Poll: Dynasty Warriors: Is it really that bad?

[WhyTravisFelt]

I know I'll never really be a 'snob' at anything. I always preferred Miller High Life over Heineken, I prefer Seagram's to Bombay, I prefer 7-11 coffee to Starbucks, I don't think I've ever liked an Academy Award Best Picture winning movie, heck, I even prefer tap water to bottled. When it comes to videogames, I guess I follow the same pattern. For instance, I'll take NFL Blitz over Madden anyday.

It just seems to me that nothing IGN ever says is good ever really is, and everything they say is mediocre is where my fancies generally lie. IGN has made me go out and blow my dough on titles that severely fall short on fun (I'm sorry for you Halo fans, but **blecch**, whatever happened to GoldenEye?), and then when I happen to end up with a game that provides me fun for months, I find that they gave it terrible ratings: Vigilante 8 (and Second Offense), NFL Blitz, NHL Hitz, they even have the audacity to criticize the Fire Emblem series? What's wrong with Fire Emblem?

But the point I'm coming to is that I went on their site today and saw they gave DW6 for the PS2 a 3.5. Now, I thought ratings like those were reserved for games like Elephantz: Poop-Scooping for Kidz and the related ilk of nonsense: low-budget third party games for people who don't know what to buy their grandchildren for Christmas. Now, I have yet to experience DW6 on any console, and I won't pretend to vouch for it. But I know the shortcomings of the Dynasty Warriors games going back to DW4 (my first experience with them); I don't even need IGN to tell me. Let me guess, co-op slows the game down like a b****, you can't see twenty feet in front of you and people magically dis-and-reappear around you. Hey, guess what? I don't have a problem with that. I'd rather play a game with those problems, than play one of those 9.8 point games like Halo 2/3, that are boring and monotonous.

But it got me wondering, so I checked out the review for Dynasty Warriors 5 Empires, probably my favorite and most played of the series, to see it got a whopping five point nothing. Honestly? You have a huge cast of playable characters, not to mention you can create your own (albeit with somewhat limited options), you can build each one up as you see fit as you build up your nation and add people to your army, you get an array of tactics, you can be good or evil, and you have around ten different stories you can play, including the "randomized" play mode. All of that on top of the normal, run around and kill people gameplay. And when you're talking about putting it on the hardest difficulty with further options (lke limiting your officer count) to set the cpu against you, it's not like the game is devoid of challenge. What am I missing? Does this game really suck that bad? And, if so, how?

 

[Cousin_IT]

whatever happened to GoldenEye?

It was called Rogue Agent. It wasnt as good

 

[The Iron Ninja]

I like the word "adequate", and one option on the poll had it written twice, so I picked that one.

I haven't played the game, nor have I seen anyone play it (via any medium) so I'm not really entitled to judge it.

However I must offer my deepest thanks for not having the words "Why all the hate?" in the title.

Thankyou.

May others learn from your example.

 

[Amnestic]

They penalise it for not being innovative enough is my guess. I've always enjoyed the DW series because it's simple. It doesn't pretend to be a massively deep game, it's run in, slash enemies, musou for massive damage and then repeat. I play it as, for the most part, a mindless flurry of blades and slash-a-thon destruction.

The 'problem' (and I use that term loosely) as I can see it is that it hasn't really changed much from DW2->DW6. Graphics upgrades, more officers and other minor changes but no SHAZAM innovation changes. Because 'innovative' seems to be the pet word for game reviewers these days when they have nothing better to say about it and any game which isn't A) ridiculously overhyped or B) original gets low marks for it.

So no, is my answer. I don't think Dynasty Warriors games are that bad. Generally most of them rate at the very least a 7+ in my eyes, though I despise actually branding games with numbers.

 

[Siuss]

Yes, yes it is as bad as everyone says. Bash attack for win, or don't lets face it you win no matter what you do.

 

[Limasol]

I think the main gripe that people have with the Dynasty warriors series is that its the same game every time, often with little in the way of even graphics updates. Its game-play is technically superior to similar titles like say Samurai warriors, but it becomes a grind eventually and so playing it over 7 times isn't what most. people really want. The spin offs eg: Gundam, had the same hilarious voice acting an drab environments and gameplay remained practically the same. The lack of departure makes people fatigued and cynical. Theres a reason why Tony hawk 2 scored better than 3, they were both the same but one came out later.

As for boring and monotonous, that's an opinion, but i feel like grinding my way though hundreds of identical enemies with two button attack combos more repetitive than the varied campaigns of Halo and CoD. At least their levels aren't brown valleys surrounded by brown walls and fog with occasional gates.

As for your comment about Goldeneye, have you played Goldeneye recently? It's damn near unplayable in an age where people can decide when they want to look up or down without having to find a slope or old a button and give up being able to move. Halo stands out because its technical gameplay is spot on. Where as games like Perfect dark zero's game play and character control are not even close to spot on. (just an example, i know you didn't cite perfect dark 0)

 

[Raven28256]

Simple:

Dynasty Warriors is the same repetitive muck that they release every few months.

Koei is worse than most developers when it comes to milking a franchise until the utters are shriveled prunes. Where most companies might release a series on a yearly basis, Koei releases a new Dynasty Warriors (Or the reskined mod that is Samurai Warriors) every few months. The last time I liked the series was DW3 because it just got old. Koei makes minimal changes from game to game because they know the hardcore fanbase will pay for the same repackaged game over and over again. They release a $30 "expansion" that adds one new character and a few very, very minor tweaks about five months after the original. And when they DO add something new, it is usually boring or broken, and gone by the next game anyway.

The reason why reviewers give the series such shitty scores is because they are tired of it. Koei pumps them out at a rate of about four a year or so, and they have the bare minimal of new additions. Dynasty Warriors is the Madden of action games, except released more frequently, with few changes, if any. Hell, Koei doesn't even make an effort to fix the things that are genuinely broken, like the retarded AI, short draw distance, and lag in heavy combat.

 

[Varchld]

I think the main gripe that people have with the Dynasty warriors series is that its the same game every time, often with little in the way of even graphics updates. Its game-play is technically superior to similar titles like say Samurai warriors, but it becomes a grind eventually and so playing it over 7 times isn't what most. people really want. The spin offs eg: Gundam, had the same hilarious voice acting an drab environments and gameplay remained practically the same. The lack of departure makes people fatigued and cynical.

Pretty much agree there.
It's fun to carve your way through a battlefield and defeat the enemies heroes, but when the whole game is the same as the first level but with better versions of the same weapon and tougher enemies it starts to get monotonous.

If you've never playid Dynasty Warriors before, then grab the latest and give it a try, but I don't think i'll ever buy another one again.
There was another game called "kingdom Under Fire" that was similar imo but was a little more dynamic, and have a sequel coming out soonish that I think i'll check out.

 

[000Ronald]

I only played one of the games once (I think it was 5) and I liked it. Abet, I didn't get too much into it, but I liked it.

And Lu Bu is grossly overpowered. I had to run away in order to defeat him at all. Even with my first char, I didn't have to do that with anyone else (which isn't to say the game is easy; sure individual charachters are easy to kill, but you get surrounded by a hundred units, or five generals, you're dead...unless you're Lu Bu).

I think it has to do with their standards. Meaning they're all whores.

Apologies for having to read that review.

 

[Auron555]

Just looking at the page ads I've seen in magazines, I don't want to play a game that looks .ike it just got churned out of the factory with little to no creativity. I've never played it, so maybe it deserves that 3.5, maybe not.

 

[Gotham Soul]

The button mashing is quite cathartic, although dying is always frustrating.

 

[Altorin]

I know that I personally hate it.

but that's just me

it has a huge following, so it's probably not bad, I just can't stand it.

 

[Phoenix Arrow]

First off, I'm not a gaming snob. I suck at most games and I play for fun rather than experience. I don't find DW fun, I found it more fun than N3 but not fun all the same.
It's as simple as that for me.

 

[Raven28256]

First off, I'm not a gaming snob. I suck at most games and I play for fun rather than experience. I don't find DW fun, I found it more fun than N3 but not fun all the same.
It's as simple as that for me.

Ah N3...Don't you love it when people are so desperate that they start trying to rip-off low-budget titles with cult followings?

 

[DreamKing]

I was impressed with Dynasty Warriors 4, but that was the first one I played. The thing that I find annoying is that the difference between the different games in the series is minimal and not enough to warrant a purchase. Sure, there was a Gundam version, but a lack of a PS3 and the fact it looked a little clunky really made the game, in my opinion, undesireable

 

[Aura Guardian]

Really, Really, REALLY dumb AI

 

[TsunamiWombat]

I am a fan, but they really need to improve the series. The core gameplay is sensible enough, but the graphics are bleed enducing the way they're done and the AI is so dumb. The immersion factor is low, you don't feel like your fighting in a battle, your just running around triggering missions.

They need to

1. Fix the goddamn stories written in one day.
2. Give us better voice actors/a japanese audio option (like in SW1)
3. Bloodspray.
4. The ability to command troops on the fly, and make allied troops and enemy troops more useful.

Rebalance it a bit. For instance, you should be able to slaughter through dozens of enemy troops, but you SHOULD be able to get hurt if you get ganged up on, making it more important to stay close to your units.

The scythe through wheat gameplay IS fun, and it's great feeling like your on a massive battlefield. However,

 

[2bitHero]

A few friends and I discovered it lurking at the back of a large stack of games after beer and pizza one night and hauled it out. Needless to say our experience matched up with many here - great button mashing fun for an hour or so, but not very tempting replay value.

In a word, adequate.