Criticism and play often don't rhyme: you write Anthem, we read “it is a product Electronic Arts, go back devil! " or at least that's what I've seen happening on social media all over the world. Now, that's someone the product of BioWare may not be liked I believe it, but let's face it, the reviews from "zero" you find on Metacritic they really make the blood go up to the brain. Zero would not even take me if I started creating a video game without knowing how to do it: can I take a two, a three, but zero?
I do not want to convince anyone of my opinion, everyone makes his own assessments, you may also find opinions in this piece definitely wrong, but I want to write all this out of the teeth, criticizing not only the indifferent thoughts scattered on social networks, but also the criticisms that , although they will have their basis, sometimes they should be contextualized. All this to urge you to take my words, do not make them a stone of discord or gold, but insert them in the pocket of useful ideas to develop your reasoning - mechanics necessary to be able to criticize something - thus using the brain instead of adrenaline from keyboard.
Anthem's formula
It is right (apparently) that we explain what it is Anthem: the title is a TPS with RPG mechanics that requires a constant connection, as it is designed to play cooperatively with a team of two to four players. The protagonist will have to face different missions in the shoes of one of the four classes defined by the armor to which he will have access, called Javelins, which will allow him to reach the end of a predetermined story. Regardless of the main plot, the player will be able to explore an open world, discover different mysteries, face periodic dungeons, participate in limited events and so on. This is the basic formula to which Anthem adds its "secret sauce": a completely new control system, a flight that allows a mobility almost never seen in a video game and a vertical structure of the maps capable of giving further depth to the gameplay.
What are you buying?
Well, in light of the above, you should have a clear picture of the situation: you are faced with a title that basically offers a number of "standard" things and others less. What do we find of standards that we could find anywhere?
- An average story sector
- Several characters
- A large arms compartment
- Different missions (some also divided into daily, weekly and monthly)
- Three macro dungeons to face (the Roccaforti)
To all this there is a significant weight to be added, namely the will of the company expand the product through content that will be added in the coming months, not as fillers due to the lack of success of the game, but as real materials programmed well before the game's release and immediately part of the initial offer (simply, not usable immediately). In conclusion, what Anthem players are tasting is just an appetizer, while the main course will arrive in the next three months (see contents coming in March / April / May).
Okay, we want to evaluate how much there is so far? Well, how is it possible to have an average of 6 on Metacritic when titles like No Man Sky or Fallout 76 - games that on dayone actually had little content, if not even tending to zero - instead received a better treatment? Don't you think it's justified to have a bit of amazement at seeing such heavy criticism when we actually find ourselves a game certainly full of problems, but also with functional and fun game design solutions? Shouldn't being in front of the son of Mass Effect and Destiny bring joy to fans of both series? And don't bring out Andromeda again, please, that to err is human.
I have heard many complain about the history sector: well it is not the best story ever, God forbid, but have you really explored all of Fort Tarsis? Have you read all the books, talked to all the NPCs? Have you found out who is behind the Watcher, or what happened in Bastion's past? Objective data must be put on the table to discuss this part: if Dark Souls can tell a plot only with collectibles or Destiny can use a plot that is not at all original, but functional for its ideal of the game, why can't Anthem do the same? Unfortunately, it is increasingly established that too much criticism and attention to (microscopic) details leads to an increasingly feeble suspension of disbelief.
We want to talk about gameplay, or rather in this case gunplay: the proposed experience is more than valid, both for the variety of weapons, and for the feedback they release; each weapon is distinguished by shots fired, recoil, damage and details, something that leaves almost total freedom of action. If, on the other hand, you want to dwell on realism, I always remember that, although there is a sort of fantasy realism in some works, comparing an AK47 with a marksman rifle with 56 round magazine and passive abilities (do real weapons have passive abilities?) Is like complaining that the sounds of lasers are heard in Star Wars.
The game of tomorrow, today
Like it or not, the formula of tomorrow is this: multiplayer, online and with RPG elements, and you are already experiencing it today with Anthem, Fallout 76, The Division 2, Monster Hunter World, Remnant (release later this year). Certainly single players will continue to exist, and certainly the various more frendly user games such as FIFA, Dirt and so on will continue to come out, but a multiplayer component of this caliber - which 10 years ago was relegated to a handful of titles - now always becomes more preponderant and immersive, creating above all community and sociality, that thing that most of the general press defines absent in video games, "the evil of the new millennium".
The Sins of the Father ... they broke the boxes!
You killed Mass Effect Andromeda for facial expressions and animations (which were then corrected almost immediately after launch), you decided that Star Wars Battlefront II was to die because a title that proposed a single player sector of great depth, combined with a multiplayer disconnected from the main plot, was not good for its content unlocking system (also corrected suddenly). You're burying Anthem: at this point I have to assume that there is more behind it, that there are two options which are:
- Truly one of the largest companies in the world is not understanding anything and misses every shot for a field goal;
- There is a visceral hatred for EA to the point that nothing is apologized to it and is not even given the way and time to complete a work, whatever it is.
Are you really evaluating a title for what it offers or are you shooting reviews to join the popular chorus? Do the faults of titles like Mass Effect Andromeda really have to weigh as a father's sins on his son, to the point of creating an anti-Anthem fringe (forgive the pun)? The problems are there, as already repeated: long uploads, connection problems, bugs that affect more or less. But I don't think - indeed, I'm sure - that these can be real mines capable of making a title unplayable.
Review and understand
You will have read my draft review for Anthem: the choice to define it as a draft is precisely given by not wanting to judge an unfinished work, which was announced as such and which must be terminated and judged at least after the first month of scheduled content. I have a vivid memory of a title that "maybe" you will know: Tom Clancy's: Rainbow Six Siege, to date is one of the most played titles in the global competitive landscape, with millions of active players. An excellent game, well worked; but do you by any chance remember what happened at the launch? The title did not reach the sufficiency even for an idea, yet Ubisoft did "mea culpa", admitted he was wrong and listened to a clear voice of players who wanted to have a good product. Result: today, with everyone's help, the game is among the best in the world. But then, iInstead of screaming on the web that Anthem is crap, it wouldn't be better to suggest a clear vision of change? I trust EA because once again it is facing a crusade with a new product (certainly inspired by others, but largely original), it has once again had the courage to innovate, and for me these are characteristics that must be rewarded. If I had to cast a current vote on Anthem, I would say we are now over eight, but even this is a partial vote because the outgoing content could bury the game entirely, or make it shine in the firmament of looter shooters. If there is only one thing I would like to ask you, it is to approach things with the right perspective and the right vision: it is not necessarily mine, but if there is one thing I am sure of, it is not even the vision that defines Anthem as a poor product is.
