lol, you should work for Edge, Lorenz! lol. you're as hardcore as they are!
i understand what you mean, even though i don't entirely agree.
for me, a 7, 7.5 is a game like the Darkness, while a game like God of War is a 9, and a game like Shadow of the Colossus is damn near a 10 (more like a 9.5).
a game like Spider-Man 3 on the PS3, is a 5, which is average/mediocre.
i'm not nearly as harsh, but i don't think i'm very lenient either...
jesus! that's hardcore!
i mean, i don't have much of an interest in Blue Dragon, but i'd think it would at *LEAST warrant a 7. but 3?? wow, and i don't even own a 360 and that just sounds...off.
even if the game has epic graphics, this is how it *SHOULD rate out:
Spider-Man 3:
Presentation - 5 - though the graphics are great, the overall presentation of this game is poor. the user interface is generic, the cutscenes are terribly shot, and it has a very, very loose tie to the movie it's supposed to be following.
Graphics - 10 - this game has epic graphics!
Sound - 4 - stock sound effects, bland, uninspired voice-acting, and ...
has being compared to a stellar game like God of War been a bad thing? especially if, for the most part, you deliver a worthy experience.
this isn't like, say, Cold Fear (or whatever that one Resident Evil knock-off was called, the one with the zombies on the boat), and Resident Evil.
this is more like, well, Resident Evil and Silent Hill; similar, but different, yet both are satisfying in their own ways.
i just don't understand how it's suddenly *...
represent an *AVERAGE, which i've always found unfair, for reviews of *ALL GAMES on *ALL SYSTEMS.
i mean, i thought the reason why we use averages was to give a general idea of something. if they're just going to throw out averages for the hell of it, well, i just don't know.
i guess i shouldn't find it surprising that if you look up the reviews of practically *EVERY SHOOTER on the PS3 released so far, you'll find a bunch of high scores.
it's as if...
i'm going to compare their final scores to what they *ACTUALLY SAID in the body of the review:
Presentation 9 - "The presentation is great from top to bottom, with fantastic voice acting that supports absolutely stellar motion capture performances. Characters display a very wide amount of emotion thanks to facial animation that covers not only their eyes and mouth but eyebrows, forehead, cheeks and pretty much every other part of their entire body. It rivals and perhaps ev...
*WHAT'S to take out of context?
did they not say "This is one Wii game that can proudly stand next to the best-looking Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 games."
like i said in my post, Mario Galaxy looks good. really good, to be honest, but to say it can stand next to the "*BEST-LOOKING" X Box 360 and PS3 games is a bit much.
something tells me, like always, Nintendo fans get their panties in a bunch whenever someone criticizes their k...
but tell me, can you play Crysis, in all it's visual glory, for less than $500?
the truth of the matter, is that in order to play Crysis to it's maximum settings, you'll need a processor fast enough to push it, which will run you roughly $200 or more.
then you'll need the equivilent RAM, we'll say 1gig, which will run you about $70-$100.
*THEN you'll need a graphics card, and the best ones i've seen out there these days will run you about $500-$600...
just that demo alone is 2gigs, he said at the end of the video.
this game amazes me, simply on a technical level. on the surface, you think "oh, it's just another FPS," but then when you peel away the layers and look at the *INSANE attention to detail the developers are putting into this, i think, "damn, imagine what an FFVII remake would be like in 2, 3 years, using the knowledge gained from this game."
Guerilla should be commended for spendi...
ign, meet hyperbole, hyperbole, meet ign!
well, i guess they have to say *SOMETHING to make the Wii fans feel better, considering all the Halo/Bioshock/Killzone/PrettyN extGenGame coverage they've been doing lately.
while i agree Mario Galaxy is quite impressive-looking, saying it compares to *ANYTHING the 360 and PS3 are doing is the absolute *EPITOME of exaggeration.
i mean, i don't see any Havok physics like Motorstorm, or water effects like Bio...
Heavenly Sword and Warhawk aren't out yet, but i played Heavenly Sword at E3 in 2006, and i've played the Heavenly Sword demo released on the PSN a few weeks back.
i've thoroughly enjoyed both experiences.
not only that, but after reading the ign UK review of Heavenly Sword, his "true" complaints about the game don't warrant it getting a 7/10. an 8/10, 8.5/10, yes, but 7/10? *DEFINITELY not.
then this Edge magazine, which seems notorious ...
i have to shamefully admit that i'm a little *GLAD that the game is native 720p, since i own a 720p set.
i know, i know, i'm terrible, and i feel bad for my roommate, who has a sweet 46" 1080p set, but very few games really push it, but i told him that the difference between 720p and 1080p at under 50" isn't that big of a difference (for the record, my TV is 40").
30fps is fine by me. most of the games i've been enjoying lately have been 30fps@720p...
to understand some of what they were saying, but i got the gist.
the game is fun, but flawed in a few areas:
it's short, not enough bosses.
the *IMPORTANT stuff, however, seems to be intact. story, acting, and combat are top notch.
it's not a button masher by any means, and the timed sequences are well implemented.
bottom line, it's a fun game, and "one of the better titles for the Playstation 3" according to...
*I'M American and i can hardly understand anything American's say, you aren't alone. lol.
but i agree with VirusE, nasim is annoying as f*ck.
he's simply an angry, bitter fanboy, and if there's a good game on the 360 (ie, Bioshock), he trashes it.
it's just like the rabid 360 fans that can't accept it when a PS3 gets a good game (ie, Warhawk, Heavenly Sword, etc).
it's tiring.
if it's true that Edge gave God of War 2 a 7, then i'll ignore their scores of Heavenly Sword.
these guys seem harsh. an 8 for Biosh...
you get, like, +30 points for actually reading through that entire post (i didn't mean for it to go on so long)! plus bubbles too!
yeah, i've been burned by the PR machine too much over my years of gaming (going strong since 1986!), so i've learned to get whatever information i can out of reviews (ie, game plot, gameplay mechanics, anything else informative) from PR and developers, but ignore all the hyperbole.
i think you should introduce him again, just in case i didn't do it right the first time.
*WHY did you buy a gaming console that is *PRIMARILY KNOWN for "weird, Japanese" games?
seriously now, do some of you guys even *RESEARCH what you're throwing your money at?
i happen to like both eastern and western games, but i know, based off of the past *TWO consoles, that the Japanese developers favor the Playstation consoles over competitors.
i have to admit, however, that it's kind of ironic to me that some of the Playstation 3's bi...
is *NOT the same demo as the Japanese one.
aside from the obvious English text change, you *DON'T start off in the town of Doolin and aimlessly wander around the town to the tavern.
you start the demo out already in the Netherworld, and you get different Folks to use, and even get a boss battle.
also, Keats is in an *ENTIRELY DIFFERENT area than Ellen, and again, you get to use different Folks, and you fight a different boss.
this de...
really think that $150 million dollars was enough to sway them?
Shrek the Third - $321,012,359
Transformers - $308,631,000
Mission Impossible 3 - $134,029,801
and these are just *DOMESTIC numbers, not worldwide.
do you think DVD, HD DVD, and Blu Ray actually *MATTER to these studios?
the money they make off of the formats are just a *BONUS to what the film makes in the Box Office.
it's like buying a Cinna...