The Worst Dynasty Warriors Game Ever Made

[cckerberos]

It'll be a long while before I get to this (have a number of Warriors plats to get to first), but it'll have to be pretty bad to top the pile of mediocrity that was DW6.

[turniplord]

2 hours ago, milanbarca82 said:

Agreed.

Some of his "questionable" scores for games:
No Man's Sky 5/5 (He replied to each comment using an anime pic, so childish)
Doom (2016) 2.5/5
Horizon Zero Dawn 3.5/5
Lost Sphear 5/5
Almost every Warriors style game gets either 4.5 or 5/5
Almost every Neptunia game gets either 4.5 or 5/5 (I don't think Neptunia games are bad but, come on!)
It seems he's pretty biased in favor of Japanese games.

And, yeah, I understand everyone has his/her own opinion regarding games but resorting to hijacking, altering, then deleting comments that dare to challenge your opinion is borderline ridiculous.

I would say the same thing I say about my reviews - Don't go off the 'score' as that's always going to be subjective based on the reviewer's opinions - but read the text to see what their actual thoughts and explanations are. I write reviews for SquareXO and I gave it a 9/10 (most of my reviews are quite high but that's because we are a small site and the vast majority of titles I review, I have manually requested from the developers directly - so I guess you could say cherry picking, I'd just rather play games I like the look of).

In my review, I bring up the framerate issues, texture pop-ins, the fact you can gimp it by upgrading a weapon then giving it to the next level 1 character, the hookshot allowing you to bypass all strategy, the horse physics etc... But, after playing for around 30 hours and deciding to just take my time exploring, bumping up the difficulty, not giving my best weapon to the next person I play as and taking on more side missions to gain advantages on the final part of the chapter - I started to have a lot more fun. I'm on about 168 hours gameplay now and I just have one trophy left for the plat.

It's all about what you expect from the game and how you want to play it - I believe they have looked at Breath of the wild and Assassins creed and taken elements from both - you have the watchtowers and the horse auto-drive from AC and the fact you can b-line to the end, just like in Zelda. But, you don't have to do that if you wish to mess about and have fun looking around the world. 


The main complaint I see is people saying the game has gone from small missions with objectives and goals and gone to a bigger map with nothing to do - which is fair enough. But if you look at it - each chapter is 3-5 main missions, each with their own optional side missions which gives you an advantage with the addition of going random experience and material missions to get better equipment in the town - it's basically the same but on a bigger scale. Although, I do wish certain missions were more structured and the towns were more unique. I also want them to get rid of the hookshot or restrict it to level 50 or a purchased item (maybe in the empires version?).


Anyway, enough of me waffling on - is it the worse game ever - no. Should you look at a guys review 'score' and instantly judge them - no. Does Jim exaggerate a lot just for views and because he likes to gain attention - yup - he has slagged off pretty much every DW and their spin-offs for the last few years.

What you need to do with reviews in games like this is read what is being said and make up your own mind - I have a Pro and the frame drops weren't as bad as the Wii U or last Gen - so I was fine with that, I prefer a much higher rate but it didn't ruin the game or drop to an unplayable level - and the graphics didn't bother me as I played on 'movie mode' and they looked pretty decent. So my 'score' is going to be higher than someone else's because these things didn't bother me, yet another site might think graphics make a game and instantly take half the points off for not being in 2160p.

Edited February 14, 2018 by turniplord
dupe

[Xionx]

Looks like patch 1.03 adresses the framerate drops and adds action mode (less graphics but higher framerate) for base ps4.

 

Hey i have an other problem , When i play Xin Xianying i always hear some strange clinking noise , like a chain . Its very very annoying and i dont know if this is normal or sound bug.

Can someone tell me if this is normal? it drives me crazy and i want to mute the game playing her.

[You]

I think graphics are the least of this game's problems.

 

> Like it's trying to check all the marks of AAA games to grab everyone it can.

> Nothing wrong with being your own deal, not everything's gotta be open world

> (and this is coming from someone who absolutely loves open world games)

 

You know what this reminds me of? Resident Evil 6, that game did the same, trying check all the marks of AAA games. And do you know what I find depressing about that? Resident Evil 6 sold more than Resident Evil 5 and 4.

 

Worst of all, it can't have been a fluke because look at the PS4 rereleases of both games on this site.

 

https://psnprofiles.com/trophies/4850-resident-evil-5

https://psnprofiles.com/trophies/4389-resident-evil-6

 

If even the PS4 version of Resident Evil 6 sells more copies than Resident Evil 5, that really does mean people love RE6 more than RE5. Sure it's a close race, but considering most people prefer RE5 over RE6, the actual facts are different.

 

I dare say that Dynasty Warriors 9 might sell more than Dynasty Warriors 8. Time will tell, but I think just like survival horror and other game genres before it, we're seeing the end of a best selling franchise that has turned into something entirely new, just like what Resident Evil 4 did with survival horror

 

Resident Evil 4 was awesome though, unlike Dynasty Warriors 9.

[Hideoki_AU]

Dynasty Warriors 2 was one of the first games I had on PS2.  Loved it to death.  Hardly played one since.  Sorta interested in that mash-up one with the DOA characters in it.

[You]

> Sorta interested in that mash-up one with the DOA characters in it.

 

Make sure it's Warriors Orochi 2 you get, that also has DOA characters in it. Warriors Orochi has about 80 characters in it and on PS4 runs at a constant 60fps. Is a lot better than the "All Stars" one. That one does indeed have a few DOA characters in it but is 30fps, has very few characters and loads of weird cat and other characters that few people care about or have even heard of.

[You]

Sorry to post a second time...

 

However want to reply to turniplord

 

 

> I bring up the framerate issues, texture pop-ins

> the fact you can gimp it by upgrading a weapon then giving it to the next level 1 character,

> the hookshot allowing you to bypass all strategy,

> the horse physics

> I do wish certain missions were more structured and the towns were more unique

> I also want them to get rid of the hookshot

 

Dude you just brought up 6 VERY important flaws with the game off the top of your head, and yet you STILL gave the game 9/10.

Remind me never to visit your site.

 

If a game has framerate issues, gameplay problems by your own admission and you still give it a 9. If the horses physics get fixed in the next patch, does that mean Dynasty Warriors 9 will become a 10?!

 

Basically you'll give ANY game a good score. That's not me saying it, you just said it yourself:-

 

>  (most of my reviews are quite high but

> that's because we are a small site and the vast majority of titles I review

 

You're a small site, don't bite the hand that feeds you then I guess. Jim Sterling says he hated being a shill having to give good reviews to developers so they don't halt free review copies in the future. Well I guess you're the future of shilled biased reviews then. You've just agreed to the games problems but still gave it a high score for fear of being black listed I guess?

 

Like you say, it's best not to look at the score and read the review, I'm interested to know how buggy and or terrible a game has to be before you give a game on your site a bad review.

 

 

[Kapika96]

18 hours ago, It Is Time To Oil Up said:

I'll wait for a sale on this.

 

Never played Dynasty Warriors, so might as well try this one.

 

Also I am curious about this series because lol...

 

Don't wait, just get Dynasty Warriors 8XL Complete Edition instead. IMO that is the absolute best game in franchise, by far! A ridiculous amount of content in it and it's just a lot of fun.

 

As for the topic itself, it certainly looks like the worst one so far. Glad I never bought it. Oh well, when they screwed up 6 they made up for it with 7, so hopefully they'll do the same again and 10 will be awesome.

[You]

Agreed. DW8 XL has an insane amount of content because it also includes all the missions and whatnot from DW8 (albeit without trophies, better to plat that on PS3 first first and then transfer your save from PS3 to PS4) on top of that it's cross save with Vita. DW8 XL is also awesome on Vita.

Naturally no Vita version for DW9.

 

Samurai Warriors 4 is also absolutely fantastic and available on Vita and PS4 at 60fps, complete with offline coop, online coop etc

Edited February 15, 2018 by enaysoft

[cckerberos]

1 hour ago, enaysoft said:

Dude you just brought up 6 VERY important flaws with the game off the top of your head, and yet you STILL gave the game 9/10.

Remind me never to visit your site.

 

If he fairly discussed the game's flaws in the review, who cares what numerical score he gave it in the end? The important thing is, does a reader of the review come away with a good analysis of the game's merits and flaws? And that's independent of whatever subjective score he ultimately gave it.

[Hideoki_AU]

3 hours ago, enaysoft said:

> Sorta interested in that mash-up one with the DOA characters in it.

 

Make sure it's Warriors Orochi 2 you get, that also has DOA characters in it. Warriors Orochi has about 80 characters in it and on PS4 runs at a constant 60fps. Is a lot better than the "All Stars" one. That one does indeed have a few DOA characters in it but is 30fps, has very few characters and loads of weird cat and other characters that few people care about or have even heard of.

 

WO2 seems to be a PS3 game.  Is WO3 good?  It's pretty cheap, I might get that. 

[cckerberos]

13 minutes ago, Hideoki_AU said:

 

WO2 seems to be a PS3 game.  Is WO3 good?  It's pretty cheap, I might get that. 

 

He probably meant WO3 (perhaps because it's Japanese name is Musou Orochi 2). WO2 is a PS2 game without any DOA characters.

 

WO3 is fun even if it does suffer a little from having so many characters. If you don't care about the platinum, there's an expanded version for the PS4.

[turniplord]

3 hours ago, enaysoft said:

Sorry to post a second time...

 

However want to reply to turniplord

 

 

> I bring up the framerate issues, texture pop-ins

> the fact you can gimp it by upgrading a weapon then giving it to the next level 1 character,

> the hookshot allowing you to bypass all strategy,

> the horse physics

> I do wish certain missions were more structured and the towns were more unique

> I also want them to get rid of the hookshot

 

Dude you just brought up 6 VERY important flaws with the game off the top of your head, and yet you STILL gave the game 9/10.

Remind me never to visit your site.

 

If a game has framerate issues, gameplay problems by your own admission and you still give it a 9. If the horses physics get fixed in the next patch, does that mean Dynasty Warriors 9 will become a 10?!

 

Basically you'll give ANY game a good score. That's not me saying it, you just said it yourself:-

 

>  (most of my reviews are quite high but

> that's because we are a small site and the vast majority of titles I review

 

You're a small site, don't bite the hand that feeds you then I guess. Jim Sterling says he hated being a shill having to give good reviews to developers so they don't halt free review copies in the future. Well I guess you're the future of shilled biased reviews then. You've just agreed to the games problems but still gave it a high score for fear of being black listed I guess?

 

Like you say, it's best not to look at the score and read the review, I'm interested to know how buggy and or terrible a game has to be before you give a game on your site a bad review.

 

 

You're not the target audience for my reviews then which is clearly demonstrated b your lack of understanding what I wrong and just homed into a few points and instantly became triggered by them.

Like I said, yeah - the game has flaws but did they detract from my enjoyment of the game? No. Did they break the game? No. Did they force me to stop playing because I felt the game was too unfair or a pain to play? No. However, I mention all of the above throughout the review so that people like yourself, who seem to believe everything has to work perfect Day-One and a kind of niche Japanese game should make its first jump into an open-world perfect with a solid 60fps at 2160p with all the bells and whistles, can make your own mind up on what you like and what affects your purchase.

I'm not you, none of these reviewers is your conscious or your mother - they shouldn't be influencing your purchase. If you literally only buy games which other people find good then what are you? A hollow shell of a sheep with no thoughts or opinions of your own? The numerical score on any review is subjective and pointless to the people reading the review. If that's all that people look at then they are morons.However, if the review failed to mention any of the flaws and lied about the game and pretended it was the best thing in the world without bringing up any of the issues, even just to talk about them and explain why it's actually a good idea, then that's not on as that's blatantly lying about the product. 


I've not been reviewing games for long, but let's say I was to review The Breath of the Wild - for ME that would have got around a 7-7.5/10 because I found the game boring and pointless and a terrible 'Zelda' game. Does that make me wrong because I don't blindly follow everyone else? No - it means I have my own opinions. I gave a high rating to School Girl/Zombie Hunter - other sites didn't - why? Because I had about 40-50 hours of fun and really enjoyed myself. What about Tokyo Xanadu ex+ - some sites gave it a 5-6/10 and called it shallow and a terrible JRPG yet 195 hours later, I had completed 4 playthroughs and got the plat and gave it a perfect score because for the money I literally couldn't stop playing it.


Seriously though, Take any sites 'score' with a grain of salt as it all comes down to the reviewer's experience, how much time they had with the game, their knowledge, their tastes and if they got what they were expecting/hype. Read the text, make up your own mind. No doubt you won't read this and will just home in on certain points to pick at though - which just kinda proves my point.

Also, no. I will give a game a low score if I don't like it but like I said (which again, you probably didn't read), I choose which developers and games I ask to review so 9 out of 10 times I know the game is one I've been waiting for or a series that I already love. Developers and publishers don't blacklist you if you give a game a bad score - they would rather than an honest critique as they will take the feedback and work on making their game better. Which is why I email every dev/publisher my review once done along with any issues or suggestions I have which could be implimented to make the game a better experience - the bugs in the recent kalypso games - found and reported by me then fixed by the devs, the kill and play timer in DW9 - suggested by me then put into the game, the bugs and graphical errors in Outcast Second contact - reported by me then a skype call was set up with me and the lead devs as we worked for about three weeks together until all the issues had been resolved. 

So yeah, they don't care about the 'score' they care about the text. Something a lot of people need to also start doing.

[Konoe_Subaruu]

1 hour ago, turniplord said:

You're not the target audience for my reviews then which is clearly demonstrated b your lack of understanding what I wrong and just homed into a few points and instantly became triggered by them.

Like I said, yeah - the game has flaws but did they detract from my enjoyment of the game? No. Did they break the game? No. Did they force me to stop playing because I felt the game was too unfair or a pain to play? No. However, I mention all of the above throughout the review so that people like yourself, who seem to believe everything has to work perfect Day-One and a kind of niche Japanese game should make its first jump into an open-world perfect with a solid 60fps at 2160p with all the bells and whistles, can make your own mind up on what you like and what affects your purchase.

I'm not you, none of these reviewers is your conscious or your mother - they shouldn't be influencing your purchase. If you literally only buy games which other people find good then what are you? A hollow shell of a sheep with no thoughts or opinions of your own? The numerical score on any review is subjective and pointless to the people reading the review. If that's all that people look at then they are morons.However, if the review failed to mention any of the flaws and lied about the game and pretended it was the best thing in the world without bringing up any of the issues, even just to talk about them and explain why it's actually a good idea, then that's not on as that's blatantly lying about the product. 


I've not been reviewing games for long, but let's say I was to review The Breath of the Wild - for ME that would have got around a 7-7.5/10 because I found the game boring and pointless and a terrible 'Zelda' game. Does that make me wrong because I don't blindly follow everyone else? No - it means I have my own opinions. I gave a high rating to School Girl/Zombie Hunter - other sites didn't - why? Because I had about 40-50 hours of fun and really enjoyed myself. What about Tokyo Xanadu ex+ - some sites gave it a 5-6/10 and called it shallow and a terrible JRPG yet 195 hours later, I had completed 4 playthroughs and got the plat and gave it a perfect score because for the money I literally couldn't stop playing it.


Seriously though, Take any sites 'score' with a grain of salt as it all comes down to the reviewer's experience, how much time they had with the game, their knowledge, their tastes and if they got what they were expecting/hype. Read the text, make up your own mind. No doubt you won't read this and will just home in on certain points to pick at though - which just kinda proves my point.

Also, no. I will give a game a low score if I don't like it but like I said (which again, you probably didn't read), I choose which developers and games I ask to review so 9 out of 10 times I know the game is one I've been waiting for or a series that I already love. Developers and publishers don't blacklist you if you give a game a bad score - they would rather than an honest critique as they will take the feedback and work on making their game better. Which is why I email every dev/publisher my review once done along with any issues or suggestions I have which could be implimented to make the game a better experience - the bugs in the recent kalypso games - found and reported by me then fixed by the devs, the kill and play timer in DW9 - suggested by me then put into the game, the bugs and graphical errors in Outcast Second contact - reported by me then a skype call was set up with me and the lead devs as we worked for about three weeks together until all the issues had been resolved. 

So yeah, they don't care about the 'score' they care about the text. Something a lot of people need to also start doing.

Guys chill your both entitled to your opinions no need to turn this into a flame war some people are going to like the game even though it has flaws some are going to hate it so please let’s be civil 

[turniplord]

4 minutes ago, spykeralbersfan1 said:

Guys chill your both entitled to your opinions no need to turn this into a flame war some people are going to like the game even though it has flaws some are going to hate it so please let’s be civil 

It's fine - I was just giving him feedback on the post he decided to reply to my original comment with. I'm not trying to start anything - just wish more people had their own initiative to think for themselves and make their own mind up by actually reading things rather than looking and a number and instantly being triggered just because the experience one person had playing a game doesn't match that of their favorite internet troll

[Konoe_Subaruu]

23 minutes ago, turniplord said:

It's fine - I was just giving him feedback on the post he decided to reply to my original comment with. I'm not trying to start anything - just wish more people had their own initiative to think for themselves and make their own mind up by actually reading things rather than looking and a number and instantly being triggered just because the experience one person had playing a game doesn't match that of their favorite internet troll

I agree I don’t give a damn about reviews I play the games I want to play and form my own opinion and hate people who take people like Jim sterlings words as gospel and won’t even try the game themselves 

[GizmoCat79]

20 hours ago, spykeralbersfan1 said:

Seeing a lot of complaints about graphics Jesus Christ people graphics don’t make a game there are a lot of great games that have shit graphics and a lot of not so great games with great graphics(cough order 1886 cough)

 

Have you actually played the game? The graphics are so bad they affect the gameplay because the action is so choppy and frame rate is abysmal. It’s harder than it should be to pull off the moves because it doesn’t feel responsive because of the low fps. It runs at around 25fps at all times. Even when nothing is happening. The game just looks ugly it has screen tearing too which I thought was a thing of the past with last gen. 

 

the game looks like it’s running on the ps2 engine so there’s no excuse for it.

Edited February 15, 2018 by Gizmo_Monkey

[Konoe_Subaruu]

12 minutes ago, Gizmo_Monkey said:

 

Have you actually played the game? The graphics are so bad they affect the gameplay because the action is so choppy and frame rate is abysmal. It’s harder than it should be to pull off the moves because it doesn’t feel responsive because of the low fps. It runs at around 25fps at all times. Even when nothing is happening. The game just looks ugly it has screen tearing too which I thought was a thing of the past with last gen. 

 

the game looks like it’s running on the ps2 engine so there’s no excuse for it.

As I said graphics don’t make the game and yes ive played the game I currently have 13 hours in the game and I haven’t had any issues with framerate since the 1.3 patch maybe you need to download the patch if you haven’t already 

17 minutes ago, Gizmo_Monkey said:

 

Have you actually played the game? The graphics are so bad they affect the gameplay because the action is so choppy and frame rate is abysmal. It’s harder than it should be to pull off the moves because it doesn’t feel responsive because of the low fps. It runs at around 25fps at all times. Even when nothing is happening. The game just looks ugly it has screen tearing too which I thought was a thing of the past with last gen. 

 

the game looks like it’s running on the ps2 engine so there’s no excuse for it.

Also just looked at your profile pretty rich comment come from someone who hasn’t played the game quit being a troll and play the game 

[You]

Hi turniplord,

 

Sorry if you interpreted my post as an attack or anything it genuienly wasn't. Not at all.

Of course I read exactly what you said, and it is why I purposely wrote you my wrong post.

 

Like I said, to me 9/10, by anyones measure whatever that may be, this is widely considered a very very good score, it's literally only 1 away from being a perfect score. If Dynasty Warriors 9 gets a 9 out of 10 then that doesn't give you much room for error, there will be many games better than Dynasty Warriors 9, a bit better, much better, and oustandingly better, and that's not including if the game has no bugs. Giving the game a 9 despite it's abundance of faults.

 

I ask you this, how can you give a rating to those games that are better than DW9? You can only give a score that is the same or a perfect 10.

As a reviewer though you should be reviewing a game on its overall quality as a product, not whether you enjoy the game or not. I just think that 9 out of 10 leaves no room for error for games that are better than Dynasty Warriors 9 or games that as are (subjectively) as good as Dynasty Wariors 9 but aren't as buggy.

 

>  I want to play and form my own opinion and hate people who take
> people like Jim sterlings words as gospel and won’ even
> try the game themselves  

 

That is of course common sense. But it's not like Jim is hating or loving a game because he is a fan boy. In fact it's the exact opposite in this case since is a BIG fan of the games. Agree with him or not, his 30 minute video goes into great depth, There is backing behind his words, whether you choose to ignore them or not, or perhaps like them.

Saying that you hate people who take Jim Sterlings words as gospel is no different to people who do the opposite and completely disregard his views just because it is Jim Sterling saying it and for no other reason.

At any rate my original point is, DW9 should be a 4 or 5, it's not the worst game in the world. It's just, subjectively a dissapointment and right now really quite buggy in places. i'm sure we can all agree on that. But giving it a 9 out of 10 in its current state, that just seem a bit ingenious.

 

Nobody who likes DW9 seems to address all the things that are missing and no longer part of the game, no offline or online coop, poor framerate that will affect gameplay, all interesting weapons for most characters replaced with boring ones etc.

 

Oh and no Vita version. although having no Vita version seems like a luxury at this point.

 

Think of it the other way, I could go on all day about how awful this game is. Sell it to me! Tell me why I should go out and buy this game and why it's a great game. Perhaps then I might be able to understand why some people seem to love this game. It's not for the want of trying, believe me.

 

------

 

[edit]

Yes sorry I did mean to say "WARRIORS OROCHI 3 Ultimate" for PS4, It's Warriors Orochi 2 when referring to the Japanese version.

 

Edited February 15, 2018 by enaysoft

[Konoe_Subaruu]

Enaysoft since patch 1.3 the framerate hasn’t been an issue and on the not having a vita version as much as it pains me to say it the vita is dead and the likelihood of bigger games is very unlikely it’s not going to be long before nothing but small indie games is all that’s released on it oh wait that’s what it already is which makes me ? 

[You]

Don't worry. I still have [edit](had a recount) eleven Musou games on Vita that I have yet to buy/start playing. Not to mention I still have Berzerk Muzou to finish off. Already at patch 1.3 huh? I hope they patch in coop at some point. Coop in that big open world would be awesome.

Edited February 15, 2018 by enaysoft

[Konoe_Subaruu]

4 minutes ago, enaysoft said:

Don't worry. I still have 9 Musou games on Vita that I have yet to buy/start playing. Not to mention I still have Berzerk Muzou to finish off. Already at patch 1.3 huh? I hope they patch in coop at some point. Coop in that big open world would be awesome.

It had two patches at launch and one last night and by the way did you ever get the fate musou

[You]

Wow no I didn't know about Fate Musou, I guess after a third recount including Fate Musou that make that 13 Musou games. 14 if Fate Musou is out on Vita in the west. Will have to look into it. Thanks.

Edited February 15, 2018 by enaysoft

[YROSHIKU]

Another game that was shit by Koei Tecmo and another proof of how lazy and incompetent  they are ?!

[AlchemistWer]

6 minutes ago, YROSHIKU said:

Another game that was shit by Koei Tecmo and another proof of how lazy and incompetent  they are !

Well... Uhmm... maybe, sometimes... ?