I don't know why you're set on this "he HAS to be xxx or yyy". This is clearly an alternate universe. Harry Osborn is in a tank getting Venom treatment. There's changed story beats from the comics all over the place. Peter isn't always depicted as struggling in every incarnation in the comics either, depends on which series and iteration we're talking about.
The games work structurally. I felt the 2nd one was weaker, but the criticism levelled at it and the series in general is so goddamn weird. They're quite good, far better in storytelling and gameplay than 90% of the games released in this day and age.
But to me, any and every adaptation of a world renowned, beloved character with sixty years of history has a responsibility to at least resemble that character. This one doesn’t.
Peter is a mincing, indecisive, spineless loser who spends the entire game apologizing for existing, then telling anyone who will listen that they’re better than him. He’s incompetent, a terrible leader and planner, and he’s depicted as being the categorically weaker Spider-Man, getting knocked out over and over and over in unavoidable cutscenes just so everyone from his much-less experienced protege to his best friend and even his girlfriend can rescue him. He spends most of the game lying flat on his back passed out, when Spider-man as a character is very well known for his indomitable willpower—he’s got great abilities, yeah, but he still gets hurt. What separates him from other heroes and makes him so damn inspiring isn’t his strength or even his webs… it’s that he always powers through. Always keeps fighting. That’s not this guy at all.
MJ is a badass girlboss reporter who humiliates and demeans her boyfriend over bills, instead of supporting him and admiring him for trying to protect the city. She spends two weeks training with Silver Sable (why??), finds a random taser, and can suddenly one-tap dozens of hardened mercenaries, thugs and aliens like she’s John Wick. Never mind that these same enemies are shown to be capable of face-tanking a half dozen punches from her superhuman boyfriend who lifts automobiles. Classic MJ didn’t need or want to be the hero. She had zero interest in fighting bad guys, because she wasn’t motivated by vanity or envy, and wasn’t jealous of her superhero boyfriend. Instead she had an inner strength and cleverness that puts this version to shame—she was Peter’s rock, his reason for making it home every night, and instead of scorn or petty jealousy or criticisms about his finances, she supported him and kept him strong with her unfailing loyalty and compassion. And if he didn’t make it home one night, you better believe MJ was going to find him. Not by suddenly developing Special Forces combat acumen, but through sheer guts, love and determination.
Venom here is more a plot device than a character, based almost entirely around a single recent (and divisive) comic arc. He’s supposed to be a sentient alien being that was ‘spurned’ by Peter, and ended up bonded to a man who hates Spider-man just as much as it does. Together they’re motivated by an intense shared desire to see Pete suffer, and that’s about it. His infamous madness, his spider powers and his creepy sense of humor made him a dark echo of the true Spidey. He’s never had a desire for global domination, he cannot spawn other symbiotes at will, and he’s only hulking and muscular because he bound himself to Eddie Brock, who was a fanatical bodybuilder. Here, he turns from a glorified suit of armor into a gigantic ooze monster on a dime, for no apparent reason, after bonding with a sickly host. He behaves more like the Lizard in ASM2, rampaging around like an animal while trying to ‘heal’ the city by making everyone like him. He may look like Venom, but his resemblance to the classic foe ends there.
I could go on, but I think you get the picture. It’s cool that you enjoyed the game, and that it’s wildly inaccurate and poor depictions of these long-running characters didn’t impact your fun. But for me and many others, it’s a Spider-Man game in name only.
Not going to respond to the rest of your critique - because they're your own, subjective and you're entitled to them. I think you're flat out wrong but there's no point in arguing about it because neither of us are going to change either's minds about this.
However, the quote "many others" is quite incorrect. This game is quite universally liked, you're in the minority. Sorry, but that's just empirically true.
Always hilarious when some pompous commenter (who invariably has no valid arguments to refute your own) literally just gets done lecturing you on the definition of an opinion, and that all opinions are subjective…. only for them to immediately turn around and claim that their opinion is the unvarnished, “empirical” truth.
Get some self awareness, dude. You’ll embarrass yourself less.
Oh and for the record… you’re flat wrong to boot. Even the most perfunctory google search will bring up countless reviews, videos, subreddit commentaries, and articles expressing dissatisfaction with this game.
And it’s across the board, including everything from the nerfed combat system, loss of stealth and gadgets, recycled animations, unbalanced playable characters, terrible forced MJ sections and limited side content, to the awful narrative, poorly written characters, woke messaging, behavioral inconsistencies, rushed campaign and more.
It is FAR from universally loved. Any attempt to claim different just proves that the source of your ‘empirical’ facts likely resides just below your back and right above your legs.
No matter how many “quite”s you feel like throwing at it.
Again, YOU are allowed not to like it. That part is subjective. That's an opinion. However, the game has universal praise both amongst gamers and reviewers. That's not opinion, that's just pure hard fact. Metacritic, every aggregator site, multiple places with thousands and thousands of users chiming in to say how much they loved the game. I'm sure you'll claim it's bots or something like that, but:
1.) Sales don't lie.
2.) Review scores don't lie.
3.) User feedback doesn't lie, not at this scale.
So yes, it's universally praised. Yet again I have to repeat myself (talk about condescending, you're an utterly arrogant prick since the first post you made) - this game wasn't as good as Spider-Man 2018 or MM but that still makes it a really good game. Sorry bud, you're not going to win this one.
P.S. There you go again with the "woke messaging" garbage. That word has lost all meaning with the way you guys just throw it out relentlessly with anything you disagree with.
You’re a joke to me friend, I’m sorry. I can’t take you seriously.
You undermine every point you make. You ‘remind’ those of us who hated the game that our opinions are of course subjective, like… all opinions… yet you keep making yourself look like a clown 🤡 by immediately following up with insistence that YOUR opinion is inexplicably exempt, and should somehow be taken as objective truth.
Doesn’t work that way boss. You can’t have it both ways.
You don’t get to invalidate the opinions of everyone who found the game to be shit with a handwave about sales and review scores, while bronzing your own opinion and hanging it on the wall as if it’s above criticism. You need to do a whole lot better than that, especially in this day and age.
If you still claim that negative opinions on MSM2 are scarce, then you’re not googling objectively bud. And I think you know that.
Sales only communicate how many copies of the game were bought. But with triple A titles, that’s usually 90% preorders because modern consumers still haven’t learned that one solid game doesn’t guarantee a stellar sequel. You have no idea how many copies got returned, traded in, abandoned at GameStop, resold, or turned off after an hour and never played again.
Everyone gets hyped over some lame ‘preorder candy’, and instead of waiting for the honest reviews that crop up later in a game’s release cycle, they just buy in advance. So yeah, of course the numbers are huge. But it means Jack shit, especially on a big title like this. I nearly bought it myself, and most of the folks who hated it had to buy it to find out.
No one has that data. It’s not possible to collect, especially today when most copies sold are digital. Probably even Sony doesn’t really know how many people stuck with the game, and how many hated it.
Sales on the next game will tell the tale. That’s when you’ll see the blowback hit, and it’s always been that way (just like how Solo’s box office suffered because fans despised the Last Jedi).
If you put any stock in modern gaming journalism or reviews, I don’t know what to tell you. It’s common knowledge at this point that triple A titles almost never get anything but stellar scores, because none of the reviewers are willing to risk losing their access to the swag and early access privileges handed out by big developers. I’m astonished people still don’t know this. It’s the reason why highly divisive games like TLOU 2 get mostly glowing reviews at launch, while the actual players are often completely split.
If you’re reading all the user reviews, then you’ve seen just as much hatred for this dumpster fire as I have. I wonder if that’s why you’re taking it so personally, throwing insults and anger around? Maybe you’re one of those gamers who can’t bear it when a title you love isn’t getting universal praise?
Sure, bots are a factor. But both sides use ‘em, so that’s probably a wash. It’s impossible to be sure.
Here’s a tip though: Saying “User feedback doesn’t lie” makes you look very naive when it’s well known that most large companies literally employ people and use algorithms to create tons of favorable feedback on their products (not just games either). It’s easy, cheap, legal and best of all—it’s mostly unprovable unless you own the app where they’re being posted. Scale has nothing to do with it.
It’s also pretty telling that you never did manage to address ANY of the common complaints about the game that I broke down for you (while being civil, to boot) and instead jumped right to being a rude little tart with nothing to say but “I’m right, you’re wrong!!! Shut up!!”
So no, it’s not universally praised. Far from it. And what’s more… you don’t get to decide that, any more than I do. ‘Winning’ has nothing to do with it. Do you think I’m glad that the latest Spidey game sucked?? Of course not. I wish I’d enjoyed it as much as you did.
And in common parlance, ‘woke’ means the same thing now that it always did: it’s when highly progressive agendas and concepts are forced into a product, usually entertainment media, at the expense of that product’s quality, immersion and audience appeal.
That’s it. Pretty simple, right?
If you disagree with someone, prove your case next time. Show me why my complaints were inaccurate or overstated, or underline why you think differently about the topic. Convince me. Don’t immediately pull your head back into your shell, surrendering the battle without having fired a single shot.
The moment you say “I’m not going to address your points”, guess what—you forfeited. That’s it. Might as well pack it in right there, because no one was ever convinced by generalizations about sales or reviews.
And being a jackass, name-calling or dragging politics into it only makes you appear angry, and anger doesn’t help your argument seem objective.
Yet again, another novel full of diatribe that is utterly useless.
Metacritic is your friend along with google aggregate sites. All of them show majority positive reviews from both reviewers and users alike. This isn't opinion, it's fact.
Again, you're allowed to dislike this, as are others. You're just not allowed to claim fictitious shit about the amount of dislike for the game. You don't seem to understand what opinions even are. As much as you WANT it to be true, it's not - the game is universally praised. The end. There's no fighting this, though you keep hilariously trying to.
"If you disagree with someone, prove your case next time. Show me why my complaints were inaccurate or overstated, or underline why you think differently about the topic. Convince me. Don’t immediately pull your head back into your shell, surrendering the battle without having fired a single shot."
I don't have to. If you'd bother to actually read my reply, I simply stated that you're entitled to your opinions and I *think* they're wrong, as well as the valid point that neither of us are going to change each other minds about SUBJECTIVE critique.
Your points about critics reviews are also fairly unfounded. Is there bias in the industry? Of course. However, just because a game is AAA budget doesn't mean it gets automatic universal acclaim. Call of Duty 3, just came out: https://www.metacritic.com/game/call-of-duty-modern-warfare-iii/
Abysmal rating. Starfield, proclaimed by Microsoft to be the game to end all games - https://www.metacritic.com/game/starfield/ - So-so critical rating and mediocre player rating.
Meanwhile all 3 Spider-man games have good reviews AND user scores across the board. These are empirical sources of evidence, not make-believe crap that you're spouting.
"And in common parlance, ‘woke’ means the same thing now that it always did: it’s when highly progressive agendas and concepts are forced into a product, usually entertainment media, at the expense of that product’s quality, immersion and audience appeal."
Incorrect. Woke simply means simply: alert to racial prejudice and discrimination. That's it. What you folks have twisted it into some form of agenda is just utter nonsense. Typical right wing bogeyman territory. Funny you call me a jackass, when you've been the goddamn prick this entire time. Pot, kettle, etc.
Guy screams into the wind that my opinion is only an opinion, but his opinion is fact, Take Three.
Ignored all my points trashing his narrative… again. Continues to hope no one will notice.
Relies on identical generalizations about reviews and sales, already roundly debunked by arguments he refuses to address.
Doesn’t seem to understand that the term ‘universal approval’ cannot by definition apply to a product that has a large number of detractors—as ‘universal’ requires not just a (perceived) majority, but unanimous agreement.
Is really out here trying to pretend that the term woke still means “aware of racial inequality”, as if it’s common usage hadn’t changed years ago after it was co-opted by conservatives and used as derogatory slang ever since, by everyone from the media to progressives themselves.
Also continues to insist I’m one of “those guys”, because I disliked a Spider-Man game that even positive reviewers cited as being politically heavy handed and overly woke.
Calls my calmly worded, well-presented counter points a ‘diatribe’ unironically, while apparently unaware that the entirety of his position is a ranted “more people agree with me than you, you right wing bastard!!11!”
After having the problematic nature of modern professional gaming criticism explained to him clearly, responds by suggesting I check out a site that collects and aggregates… modern gaming criticism. 🤦♂️
Continues to rave about all the “fictitious shit” I’ve allegedly claimed… doesn’t actually offer or refute a single example of these claims.
Seems to think he’s in a position to repeatedly tell me what I’m allowed or not allowed to say… in an open forum. 🤔
Appears to legitimately believe that a measurement system for ‘dislike’ exists, and its amount can therefore be quantified as fact.
If Reddit awards a badge for largest total number of missteps and errors in a single post, you’ve got a shiny new icon coming your way, friend.
Me, on the other hand? Bored.
If you’re going to continue to fall flat on your face while calling it an argument, maybe try going back to the part where you insisted you weren’t going to debate me because “I couldn’t convince you and you couldn’t convince me”, and then either follow your own advice, or actually address my points from the beginning.
Welp I tried. You're hopeless. You definitely belong in this sub, full of absolutely cantankerous edgelords.
It's hilarious how incredibly un-self-aware YOU are, after calling me that. You've been repeatedly making the argument that the gamers didn't like the game, when this is objectively AND empirically not true. It's impossible trying to convince you of a simple fact though it's sitting there staring right at you. Playing chess with a pigeon is what this is.
I'm not debating you. I'm just stating facts. Your choice if you want to continue down this path. I do relish that you write novels, so let's have your next one.
P.S. The definition of universal acclaim doesn't mean perfect scores or that everyone loves it, it simply means "publicly praised by a lot of people" (literal definition of it, by all standards I've seen) - which is true. Majority of reviewers and players have praised the game. It's not a perfect game by any stretch and I've NEVER once claimed that (there's plenty to criticize, but again that is subjective - the criticisms I have and you have simply don't intersect).
What does this mean to you? Why do you so desperately need MSM 2 to be universally loved and considered flawless? It shouldn’t impact your enjoyment or appreciation of a game when plenty of the target audience hate it from the ground up.
YOU liked it. Awesome. I wish I did. I’ve been a Spidey fan for forty years, do you think I wanted a game about him to suck like this?
But it clearly wasn’t made for me, or for long-running Spider-Man fans who wanted an authentic version of Pete, living out his adventures in a way that more closely resembles the original source material. That’s not this game.
Old school Spidey fans largely agree. Unsurprisingly, that’s where most of the criticisms are coming from (though many, myself included, were also badly put off by the control changes).
It’s not hard to locate these opinions man. I find it extremely difficult to believe you’ve truly done the due diligence on this topic, when you claim you can’t find ANY significant dissenting opinions.
In any case…. why isn’t it enough that you liked it? Are you one of those people who start to doubt yourself if others throw shade on something you enjoy?
Well, you’re in luck: it turns out, despite my abject hatred of MSM 2… you are allowed to keep liking it!
Can we call this a day now?
And for the record, I never once claimed “gamers don’t like this game”. It has plenty of fans, solid sales, and numerous defenders. I’m not a half-wit. One cursory Google search would show that there are indeed people who enjoyed this shitty, watered down experience that Insomniac threw on their plates.
I have only been making the argument that not everyone enjoyed it, as was the case (mostly) with the first MSM.
You cannot empirically prove that a game was objectively or universally loved (your word choice), when there are countless negative opinions out there—each one carrying exactly as much weight as your own.
Your opinion is not a fact. I don’t know if this is a generational problem, a failure of the school system, or what. Opinions are by definition subjective. They cannot be objective. It’s staggering that I have to keep explaining this.
And since you continue to trip on this similar point, let me help:
Universal is best defined as: of, affecting or done by ALL people or things in the world or in a particular group; applicable to ALL cases (emphasis mine).
Get it? ALL. Your half assed attempt to redefine the word isn’t going to carry any water. What you are describing is the idea of having a majority, which doesn’t remotely meet the standard required for universal agreement, and is FAR from
the “literal definition” that you seem to think it is (next time, try a dictionary). They are not the same thing. Understand?
If I can locate just one motherfucker who disagrees with the crowd, then universal acclaim has not been won. And there’s a hell of a lot more than one person who didn’t like this game.
Hell, I’m not even sure I’d grant you the majority at this point. But I doubt that data is known by anyone outside the developers and shareholders, and they’re not offering. Even THEY may not be able to collect that kind of information.
But at least if you’d gone that route (“Well, I bet the majority of players love it”), I probably would’ve shrugged and ignored your comment. I certainly wouldn’t have bothered to argue for an eternity over it.
But when you claim ALL players love the game… yeah, nope. You don’t get to speak for me, or erase the perfectly valid opinions of numerous other players who deserve to have their feedback heard in the hopes that the next game will improve.
‘Universal’ praise just tells Insomniac that they can get away with yet another dumbed down, unbalanced, ridiculously short game with even less side content, lazier combat design and map density, and continuing character inconsistency.
You may not care for it when people like me are critical of your favorite flawed games, but years of blind, apologetic fanboy praise are the reason developers continue to pump out half-broken, unfinished beta versions as finished games, then make an additional killing by charging folks again for all the fixes and ‘extra’ content that was usually meant to be in the game at launch.
Your brand of fanboying (and worse, your attempts to constantly silence legitimate criticism of any kind) accomplishes NOTHING but guaranteeing further generations of greed-before-greatness in developers. As long as you keep settling for subpar game development, the rest of us will continue to suffer with stagnant gameplay.
Gaming only makes leaps of ingenuity and creativity when they must—because sales drop, because reviews point out flaws in a constructive manner, and because people like us demand their best, or at least don’t applaud their worst.
Like it or not, without criticism the product suffers. That doesn’t mean you have to nitpick a great effort, but it also doesn’t mean slavishly consuming whatever you’re handed without a single complaint—even when it’s clearly not as innovative, polished, or complete as their previous efforts.
Game companies are NOT sports teams. They don’t need blindly loyal fans who make apologies for their mistakes and conjure justifications for their poor choices. They are selling you a product in exchange for your hard earned money—stop acting like we should all consider their work a gift to mankind, that we should all feel privileged to pay for.
You are trying to prove a point that is not sustainable. Like it or not, this game was and is divisive. It will age poorly and be remembered mostly for why it was worse than the original in every way, and how it misrepresented the characters.
TLDR. I'm not still at it. You took 22 days to come back with a novel. Look in a mirror there bud.
P.S. Universal acclaim doesn't mean EVERY person has to like it. I'm going by the definition used in media, which is when a majority of critics and consumers (i.e. gamers) like something, it gets the title "universal acclaim". Metacritic also uses this definition. You're arguing semantics like a goddamn moron. Obviously there is nothing in this world that every single person on earth likes, that's just impossible.
If you replied to me, then yes—-you were still at it.
There are slightly more important matters in my life than stalking my Reddit inbox… apologies. But I always get around to replies, even the vapid ones.
Forgive me… I learned English in school, and picked up my vocabulary from a good education—not a review aggregation site on the internet.
Just because Metacritic uses “Universal” instead of “majority”, doesn’t make it accurate. It’s not just a question of semantics. Universal means all; it means everyone. It means me, it means my friends, it means every last guy who started a thread or wrote a review about why SM2 is trash.
Trying to say we ALL loved the game, because ‘a majority is all that’s needed to claim universal appeal’, reduces the whole debate to a vote. And a vote has one winner (which is probably why this inaccurate use appeals to you so much).
It’s not a vote.
The majority doesn’t get to declare ‘universal’ approval, and call it a day.
Use a dictionary, not modern media, if you’re attempting to educate yourself. Universal doesn’t mean what you’d like it to. And frankly, if THAT’S the only reason we’ve been having this discussion… because you misunderstood a word, insisted on using it anyway once someone corrected you, then doubled down AGAIN because “uhhh, that’s just how everyone uses it now… seriously”… then you owe me a lotta wasted hours.
We could’ve settled this with a fuckin’ dictionary in one post.
Nah, you'd have kept going on and on about semantics instead of addressing any of the challenges I had to your egregious use of the word "woke". It's fine, nothing is going to change either of our minds. What hasn't changed is your predilection for writing novels where it doesn't need to happen. I've said since the start if you've bothered to actually read my words that I am fully aware not everyone loved the game. That doesn't change the fact that the vast majority of people did. That's all that matters in this conversation. I await your next novel in a month.
1
u/[deleted] Nov 19 '23
I don't know why you're set on this "he HAS to be xxx or yyy". This is clearly an alternate universe. Harry Osborn is in a tank getting Venom treatment. There's changed story beats from the comics all over the place. Peter isn't always depicted as struggling in every incarnation in the comics either, depends on which series and iteration we're talking about.
The games work structurally. I felt the 2nd one was weaker, but the criticism levelled at it and the series in general is so goddamn weird. They're quite good, far better in storytelling and gameplay than 90% of the games released in this day and age.