"There are NO new enemies, NO new weapons."
That is false, btw. There are both.
They also would hold a press conference.
Interesting, looks like Sony has been sneaking peeks at Microsoft's playbook. It's strange that if a deal was struck for exclusivity to PS3 in the US though, this wasn't publicized before the game came out to sell more copies on PS3 vs. 360.
MOTION CONTROLS!!
I can't believe how many of you seem to really think that Microsoft paid off dozens of reviewers at just as many independent web sites to rank their game more highly than their true opinions. I won't even debate Microsoft's ethics, but do you guys REALLY think any company in the world could pull that off? Every person they offered money to would be instantly in a position to win all the fame and glory and credibility the video gaming community has to offer by calling them out publicly on it. ...
That's pretty lengthy for a magazine review I'd say...
You realize 5/5 on G4's scale doesn't mean perfect, right? It just means the game is highly recommended.
Chill.
EDIT: Good edit. I like the new comment better.
oops double post
EDIT: Actually G4 has 2 pages for the game, one of which DOES have a score of 4/5. Fail on my part.
The same-score thing seems reasonable to me though. The game has just enough additions and improvements to justify it being a 2009 game of the same quality for its time that the Xbox version had in mid-2008.
An alternate source was submitted... majornelson.com. That's from Microsoft PR.
Forgive me if this is a stupid question, but is the 250GB PS3 a PS3 Slim? Or is this a way of trying to sell out of their old larger model? This article isn't specific on that.
When capitalized, NOW stands for No Obligatory Waiting. True story.
This game is not long by any means, but it seems to have an amount of content that is decidedly average for a first-person shooter these days. And the quality we expect from Bungie is clearly there. If Microsoft had kept its mouth shut originally instead of suggesting that this was an "expansion" and would cost below $60, they could have avoided this PR mess.
Well it's not that what Rare has to say doesn't matter. But what a company is NOT upset about doesn't make for particularly compelling news...
Do you realize you're challenging him to disprove your judgements about a game... THAT NEITHER OF YOU HAVE PLAYED?
This whole site is so idiotic on the days the big release reviews pour in.
What's so unacceptable about three different people from three different continents and three different cultures having slightly different opinion about a game?
Basically any game that they highly recommend gets 5 stars, any that they recommend get 4 stars, and 3 or below means it has serious issues that may keep you from enjoying it. They express their feelings about the games simply without fanboys bickering over every meaningless 0.1 point.
The outlying lowest score of the evening's embargo lift is clearly the most accurate...
Hey, it's better than if they trotted out a pets expansion, a party expansion, and all the others they did for both Sims 1 and 2 and held back from the content in 3.
Does every sentence uttered in this press conference have to be a N4G headline? How does this possibly matter to anyone?