Bastion reviews rounded-up ahead of tomorrow’s launch

Tuesday, 19th July 2011 16:47 GMT By Stephany Nunneley

Bastion reviews have started hitting the net, and it looks as though the majority find it a charming Xbox Live title from Supergiant Games.

Wired even said it enjoyed the game’s “aesthetics and narration,”  and that it contains a “poignant plot,” with “plenty of chilling moments.”

There’s more good, and bad about it in each review link below, and some don’t provide a score based on reviews.

As usual, if you have any to add yourselves, please post links in the comment section.

Bastion launches as part of Microsoft’s Summer of Arcade on Xbox Live tomorrow for 1200 MS points.



  1. marijnlems

    Great! The sole dissenting review (at Destructoid) was written by Jim Sterling, so it can be safely disregarded.

    The most well written review so far is the one by Ryan Kuo, over at Kill Screen:

    #1 3 years ago
  2. darksied

    Crap! I have 1140 MS points, argh!! How can I get 60 points? Anyone? :/ I really want to get this game.

    @1 Yeah, I found that guys reviews to be all over the place; can’t trust his reviews.

    #2 3 years ago
  3. mathare92

    @1 Indeed. KillScreen should be a fixture on all these review round-ups.

    As always with Sterling, he doesn’t have an opinion… he has an agenda. Just look up his Witcher 2 review.

    #3 3 years ago
  4. Crazyreyn

    Digital Spy, 5/5:

    #4 3 years ago
  5. The_Red

    Why does Destructoid feel like they have to give lower than normal scores to some great games? 5 / 10 for Assassin’s Creed 2 and now 6 for this beautiful little game.

    #5 3 years ago
  6. marijnlems

    To be honest, it’s just Jim Sterling. The other Destructoid reviewers are alright.

    Sterling, however, seems to think a review isn’t credible unless the score is at least thirty percentage points removed from whatever the consensus is.

    #6 3 years ago
  7. DSB

    “This reviewer doesn’t agree with me or the internet groupthink, ergo he is wrong.”


    @1 Except for the fact that the guy is enough of a narcicist, to actually quote an obscure french movie to support his own pseudo-intellectual internet brand, in the first three sentences of what was supposed to be a games review, you know, about a game.

    The rest seems to be a mundane mix of stating the obvious, but using the most redundant words you possibly could, to communicate it.

    Horrible waste of time, but pretty useful in case you need an example of how never to do a review :P

    #7 3 years ago
  8. marijnlems

    @DSB: I’m not saying it’s wrong to disagree with me or most other critics in a review, I’m just saying that with Sterling it seems that he pathologically overcompensates for the Internet groupthink that some other reviewers are guilty of. If you always say the opposite of what everybody else is saying, your opinion is just as useless as if you always agreed with everyone.

    Too bad you can’t appreciate Kuo’s writing. Different strokes I guess (and there are plenty of websites that have a less… intellectual review style), though I can imagine that if you consider La Jetée to be an “obscure French movie” you wouldn’t really be able to connect with the essence of the piece.

    #8 3 years ago
  9. DSB

    @8 I’d say the opposite is true. If all reviewers are taking exactly the same view to a game as eachother, then obviously someone is lying. Somewhere, out there, a reviewer doesn’t like this game as much as the next guy, and we’re poorer for that guy not speaking up. Very few movies can unite reviewers, and yet, a fairly clear consensus seems to be the inevitable result, every time a new game comes out.

    I’m sure Bastion is great, and I’m sure Sterling takes pride in scoring differently than everybody else, but reading through his review, he seems to found his conclusion nothing more than the game itself, even though he makes some amateurish mistakes, like repeating his conclusion several times. Which still in my opinion pale in comparison to a guy who is talking about french cinema three sentences into a games review.

    I realize that there’s a growing niche for reviewers who are actually bloggers writing self-indulgent diaries based on videogames, and calling that a review, but he barely gets into the material he’s reviewing because he’s so busy throwing ridiculous pseudonyms around, which is just not good enough, when you’re trying to argue why a game is that great. Or indeed, when trying to prove your ability or intelligence in reviewing a piece of media.

    We aren’t poorer for having more views to a game. Even if Sterling does it for negative attention (in which case I have a hard time seeing any deliberate provocation in the review itself) the fact that he actually takes an angle that no one else does, is useful in itself.

    #9 3 years ago
  10. Prof.Dr.Moertel

    GIGA.DE (German) – 87%

    #10 3 years ago
  11. marijnlems

    @9: Fair enough, for the most part. The reason I prefer Kuo’s writing is that it focuses on what makes the game a unique experience. I really don’t care about a checklist of features and whether or not they work; I’d like to know if the game is a worthwhile whole. It’s good that you bring up film reviews; they (and indeed, all art reviews) tend to be more varied BECAUSE they’re written from an experiential perspective (by the way, do you know Armond White? He’s like the Jim Sterling of movie reviewing:

    But you’re right, the more perspectives the better, and of course I can just personally ignore Sterling for his perceived transgressions. You can call Kuo self-indulgent and pretentious, and I can call Sterling a self-righteous mouth-breather, and call it a day.

    #11 3 years ago
  12. marijnlems

    Oh and by the way, there’s a great discussion on game reviews going on in the comments section of Brainy Gamer right now:

    Terribly off-topic, I apologize.

    #12 3 years ago
  13. DSB

    Of course Kuo is free to review however he wants, and if the readers are there, then that’s validation in itself.

    For me as a traditionalist writer, that sort of thing just annoys me to no end. It’s the least effective way of communicating with people, it’s almost like leaving people behind simply to boost your ego based on something as banal as vocabulary, and marginal references. And while I wouldn’t like a laundry list of features, I do like to feel that the main setpieces of the game have been touched on.

    I just like to be careful with derogatory terms like contrarian, or “shockjockey”. Most good reviewers will seek to make an example out of select pieces they come across, for better or worse. That doesn’t mean they have an agenda to do so, or that they’re showboating – in a lot of cases I think it just means they care.

    If you see a game with obvious flaws, while everybody else is readily handing out 9s and 10s, then taking a stand and really making those flaws count, in both review and score, can be an invaluable point of view. One of my biggest beefs with the games press in recent years were the flawless reviews of Mass Effect 2. When I played it, I found a game that, although much better engineered than the first one, was pretty much an embarressment in every other way. I wish someone would’ve given that point of view.

    And the same can be done in reverse. Equally so, a good reviewer will bring out certain games to make examples of where everything is done right, which is where Bastion seems to end up for a lot of people. It just shouldn’t be allowed as an obvious truth, which no one has a right to counter.


    Great article by the way.

    #13 3 years ago
  14. Blerk

    9/10 from Edge.

    #14 3 years ago

Comments are now closed on this article.