As general rule of thumb, a work should be reviewed according to the standards of its own genre, not by the standards of other genres. On one end of the spectrum, you have action games, which should be judged mainly on their action gameplay. On the other end of the spectrum, you have visual novels, which should be judged mainly on their writing. Then you have genres like adventure games, RPGs, strategy games, sports games, simulators, action-adventures, etc. When reviewing different genres, reviewers judge them according to different sets of criteria.
In the case of Death Stranding, reviewers are presented with a game that doesn't fit neatly into any particular genre. It's not clear what the game's genre is, whether it's a delivery management simulator, survival game, adventure game, cinematic movie game, parcel delivery simulator, fetch-quest simulator, open-world game, bridge-building game, etc. Whatever it is, it seems apparent that DS is not an action-oriented game. So it wouldn't make sense to judge it according to action game standards. It doesn't make sense to criticize a game for a lack of action when it's not even trying to be an action-oriented game.
Much of the gameplay appears to be about things like delivery management, survival mechanics, building bridges, online communication, virtual social media, and yes, fetch quests. Many reviews praised the delivery management system and survival mechanics, and found them surprisingly engaging. They also praised the story, cinematics and world-building. At the same time, a number of reviewers expressed disappointment and/or frustration at the lack of action, which is what they've come to expect from a Kojima game, but many of them logically determined that it shouldn't be a deal-breaker because it's not trying to be an action-oriented game in the first place. And most ended up finding the overall experience enjoyable.
In other words, there is no conspiracy. Reviewers are simply doing their jobs. They praised what the game does well (e.g. delivery management, survival mechanics, story, cinematics, world-building) and mentioned what it lacks (i.e. lack of action), with most focusing on what the game is actually about (not the action) and finding the overall experience enjoyable. Some folks need to get over themselves and stop peddling conspiracy theories, over a game that hasn't even come out yet. Conspiracy theories are just getting tired and boring now.
Log in to comment