Undertale Review Controversy - How could this game earn a 9 in a professional Gamespot review?

Only a few months after its official release, Undertale is being called a classic title by modern gamers and has already received a lot of buzz from professional gaming journalists. At the same time, the game is receiving considerable backlash from gamers who have never played the game. A large number of comments in the forums and review page on Gamespot demonstrate that the game is being judged as "objectively worse" than triple A titles such as Bloodborne, The Witcher 3, Fallout 4, Metal Gear Solid V, and Black Ops 3 by a number of Gamespot users.

This post is dedicated to my gamer friends who are having a difficult time accepting the fact that such a simple, brief, and graphically limited game actually deserves the praise it's been receiving. It can be hard to comprehend why a game like this can earn as high or higher scores than state-of-the-art large budget titles, but I'll try to explain this in depth without boring you if that's possible. As you read on, keep in mind that these words are simply my own opinion.

This essay was partially inspired from a post on the Gamespot review page for Undertale where a user said, "So this piece of shit gets a 9 and say a game like black ops 3 takes a 7 ? why ?! even if black ops 3 is broken it deserves better score than this shit. I dont understand how those ppl rate games. hell even a mobile game is better than this." The following words are primarily in response to anyone who is under the same impression or who feels confused like this user appeared to be.

Advanced or high end graphics, physics, and mechanics might be an essential part of the experience for you, but there are a lot of gamers out here who don't require them for a game to be fun, even though they can add to the experience as I'm sure you've noticed.

In addition to that fact, there is a large population of gamers who have massive backlogs containing dozens if not more than a hundred great games we want to play, but we'll never have enough time in our life to complete them all. We make enough money to buy whatever games we want, but there will never be enough time to play through all of them. This is partially due to work, school, dating, family, and life in general being a higher priority than the games, even though we are passionate about them. It's also a result of our gaming economy where video games have become so popular that there are more good games being created now then there are hours in a persons life to play all of them. This is the state of the world that developed over time as we became adults and gaming became more mainstream. Because of those things, this demographic of gamers often appreciate a simple game that can be played through once in a few sittings such as Undertale. Even though I love games like Bloodborne, The Witcher 3, and Fallout 4, it's a breath of fresh air to play something as unique and ambiguously straight to the point as Undertale.

Some of us remember a time where we were considered nerds or outcasts for being passionate about video games. Fortunately for the newer generations of gamers, we held on to our love of video games, passed them down to our younger siblings, children, and relatives, and the negative perception of gaming has changed over time.

I've put in dozens, if not over a hundred hours into the first 2 triple A games that I mentioned and they were great experiences. That doesn't mean that those types of gameplay are the only experiences I can enjoy. It's true that AAA games require a lot more effort, development time, and money put into them, but that isn't going to guarantee the experience will be more enjoyable for every gamer. That's one of the big reasons why professional review scores are subjective and points are usually not added or subtracted for effort, game length of one play-through, development time, or budget. Music, gameplay, and story can be the biggest factors in creating an enjoyable experience for some of us, and Undertale exceeds in all three categories. This is a game that actually leaves a lasting impression on most of the people who play through it, and I can attest to that.

Another thing it does right, is that it does not waste the players time with "filler" content. The game only presents the best of its ideas and does not encourage the player to dick around with content designed to extend the experience through boring generic scenarios. Think of your entire experience with a game like Fallout 4, Skyrim, or Metal Gear Solid V. How often did you feel like, "this is repetitive / boring, but it will be worth it when I get to the really good content."? I feel that filler content is a waste of my personal gaming time, and it's only valuable to players who currently have a limited budget and can only play a few games per year. I used to be in that situation, and trust me, it gets better as you start to appreciate different things in games when you can afford to play any game you want.

Based on the content of that users comments I mentioned, I can tell that person is a young gamer, probably in the late teens at most. I don't mean that as an insult in any way, and we've all been gamers of that age at one time. I remember being baffled when short and simple games were given high scores when I was younger as well, so I think I understand where some young gamers are coming from in this regard. Undertale is the type of game you might enjoy when you're a bit older. Maybe in 10-20 years, after you've had kids, nieces and nephews, or found an appreciation for the value in the moral behind a story that pleasantly defies you're expectations at every corner. As deceptively basic as the game may look on the outside, it is very capable of drawing players in and making them feel things that they haven't felt since they were little kids. That can only happen to people who give it an honest chance and let go of whatever preconceived notions they previously had. At the same time, it won't have that effect on everyone.

It's unfortunate if you feel like people ganged up on you in response to your original comment that called Undertale a "piece of shit." I'm guessing that you already know that's how it usually goes when you demonstrate a strong opinionated stance through a comment in most forums. Just in case you didn't already know that, welcome to the internet.

Regardless of your age, it's perfectly fine if you prefer high budget triple A games and dislike simple, retro, or short games like Undertale. Just don't expect everyone else to agree with you because we all have different preferences, experiences, and life situations that influence the way we enjoy games. Game journalists and reviewers are all entitled to their own opinion and that won't always agree with your preferences. This is one of those things you'll have to get used to if you continue to spend time on video game websites and read the reviews. Just remember, a review is a single persons opinion, not much more. If you want a review to be more than that, you can simply go to metacritic.com , read a variety of reviews, and make your own judgement through collective opinions. Hopefully you don't need to be reminded repeatedly that each individual review is only a single persons opinion.

If you want to start off on the right foot in the gamer community, start by making the effort to understand the difference between complaining and constructive criticism. The forums on this site would be the perfect starting point to observe and demonstrate that since both types of comments are pretty common. Google is a good place to look for answers and advice for subjects like that.

There are some games that change peoples lives or at least influence them in some small way and become unforgettable. There is something about Undertale that makes it stand out among other games that may appear to be so much greater on the surface. Most reviewers and users have hinted at the underlying reason for this but to give it away would lessen your experience compared to taking the journey on your own. Will you ignore these strong recommendations in your search for knowledge and chalk it up to yourself as the only opinion that matters? Or will you dig deeper and concede that understanding is the greatest power we are capable of utilizing?

You can find all the spoilers you want on YouTube, but if you are intrigued at all by the hype surrounding this game, I suggest you spend the 10 dollars and buy it on Steam. If this all sounds like BS to you, then by all means, skim through some YouTube videos and try to understand what the emotional attachment to this game is all about. It wouldn't be nearly as meaningful or have the same emotional impact as getting engrossed in the game and experiencing it first hand, but as I alluded to earlier, this type of game is not for everyone.

It's been said many times in the past and it bears repeating, "never judge a book by it's cover."

My only real gripe is the reviewer not stating a single bad thing and then giving it a 9/10 instead of a 10/10. Great essay, by the way. If this were for some kind of school project, I'd give you an A.

I get to chose what I want to play and what I spend money on. Problem with telling me I don't understand it without buying it, is I just gone out and brought it. I am weary of reviews and marketing these days (one of the games that meant the most to me emotionally and I felt very compassionate about got a 6/10 on Gamespot) I don't always go on peoples recommendations, I make my decision that if it fails it's pitch with me it's not worth my time and investment.

I'm especially weary when it's a game that would otherwise fall under the radar. I don't like being pushed. I've played my fair share of quirky, indy and whatnot. I read a lot of reviews and I do some research, and this ones turns up thumbs down.

You all go ahead and enjoy it. Maybe they make a sequel. I don't hate it with a passion I'm just passing on it. I hate Halo with a passion.

I'd give it a 5 for the complete lack of effort in visuals.

They could have at least gone with 32bit sprites vs 8bit and that would have made a massive difference.

I haven't tried it yet but I plan to once I'm done with fallout4, AC, and Witcher expansion.

I was shocked it got so high reviews but then I don't see the problem. Beauty is in the eyes of the beholder, no? Graphics are not always essential.

If you can't accept indie games as legitimate games, you may not enjoy Undertale. I say this not because the game isn't objectively great, but because I believe people who think that way carry too much baggage to open up to anything that didn't have tens of millions of dollars spent on its development.

FTL broke my top 10 list of all-time favorite games, and I still play it to this day. I had more fun with Mark of the Ninja than I did with Arkham Origins (refunded Arkham Knight), most Metal Gear Solid games and every Splinter Cell game. Cave Story rocked my world when I first played it on my Wii. And let's not forget Minecraft which had already sucked me in when it was in Beta.

If you've never had a similar experience with indie games AND you didn't grow up playing NES/SNES/GB/GBC/GBA games, then you may be unreachable. But that doesn't mean these games aren't worth the praise they get.

I don't get why people are so offended by the high reviews. If it's a great game, does it matter what it looks like? Graphics aren't everything, and from the look of the game, it looks quirky and charming (at least to me). I'd rather the game be fun than look good.

Its actually pretty good

You're kidding right? People are getting all bitchy about this game getting a 9/10 because it looks like a 90s retro game? Here we have Metal Gear Solid V: Phantom Pain, the most boring, repetitive, storyless open world game I've ever played gets a 10/10. Now that's a truly overrated piece of shit. Even Fallout 4 with it's dumbed down gameplay and it's plethora of glitches some how gets a 9/10. Too many overrated garbage games this generation and people are going to shit on something that actually deserves it's score?

There isn't really anything "bad" to remark against the game, that's why there's nothing listed under "cons".

Graphics are going to be totally down to what your visual preference is. Personally I think they are too simple but if I were writing a review I wouldn't say flat-out they were bad.

I bought the game because of all the positive things players and professional journalists alike were saying about it and I'm very glad I did.

People who complain about the review scores should probably finish the game themselves before passing judgement.

And people who are only interested in the latest "triple-A" big-budget games, there's no reason to even read the review here. This game isn't going to have any effect on what you spend your time on.

Nah, GS has just lost its way these days, giving crappy games high scores to generate traffic, like giving uprezzed Journey a 10 for instance.

People feel this game is a lazy effort while you say it cuts filler. Pong cuts filler. I think lots of folks are like me and are tired of reviewers praising little indie titles like this to the high heavens, when they only appeal to a very small part of the gaming community.

Why are we focusing on just GS? The game apparently is being lauded across the board. There must be something about the game that's worth admiration. I think instead what we have here is another case of a gamers being upset because THEIR favorite AAA games aren't getting the scores they want, and another indie game is getting scores they don't want. Just shut up and play.

lol When will people learn?

Sometimes I think anybody or any site deemed as "professional" could paste any score to any game and some of you guys would eat it up and want more.

The reason so many gamers have problems with situations like this is because they feel like these experiences aren't part of their field. Kinda like a movie buff rolling his eyes at critical acclaim of some pretentious indie film receiving similar awards to some of film's greats. Or Justin Beiber or the Backstreet Boys getting a Grammy.

These games might (or might not) be good, but do they really deserve to be judged on the same scale as games that are much larger and are more complicated works? Apparently a lot of people do not think so, including myself.

They are giving it 9/10 in the indie catagory even though they are not addressing this, they are not comparing it side by side with AAA titles but i guess everyone knows this. Also, i havn't played this game my self but i know Gamespot are rating games high when it comes to intuitive and original games.

Problem is they don't differentiate them. Journey won GS goty a few years back.

I think part of the problem is that you can get a room full of friends together who are similar enough, yet will often have wild divergence in music, games, the food they like, etc. But somehow critics across the net all have the same opinion? That is immediately suspect...with anything. Not talking about this game in particular, just speaking on critics in general. It's hard not to suspect pandering or rampant snobbery sometimes. A great example is the Dark Souls franchise, which is incredibly polarizing with gamers...yet game critics across the board give it high scores ? The most we get is 2 mixed opinions? That is the one thing I enjoy metacritic for - noting the divergence in opinions. Lacking any is the equivalent of making a song that everyone likes. Do you seriously believe anyone has done that? Of course not.

It is my personal game of the year so far, it was an incredible game.

User comments that are negative without discussing anything about the game apart from graphics are from users who have not played the game.

Ori and the Blind Forest is one of my favorite games of all time. Having said that I wouldn't expect it to be a goty contender simply because I know the game isn't of the same scale as a game like The Witcher 3, and I know the amount of work, money and time puts it in a class above an indie title.

Those things need to be taken in to account by not only reviewers, but by consumers and posters as well.

@homestar99:This is because reviews don't start at 10 and have points deducted with each negative. Even if there's nothing really worth mentioning as far as negatives, the reviewer may have felt the game didn't do enough to warrant a 10. If a game does several things well, I figure the game would need to do most of those things exceptionally well in order to earn a 10.

OP: Great post. Looking through the comments though, it's pretty clear some people just read the title and made an assumption on what you were discussing.

I usually avoid bringing up user reviews because they're shit, but out of 14,698 user reviews the game has on Steam 98% of them are positive. So it's not just pretentious critics praising the game, it's pretty much everyone that's played it. Honestly I enjoyed the game much more than any AAA game that came out this year. It really is a great game.

The people complaining are a small minority that just want to whine about something regardless as to whether its bad or not. They're pretty much trolls but with less self awareness.

Ok, but that doesn't address my other point. Why should a doll house be considered the same as an actual house? While they might deserve praise, they don't deserve to be judged by the same standards as more complicated works, yet I see nothing separating them or distinguishing them from each other.

A review is an opinion.

You taking it as something more is hilarious.

The best doll house is worth a lot more than an average house.

If a game is better then why does it matter if it's smaller scale? Are you really ever going to say "well this game looks like the best thing ever, but it's 2D while this piece of crap is 3D so I'll buy that instead"? Of course you won't, you would go for whatever game is better. Sure most indie games aren't as good as the average AAA game, but in cases like this where it is better than most AAA games then obviously it should score higher than most AAA games.

If you shouldn't raise the score because it's indie, then why should you lower the score because it's indie? Of course price differences does complicate the matter slightly as better could mean "best value" and Undertales relatively low price makes it incredibly good value, however that isn't exclusive for indie vs AAA, games come in a wide variety of prices.

@superflyzero: Yup and Journey truly deserved it for being such an original game with awesome artwork and just that perfect flow through the entire game even though it didn't last that long but the game it self is quite a masterpiece and has truly left it's mark in the gaming history.

@toast_burner: Because the amount of money and work going in to a project matters, and should at the very least be taken in to account. Can you seriously sit here and say that because a rare toy might hold some exceptional value, that it's really on the same level as a monumental piece of architect?

Does a hotwheel deserve the exact same treatment of respect as a real car? Hell no.

How would you feel if you spent several years working on a large project, a very good project, and some other company receives more awards than you did if they only spent a few months making something?

A better example would be if a little leaguer was on time magazine instead of Tom Brady for athlete of the year, or if a marathon runner received lesser praise than a guy who runs around the block.

Not by a long shot. GS lost a ton of traffic and credibility after that absurdity.

Destiny was the highest budget game of all time. Are you really trying to tell me that it's the best game ever simply because some publisher threw tons of money at it?

If I spend years building a house and it falls down as moments after completion then it was a shit house. The amount of time I put into it is irrelevant. This isn't primary school, you don't get points for effort.

Besides Undertale took 3 years to make, that's about the same amount of time as a lot of AAA games. The developer obviously put a lot of blood and sweat into the game, so I don't know why you're trying to undermine it. But even if he made it in a single night as a joke, that still doesn't change the fact that it's a highly enjoyable game.

@toast_burner: Highly enjoyable game, but not made at the level of difficulty as other games. Also, those games are not houses that are falling down and are not shit games.

Praise is deserved for quality indie products, but they shouldn't be judged by the exact same standards as larger games. That's just common sense.

I don't know, the quality of destiny is comparable to a house that wobbles. And again what do you mean by "level of difficulty as other games"? Are you trying to claim that the developer of Undertale didn't put effort into his game? Because he obviously did. Why does it matter how many people and how much money was involved in the product? You're reviewing the product, not the development process.

Should Destiny be scored higher than any other game simply due to how much money they spent making it? What about Duke Nukem Forever? They spent over a decade making that game so surely it must be one of the best games ever.

So what point are you trying to make? Indie games should be held to a lower standard and therefore get higher review scores than AAA games?

If we see same type of games getting poured out year after year and then one year a small low budget indie company makes this truly amazing and intuitive game that they spent probably just as much time making as the big companies do on AAA games with hundreds and even thousands of workers, offcourse it deserves the praise and recognition and maybe even a GOTY award if it stands out enough that particular year. It's not all about technical superiority or advanced gameplay design, sometimes, simplicity is often the best, there are some games that has proven this up through the years, games like Shadow of the collossus for instance just to name one other than Journey.

@toast_burner: Undertale devs didn't have to go through as much work as CDPR did, not even remotely as much work, like research, scale, video capturing, voice acting contracts, studio capturing, world design etc.

And Destiny is just another big budget game, never did I say it was the best game in existence, just that the two games in my example are from different classes. ( As a side note, the game isn't as bad as some say. )

I don't care about scores in particular, I'm talking about game awards, like goty. It's just not fair by any standard or measure to give indie games these awards, so they should have special categories.

You do realise that CDPR is made up of multiple people? They didn't have one guy doing all of that. Undertale was almost entirely made by one guy, so that one guy would have been working as hard if not harder than anyone at CDPR.

If the game is the best game of the year then why shouldn't it get GOTY? You talk about fairness but how is excluding a game from awards based on who made it fair?

Because it can't be the best game of the year. Money matters. Content matters. Scale matters.

Money is the most important thing in the world. It allows for grander, richer things. You don't offer the same amount of credit to bum joe as you do Donald Trump. You consider all things, not just how a game made you feel personally. At least you do if you have any credibility and professionalism about you.

Gamespot fucked up giving Journey game of the year, and their sponsors would agree since they pay the bills. You won't see that happening again any time soon.

And why does money make it better? Like I said they're reviewing the game, not the development process.

If bum Joe made something good then it's pretty horrible for you to dismiss it just because he doesn't have lots of money. Vincent Van Gogh died poor, so was all his art shit?

@toast_burner: You continually bring up extreme and unlikely situations while I've included multiple common sense examples. You also keep asking questions already answered.

I've given you clear scenarios as to why money matters, and why a more difficult effort is more important and valuable than a lesser one.

If you can't provide solid, common sense examples to support your views, there's no need to stretch this dog tail chase discussion out any further.

@toast_burner: I'll do one more common example of the worth of money vs feelings: Let's say you have a daughter, and she has two potential husbands lined up. One, she loves with all her heart, but he's a bum bad boy with a shitty outlook on life, and the other she's indifferent to, a total bore, but he has a bright future as a Harvard grad with a great attitude for life.

Would you really let her marry the bum, or would you convince her that her life would be exponentially better marrying the boring one? And consider what 99% of other parents would choose.

Which is more important, feelings or money?

Ok you were trolling. GG

@toast_burner: Only as much as you were trolling by pretending to not know the value, influence and worth of money. :)

Wait you want people on the internet to learn things , have you met the internet people before?

What utter nonsense.

Money does not mean jack shit when it comes to if a game is good or not, if you are basing your judgments on how much the developers have spent, that is on you and you will hopefully learn as you grow older.

Gamespot did not **** up when they gave Journey GOTY, nor did they **** up when they gave Raymen 3ds game of the year or if they give it to Undertale.

A review and a GOTY title is based on the staffs personal opinion nothing else, if you do not like then that is your prerogative and you can go on youtube or twitter and rant all you want.

I've had UnderTale for awhile now but haven't played it yet, it'll probably be January when I give it the respect it deserves. Though all I've heared are positive things.

I'll humor you and take this seriously. I would strongly advise her against either guy. I would certainly not advice her to go for the rich guy. Money can only lead to happiness to a certain extent and in the end, I want my daughter to be happy, not be rich. I would advise her to keep looking for something better. So, yeah, it's about feelings, but it's not necessarily about feelings of love for someone, but about what needs to be done to make you feel happy. If money turns out to be the thing that makes my daughter happy and if she's willing to put up with a total douche, then who am I to stop her? Similarly, if being with someone she truly cares about makes her happy and if she's willing to face some trouble on the way, then who I am to stop her? In both cases I would say she can do better and in both cases I would say she should do what makes her the happiest.

So feelings. Money is not a guaranteed happiness provider. And that's also the case with videogames. That whole daughter story can pretty much be applied to videogames if you change a few words. Videogames are entertainment products. They are made for the consumer. They are meant to be experienced. So the experience one gets from consuming the product is all that matters. Money and effort can lead to more enjoyment, but they can also be completely irrelevant.

If money and effort aren't guarantees for an enjoyable product, it's very hard to always take them into account as factors that determine the quality of the experience. All the effort would be wasted if a product is made by people who lack talent or are restricted in their expression. All the money would be wasted if it was spent on the wrong things. You can only judge the product that's in your hands. The effort and money that surround it are a mess of speculation and presumption.

LOL

Nice try Troll, Nice Try

You did decent up to this post but than it just became way to obvious and a obvious troll is well Obvious ;)

It really doesn't deserve such high appraisal. I've enjoyed my first playthrough of this game and the subsequent ones as well, but they never were very impressive from any standpoint except the soundtrack

The gameplay itself is quite shallow. Being able to spare everyone is a nice option but doesn't excuse a very simple and plain combat system which could have easily been more complex without being overwhelming. Overworld gameplay is well-realized during the first half of the game but afterwards its quality drops significantly. The fact that the world is quite small doesn't help it either, and there is no reason it couldn't have been larger and boast more variety. Lack of variety seems to be one of the key problems, with the number of enem The undisputed highlight of gameplay is one particular boss battle which could very easily be labeled as artificial difficulty, but taking into account its relevance to the story its difficulty factor is quite fitting.

Storywise it leaves much to be desired as well. Gamespot's reviewer especially praised its subverting of expectations, but if anything this works to the game's detriment. The best thing about is a dark tone which was established immediately and had great potential, but the game never builds upon it and it is squandered early on in favor of the subversion gimmick and replaced with a much inferior mishmash lighthearted and goofy tones. The second best asset of the writing is an underlying storyline which spans throughout the game and is woven in quite a lot of dialogue, but is never expanded upon and in the end clearly only meant to add some mystique which ultimately comes off as cheap

Can we get rid of scores already?

It has a 94 on Metacritic................

It is fully deserving of its 9/10 and is a masterpiece.

Yes, please.

Do you have any proof to back up that claim?

My proof is... *drum roll* .... ... that I'm just messin' with you guys. :D

All opinions that aren't indicative of inherent quality.

And Metacritic is highly flawed. Use OpenCritic (all reviews are equally weighted and no special treatment is given to anyone). It's 95 there.