http://en.wikipedia.org/wik...
<.<
>.>
:-)
Your talking stats. I'm talking cold, hard, unambiguous figures. When your baseline is very low, any increase will look fantastic by comparison. It is not a good way of doing things.
Sorry, but 11 million since inception is not that great. Especially considering the number of players around. It definately doesn't support all the chest-beating.
I am really not convinced that 11 million disks sold suggests "consumers jumping into high-def discs with both feet.&quo...
11 million doesn't sound too impressive considering the amount of Blu-ray players out there and the amount of time they've been on the market.
Why should Gamesradar explain? They gave it neither a 9.5 nor 9.6...
EDIT:
@Sonarus.
Maybe. But I was only responding to "krackchap" who was asking Gamesradar a direct (if rhetorical) question. What is the difference of 0.1. I'm merely saying a site that doesn't mark in 0.1 increments cannot ask that question.
The title of the article shouldn't have been
"Capcom trades racism for sexism"
but
"Watch Avenfeld from Ubergame construct a massive straw(wo)man, whilst at the same time time highlighting his own ignorance and prejudices."
That would have been much more accurate :-)
Quite. I agree. There is a definite problem here and it is rather tiring to see just go:
"Yes well it is a shame, but don't try and change it, that is just way things are."
Not only for video game journalism, but in many other aspects of life.
It is quite funny to see donator saying "suck it up like every other American" though. If only because a couple of centuries back Americans very well may have scoffed at such an idea of ju...
If they thought something would loose them customers they shouldn't have put it in the game.
The idea that Konami have our best interests at heart and that they don't want us to see "spoilers" is completely laughable. As I said, Konami isn't a charity and doesn't have our best interests at heart. But [Condolezza Rice] is correct to point out the difference between the marketing department and the developement team.
It is just a shame that such dirty tri...
[[scottie2521 -]]
"its Konami's game, so they can put all the restrictions on it they want if people want it early.
and its EGM magazine, so they have the right not to do what Konami tells them in their own review.
in the end, everyone is happy and MGS4 receives a 9.5 from EGM (my prediction)"
This sounds far too close to corruption to be allowed a free pass. I am rather alarmed by your tacit acceptance of bribery in this matter.
...
Shops wouldn't (or shouldn't, anyway) be allowed to underaged gamers. Cinemas cannot allow anyone under the listed age in.
However, at home parents are allowed to make the rules. The certifications main regulate who has access to media in the public sphere.
----------------------------- ------------------------------- ----------
I like the way that Newsnight defend this as saying that they are just reflecting what goes on normally.
They are of...
"Konami just dont want EGM and other to spend a whole review crapping on about cut scene lengths and install time."
I agree, and for good reason. Konami know that lots and lots of cut scenes, constantly removing control from the player and such, may very well turn off some gamers. They are trying to shepherd reviewers into line with, what can only be described as, petty blackmail.
Anyway, Konami shouldn't get a say in what reviewers focus on. It isn't there...
However, it smakes of pre-emptive damage control, and by putting these restrictions on reviews Konami is pretty much writing the reviews itself. Sure, plenty of people have no problem with cutscenes and loading times. But Konami obviously think it may be a turn off.
My main problem with this is that it unduely biases reviews, and makes a mockery of the idea of an independent review process.
This goes beyond just asking reviewers not to mention spoilers (something rev...
That word doesn't mean what you think it means.
even 99% isn't enough for some people.
I'd laugh if it wasn't so funny.
I thought the knicker twisting over Eurogamer's positive was hilarious, but this is just pathetic.
Please, get some perspective people. You are putting far too much stock into an abstract number. Especially since it is a game no one here has played.
I thought IGN was part of the vast Microsoft conspiracy... :-S
Or did Eurogamer take its place when I wasn't looking.
(Not a fan of Halo or the 3D GTAs)
What?
That doesn't make even make sense.
Because he was told to by the editors and they pay him?
Just a hunch, but I think that is why most employed people do their jobs.
:EDIT:
What? Someone disagrees? Why?
Because heavens forfend that a commercial video game reviewing site reviews video games.
Since when did an 8 out of 10 and a favourable write up, constiture a poor review?
Because parents have precognitive abilities right?
(And you can hardly blame the parents for the surname, and Richard is hardly an uncommon first name)
It isn't the fact that there are cut scenes. But rather the shear length and quantity of them, and the way the game rudely takes control away from you as if it cannot trust you to do things properly. I have absolutely no problem with a game being marked down for this.
Call me old fashioned. But if I shell out 50 quid on a game, I want to play a ****ing game, not watch a movie ;-).