Board 8 > Stranger of Paradise: Final Fantasy Origin Review Zone

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/5/5/3/AAB6RfAADBfp.png

Just kidding

https://opencritic.com/game/12854/stranger-of-paradise-final-fantasy-origin/reviews

Currently averaging a 76 through 28 reviews so far which is more in line with what I was expecting. The gameplay is solid albiet maybe has too many systems to it. If you've played the Nioh games you should know what to expect here. It really comes down to to how much you can take of the story and the its characters. Of course that's the main reason I'm here is to see Jack Garland be an edgelord to everyone so see you all day 1.

RPG Fan - 8.7/10
Despite all the memes and jokes, Stranger of Paradise Final Fantasy Origin is a surprisingly earnest tale tied to an astounding combat system that is impossible to put down. Not only that, but it somehow manages to remain reverent to the original Final Fantasy and the series as a whole. I think anyone who enjoys both action RPGs and Final Fantasy will enjoy this game, too.

Destructoid - 8.5/10
It's a Team Ninja action game first, and an oddball isekai story second. It's also one of the weirdest games I've reviewed in a while because it speaks to me in a lot of ways, but it wears its flaws on its sleeve.

Noisy Pixel - 8.5/10
Stranger of Paradise Final Fantasy Origin is an undeniably stellar action game boasting addictive mechanics that will cater to a myriad of crowds. Even when accounting for a few minor critiques, the combat is some of the best the franchise has to offer. Further, its clever writing choices and conclusion will undoubtedly be lasting and impressionable for those engaged by the narrative.

RPG Site - 8/10
Stranger of Paradise Final Fantasy Origin is undoubtedly a fun chaotic romp that will delight number crunchers and action RPG aficionados. Even though I found the characters and some of the story lacking, I still had a really good time testing out new jobs, exploring the various levels, seeing all the easter eggs, and devising strategies to tackle the level bosses. Im looking forward to grinding gear with friends and finding out what the future holds with this new spinoff series of Final Fantasy.

Game Informer - 7/10
Stranger of Paradise is the strangest Final Fantasy game yet, bounding wildly between awful and fantastic. If you can tolerate Jack (and thats a big ask), the excellently crafted combat is worth a look. You may be coming to this game for the story and Final Fantasy experience, but its all about combat and little else.

NME - 2/10
Stranger of Paradise is mostly just a mess. When the gameplay works, it works surprisingly well, but that wasnt often enough to make it fun for its entire runtime. Its hard to make a judgement on the story, mostly because there isnt much of a narrative, but its even more disappointing because I wanted to spend more time with the characters, because theyre far from unlikeable. A grand ode to Final Fantasy it is not, and it fails to appeal to the JRPG lover in me on most counts.

There is a CHAOS difficulty setting 10/10

For real idk if I'll buy this as I'm really bad at these kinds of action games, but I'm glad it's not a disaster.

ninkendo posted...

NME - 2/10

wtf tho

Stranger of Paradise: Final Fantasy Origin thinks that it's Daniel Craig's James Bond but it's actually Austin Powers. There's barely a moment in the game that isn't stretching credulity, be it the absurd writing, bewildering story, or inane characters. There's a host of technical issues, too. But somehow, despite everything, it manages to fail upwards and be a pretty good time. Maybe we've lost the plot but we liked it.

Yeah ok, Ill play it when it hits ps+ in a year

I have no idea what NME is, but the review appears to have been removed from Opencritic so I guess it must not have met their standards lol.

NGL I was kind of hoping the plot was big hot mess of nonsense. This makes me want it more.

NME is a major music magazine from Britain - not exactly known for video game reviews, I think

far from unlikeable

I feel like I'm reading a music review on Facebook

ninkendo posted...

NME - 2/10
Stranger of Paradise is mostly just a mess. When the gameplay works, it works surprisingly well, but that wasnt often enough to make it fun for its entire runtime. Its hard to make a judgement on the story, mostly because there isnt much of a narrative, but its even more disappointing because I wanted to spend more time with the characters, because theyre far from unlikeable. A grand ode to Final Fantasy it is not, and it fails to appeal to the JRPG lover in me on most counts

I'm getting the game for sure because Nioh but Jesus Christ what the fuck is this review?

Should that review even be counted on open and meta?

Yea NME is a music publication primarily, and it's weird that a "gameplay is generally good and the characters aren't bad" would equate a 2/10 to them. Just baffling all around.

It reads like a review auto generated by an AI.

Axl_Rose_85 posted...

Should that review even be counted on open and meta?

Apparently it's not counted on Open anymore! It's not on the list. Meta will take anything though they basically have no standards.

Chaos!

I dont really know why Opencritic would remove it, its a valid opinion from a notable source. And I think the key point is When the gameplay works which is itself pretty damning. Its also 1/5 not a 2/10.

Honestly I think a lot of reviews are in general too kind to AAA games because they function. If its a 1/5 experience, its a 1/5 experience.

Bit weird to say this given the franchise it's a part of.
But looks like this has all the makings of a cult classic

Lightning Strikes posted...

Its also 1/5 not a 2/10.

....

Lightning Strikes posted...

I dont really know why Opencritic would remove it, its a valid opinion from a notable source.

I believe it wasn't ever on OC in the first place, SHINE just included it to include an opinion on the low end.

yeah I stole it from metacritic just to have a spectrum of reviews in the opening post

Lightning Strikes posted...

Its also 1/5 not a 2/10

American Mathematics strikes again!!

Music websites are more willing to use the whole spectrum of scores, but the description still doesnt really match the score

good gameplay, great characters, dunno about the story (*edit* review itself adds a bit more about not enjoying the levels)

1/5 worst game lmao

like I'm all for using the full scale but this doesn't read like that

Reading the review itself I'm even more confused at mentions of being overcome with joy from campiness (ie. a sucker-punch)... that's not a descriptor I would ever use on a 1/5 but it's brought up a few times. By the end it sounds like there was a lot there to enjoy but overall the experience felt lacklustre, which yeah I can relate too as mid but not awful.

1/5 on a five point scale is obviously different to a 2/10 on a 10 point scale. They are different qualitative assessments, you cant just do a direct mathematical conversion. Its the whole reason Metacritic does weighting.

_PandaMaster_ posted...

American Mathematics strikes again!!

If this is meant as a dig Im not American and Im not talking mathematically.

1/5 on a five point scale can mean the equivalent of anywhere from a 1/10 to a 3/10, so Metacritic going hmmm, seems like a 2/10 to me has always been flawed.

To put it a different way, it is impossible on aggregates like Opencritic for a 1/5 review to be the lowest possible score, despite the fact that the review could say this is the worst game ever and were giving it our lowest possible score it wouldnt be possible for it to be considered the lowest. That is absurd, of course scoring on a five point scale is different to scoring on a ten point scale or a hundred point scale.

sounds like

CHAOS

someone who works at NME has a clarification

Hey! I run the gaming section at NME - without singling out our reviewer, he said that it was one of the worst games he's played in ages, and after some discussion on the score we settled on 1/5. I've not played it, but I stand by it.

Our thinking with scores is that a 2.5 would be an average score. We don't do half stars, because it's kind of fence-sitting to say a game is 5/10 IMO, and as Oisin didn't enjoy the game and thought that a couple of solid jokes and amusing enough gameplay weren't enough to make it worthwhile. It's one of the lowest scores we've given out in the year or so I've been with NME, but not every critics tastes will be the same.

By 1/5 they literally do mean "one of the worst games he's played in ages" so that's that. Which again to me just baffling because the review just does not read that way at all and has me questioning their experience.

I ain't got any skin in this game, if I ever do play SoP it likely wouldn't be for a long time and I currently see it as a big meme that very well could be trash or it could be enjoyable, from what's written in the actual review though it sounds a lot like my view of World of Final Fantasy, a game that has its charms but is frankly a of a slog to playthrough (but again being fair, the reviewers says he uses easy mode because bosses are unfair and poorly telegraphed... which sounds like that would be a factor in gameplay being a slog in his review).

Lightning Strikes posted...

1/5 on a five point scale is obviously different to a 2/10 on a 10 point scale. They are different qualitative assessments, you cant just do a direct mathematical conversion. Its the whole reason Metacritic does weighting.

If this is meant as a dig Im not American and Im not talking mathematically.

1/5 on a five point scale can mean the equivalent of anywhere from a 1/10 to a 3/10, so Metacritic going hmmm, seems like a 2/10 to me has always been flawed.

Metacritic uses a 100 point scale - do you also have a problem with them turning a 2/10 into a 20/100, even though it could also be anywhere between a 15/100 and a 24/100?

video game reviews have this weird thing where anything 5/10 or below is considered a dumpster fire

a 2/5 for a movie is used the same way a 6.5/10 is used for a game

I'd wager that has to do with the respective investment required by the consumer. A 2/5 film might only take 90 minutes of your life and the average price of a cinema ticket/rental fee/blu ray etc.

A game with an equivalent rating might cost in the region of 3-5 times that, and take 10 times as long, or more, to complete.

If it's one of the worst games you've ever played, why would you not actually say that in your review, or even reflect that in the actual text?

I feel like video game review scores are written in the mindset of school grades - anything below a 6/10 is a failing grade, so who cares whether that failing grade is a 0 or a 5? So most just settle on the higher end, I think because we all know there are thousands of shovelware games that would populate those bottom ranks if we actually played everything. I think this is a silent assumption most video game reviewers acknowledge but a music publication might not.

Additionally, my 'worst game I have played in ages' would still be a solid 6/10 - it's a statement entirely based on the other games you have played.

So, I think most video game reviewers are viewing it as a scale of all video games, including the bad games they would never actually bother reviewing. Meanwhile, I imagine NME is only considering games of a certain level of competence in their scale.

banananor posted...

video game reviews have this weird thing where anything 5/10 or below is considered a dumpster fire

5 point scale but scored out of 100 to avoid offending the advertisers

The real conversion for a 1/5 is probably like a 6.2/10 lmao

CasanovaZelos posted...

I feel like video game review scores are written in the mindset of school grades - anything below a 6/10 is a failing grade, so who cares whether that failing grade is a 0 or a 5? So most just settle on the higher end, I think because we all know there are thousands of shovelware games that would populate those bottom ranks if we actually played everything. I think this is a silent assumption most video game reviewers acknowledge but a music publication might not.

Additionally, my 'worst game I have played in ages' would still be a solid 6/10 - it's a statement entirely based on the other games you have played.

So, I think most video game reviewers are viewing it as a scale of all video games, including the bad games they would never actually bother reviewing. Meanwhile, I imagine NME is only considering games of a certain level of competence in their scale.

This pretty much covers my thoughts on it.
I think it's fair to critique reviews when what they say about the game and the actual score don't line up. And this NME one definitely seems to fit that.

Spoilers

https://twitter.com/enigma0451/status/1503513501314293762

Alright buying this game.

UshiromiyaEva posted...

Spoilers

https://twitter.com/enigma0451/status/1503513501314293762

Alright buying this game.

Did you also enjoy DmC?

DmC is great yes

Mac Arrowny posted...

Did you also enjoy DmC?

Yep!

2nd best DMC game after the updates.

I cant wait until FFV gets a similar treatment featuring Tony Exdeath.

they're probably already working on Jason Sephiroth

Kuja Jones

Billy Beoulve

Just to be clear, DmC is terrible and I hope SoP is nothing like it

Franz Kefka

Chaos

Cloud of Franklin Delano Darkness

https://www.polygon.com/22973082/stranger-of-paradise-final-fantasy-origin-early-review-ps5-xbox-series-x-pc

I checked out the demo and man this game is something... Lmao

CHAOS has shipped