Technically, Saturn was superior to PS1. But it was harder to program for, while Sony made it veerery easy to program the first PS1 games. MS used the same strategy and that's why most games end up better on 360. Easier and faster (like ps1). Also, the 10 year strategy is not for hardcore gamers. People still buy ps2; but I haven't played mine since 2005. Finally, systems are never maxed. It becomes harder to make games look better but you can never achieve 100% on any machine.
You can't play a demo and state that reviewers got it wrong. That just proves how biased YOU are. "Hey, I just watched 5 minutes of a movie and I think critics are wrong!" If you don't hype games (the industry is guilty of this) then this doesn't happen. This is just like GT5 and Alan Wake. Again, great games but not perfect. KZ3 is (according to reviews) a great game but NOT the best FPS. Does it have to be the best to be fun? NO!
Huh, so a demo is a better indicator than the full game? Just buy the game and stop this silly debate. It appears the game is great; just not the best. Who cares?
Just wanted to get your attention. LBP2 rocks. Metacritic considers reviewer stature. If I come up with my own site, review KZ3, give it 100%, my review doesn't mean as much as Edge/IGN/1up. It's common sense. LBP2 is a masterpiece. According to reputable sites KZ3 is not. KZ3 will release and I'm sure we'll realize it's not the perfect game we wanted it to be. but until then, we have the Beta and credible reviews (G4/IGN/1UP/EDGE/Gamespot). These are actually top sites. I...
I'll take their word. Why? They actually played it. KZ1 was mediocre. KZ2 was good and it appears KZ3 is good (which is what a 7 means). 5 out of 10 is average. 7 better than average.
This reminds me of GT5. People complaining about a review for a game not released. Edge wasn't the only credible source not to give it a 9. So who is biased? People on these forums or magazines and websites dedicated to playing and reviewing games? G4/IGN/Gamespot/1up all in a conspiracy?
Have you played it?
God of War III? A button smashing game? It looks nice but it's faaar from perfect.
Those scores are ok. None of the games listed were perfect score material. And I see plenty of 9s. I think you just defended them. Games get what they get.
Ok, so the game isn't perfect. The most popular/cridible sites say 8.5ish. Others say 9ish. KZ2, which I own, wasn't perfect. It was good. Complaining about scores of games you haven't played is silly. It's exactly like complaininig about the review of a movie you haven't seen. "But it stars Al Pacino. It must be perfect..." None of the reviews say the game is bad. Most say it's good. The whole thing of expecting a score is silly. Relax. You have the better M...
The PS3 version is buggy.
When exactly did you play a game that hasn't released? Oh you mean the Beta? Why is KZ3 supposed to be better than Epic Mickey? Why not complain about LBP2 getting a better score? 3.5 is a decent score.
1st- this is a score in 2011. Stop comparing it to the scores of older games. In my book a game that scored 10 a year ago needs to innovate to get the same score the next year.
2nd- the review was actually positive.
3rd- expecting 10s for all AAA makes reviews useless. Great games should get 8s not 10s. X-play's Sessler had a rant about this.
4rth- Not all gamers are on their teens. Some of us want informative reviews. If the story isn't great it isn't.
Yes, NGP looks great, but it won't look better than 360 or PS3 which were deisgned for big screens. This sounds a lot like the 2x HDMIs at 1080p that the PS3 would be capable of. Relax, it will be good but not PS3/360 good; it doesn't need to. As far as the 360 graphics being inserted in this debate (by some posts), there are maybe 5 games that look better than what 360 delivers (KZ2/Uncharted 2 among others). All other games look better on 360. This reminds me of the SNES vs Genesis ...
I actually own Crysis 1 and it wasn't the great game PC fans want you to think. KZ1 was definitely a better game.
That's all it means. Companies showcase good products.
Looks nice but it's pricey, not revolutionary like 3DS is, and will probably end up shipping in the US in March 2012. This is evolutionary not revolutionary. Graphics are comparable to ps3 like psp was to ps2. Will probably sell ok, but don't expect it to win handheld.
when a company chooses not to show a version it's not a good sign. Don't get your hopes up for the PS3 version.
Not sure what the writer is talking about. IGN said it looks great and I just confirmed it. Controls do seem slower than Black Ops. By the way, Crytek has only shown th 360 version since last year. PS3 owners, stick with KZ3 (which looks great as well). I don't think this will play well on PS3. I own both consoles and a gaming desktop.
At six years they better do something (perhaps that add-on mentioned a month ago). About the x-box obsolete comments, most games look and perform better on 360 thanks to the better GPU today (not 2 years ago). Five awesome looking PS3 games don't make up for all the other games that look better on 360. I know; I own both systems. Generally speaking, the ps3 is my br player. CPU wise PS3 rocks but it takes forever to program maximizing this. The ps3 has been costly (not necessarily bad) an...