Crackdown 3 review: Years late and full of disappointment

Crackdown 3 is finally here. Announced almost five years ago, Crackdown 3 has become a bit notorious for its lengthy development cycle. Was it all worth it?

Crackdown 3 Jaxon
(Image: © Sumo Digital)

Crackdown 3 was revealed almost five years ago at E3 2014. Since then, the game has become notorious for its lengthy and storied development history, with Cloudgine departing mid-way through development, coupled with extensive delays.

Crackdown 3 is the third entry in an open world series that revolves around superhero-style open world mayhem. As a member of the crime-fighting Agency, you're a super-soldier tasked with single-handedly infiltrating and dismantling criminal factions.

The third game takes place after a devastating global attack, resulting in the loss of power across the world. A mysterious corporation, known as Terra Nova, has taken over the island of New Providence, and fashioned it as a new nation, and safe haven for the world's beleaguered refugees. However, all is it not as it seems.

A contingent of Agency operatives head out to New Providence to investigate the source of the global blackout, only to be met with heavy militarized resistance. It's on you to bring Terra Nova to justice.

Crackdown 3 is ultimately a tale of two price points. At $60, the game is aggressively difficult to recommend for a litany of reasons. But as part of a $10 Xbox Game Pass monthly subscription, it offers some genuinely satisfying open world chaos and some truly impressive technical achievements in its cloud-powered Wrecking Zone, that make it a worthy addition to the library.

Here's our review of Crackdown 3.

Sandbox mayhem

Crackdown 3

$60 (opens in new tab) | $10 (Xbox Game Pass) (opens in new tab)

Bottom line: Crackdown 3 is a relatively shallow experience across the board, but fans of sandbox destruction will find plenty of fun.


  • Vibrant art style and special effects.
  • Good character designs.
  • High-octane sandbox destruction.
  • Available in Xbox Game Pass.
  • Terry Crews.


  • Forgettable story.
  • Dated level design.
  • Poor multiplayer component.
  • Not enough Terry Crews.

Crackdown 3 Visuals and sound

Crackdown 3, like its predecessors, sports comic book-style designs with vibrant, outlined 3D models. The art direction is decent, with interesting characters and a neon-washed sci-fi city that makes for great screencaps. The lighting and modelling work leaves a lot to be desired, however. Crackdown 3 is a relatively dated-looking game, even when taking into account that stylized art. Luckily for Crackdown 3, the action is so incredibly fast-paced you'll rarely have time to sit back and examine the sights.

Speaking of action, this is clearly where Crackdown 3 prioritized its time, with some spectacular particle effects and explosions. As you leap and cavort through New Providence, the game world provides ample opportunity to create these cascading explosive effects with a wide array of weapons and vehicles, most of which have unique visuals of their own.

In terms of performance, I didn't experience any slowdown even when the action on-screen reached its most chaotic levels towards the end of the game. The Xbox One X handles the game well at 4K with 30 FPS, although I did suffer a couple of crashes throughout my time with the game.

It's a little frustrating because there are shades of greatness throughout the design direction, including the (brief) animated vignettes and the detailed pre-rendered scenes (all two of them). The vast majority of the game, however, looks like it was dragged out of the Xbox 360 era.

Crackdown 3 Story

This will be a short section, since Crackdown 3 is incredibly light on narrative. Crackdown 3 rarely takes control away from the player with traditional cutscenes, save for a few character introductions. The vast majority of the dialogue is delivered over the radio, from both the Agency director and a local militia member who helps your agent take the fight to Terra Nova.

Like most comic book-inspired stories, Crackdown 3's plot is a little cheesy and obvious. Some of the villain designs and delivery are rather good, but they're all under utilized. By the time you start to get an idea of what makes a particular baddie tick, you've probably killed them off.

Perhaps the most egregious aspect of Crackdown 3's story delivery is that Terry Crews' bombastic portrayal of Commander Jaxon is barely present. Perhaps this is down to the game's marketing being out of sync with the game, but the fact Terry Crews' Jaxon feels more prevalent in the game's trailers than Crackdown 3 itself, seems like a poor allocation of resources.

The game offers brief audio dialogue as the game's villains chatter and bicker over your explosive infiltration of the island, and there are some audio dialogue files to uncover for further context. However, beyond that, the narrative as bare bones as it comes, split across brief comic-book style vignettes, Xbox 360-era facial animations, and just a couple of high-quality pre-rendered scenes that appear only at the start and at the end of the campaign. You might get some fleeting joy at Crackdown 3's one-liners as you tear up the city, but the truth is that you're probably not here for the story, though. Crackdown is pretty upfront about revolving around explosive action, and in that, the game delivers fairly well.

Crackdown 3 Campaign Gameplay

Crackdown 3 is split across two separate clients, one granting access to the 2-player co-op campaign and the other granting access to the Wrecking Zone multiplayer. The campaign offers around seven hours of gameplay depending on how many of the side activities you want to partake in. The primary gameplay loop barely changes throughout, however. Once you've taken down your first outpost, you basically do the same thing over and over, with little to break things up. Thankfully, though, it's pretty fun.

Crackdown 3 is good mindless fun.

Like previous Crackdown games, Crackdown 3 features incremental progression mechanics that rewards players with increasing strength, gun control, vehicle handling, and other powers. If you favour beating enemies down, it'll increase your strength rating. Utilizing lots of explosives will increase the power of your rocket-powered weapons, and so on. Eventually, your agility skill will be high enough to allow you to leap over large buildings, double jumping and aerial dashing across the map.

I don't think a lot of work went in to testing some of the gameplay features on offer in Crackdown 3, though. For example, regular firearms such as assault rifles are too weak to bother with, when rocket launchers and ammunition are in such huge abundance. By the end of the game, I had forgotten about firearms entirely, even though I had spent a significant amount of time levelling them up. They lack versatility, and well, fun, since they don't create gigantic explosions, and a lot of the more powerful units you meet towards the end of the game are practically immune to them.

Vehicle handling is also dissatisfying poor, to the point where I just opted to run around and use fast travel points most of the time. There are time trials and stunts you can do if you're a completionist, though, and it'll reward you with various vehicular upgrades, including a battle tank, if you suffer through it.

When you disregard the bad stuff, though, Crackdown 3 is good mindless fun. Picking up tanks and throwing them across the map, vacuuming up enemies into a singularity grenade, and punching enemies off buildings is endlessly amusing. Targeting can be frustrating at times and, larger objects can actually get stuck on the floor when you attempt to throw them, but they're minor problems that Microsoft's partners could probably address quite easily.

Crackdown 3 follows a typical open world model where you defeat enemy lieutenants, each with unique armies and different abilities. The thing is, the approach to combat is pretty much the same regardless of who you fight, despite some weapons gain advantages when attacking robots, for example, while others are better against vehicles. Explosive weapons, however, just seem to be by far the best option in almost every situation. Some of the other guns that are fun to use, like the force-blasting vortex gun, are simply sub optimal, lacking area-of-effect capabilities and, well, raw power.

Throwing trucks at crowds of bad dudes has an odd therapeutic quality.

There are a few simple boss battles and different types of outposts to tackle as you work your way up to the game's big evil, but Crackdown 3 doesn't dictate how you should approach any of these objectives.

While I found it to be optimal to simply jump around spamming rockets and throwing cars, others may prefer other means of destruction. In that sense, Crackdown 3 is a true sandbox, granting you the tools, but not telling you how to use them.

Crackdown 3 certainly isn't going to appeal to everyone, nor is it what I would call an experience I'll recall fondly in a few years, but I completed the game in almost one sitting. I was never bored. Throwing trucks at crowds of bad dudes has an odd therapeutic quality. If that's your jam, then Crackdown 3's campaign should satisfy you.

Crackdown 3 Wrecking Zone Multiplayer

As of writing, we haven't had hands-on time with the final build of Crackdown 3's Wrecking Zone mode, its long-anticipated cloud-powered destruction arena. We have however played the recent beta tests, and we'll offer some initial thoughts on that experience, updating this section if the final build is significantly different.

Like much of Crackdown 3, Wrecking Zone feels as though it emerged from the Xbox 360 generation on the one hand, contrasted against the monumental technical achievement that is its dynamic, cloud-powered destruction tech on the other hand. It's an odd juxtaposition that such staggeringly powerful technology sits on top of what is an painfully simplistic auto-aim arena shooter, with gameplay from a bygone era.

In Wrecking Zone, you're dropped into team-based scenarios across a variety of holographic-style maps, in what is narratively an Agency training simulation. Players must leap and dash across the environment, laying waste to cover while attempting to remain out of enemy player's line of sight.

Combat in the Wrecking Zone isn't as dynamic as I would have hoped. Caught out in the open, the player who shot first, with the higher DPS weapon will effectively win any conflict thanks to auto-aim, unless the defender has some kind of shield buff. You can mitigate this by punching through walls to break the line of sight, or using jump pads to get out of range, but beyond that there isn't much by way of forethought or strategy that goes into play. That isn't necessarily such a terrible thing, though.

Much like the game's campaign sandbox, the wanton destruction is satisfying to partake in, even if the competitive aspects of the game are a little muted. Taking out huge walkways with a rocket launcher, seeing the chunks collapse in real time with full physics sparks the imagination. It's just that the actual game layered on top feels almost like it gets in the way. There's no doubt a high-quality competitive game that can emerge from this technology, but I can't see Wrecking Zone having the staying power of competing multiplayer titles out there, particularly given that it is launching without any sort of party system to play with friends.

Should you buy Crackdown 3?

Crackdown 3

Crackdown 3 (Image credit: Microsoft)

Crackdown 3 is ultimately the tale of two price points. At $60, it's pretty difficult to recommend. The content spread just isn't there, there are other games available now or very soon that will probably be a far better investment. However, Xbox Game Pass (opens in new tab) completely changes the argument. As a $10 payment for a month's worth of access, Crackdown 3 is some decent mindless fun, tossing tanks into the sky, spraying rockets across the map, or punching dudes into buildings. Wrecking Zone is also worth a look, if for no reason other than the impressive destruction mechanics.

Crackdown 3 just doesn't meet contemporary standards as a premium $60 title, with dated visuals, thin gameplay features, and an under-delivered story. There are too many open world superhero-style games that simply do it better. That said, it's not a bad game, by any means. To enjoy Crackdown 3, you probably need to be the type of person who really likes basic sandbox mayhem, because that's effectively all Crackdown 3 has (and wants) to offer.

Jez reviewed Crackdown 3 on Xbox One X, using a copy provided by Microsoft.

Jez Corden
Co-Managing Editor

Jez Corden a Managing Editor at Windows Central, focusing primarily on all things Xbox and gaming. Jez is known for breaking exclusive news and analysis as relates to the Microsoft ecosystem while being powered by caffeine. Follow on Twitter @JezCorden and listen to his Xbox Two podcast, all about, you guessed it, Xbox!

  • With all that development time was it too big to cancel?
  • It's good Xbox Game Pass filler content but beyond that I'm not sure. It provides some fleeting amusement but yeah... at $60 I would've felt screwed.
  • Yes, and their mistake was an influx of $$ for star power in hopes to breathe life into a game that was well past its cancellation point.
  • The very first game was a "shoot this, collect orb" basic romp. But it's a different time now and I can see why someone would/should expect more from a $60 dollar title.
  • Fair review. I guess the best argument to get this game would be if you have gamepass. Otherwise this game is a pass.
  • What do people expect from to me a guilty pleasure game. People read all these reviews for the game without knowing the hits it had to take over the years, all impacting the game's development. Sumo that had to replace Reagent, those that already did the majority of the game before the delays and the 2nd loss of Epic Games buying Cloudgine. Its sad to see that Nothing from 2015's demo made it. That makes me think how far they had to start over from. Do i think if all that didn't happen we would have a better game?.. Yes No doubt. But it is what it is. And i give my respect to Sumo and friends for continuing working on a heavy impacted game and for still delivering it.
  • Another Xbox one exclusive stinker. I feel depressed
  • That's like 3 in a row isn't it? SOT, SOD2, and CD3.
  • I advise you to play SoT, it has been seriously improved since launch.
  • Sea of Thieves is a great game--exactly what they said it would be--an open-world, shared adventure game with a Games-as-a-Service update model. It's the most fun I've had gaming in years, and Rare delivered on exactly what they promised. I love Sea of Thieves, play it daily, and can't wait for the upcoming updates like Arena mode.
  • I wouldn't say "exactly what they said it would be". Look at early footage. Look at the whole Kraken hype before we saw the actual thing.
  • I played the beta and read all the pre-release media coverage. I don't see any instance of them saying anything about the game that wasn't there at launch, including anything about the kraken. Regardless, the game is fun as hell.
  • Well, for starter. The kraken is a lie. It's not a Kraken it's just tentacles dangling over the water. So what was it? Were they too lazy to design an actual Kraken or did they run out of time? Did they just darken the water to hide the fact that it's not a kraken? What about the different moves or about all the rewards after defeating the kraken? Maybe these are features that will be added later on but just like Sean Murray it's a lie. I mean NMS eventually introduced the meeting other player feature. So if this isn't a lie I guess that also wasn't a lie? Look back at the first trailer, there is definitely a downgrade and there you can see there the crew is larger than 4. There were a number of items that were missing from the main game. Also they misled people about the end game.
    Here is an article about it: Regardless if you found the game fun, that remains your opinion. For me, the game was boring as hell
  • Sea of Thieves is amazing now, but it definitely didn't start off that way.
  • Most objective people who followed this game's development saw this coming from a mile away.
  • I'll admit that with Joseph Staten as creative director and a charismatic actor Terry Crews involved, I had high hopes for the story, so that is disappointing to hear that it's not great. However, blowing stuff up does seem kind of fun and I like the neon art style, so I'll give it a shot on Game Pass.
  • After playing the game for the past few days nonstop, I must say I am really liking it. It's just fun! I don't understand the criticism of the "dated" gameplay. It's the exact same gameplay as critically acclaimed games like Sunset Overdrive--you follow waypoints around a big, open city, blow up enemies and do little tasks like jamming equipment to break machinery and whatnot, all while leveling up your character and your weapons to have more advanced mobility and bigger explosions. Anyway, I like the simplicity of it, I like the neon sci-fi city design, and I like Terry Crews. I tend to judge a game by how much I want to play it. This game passes that test--I just want to keep playing it. It's addicting. Definitely worth checking out.
  • My best advice, get Game Pass and play it. Reviews are great and gives you some things to expect or look for. Your experience may be different from the person that gave the review. Meaning, you may feel differently about some of the things said and realize that it may not be a kill point for you. With all of that said, I did purchase the game. I won't know what to expect outside of this review, until I actually play it. I'm hoping that I will not be disappointed, but for $60, I will play the hell out of it regardless. I don't often buy games as sone as they come out, but I enjoyed the first two and I hope this one will be enjoyable, as well.
  • Well this is the last game that was being worked on before MS hit the reset button last year, so they had to go ahead and release it or it would have done a disservice to the developers that have been working on it all of this time. And the same people that are bashing it now would be bashing MS for canceling it. Things should start looking up from here on with all these new studios.
  • It's Crackdown people 🤔
  • I can't imagine this is really all that surprising, I didn't really have high hopes for the game anyway, luckily I've got game pass though. It does make you wonder though. Are these titles just not getting the proper polish because of Game Pass? Like are they not being thought of as a "$60" game any more and developers aren't expecting to get a huge income gain because of the service?
  • I guess it's the same as Assassins' Creed situation.
    1, 3, 5, the odd number ones, you spend money and time on tech and game engine.
    2, 4, 6, spend on contents.
    If you want new tech (never been done before server physics) with rich content... another 2 to 3 years?
  • I don't think Gamepass has anything to do with it. Horizon 4 was gamepass day 1. And it's one of the most polished games this Gen. And the best racer for a long long time. State of decay 2 wasn't developed as a first party tile, as I dead labs was acquired after that was developed. So who knows what Undead is capable of as a first party developer with MS money and facilities behind them now. Ninja Theory, Obsidian, The Initiative, Playground Games, 343, The Coalition, I exile will have games releasing launch day on Gamepass. Judging Gamepass on some small AA non first party games isn't really fair.
  • Yeah, Just like Crackdown 2... The original was Great though... Maybe they should have gotten David Jones involved again....
  • It's exactly how I expected to be an Xbox one x version of crackdown.. Sure it could have been better... But it does provide the CD rush people who enjoyed the game wanted... Mission accomplished... I don't see what more was expected...
  • Whatever, THOROUGHLY enjoying this game, it looks great and lots to do... #worthit #getlost #lostinnewprovidence 😅💖🗽
  • Maybe it's like Assassins' Creed situation? 1, 3, 5, the money goes to tech building and game engine. 2, 4, 6 normally has richer contents.
    The aim button... I haven't played it yet but, maybe, because the game is actually difficult to aim? From the vid / gameplay, everything moves soo fast not just horizontally but also vertically...
  • I've never been a Crackdown fan. But I thought I'd try it on Game Pass free. I wasn't expecting much based on the reviews at all. I'm actually pretty shocked at how much fun this is. I started playing expecting to give an hour and never return. 6 hours later I went to bed at 3 in the morning. Hahahaha ha. I haven't played a game with this much mindless fun in a long long time. Everything now is a walkathon Cinematic heavy Hollywood romp. It was actually such a breath of fresh air to smoke some Mary Jane and kick back and platform around, level up and blow some sh*t up. What concerns me the most based on my experience with reviews and then playing myself is it seems gaming is headed the same way as Movies. Critics rate a film on rotten tomatoes. And the audience score is vastly different. In many cases over the last 2 years there is sometimes a 40-50% deficit between critics and Audience on RT. Alita being the latest. 52% from critics. 92% from audience. Sea Of Thieves last year was the same. Poor critic reviews. Yet somehow it has now over 7 million players. And big streamers have now got hold of the game and its player base is still climbing. People love Sea Of Thieves. Crackdown 3 is similar. My friends list is surprisingly all on Crackdown 3. But the important bit is they are continually playing it daily. I personally enjoyed God Of War. Not as much as previous God Of War titles, but I know people that hate the new one. Regardless of what Critics say. Because they are fans of proper hack n slash. And they certainly aren't fans of "walk and talk, go to boat, slow battle some enemies, walk to boat, rinse and repeat." The state of the critic industry in movies, music and games is not great. And vastly doesn't represent what gamers love and play. Sure fan boys use this stuff all the time. But sales and player base is where it's really at. 200 million Fortnite players when the game reviewed in the 70s. World of War craft 70s. Sea Of thieves 7 million and growing, 70s. Just try for yourself for free on gamepass and if you enjoy something someone else is telling you that you shouldn't, don't feel guilty. Screw them. Have fun with what makes you smile. End of story. I don't tell PSVR people to stop playing even though it's a massive failure commercially.
  • LOL what a funny post. I won't bother replying some of the stuff in it. I don't think it's worth wasting time...
  • Please feel free. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. Its only a few people on the internet that hold so much weight to reviews and stuff because it helps in console wars. I have many friends who have never visited an Online game review in their life. And couldn't care less what game scored what. They just play what they find they enjoy. And often than not they don't like what the media online score so highly. I've seen over on VGC people hating in Red Dead 2. Just because it reviewed so highly. But wouldn't accept anyone hating on GOW. Even though the latter hasn't even got half the sales of the former.
  • So are you saying that Jez and all the professional gaming journalist who criticise the game don't have a clue what they are talking and just because your few "friends" enjoyed the game it means that a majority of people are enjoying it? LOL
    Please... Sales doesn't equal quality. 7m may have played or tried SoT but it doesn't mean that majority of them loved the game and are still playing it. If it was believe me that MS would be communicating on the number of concurrent gamers playing the game. The game scores bady because it has flaws. Now even behind your bias MS/XB glasses you can see that the game has flaws, bugs and is unfinished because it's missing key features. This is not subjective.
    Look at the false promises and massive downgrade. Did you even watch the hype around the game in 2014-2015? Talk to me about the downgrade and all these flaws, not about subjective stuff like it's "fun". Also don't talk of what the majority likes and dislike without providing proof... And finally don't talk of massive commercial failure without any proof. Honestly your posts are too funny. Classical Richard Loveridge bs...
  • “So are you saying that Jez and all the professional gaming journalist who criticise the game don't have a clue what they are talking and just because your few "friends" enjoyed the game it means that a majority of people are enjoying it?” He never said that. He simply said that he’s enjoying it and that he thinks reviews shouldn’t be the end-all be-all when it comes to games.
  • @Brendan
    Well the problem here is that the guy does say: "The state of the critic industry in movies, music and games is not great. And vastly doesn't represent what gamers love and play." The guy is literally trying to say that professional critics aren't great because he claims that majority of gamers feel the opposite to what critics say. He is trying to define what gamers love and play.
    And what does he base that on?
    1) Sot
    number of players who played the game. Which obviously doesn't mean that majority of them loved the game and still plays it. It's ridiculous to claim that most people loved the game.
    2) Crackdown 3
    He is saying most people loved the game based on his and his "friend"'s opinions on the game. ofc that is hardly proof that most gamers love the game. In fact, look at this comment section only he and another guy actually loved the game. That's hardly the majority. But again that doesn't prove anything. So once again it's ridiculous to claim that most people loved the game.
    3) GoW
    He is basing his opinion on "I know people that hate the new one". Which again doesn't prove ANYTHING. ofc he also fails to mention that this God of war was the fastest-selling PlayStation title of all time. LOL
    4) Fortnite
    He says fortnite had poor ratings. Fortnite got ratings from 78 to 85 on current gen consoles. Also quite a few of the lower ratings came from before the battle royale mode was launched. That's really the mode that is so popular. If you don't know that the mode was launched later than I'm sorry you're not really a gamer.
    5) World of Warcraft
    He says it had poor ratings. The game has ratings in the 90s. I'm not sure what the guy is even talking about at this point. If the guy simply said he’s enjoying it and that he thinks reviews shouldn’t be the end-all be-all.
    Fine, but the problem here is that he tries to claim that some games are popular based on nothing but his and his friend's opinion. He tries to make claims base on nothing and he just is all over the place with his statements and claims.
  • Woah easy fella. Reviews actually don't mean anything to any product in general. It's pretty common to see that people praise Sea Of Thieves alot. Pretty much everywhere you go. It's also been regularly right up with Fortnite on stream channels and views over the last 2 months. Relying on reviews as you are to point to the success or failure of a game is not reliable. As many many poorly reviewed games with massive commercial success show. And I mention PSVR being a commercial failure because it is. Kinect sold 24 million in 2 years and was widely considered a failure. PSVR has sold less than 4 million in 2 years. Occulus Rift has canceled version 2 and ViVe is halting plans for further development. They all Are a commercial failure. No amount of Good reviews is ever going to change that fact. But there is a small niche of people that enjoy it. And nothing any of us are gonna say is ever going to take that away from them. You can pick and choose all day long what figures and sales you want to look at. Gof Of War sold 9 million. That doesn't mean 9 million people liked it or even finished it. See how we can use your logic against any title. Regardless of reviews? At the end of the day, my point was. Generally speaking average reviewed games are the most bought and played titles based on sales and player counts. The well received media reviewed games are more often than not not the best selling games or most played. That's something Noone can deny.
  • And here you show how dishonest you actually are.
    So why aren't you talking about the massive downgrade? Why aren't you talking of the bugs and flaws of the game?
    Why aren't you talking of the missing features?
    This is one of the most downgraded game in history. Personally, I think it is by far the most downgraded game ever.
    ofc I don't see you talk about any of these issues... "It's pretty common to see that people praise Sea Of Thieves alot"
    It is common where? In the SoT community that still plays the game? So how big is that community? The only people I see praising SoT or crackdown 3 happens to be massive MS/XB "fans". LOL "It's also been regularly right up with Fortnite on stream channels and views over the last 2 months."
    Yeah, what a coincidence. Between december till very early february a few very popular streamers suddenly all were interested in playing and streaming. ofc it all resulted in Aaron Greenberg proudly announcing it along with a discount on the game. ofc it's all coincidence. :)
    Well the game has dropped since the start of the month and is 45th right now.
    ofc that doesn't say ANYTHING about how popular the game actually is. Or how many players are still playing it. "As many many poorly reviewed games with massive commercial success show."
    Really many? Can you post the names of the games because Fortnite and World of Warcraft both got good reviews. Or are you making that statement up as usual? "And I mention PSVR being a commercial failure because it is. Kinect sold 24 million in 2 years and was widely considered a failure."
    LOL You do understand that kinect and VR aren't the same tech? LOL
    How can you compare a tech that cost 150 bucks with one that costs 500 at launch? Don't be ridiculous.
    Sony were happy and excited to celebrate the 3m milestone. It's ridiculous to even think that PSVR would sell 24m. Let Sony say it's a failure. It's not a MS "fan" like you who will decide that. You have no idea how much Sony invested in the tech and you have no idea how much profit it has made. You are just making things up from nothing as usual. There is a difference between 9m copies SOLD. And 7m people tried the game. You know with game pass everything has changed. MS doesn't publish the numbers of active players but the number of player who played the games. That includes al those who just tried it (like me). I played it for 10 hours, but that doesn't mean I liked it.
    Do you think that 9m people would have both GoW if it had poor ratings and reviews? Or if the game had huge amount of bugs, missing features or massive downgrade? "Generally speaking average reviewed games are the most bought and played titles based on sales and player counts."
    No they are not. You are yet to prove that Sot or Crackdown 3 are the most bought video game. With game pass, player count doesn't mean a game is popular or appreciated. People trying a game is not the same as people investing 60 bucks in a game. It seems like you want to ignore that most of these reviewers are pointing actual flaws with the game. You can try and keep ignoring massive downgrade, missing key features, bugs... but reviewers judge a game for what it is. Unlike fanboys, they don't praise a game just because it is made by certain company. Now since you seem to think that most gamers enjoy SoT and crackdown 3, why don't you post links of gamers (that are not MS/XB fans) that enjoys the two games.
  • I agree a lot with what Richard Loveridge said--I think that there is becoming some convergence among professional reviewers in the industry about the types of games they like--which is totally fine and totally expected, but which is essentially resulting in certain types of games that some gamers like otherwise getting dismissed, and then the result is that a bunch of weird console warrior fanboys who actually never even played these games just use these statistically meaningless Metacritic scores to dismiss games entirely. Personally, there are a lot of highly rated games that I tried out simply because they were so critically acclaimed (e.g. GTA V, which "everyone" said was one of the best games ever but which I found to be a tedious, unfocused bore), and then I kept getting surprised when games I love--games like Ryse, Sea of Thieves, and now Crackdown 3--got dismissed as bad games when, although not perfect games by no means, are, in my opinion, way more fun than overly inflated, needlessly complex games stuffed with vapid filler like GTA V.
  • The problem with what you said coip is that professional reviewers in the industry don't give poor reviews to certain "types of games". Most of the criticism is about actual flaws in the game. Did you read Jez's review? He literally mentioned your main argument for the game. He said the game was "fun".
    These reviewers aren't really bashing the type of game but more exposing flaws, bugs, downgrade and missing features. Yes, I haven't played crackdown 3 but I'm not saying it's a good or bad game. All I'm saying is that the final product is a MAJOR downgrade compared to the 2015 hype and what they promised. I've never EVER seen a game so downgraded. Also the game doesn't support party functionality FFS! Missing basic feature is a flaw. And reviewers cannot just ignore it. I played around 10 hours of SoT. It was actually fun for the first 1-2 hours as I learned how to play it. Navigate to an island find a chest and get it back. But when I realised that the game whole game is just about these randomly generated fetch quests then I understood that it's not for me.
    ofc if you are into grinding for cosmetic items and love doing these fetch quest, you are free to love the game. But that is your preference. What is good or bad is totally subjective. So while you are free to bring out a subjective argument like "fun" to say that the game is good. That remains YOUR opinion. You and Richard should not dismiss other people's opinion just because you happen to love a game. You guys can't ignore the flaws to the game that leads poor scores. And also Richard cannot say that majority of gamers love these games without any proof.
  • To not call any VR product a failure is fan boyish. Sony act happy about 3 million because they are trying to generate hype for it. And it's sales have fallen off a cliff. They can't give it away. And the sales of VR games are dreadful. Cpacom even released figures saying only 10% played Resi 7 with VR. And that's the best VR game out there. If Sony waste resources on PS5 making hardware inside better for VR instead of spending that money on more power for normal games, they will find themselves in the same position the Xbox One was at launch. MS should never have designed the insides of Xbox One around Kinect 2.0. As for the downgrade to Crackdown 3. I don't even know what your talking about. I didn't follow the game. I wasn't a fan of the first. There was no hype outside the cloud tech demos. Which was interesting at the time. Nothing more. Something Phil obviously turned away from as it's use was not used in other titles since he took over. As far as I was aware, Crackdown 3 was made for the fans of the first game. Nothing more. I certainly wasn't expecting anything else. Definately didn't get the same hype levels as Gears, Halo or Forza. Or even Titanfall 1 and Sunset Overdrive at the time. You go on about Gamepass and player base like it's any different than sales. Just because someone buys the game doesn't mean they like it or play it all the way through. A quick look at the trophies for God Of War as an example shows only 47% of people have completed it out of all the people that started it. So less than half the sales have actually bothered to finish the game. And titles like Fortnite and Wow didn't review well according to fan boys. Anything less than 85 and they stick there nose up at the game. Slagging it off on forums wherever you go. I guarantee any Xbox or PS game exclusive that metacritics the scores of Fortnite will be laughed at by either fan boy group. It's pathetic. The difference is Gamepass makes reviews pretty moot. Because you can try the game where normally you wouldn't. Meaning people have the chance to make their own mind up on launch day without the need to shell out £50. Since Gamepass has come to fruition we have only had small developer exclusives (SOT and Horizon 4 aside) release on it. And undead labs wasn't even first party when they developed State of decay 2. Going forward, gamepass will receive every first party game on launch day free. Ninja Theory new game. Playground Games Fable 4 (yet to be official, but everyone knows that's the open world RPG they are making), Gears 5, The Initiatives first game. Obsidian The Outer Worlds, Halo Infinite, Forza 8 etc. And who knows what Compulsion Games and Undead Labs can do now with MS money behind them and access to their mocaps facilities etc. The future is incredibly bright for Gamepass. There's even rumored more acquisitions this year. Including IO Interactive that's been heavily rumored. Halo Infinite seems to be a reboot gameplay wise for the series as well. With RPG job postings forn3re and the leak of a screen shot showing a way point saying 63 KM away. Hinting at a large open world on a Halo ring. Where it's rumored you can traverse the entire ring with its on ecosystem and wildlife. If people are enjoying what they play you should just be happy for them. There's plenty of Polished games on Xbox and Playstation. And now Xbox has a much more talented group of First party development studios going forward with 2 in particular being known for fantastic RPGS. And if Playground Games nails RPG like they did Open world racing going forward gaming is gonna be awesome regardless of your choice of console. I own both. So I couldnt care less about fan boy wars. I'm happy to call out MS on they botched the Xbox One at launch. Equally I'm happy to call out Sony on the waste of resources for VR. I sincerely hope PS5 isn't designed around VR. That's a red flag for me. People need to stop putting stock on reviews to use as fan boy wars and just play video games. Thankfully Gamepass allows us to play games we wouldn't normally buy. And quite often I'm surprised on just what fun I would have missed out on playing games.
  • "To not call any VR product a failure is fan boyish."
    This must be the most stupid statement you've made in this topic.
    I'm not saying it's a commercial success nor I'm saying it's a commercial failure. And you know why?
    Because I have no idea. I don't know how much Sony invested in the tech. I have no idea how much profit or loss they made.
    It looks like you don't know the meaning of the word facts and proof.
    Prove me that it's a commercial failure by showing me how much money Sony lost. If you can't, then stfu.
    I don't want to deal with your fanboy speculation. If you don't know about the downgrade then please educate yourself. I've already posted the link but looks like you purposely ignored it. So here it is again:
    If you want to know more just search "crackdown 3 2015" and see the IGN video. Now here is a question for you. Do you see the downgrade? Can you name another game in history that was downgraded by this amount?
    Can you even understand the criticism about the downgrade? You can't just ignore it and ignore what they promised. Unlike you, reviewers are not clueless about what was being said, so they have every right to mention it in their reviews. The people criticising the game have every right to mention it.
    You love the game? Cool, good for you. But your opinion is not a fact and if you and your "friends" love the game, it doesn't mean that those who don't like the game are wrong. Also it doesn't mean that majority of gamers love the game. "Gamepass and player base like it's any different than sales. Just because someone buys the game doesn't mean they like it or play it all the way through."
    LOL You do understand that trying the game is different from investing 60 bucks to buy the game? Those who invest 60 bucks into a game do it because they want to play the game and they know they'll probably enjoy it. If they are not sure they just won't risk paying 60 bucks. With game pass everyone can just try it without any risk.
    47% is a massive amount. Only about 25% finished RDR2. I'm not sure what you're talking about. Fortnite got 85 on XB1, WoW got 90s something. Metacritic considers something above 75 a good score, 60-75 is considered average. What you and other fanboys consider is not my problem. With gamepass, companies can launch unfinished games. Games full of bugs and missing key features.
    We've seen it with 3 of the last 4 major MS release. SoT (unfinished game), SoD2 (full of bugs) and Crackdown 3 (incomplete, missing key features + bugs).
    I've said it years back, gamepass will just reduce the quality of games as what would be important is quantity. Games will just be rushed in and the common argument will be "if the game has problems it doesn't matter it's on game pass". The rest of your post is just random fanboy arguments and speculations.
    Sorry I don't deal with that, I only deal with facts. Something that you seem to have problems with...
  • I can't discuss the failure of VR with you any further. There is numerous articles last year on why VR is failing to take off. It's a niche product. And as I said, I hope Sony doesn't build PS5 around that. As for Fortnite scoring 85 on Xbox. That was out of 5 reviews. On PS4 it has 77. With more reviews. You can't take the Xbox reviews because it's missing a ton of review sites. My point still stands on the gamepass versus sales. Because sales don't mean someone likes the game. Just as much as the player base on Gamepass. RDR 2 although less on PS4 sold more than GOW on PS4. And when you combine with Xbox One has sold over 25 million copies to day. More than double GOW. So more people have definately finished RDR2. Your statement of gamepass is grossly misplaced. Horizon 4 is one of the most polished games of the generation. And exceeds what the reviewers thought was possible after 3. The Coailition have taken longer to develop Gears 5 than 4. Halo Inifinte is the longest development Time of any Halo game ever. And the same with Forza 8. Longest Motorsports title development ever. So I don't see this rush games out unfinished malarkey your trying to portray about Gamepass. If anything since gamepass apart from State of Decay 2 (non first party at the time) and Crackdown 3 which switched devs halfway through, all the first party MS studios have taken longer to develop their games not less time to rush out an unfinished product. However I do agree 100% that Crackdown 3 is nothing like that Cloud tech demo from 2015. I remember that demo. To be honest at the time I saw it as a tech demo. Because we didn't see actual Campaign stuff till late last year. So I actually didn't get hyped by that tech demo at all. But yes I agree it's nothing like the final. Product we got in our hands.
  • "I can't discuss the failure of VR with you any further. There is numerous articles last year on why VR is failing to take off."
    Like I said I don't discuss about speculation. You're talking about articles of VR in general.
    I don't talk about speculation. I talk with facts. If you say PSVR is a commercial failure, prove it. Show me how much money they have lost. Like I said post proof or stfu. I guess you'll just have to stfu because you have zero proof. Do you have a problem with facts? On PS4 the average ratings on metacritic by Fortnite is 78 not 77. And do you know that many of these reviews were out before fortnite had the highly popular battle royale mode? Are you a gamer who knows this thing or is that something else that you didn't know? You didn't consider switch had 10 reviews at 83%. The PC version had 11 reviews at 81%.
    Either way the average score of the royal battle mode should be in the 80s and I already said metacritic consider that a good score. It's not anywhere close to the 58-60% that crackdown 3 got. "My point still stands on the gamepass versus sales. Because sales don't mean someone likes the game. Just as much as the player base on Gamepass."
    Yes, but it doesn't mean that sales is the same thing as trying a game. But I would say it's a greater gauge of popularity. "RDR 2 although less on PS4 sold more than GOW on PS4. And when you combine with Xbox One has sold over 25 million copies to day. More than double GOW. So more people have definately finished RDR2."
    Are you having a laugh? We were talking about percentage. Percentage of people finishing a game after buying it. "Your statement of gamepass is grossly misplaced."
    Are you kidding? I said 3 of the last 4. I've excluded the Forza game which is a yearly franchise. They just serve sequels after sequels every year. "So I don't see this rush games out unfinished malarkey your trying to portray about Gamepass."
    I'm talking about the main games that were launched on game pass published by MS since the start of game pass. I've excluded the yearly forza that generally gets good ratings even before game pass. I'm not talking or speculating about future Halo or gears sequels. I'm talking about facts and the information we have. Like I said, I don't talk about speculation but about facts.
  • Got around to finishing this game last night. The more I played the less I enjoyed it, especially once level 3 security rocked up. It's damn near impossible to get away from that unless you spend 30 minutes fighting everything to then get a lockdown and slug your way through that. Outside of one time, I have never been able to hide from level 3 security, even if they can't see me. The game was fun initially but, eventually it just got easy and boring, the last fight was an absolute joke, although a cool design, there was no challenge. Just playing normally I was level 5 in everything except driving by the endgame, I was OP as hell. And the game played exactly the same as it did in 2007, they didn't improve on combat or exploration, at all. Which was ok then, but 14 years later, the issues were glaring. The review on PC World probably gave the best comment I've seen in relation to this game (and I'm paraphrasing), the Developers could have released a remake of the original Crackdown and it would have received a better reception, Crackdown 3 brings NOTHING new to the table. All I'm going to say about the multiplayer is it feels like the most tacked on, early 2000's, mess of a game mode I've ever played. When I can actually get into a game it's just bad, lock on takes away any necessary skill, environmental destruction is abysmal and I saw better destruction from the Red Faction or Battlefield series. It's just bad, excruciatingly bad. I'd actually give this game a 4/10, it's definitely below average in my opinion.
  • Addition fail, I should have said "12 years later".