The salt is palpable. You guys care way too much about what other people think of games you worship, lol.
Running out to buy an actual polished, good/great game after 7 years is a much better deal than running out to buy a mediocre one after 6.
Does one need to have first-hand experience with E.T. for Atari to "confirm" that it's abysmal? Apparently just watching the footage isn't enough -- somehow the empirical involvement just changes everything and makes your sentiment validated! Pressing them buttons on that there controller -- your opinion is now valid my good man!
"this reviewer has a dissenting opinion from me, i hate this reviewer!"
Lol you are always proving why cognitive dissonance is a thing. If nobody has done it right yet, then clearly the phrase "it doesn't work at all" is still valid. TV shows + video games is a pointless combination. Get over it.
Review scores should always reflect the state of the game as it was released, not what it could potentially become down the road. THAT would be the textboot definition of "irresponsible journalism", because it is totally disingenuous and misleading to readers.
Yes the score may be devastating for PC sales but Remedy and Microsoft are at fault for that. The game is a technical mess and it's their fault, not the reviewers' and definitely not the consumers'...
COD4 MP on PS3 has been a hackfest for years already. I heard WaW was saddled with the same fate.
I went back and played thru the campaign on Veteran on PC last year and still had a blast. A testament to good game design that it still holds up well almost a decade later.
Well you can't expect people to just throw that much money for a PC port of a game that wasn't even finished (and still isn't) when it got released initially. RB4 released as what was essentially an Early Access game, except they charged full price for it and had crazy prices for the instrument bundles. RB4 had less content and features than the first Rock Band back in 2007.
@Blackwolf
No they cannot. The game releases in a month, they could only make the most minute of changes before the game went gold and shipped. Even the core gameplay mechanics, something as simple as changing how a single gun functioned could and most likely would take weeks or even a month+ to properly test and debug to make sure it wasn't broken and/or didn't break something else.
People who just handwave this sort of mediocrity by espousing banal...
You don't have a clue d00d, literally everything you said was completely wrong. Even the first Doom could be played over the net, and that was 1993. The dial-up modems of the time were "quality" enough that netplay matches with low player counts were perfectly playable. CS already ran "flawlessly" well before Valve got their hands on it in 2003 (when 1.6, aka the Steam release happened.)
Rainbow Six was not the first "true" online game. Your...
This concept doesn't even make any sense lol. No wonder it never came to fruition.
The reviews are for the beta, not the actual game. They are valid, however much anybody may disagree with the content of said reviews themselves.
Yep. I remember back in the day doing actual alpha and beta tests for the PS2. Usually you'd get sent a physical package through the mail containing beta feedback guides, info about the game, the game disc itself, and maybe some free swag (fun fact, in the tech industry, swag stood for "stuff we all get.") You had to be invited/selected to participate in them and the common amount of testers was typically around 100 or less people. The tests took place many months ahead of relea...
@Flamebait
Fps's were online way before CS in '99. CS began as a Half-Life mod and Half-Life already had built-in online multiplayer. People were playing the original DooM games over the net back in the early 90's, and Quake really was the birth and godfather of e-sports as we know it way back in 1996.
Damn... RIP dude. Gone way too soon.
Happened to me yesterday. Like four of my games randomly had to "download" a 0KB "patch", lol.
@zerogotit
It's also not "critical acclaim". An over 30% disparity between positive and negative reviews is not critical acclaim.
It's astounding to me how much gamers care about trivial, non-important things like scores, lol. As if you actually need your opinions and feelings validated by someone else before you can enjoy them?
"1 thing is for sure, if this was a ps4 exclusive it would be a smash hit and rated 90+ on metacritic "
A really embarrassing case of damage control here, folks. I guess you forgot about Sony exclusives like The Order and Beyond: Two Souls? Two ga...
The $150 million in this case are unpaid royalties he is owed for his work as a member of the board of principals, amongst other things. Not just a random arbitrary amount. Given what happened to him, he actually deserves even more than that.
Piss-poor counter-argument. The game ALSO has plenty of negative scores and average scores. You're willfully ignoring that because it doesn't fit your cognitively-biased narrative of "I enjoy it, therefore it is absolutely good and nobody else's opinion is valid" just like all the other white knights in this thread.
Having a "feel" for a game doesn't magically redact technical issues or game design flaws. You can clearly experience and wit...