Review: Valiant Hearts: The Great War

This game has a "throbbing hint pigeon" in it.

[@josiahaustin9606]

I think you were expecting a very different game.

[@TheStephenm1993]

For me, it felt like a playable Horrible Histories game, designed to be light hearted, but forward enough for you to understand the point, whether the person playing was aged 5 or 55.

[@AGayTwitterArtist]

Just a note on the art style: It's art is fairly reminiscent of the old political cartoons of the era, as in the single image drawings with the harsh line work that came with simple sketchy and printing press lithography that was available for mass production.

[@lewisaino]

I remember Freddie looked like an Absolute Unit lol

[@FlyingFox1984]

Hey Bunnyhop, I usually like your reviews but for this one, there's something you missed and it's essential: the cultural aura of this game. It has defined everything Valiant Hearts turned out to be. It was obviously designed to be played and enjoyed by anyone on the occasion of the 100th anniversary of WWI. It was never, ever going to be a game with groundbreaking and innovative mechanics. Here in France, Valiant Hearts was a big hit. It got more than one GOTY award. Its popularity is really something which could not have been achieved through some of the stuff you wish it had. It also needed the design choices you dislike so much (animations, drawing, voices) as they look absolutely not inappropriate to people here. They actually look perfect for this kind of story because they draw inspiration from so many similar French cartoons or movies. No, really, I think Ubisoft Montpellier did their job well, there. They don't deserve to be criticized for not daring enough things with this game. It simply could not have happened.

[@lewisaino]

It worked and earned its place.

[@stalinov91]

That is undeservingly harsh. Usually when a reviewer is saying something is bad while showing the part that he is talking about, it's agreeable most of the time because I'm a gamer too and I can see it to a certain level too. But I just don't feel like that for this title. George is saying look, this is bad, the puzzle is bad, it looks bad, animation is bad... I was looking at what he was displaying and I'm feeling like "it's not that bad, what is he talking about?" most of this review.

[@llucllumador380]

you have to ask a question to yourself, Why am I playing this game?

[@tmadeviant5375]

Lluc Llumador you are playing this game because of the story. the story hooked me. i just played the whole game and this guy who review's it, DOESNT get what this game is about

[@llucllumador380]

jasd hugo if you play only for the story, then better to watch a movie right? I mean, if you could play the history...but all the interesting things seem to happen while you're not playing

[@gregorycomey]

Thing is... It's bad.

[@dstarr3]

While I can't say I loved Valiant Hearts, I do have to respectfully disagree with most of your points here. I think the biggest misunderstanding here is that this game is an educational tool first and foremost. Education was a much higher priority above gameplay. And this game was certainly far from a failure when interpreted as education. This game is designed for teens, probably very young teens, likely to be played alongside history lessons in school. And the aesthetic is certainly far less grim than the subject material discussed in the game, but I think that deliberate choice was made to still create a game that was fun to play while learning about a very not-fun period in history. If this game were endlessly dreary as the war was, I'd have had very little interest in playing it, let alone reading all of the little historical factoids that appear. You are correct, the puzzles were simplistic and illogical at times, sometimes even frustratingly so, and the actual gameplay of this game is certainly the weakest part, which is unfortunate. Though the simplicity can be defended as being appropriate for its demographic, that notwithstanding, this game wasn't designed to revolutionize how puzzle games work or how they're made or played. The gameplay itself is just there to make it interesting to turn the pages of a history book. It's a simple vehicle for the entertaining delivery of education. The gameplay and the story is there to make you want to move forward, and to learn more, and to care about the people in this war and the people affected by the war. And it's certainly succeeded in that. I cared about every single character all the way through this game. I cared enough to read each little factoid, and I cared enough to really develop a new perspective on the people that suffered through and after the war. And besides that, I certainly know a lot more now about WWI than I did before I played. This compassion and this education were, I think, the primary objectives of this game, and in this case, this game succeeded enormously. Valiant Hearts as a game: pretty basic and even poor, yes. Valiant Hearts as education and story-telling, though: phenomenal. And I think that's exactly what they were going for.

[@RaidenRadio]

While I agree on the Baron pulling you out of an otherwise good story, I disagree with your point about the unrealistic aspect of luck. I think it works because when dealing with war, luck is the perfect metaphor for survival. Stepping onto a battlefield and being able to walk away means that none of the bullets zipping past actually hit you. That is the nature of warfare, so portraying that through good fortune makes sense. It also makes sense that when overcoming impossible odds, trying anything with what little resources you have is a fair portrayal. You're trapped behind a barricade with a crate full of grenades, what else can you do? Throw a grenade at the structure, the fact that it worked means that we're experiencing the story of those who were fortunate (or lucky) enough for it to work. But that also means that there were countless others who weren't as fortunate.

[@MrBirdistheword444]

This game is a great education tool on the overlooked and brutality of the first WW. I'm glad this game exists. I've been fascinated about the first WW for years, ever since founding out my great grandfather fought in it. Also the soundtrack is amazing.

[@danielsettle3942]

I completely disagree with this review. The puzzles pace out the game well so it never hits you with too much emotion and the art style is just fine.

[@Chromeberd]

You're going to need to give a more elaborate explanation than that to do your claim justice.

[@toonrat]

I just want to say, I really don't like this "Too video gamey" trope that's poppping up in general video game reviews. Isn't being a video game kind of the point of being a game? 4 years ago, people complained about games being too much like interactive movies and now we're complaining about them being video games again?

[@xdeser2949]

You cant please people like that. Some people legitimately think that cynicism is a good thing when it comes to a medium you enjoy, they will find anything at all to criticize. Theres nothing wrong with constructive criticism, but people take it too far

[@FeatherWait]

***** Well said. Tomb Raider ( another ubisoft game oddly enough) has similar problems; great feel, visuals and atmosphere but it tries to fake depth and technicality with undercooked game mechanics like arbitrary experience points and perks, trying real hard to be Skyrim but offering too linear an experience. It would be a better game if all these gamey mechanics were stripped away, and the game focused on being cinematic.

[@FeatherWait]

***** Well said. Tomb Raider ( another ubisoft game oddly enough) has similar problems; great feel, visuals and atmosphere but it tries to fake depth and technicality with undercooked game mechanics like arbitrary experience points and perks, trying real hard to be Skyrim but offering too linear an experience. It would be a better game if all these gamey mechanics were stripped away, and the game focused on being cinematic.

[@JayXdbX]

Jim Maguire I don't think so we do. So for me, gamey is not when something lacks uniqueness but when something is done because it's a game. Lets take mega man. Now mega man can walk left or right, but can't jump so we add a jump mechanic. Now you tell me if this is gamey, i'll give you a second to think this over. Of course not! the reason why we allow megaman to jump is so you can interact with the levels and use that 3rd dimension. To be exact, you didn't implement "jump" because Megaman was a game but because you were increasing the gaming experince. Now lets take this random racing robots game we decide to take. It plays like Need for speed game except humanoid robots are being driven. Now i have this brilliant idea; lets add a jump mechanic since this is a game about human like robots. BEST IDEA EVER!. Now i got to ask, why did this make the game better? Can you use the jump function to use short cuts? i didn't think that far ahead so nope. Can you jump over other cars? Can't jump high enough for that. This right here is "Gamey". It's doing something just because it's a game and not because it makes your game better. Let me give you example of gamey in real life. In a game called payday 2 their is this mission called Framing frame where you have to sneak into a house, find 5 items to get a code, just so you can open a vault where you're going to be placing coke *outside of*. The problem with the mission is that you need to open a vault that has no reason to be open (unless you want extra gold) for the main mission

[@MrAfroShark]

Stop saying "gaminess." The word to describe the concept you're all extrapolating on is ludonarrative dissonance.

[@Playam]

Thoughtful review as always, the world IS ready for critiques of this depth.

[@tmadeviant5375]

the review is way to subjective, i played i loved it by far better than any 60$ game i bought this year! this guy actually is a hater, who couldnt appretiate it because of game mechanics and the quality, but if this is the most important thing for you, then you shouldnt play it, but not every game is about how it looks, some are only about the story, like this game! its just hooking, i didnt care about anything but the story, thats why i played in 1 day unlike over a week

[@valentine12]

jasd hugo He gave a pretty good unbiased critique of the game. You sound to biased and are not seeing that. Pointing out flaws in something doesn't mean that you hate it or dislike it.

[@toomuchstarbucks6787]

jasd hugo Can't stand people who say "Some games are just for the story." No, no they aren't. At that point, they become books. Books and movies are "just about story". What makes games great is their power to engage the player through interactive experiences, using the GAMEPLAY to enforce the story, rather than the two being completely separate entities. At the end of this game, ask yourself this. What does the gameplay say for the game, or rather for the story. If you want something that is "just' for the story, read a book.

[@ZogDaMegnivizint]

jasd hugo There is no such thing as an unbiased entertainment review. We get the idea that journalists should be unbiased from traditional news journalism, the kind we haven't seen, especially on the news, in over twenty years. News reporters are supposed to be employed to inform the audience with as much detail as possible, the outline of an event someone thinks is newsworthy. They aren't supposed in inject their personal feelings about the matter, engage in speculation, or offer any kind of analysis. They just report the facts. That's why they're called reporters. Entertainment journalism is a different animal entirely. George, or whoever you prefer to listen to, is analyzing his experience with a game to determine why he, and by proxy his audience, might have liked or disliked it. Some elements in that analysis might be so glaring that they are objective, but for the most part a reviewer is called upon to make a subjective value judgement based on personal preference. It's an opinion. If you name a reviewer you think is objective in her/his analysis, I'll show you that you've merely identified someone who's biased, subjective, personal opinions more often than not agree with yours. What separates good reviewers and bad reviewers is their ability to articulate their reasoning. George outlined his priorities for a game, and why this one failed to measure up. It wasn't hard to follow, and if you find you disagree then you'll know next time he negatively reviews a game along similar lines, that you might in fact like that game. Personally I agree with most of the review, especially what he said about the game's aesthetic, which had nothing to do with graphical fidelity and everything to do with sloppy and lazy art choices. Since you value storytelling in games so highly, the faceless characters in Valiant Hearts should have really bothered you. That aesthetic choice dehumanized those characters, and turned them into trope constructs. Anyway I doubt I've changed your mind about Bunnyhop with this, but next time you try to attack a critic, you might want to remember it's more complicated than shouting "Bias! Subjective! Hater!", because any attempt to explain those charges will only reveal your own biases.

[@Frikgeek]

TooMuchStarbucks That's idiotic. That's like saying that movies are all about special effects and visual direction, and if you want good sound you should listen to a radio drama or if you want good writing just read a book. I'm not saying that bad gameplay is needed for a good story, but a good story is often helped by having gameplay alongside it, even if it is a bit shoddy. Just like we have games that are all gameplay with 0 story we should have games that focus on the story more than direct gameplay. Something like the recent Telltale games are a great example, they don't contain nearly as much gameplay as traditional point n click adventures and they're carried by their stories and character interaction.

[@dark_nation_7]

After finally playing this game, I can agree with most of what George has said here. For someone who plays a lot of war games, this one has got to be the cheesiest one so far. For me, the puzzles and the uninteresting game-play sort of killed it for me. The vast majority of the game-play is so antithetical to the entire sentiment the game is trying to evoke that it's hard not to notice it. On the plus side, a lot of the environments are really well done and the game is certainly well-polished (when they're not zooming in on low res assets that is).

[@KenTWOu]

George, I think you're missing the point that's why you're too harsh with this little game. It was clearly made for kids. I mean, you're sitting with your daughter and she's asking you really awkward questions about wars Factoids help you answer them. Papers and DEFCON certainly were not made for this kind of situations, were not made for kids. That's why there is nothing wrong with its cute art style and/or animation. More over, if this game was trying to be more realistic some of its scenes will be unbearable. Also you didn't mention that It's possible to turn off all hints in this six-hour game. By the way, I've spent twelve hours to finish it and find all collectibles too.

[@JayXdbX]

I don't see how this game is for kids. I really don't. Is it the art style? Well then i point to adventure time as a show aimed at kids that adults like and has one of the most ugly and childish art styles i've seen.

[@KenTWOu]

JayXdbX It's everything. Everything says this is educational game for kids + adults explaining them its real anti-war message. Really abstract art style to make horrible and violent scenes less shocking. Simplified voice overs without dialogue system with abstract icons over NPCs heads. The absence of lethal weapons. Even really rare 'shooting' sequences (were mentioned in the video) have more focus on destroying obstacles, vehicles and turrets but not real people inside/behind them. Simplified puzzles with straightforward hint system. Funny racing episodes to make the game less dark and depressing. Traditional narrative technics + cheesy villain. Even interactions with cute little dog say this game is for kids. You can't compare it with something purposely cold, rational and heartless like DEFCON. There is no point do it. The game wasn't made for hardcore players, critics or game dev awards. There is nothing ground breaking in it from gameplay point of view. It's a good little educational game and that's it. I'm glad Ubisoft made it, I really am.

[@llucllumador380]

KenTWOu wrong, not made for kids but for hipsters

[@KenTWOu]

Lluc Llumador Please, continue your crusade and witch hunting. It's adorable.

[@llucllumador380]

the opium has already worn off so there will be no more of that...

[@yarimo]

I agree with some parts of this review. But complaining about the cel shading on it? Why would you complain about it. That is a clear stylistic choice, not everything needs to be textured. Of course I would also prefer a classic 2D animation but games have budget and they don't all get the same amount, specially if its a first try like this, the examples you gave are games that are sequels and already proven themselves. Games compromise a lot with bad animation. Hell look at Mass Effect 3 specially the ending. Shepard's wobbling around with dead eyes, things pop everywhere. Not everybody masters this like Naughty Dog does. The animation in this games serves its purpose and its funny it has slapstick and it works. I'm sure that simplicity is something you forgive in a lot of other games you love. I can agree with the rest of your review.... mostly.

[@yarimo]

That is not correct. Im a 3d animator and I work in the industry. Cel shading originates from cel animation, that is why its called cel shading. 3D is mimicking the effect with shaders.

[@gustavo13k]

Yeah but, the Dog, George, THE DOG

[@Coderkoss]

I think this review is totally off this is the art style they were going for so how are you bringing it up as a negative.

[@wolfedya1]

Wow, George, you were pretty harsh on this one, I assume your expectations were pretty high given that you were apparently impressed with the beginning and unfortunately disappointed with with the plateau of mundane puzzles, that seem to be standing between each interesting story section, but I urge you not to judge a game harshly for it's look like this. It's a deliberate art style after all, you can't really say it's good or bad per se, it really is all about whether you like the look or not. Maybe it's just me, but you did not emphasize enough on it being your opinion as much as it being hard placed fact. Anyway, all that aside, I completely agree on the rest.

[@jhett7]

He can say it's good or bad. Art is subjective. He also gives reasons as to why he believes it is bad (I havent played it, but from what I watched on this I can see where he is coming from). What you need to remember is that 'reviews' are opinion pieces and you have your own brain to think for itself. If he says, "this art is bad" you're brain is more than capable to say, "Hey, I find this appealing...therefore it is good."

[@AwesomeShocker]

I understand what you mean. When a reviewer says that something is bad in a game I like, or that a whole game I like is bad, deep inside me, it kinda feels, but then I remind myself: Reviews are and always have been opinion-based, whether the reviewer acknowledges that or not. If I say something is bad in a video game, it means that, in my opinion, it's bad. I'm not gonna say that for every single thing I don't like, that it's my opinion. It's redundant. Though, sometimes, this can be misconstrued, but I wouldn't say George is like that.

[@tmadeviant5375]

i am not even sure this guy, who did the review. has a high enough IQ to even do a review. he is fkn subjective, which is totally the wrong way to do a review!

[@EhCanadianGamer]

jhett7 Yes that's what a review is. Unless you're talking about reviews from big websites like IGN and Gamespot. To me their reviews are pathetic, they really are. To me the mainstream gaming journalism isn't critical enough. But when they are being "critical" it's because of popular opinion. Or for some other reasons involving money.

[@TheThreadWeaver]

It's kind of a Catch 22 (hah, anti-war reference) that Valiant Hearts is what it is. It's great to see the game handle this subject matter, and it has good moments in it. It's refreshing, in it's own way. But it's a shame that it also has a real juxtaposition in its game elements, enough to make people think "Well it's boring, so I won't play it." The sad part is that in our world, where you effectively "vote with your money", not buying this game basically sends a message to the company that "This is not a game that people like to play, so we should avoid risks like this in the future", but buying the game might encourage the idea of "People seemed to enjoy the way the gameplay was set out in this game. We should make more just like it." It's really a tricky thing if you want to support this direction in gaming (in terms of subject matter), even though you may not support the gameplay.

[@happyk7512]

Thank god. I got this game because of the massive critical acclaim surrounding it and i was kinda perplex because of how obvious its flaws are, yet no one seemed to mention them. I think the game succeeds in pretty much everything that it wanted to do in terms of storytelling and being and edutainment game if you wish to see it as one, yet everything else just seemed like it was there just to be there. This could have possibly been a result of the game not being given the budget it deserved or the crew working on it not being very familiar with this kind of gameplay, but no matter what the reason, but i think given more budget, development time and streamlining, this could have turned out to be one of, if not the best game of 2014. (Not that it didn't show up on everybody's highlight list either way). It's also the only game i can think of that would be made better by adding excessive gore.

[@5686darryl]

i think you have a misunderstanding of what sequential art and cartooning is.

[@MrSeventyAce]

"none of them have eyes" WHAAA HOW DIDN'T I NOTICE THAT, ITS SO WEIRD

[@prahanormal]

When they first showed off this game the first thing I thought was "wow that's some awful animations." I think the art style would be way more serviceable if it wasn't for this awful tweenie style. It wouldn't be great by any means, but it wouldn't look quite as bad as it does now.

[@JE-ij7fx]

So this is mostly a meta comment about how people dislike George saying bad things about the art style. Like, one of the things I read a lot in the comments was that it shouldn't be criticized because it's either 1) a specific art choice or 2) on a low budget. So the first one doesn't make any sense as a defense of the art style. Yes, it's a deliberate choice, but being a deliberate choice doesn't make it the right choice. I think George is right to point out that the obviously flat, comic book style creates dissonance between what the style suggests and what the game wants to say. So you got basic, flat, emotionless characters with a story that wants to be about something deep and important. It doesn't gel. The second makes even less sense. We've seen for years how good and interesting styles can be made from low budget projects. I mean, it's kind of common knowledge now. So I find this to be a very weak argument. Low budget shouldn't mean unfinished.

[@a_lethe_ion]

well the style is a bit like darkes dungeons in nicer. So i am pretty sure its deliberate, they even tried to made transitions appear comic-styly. The rating of a style is deeply subjective, like I hate the style of ff12 and 13, I just find it bad, but that snot because its made bad but beicause I dont like it. So its important to say that this is subjective.

[@domhawes8166]

This is an incredible game. The graphics are fine and the animations are suppose to be that way as the game is portrayed as a comic book like thing. The story is amazing and the game play made me think a lot but it made sense as once u start to explore, things start to peace together in my head. I know its your opinion, and that what I have just said is mine, but don't you think you have been a little too harsh? being the fact this is £11.99 on steam.

[@TheStapleGunKid]

I actually liked this game, but I did have a problem with it in that it's supposed to be a gritty dark game about the horrors of war, yet it has me infiltrating enemy strongholds single handedly and getting past guards by knocking them out with my fists or a soup ladel! I liked art style and story, but it's hard to take the anti-war message of the game so seriously when the situations and gameplay mechanics are so cartoonish. Also I agree with Bunnyhop that the stereotypical mustache twirling villain was a terrible idea. The story didn't need a villain. The villain of the game was supposed to be the war itself.

[@HRAKLEITOSTHESS]

it's just you....

[@Prattical]

It's really not

[@Inogat]

Man, it would be like a cool super power. Everything I blow up happens to fall perfectly in place!

[@straitJacketFashion]

Throughout this review I kept thinking that I should replay Machinarium and Valkyria Chronicles. The first being an aesthetically pleasing and logical point and click. The second tonally achieves what Valiant Hearts appears to be aiming for.

[@AlipheeseFateburn]

Looks like a flash game.

[@Gabriel-ic3sr]

I don't think you understand this game very well...

[@jmalmis]

The cutscenes does kinda look like they were made in flash.

[@LordFang1217]

I will not be purchasing the game because the creators made the Germans villains. The Germans were not the villains in WW1 and it glosses over the historical causes for the war, and the reasons each nation entered into the war. Maybe I'm expecting to much from a game like this but, any game that claims to be giving the history of WW1 can not gloss over the causes of it.

[@kevincass9917]

Ehhh, I wouldn't say they made the Germans solely the villains. They showed the Germans able to feel compassion for the other characters, such as that one soldier who Emile rescued from the mine-shaft and in turn saved him from being captured by his comrades, or Walt's owner who was just a medic on the frontline and was rather kind to Karl. Now, for Baron von Dorf, I like to think that he's the villain not because he's German, but because of his war-obsessed nature. The man is a war hawk first and foremost, and if anyone were to represent the cruel nature of war, it had to be someone like that.

[@WannabeMarysue]

just from watching the video, another problem with the art style is line width mixing. In a cartoon art style where objects have noticeable black line art, objects in the foreground have thick outlines, objects distant have thin ones (and sometimes are drawn with less detail so they don't look more detailed than foreground objects), and obviously the line widths in between are adequately in the middle ground. It's perspective, one of the ways 2D does perspective. However, in this game, the line width is all over the place. This suggests things were placed and scaled with no consideration for what the line widths would do to the perspective, and probably why it looks so flat. That's probably why the good looking 2D games you pointed out went without hard outlines, because managing line widths is really hard in a videogame. But I mean it's not just games. It's a common problem in television cartoon animation too, especially the low-budget kind that overuses tween animation as well, so i'm not surprised to see the two turn up together.

[@graysquaredd]

What the fuck is a throbbing hint pigeon

[@AndyJourney]

In general the puzzles were fine, it's the incredibly contrived ones that leave a bad taste. Like why is that pipework so needlessly complex? How did that cogwheel get up there? Why can't I just stomp on these weak wooden planks? etc... Even though I overall liked the game, I'm still giving this review a thumbs up.

[@ColinJWiens]

Didn't play the game mostly because, as this video sort-of said, it tries to weave truth and fiction into a confusing mess; every art asset and story is more fantasy than WWI, and yet somehow they tried to teach the player about WWI.

[@flowermaze___]

"This game has a "throbbing hint pigeon" in it." ...of course

[@TijmenRaasveld]

I wholeheartedly agree with this.

[@ViktorKruger99]

6:24 This is what happens when you learn medicine from professor Dance Dance Revolution :P

[@justletmelistthese]

At least it is not Gone Home.

[@dlaroc]

It's not a AAA title. It sound like that's what the reviewer was expecting. The game is only 15 dollars. The art design is nice. It meant to have an older comic style art, which it does well. I don't know how the reviewer missed that. This game wasn't meant to have super graphics and artwork... :/

[@spadeym]

I agree. It felt like Ubi was trying too hard to dodge the inevitable 'that's not a game' claim by cramming in familiar puzzle elements. I like that they are making something a bit less mainstream, but at the same time they played awkwardly safe, and those two intentions didn't mix too well.

[@primroan5354]

I enjoyed Valiant Hearts for what it was, and I can't help but respect it. It tried, and I think what it represents in the big picture of the games industry is something that shouldn't be brushed aside (not that you were doing that in the video.) Whenever people talk about the games industry crash they always point to the big publishers and their business strategies involving development. Activision, EA, Square Enix, and Ubisoft all catch flak for chasing the next CoD. For going after that huge game. For spending tons of money on voice acting, motion capture, and everything else, then expecting a profitable return. Ubisoft is still making catastrophes like Watch Dogs, but it's also making this. They aren't expecting the big returns for a game like Valiant Hearts. They're willing to make a smaller game and be okay with getting the smaller profit. That's good. It may be true about big business ruining a niche... but I still want to see more of this in AAA games industry. I want more variety. The niche of artsy games made by indie devs is quite malleable. If it starts to get watered down by big publishers, it'll just take on a different form. I'm not worried about that. But you're SO right about the gameplay in this. It's so tropey and so Ubisoft. It's like they just glanced over other artsy games then ran down a checklist of gameplay elements and shoved them in. Far Cry 3, Assassins Creed, Watch Dogs, it's the same deal. I think gamers are either okay with this, or they're not.

[@SwedishEmpire1700]

what game is that nuke scene from? COD?

[@thesecondkat]

I'm pretty sure that's from the first modern warfare.

[@ukeyaoitrash2618]

I have one problem with this game: it is not fun. Period. I like history and find it interesting, but then I will watch a documentary! For games, I prefer verdun, battlefield ONE etc. GAMES! that are FUN!

[@MoisesCharles]

Let me explain something that has traditionally gotten me a lot of blank stares or angry reactions. The vast majority of cultures outside of the U.S. and Japan make really cheap, crappy cartoon artwork that is made to cut costs, mostly because those cultures do not have the inspiration and cultural context to take cartoons seriously. This is-- among many other things that they do-- why they resort to Flash-style "rotation animation" where instead of them animating things frame by frame, they rotate, stretch, and squash objects to create motion. You said that the animations and art in this European game look cheap and not taken seriously-- and they do. However, even though Rayman games have more polish, the Rayman games also use the exact same conventions as almost all other European and South American cartoons-- overly cartoony designs that don't take anything seriously and cheap animations based on sliding, rotating, stretching, and squashing. Other cultures outside the U.S. and Japan just do not take cartoon art seriously. And maybe one day they will have been inspired by something or someone to do so.

[@O.B23]

Wow, You were talking about criticism of wars in video games and You didn't mention greatest of all examples, Spec Ops: The Line? I am really disappointed...

[@cordia96]

I will get Valiant Hearts somewhere down the line. Let's hope that Ubisoft spends more of the Assassins Creed money on some interessting small budget stuff. And Beyond Good & Evil 2.

[@zetetick395]

0:56 *Harvester!!* Yay!! - Deffo one of the all out freakiest Games of all Time! - soo far beyond the ever-present corporate safety cordon that most modern games find themselves constrained within....

[@jedenzniewielu]

You are a really great reviewer.

[@diegofloor]

Ah, the art style is really good. Really, really good. But, as you said, it is subjective. And... that's the best I can say in favor of the game though.

[@Nasoukikos]

this game sucked, it's story was crap and nobody noticed the only black guy (or grayish whatever) goes to war without any weapon, i mean srsly? southpark was even more subtle at this issues than this piece of crap advertised as gold

[@krakatoahurricane]

But George, where is the next TOVG podcast?!

[@RiskOfBaer]

I also didn't like the puzzle aspect but I menaged to put up with it because of nice art-syle, good music and story. Overally I enjoyed it :)

[@Outshinedsg]

I'm with you on the aesthetic. The cartoony, Castle Crashers flash animation look doesn't really feel like an appropriate rendition of the World War I setting.

[@Skidonti]

I imagine the aesthetic comes down to preference. You showed plenty examples of the art and animation for us to make a judgement on them ourselves. Personally I'm not too enraptured by the style or the animation.

[@TheSilverazo]

I agree with your review , the game has some good moments but the flaws are just too much , not worth until the price goes down

[@AnonYmous-pq1fp]

It's a "low level" game designed for casual or novice players. I feel ya. I get tired of being attracted to these games only to find out how generic and uninteresting they are.

[@KSabot]

You about cover my sentiments on the game, save for the sentiment the game was going for not getting to me har har.

[@martinzahariev4081]

Dude, it's a cartoon-ish 2D puzzle game you should not worry how things land perfectly to help you progress.

[@spearfisherman308]

Whats funny is that you thought trash like Gone Home was good, a game that was very minimal in it's design and had story on the same level as a stupd romance novel for young teenage girls.

[@tadokollar7207]

It's not like you can't win a game of defcon and it's not like you can't be good at arma they aren't anti war games like spec ops the line and they aren't pro war games like CoD but they are realistic they show their subject (war) with all the awesome and horrible things that tend to happen in a war you see in them what you want to see there is no pro or anti war message in them

[@pilmun]

i enjoyed valiant hearts but when the puzzles repeated i lost some respect for it but then it tie it up with a very nice little bow at the end and i am still confused whether i like it or not i wouldn't mind another valiant hearts-ish game they just need to develop it and make it more interesting and less cartoon silliness there is the better that just took away from the feel of the entire game.

[@disporting]

My main problem with the game is some of the awkward puzzles and quests. Not all of them seem to make sense.. and seem like filler that go on for way too long

[@WaddleDee105]

I agree that the game, graphically, looks like crap. It doesn't look like a game with any notable budget.

[@llucllumador380]

so now Ubisoft wants to appeal to the indie hipsters huh? securing the future I guess...as shallow as it's ever been

[@dansattah]

Personally, I still think that this game is great, but I can see your point, that you want to make with this review.

[@TheTundraTerror]

Valiant Hearts looks like something you'd see on Newgrounds. Nuff said.

[@davejohnson1071]

"Art game appropriation", I didn't know you were turning this into a comedy channel.

[@raoulduke2924]

I'm not a fan of the art style and I'm not a fan of the gameplay. All around uninteresting looking to me.

[@meghterb]

As usual, Ubisoft succeeds at art and visuals but fails so bad at gameplay.

[@inn0c3nce7]

Many of the comments didnt exactly get what the art style did wrong. Valiant hearts itself tries to be a game depicting of the horros of war. Its meant to discourage war yet its art seems to treat it like serious topic. Its art doesnt deliver on the terror and horrors of war, yet in some cases, weirdly cheerful as though you're suppose to treat it as a light hearted game. What would do better if it used a graphic novel style would be the ones of Witcher. The style which is ugly-beautiful.

[@DaditudeEra]

This guy gets it. I appreciate the game's effort, but it ends up sabotaging itself.

[@kobun6474]

Yeah that tweening and is just. Euch. But I'm a sucker for history.

[@Dalarna3]

He actually pronounced a word correctly!

[@podto0426]

As i was watching Jesse Cox playing through this game the "Narrative/Gamepla = oil/Water" stigma was ringing in my head... Great Review George... It's reassuring to find somebody who can encapsulate and speak what i was thinking while watching/playing this game. Thanks.

[@VydeoGramesJunk]

I agree on most reviews george does cause we have the same taste to some extent! But here, idk what to say! I disagree

[@BobVosh]

I think my favorite anti-war war game is Spec Ops: The line.

[@sUnbeliver]

Its a solid game but i can agree when comes to graphics/art style.

[@harleighmaster]

Well I for one enjoyed it

[@xdeser2949]

I like your stuff man, but this is just pretentious as all get out

[@KarasuNoGoh]

When's the last time Ubisoft did anything right?

[@fretzil]

Don't Starve looks nice, its 'ugly' but it fits.

[@TheSuperDerpyGamer6]

I just like how this is the only bad review on the game

[@DrdrGames]

Wow, what a divide in our opinions. I almost always find myself agreeing with your opinions in every video you make, but I don't recognize anything you are saying in regards to this game. I loved Valiant Hearts, and my experience with it entirely contradicts yours.

[@kosmosyche]

Same. Only I disagree with him on many games. Still I watch him, because his opinions (which are sometimes complete opposites of mine) actually help me better define what I like or dislike about games. Essentially, he is very analytical guy and I am not (sadly), so his thoughts give more structure to my thoughts, even if I disagree with him.

[@googoogjoob42]

hey, man, harvester was the greatest game of the 90s

[@TheTap323]

I feel like I was one of the only people who hated the ending. I mean, it was stupid. It felt like they didn't know how to end the game so they added this "Oh No!" Ending so that way you felt something instead of putting a good ending.

[@kevincass9917]

It's a bittersweet ending. They knew how to complete the game, as they were using the setting of the French Army mutinies for the ending. Notice how there was a massive lead up to it, having Emile go through so much during the Nivelle Offensive before finally snapping and striking the officer, which is what many men did during the real life mutinies following the offensive.

[@palacemaster6685]

i completely disagree with this review

[@asendimchev1996]

The killing blow for me was the wurst machine. They totally killed the was atmosphere for a lame, pointless puzzle. Almost all of the puzzles are devoid of meaning. Being a cook could have shown the complex food situation on the battlefield, being a nurse could have illustrated the pain and suffering on the battlefield, even digging could have been used better, the war is notorious for it's mud. Most of the gameplay is just to continue the story, not tell it. I really wonder if Ubisoft's problem is with talent or with managment, I've never played a game published by them that was as good as it realistically could have been.

[@OverlordZephyros]

this game is way WAY too overrated

[@zupaniccarr4686]

While I disagree and liked the game and it's art style quite a lot, this was a very good review. Like seriously, more reviews should be like like this. You've earned another subscriber, and a lot more I'm sure.

[@GetMoreOdder]

OH the throbbing hint pigeon! lmao

[@looshkin66]

Can anybody tell me what "Tweening" means in the context used by the narrator?

[@johnmonk9167]

+Daniel Tittyfish Instead of drawing each frame they used Flash to auto animate the limbs from one pose to another.

[@gmale9000]

Great video. Thank you.

[@aconfusedcomputer1072]

Four words Tiny Itty Bittty Feets

[@Larry82ch]

"The history was more interesting than the game itself": I think to you happens what happend to me aswell and I felt it in so many games: You just get older ;-)

[@mazimadu]

The "Throbbing" intensifies!

[@ArchaicSeraphim]

Oh my. I love how you've given this so much thought! You had so much to say and you didn't cut the video short or anything. Thanks :)

[@iainooooo]

this reviewer is like a plank.

[@thetroyzernator]

Completely disagree.