GameSpot's reviewer was not fair on this game. I won't say her review is invalid because I know it's just Kallie's opinion. But I don't think the score given is a fair representation of how much fun the vast majority of 3rd-person action fans will have with this game.
It's really good. It probably gives zombie game fans more of the tropes they've been wanting for a long time than other games have.
Here are a few of my take-aways so far:
• Deacon is an asshole sometimes (which is completely understandable given the state of the world) but fights inner turmoil while making sacrifices for those few people he actually cares about. He's not the greatest character in the world, but he's believable, and his personality doesn't hinder my enjoyment of the gameplay at all.
• People are right about this game having a hodge-podge of successful mechanics from other successful games. For instance, the combat and on-the-fly crafting is almost identical to Last of Us to me. It's satisfying and powerful, yet I haven't ever felt (at least not yet) like I'm unstoppable— I still have to go into each encounter (the ones I can anticipate— some come out of nowhere!) mindful of my ammo and healing resources... and I love that. The motorcycle upgrade system reminds me of Mad Max, but feels more realistic and thankfully doesn't dominate as much of the story as the Magnum Opus did. And this game has a competent stealth system, better than what we got in the rebooted Tomb Raider series.
• The open world is a great setting and traveling by motorcycle is satisfying. The separate biomes feel distinct and interesting to explore, and the fact that there are a few survivor camps with their own loyalty/trust ladders is cool— because, imo, it simulates having to make tough decisions about where your loyalty goes in a dystopian world... do you prioritize getting better guns or beefing up your getaway ride?
But whether you're a zombie fan in the vein of Left 4 Dead or you prefer Last of Us, just being able to explore an open world (instead of led down linear hallways or streets) is refreshing! As good as LoU was, I wanted to explore more of that beautiful world Naughty Dog created but was confined to their story-driven areas. If you've ever wanted to feel like Daryl Dixon (from The Walking Dead) dropped into an open playground, this is what you've been waiting for— way better than the atrocity that wasTWD:Survival Instinct.
• Repetitive? Not really any more than other modern games... I mean, you can easily compare it to clearing outposts in Far Cry 5 or hunting down synchronization viewpoints in Assassin's Creed Odyssey— which never really got old if you liked the basic gameplay, and those games got scores of 9 and 8, respectively. "Deacon doesn't develop as a character?" FFS, your character in FC5 doesn't even talk!! When a game is fun to play, players don't mind doing those fun activities several times over. Look, Days Gone is nowhere near as shallow, buggy, or REPETITIVE as Anthem, and that piece got a 6! Anthem, an arguably unfinished game, got a higher score than Days Gone?
I know, I know... "you can't compare the numbers because the reviewers are all individuals with differing perspectives."
Some things are more objective than we want to admit— There's no planet in our galaxy where Anthem gets a higher score than Days Gone. If the purpose of having reviews on your website is to give an average gamer a fair expectation of the quality of a game, this GS staff has to do better. Do better.