "embrace the crazy." It had you spraying shit on people, posing as dirty cops, fighting Voodoo practitioners, and assisting porn stars. It marketed itself much like Just Cause 2 because the two are very similar in nature. Just Cause 3 seems to have parallels to SR 3 as well: here's a shinier, shallower experience and the new toys that are going to sell it to you.

Goat Simulator relies a lot on the LOLRANDOM elements of the game, but Just Cause has taken almost all the structure out of the typical sandbox and just said "hey, here's some toys."

I've not looked at review scores in years but used to religiously. I started using them less probably since around the time of the first Kane and Lynch thing with gamespot and I was under the assumption as well that anything under a score of 80 was only seen as so-so by reviewers, 7.5 or so was for functional but derivative games or really good when it works, but doesn't work consistently games. I'm not sure if the wonky scoring scale has gotten better over time, but 75 seems spot on for a technically flawed but really fun game.

I cannot speak to whether the reviews were merited or not, which is kind of why I didn't. However, the OP was baffled at "stellar reviews" for the game, and with it sitting at a Metascore of 74-75 depending on platform, I'm just puzzled how that works. More sites seem to place it in the 70-80, especially the sites that people are bound to either respect or complain about (Giant Bomb, IGN, Destructoid). This places the game towards "mixed" reviews, due to the exact same scoe inflation you're talking about.

Is it a good game? Dunno. Hell if I'm going to pay 60 dollars for it. Is it worth the scores it's getting? Also dunno, because I'm still not paying retail for it. But it doesn't seem like it's getting "stellar" reviews, at least not by a lot of people.

 

[CritialGaming]

I mean, you're free to feel however you want, but Saints Row stopped being a "gangster simulator" in 2, and I'm hard-pressed to think of most GTA games as Gangster. And by the way, that activity existed starting in the first Saints Row. By Saints Row 2, Volition had figured out what players wanted, and marketed to that, pretty much saying "embrace the crazy." It had you spraying shit on people, posing as dirty cops, fighting Voodoo practitioners, and assisting porn stars. It marketed itself much like Just Cause 2 because the two are very similar in nature. Just Cause 3 seems to have parallels to SR 3 as well: here's a shinier, shallower experience and the new toys that are going to sell it to you.

The problem I have with this statement, is I do not believe that Saints Row 3 was a shallower experience. Especially when you compare it to games like JC2 or 3. SR3 may have strayed from it's wackier GTA roots, but it is far from shallow in my opinion. As far as open world games go, SR3 was fantastic. The humor and just crazy (yet comprehendable) plot pushed you along to great missions that upped the scale while never seeming to go completely overboard. IT is a decent into madness absolutely, but it is done in such steps that you are never knocked out of the immersion.

It was the story that made that open world of weird side-missions and general dickbattery so much fun.

Which is something that can't be said about the Just Cause games. This is due to a couple of reasons in my mind. One, the plot is actually trying to be somewhat straight-edged, and secondly all the side objectives are the same thing, blow shit up to take over a place.

The game is called Just Cause. Simply a play ground for you to blow shit up in, why? Just 'Cause.

 

[Naraka]

Just Cause is an odd duck. It has never really been much of a game, but rather a playground for explosions. It is a game designed in such a way that it becomes a huge playground of guns, grenades, planes, cars, and tons of shit that goes boom or makes things go boom. There is no story, well not really, I mean there is a story, but it has never been the point.

Just Cause is to violence what Minecraft is to blocks. I believe it is a game designed like Minecraft for people who want to blow shit up and destroy rather than build. So it is designed for you to jump in, shoot some stuff, and genuinely play around for a bit, then turn it off.

The question is, does that sound fun? Jump into a game, blow something up, and leave? If that is something you like, then yes Just Cause 3 is a good game. If not, then you probably wont have much fun with it.

Let's be honest, JC3 is full of very samey missions, and jack all else. It is merely an explosion playground. So if you expect holy jizz to rain on your face for playing the game....Then you are doing it wrong.

So it's basically the prettier version of the Goat Simulator phenomenon of gaming? Yeah I can see that.

Goat Simulator is a smart comparison. Like GS all of the vids you see online are basically the same themes, often those rocket grenades in the case of JC3. It looks fun, but is that really much of a game? It's also in need of a patch, Arkham Knight levels of need.

 

[sXeth]

So it's basically the prettier version of the Goat Simulator phenomenon of gaming? Yeah I can see that.

I'd say it's more the "logical extension of games like Saints Row and GTA."

Those too, but it feels more, from the footage of it I've seen, to be more like Goat Simulator, in that it's specifically designed to embrace destruction+ the physics engine. SR and GTA always felt more like gangster simulators when I played them. Though there is that one mission in SR 3 & 4 where you intentionally get hit by traffic to try and get insurance money, and see how far you can ragdoll yourself.

Saints Row (til #4 randomly became superhero games) was basically a comedy played less realistic form of GTA once it found its footing. Just Cause basically is just Far Cry with the grounding elements pulled out and dialed to 11 with goofy physics/gadgets/explosions.

I haven't seen too many stellar reviews of it anyhow, but I'm guessing its that reviews tend to ignore tech issues like frequent crashing/load times if the game is open-world as a "inevitable consequence", and reviewers probably didn't get enough hours in to start getting fatigued with the generally repetitive mission types as the game goes on.

 

[Something Amyss]

The problem I have with this statement, is I do not believe that Saints Row 3 was a shallower experience.

You don't believe a shorter game with fewer options, activities, and locales is a shallower experience? That's fine, you can have a problem with it all you want. But you appear to be conflating ['thing I like] with [depth], and that's not accurate. Hell, your defense doesn't really go much to the substance of the game and your defense could be made f any Michael Bay movie.

The game is called Just Cause. Simply a play ground for you to blow shit up in, why? Just 'Cause.

I know this is the site Zero Punctuation's from and whatnot, but can we not pretend a joke from a webseries is actually true?

 

[CritialGaming]

The problem I have with this statement, is I do not believe that Saints Row 3 was a shallower experience.

You don't believe a shorter game with fewer options, activities, and locales is a shallower experience? That's fine, you can have a problem with it all you want. But you appear to be conflating ['thing I like] with [depth], and that's not accurate. Hell, your defense doesn't really go much to the substance of the game and your defense could be made f any Michael Bay movie.

The game is called Just Cause. Simply a play ground for you to blow shit up in, why? Just 'Cause.

I know this is the site Zero Punctuation's from and whatnot, but can we not pretend a joke from a webseries is actually true?

I apologize for using a sense of humor. We are talking about video games after all, not a really serious subject like AIDS treatments or the truth behind Santa Clause.

And yes I do believe that just because a game may be more condensed, that does not make it more shallow. Saint's Row 3 had a fairly long single player campaign, clocking in around 10-12 hours, a assload of side missions of a few different types and levels of challenge, and several collect-a-blow-up-doll-a-thons.

A shorter game with quality content, which I believe that SR3 had, does not make it more shallow over a game with more fluff. Now your opinions are you're own, and if you believe that SR3 was a puddle of a game than okay. I don't agree with you, but okay. And I merely was defending my position based on your statement.

 

[Artina89]

I personally have had quite a bit of fun with it, but then again, I didn't pay for it, I have gotten it as a Christmas present and I have only played about an hour of it to test that it works. As long as you don't go into it with massively high expectations, then you won't be too disappointed. I don't really pay attention to reviews any more, if it is something that I think I will enjoy, and it is relatively cheap (there is no way I am paying full price for a game at the prices they are nowadays) then I will just go out and get it.

 

[kasperbbs]

From what i have seen everyone says that it's fun at first and then gets repetitive as hell, also bugs.. Hardly a perfect score in my book.

 

[mad825]

Just Cause is an odd duck. It has never really been much of a game, but rather a playground for explosions. It is a game designed in such a way that it becomes a huge playground of guns, grenades, planes, cars, and tons of shit that goes boom or makes things go boom. There is no story, well not really, I mean there is a story, but it has never been the point.

And it doesn't even do the job well. Mercenaries; playground of destruction out classes what JC2 and JC3 were meant to be about in all aspects...without the magical grappling hook of course. JC1 was a really okay James Bond spoof.

While Mercenaries 1 didn't have a great plot it was however woven into the game play quite well.

 

[Zeraki]

I tried it through Steam family share and the load times killed it for me. Taking forever to sign into the servers followed by almost a minute of load screens just to be able to select something on the main menu is unacceptable.

 

[Something Amyss]

I apologize for using a sense of humor. We are talking about video games after all, not a really serious subject like AIDS treatments or the truth behind Santa Clause.

Your "sense of humour" looked exactly like a factual statement delivered without humour. Perhaps you were being sarcastic, but at that point, I'd point out Poe's Law and wish you a good day. Especially since you're defending your "joke," which indicates to me that you weren't actually joking but legitimately meant it.