OXCGN:
"When a game such as Square Enix‘s MindJack slips quietly onto shelves with little or no fanfare (not to mention hardly any preview coverage in the press), it usually falls into one of two categories: sleeper hit that doesn’t attract huge review scores but gains a loyal following and modest sales, or unmitigated disaster destined for the bargain bins before the next quarter.
"Unfortunately, MindJack steers dangerously close to the latter."
Mindjack was released in 2011 to negative reviews.
To me, Duke Nukem was playability at least. Most movie games were more intolerable than that.
I remember being really excited for Alien Colonial Marines, until I checked the review scores.....
Replies(1)
Seriously, Mindjack came out of nowhere. Even the Wiki page is literally ten lines.
Yep, saw it at E3 2010 on the Square area, which was huge by-the-way, and everyone's like - 'what the heck is this?'
Square weren't pushing it all that much, nor was it displayed all that well.
In the images presented in the review, some were just downright terrible for a 'current-gen' game for 2011. One even had the trigger finger missing from the hand, yet was firing the gun, jaggies everywhere, and these where from High Rez images supplied by Square.
Terrible.
If Square put the money they put into this say behind Mirror's Edge 2 (which DICE have been secretly working on behind the scenes), which EA have dumped just recently, then a game of that caliber would do 10 times better.
It's terrible when games like this get shelf space, and titles as great as True Crime Hong Kong get the can . . .
Everyone is giving a 5/10 for this game because they're essentially followers. They see big sites do it and they do it too.
The game is at least a 7/10 and it feels like the shooter equivalent of Demon's Souls. It's a fun game once you really get into it.
Well OXCGN certainly doesn't 'follow' other sites review scores . . .in fact, we're often at odds with many, but given the reviewer had never heard, seen or played the game before, then the review is based on his personal experience, not what others may have said or experienced.
Remember, reviews are not an exact science, they are a personal experience of who a person experiences the game. movie, show, book etc . . .
You may well like the game, many others might also like it, but it doesn't take away from the fact it does have some major flaws - even viewing the screens you can see that.
It seems like another case of great potential concept with a crap execution