The approval process is used fro a reason, to sort out the "crap" that gets posted, and when that process breaks down, there is obviously a reason. IMO, that is the reason.
wow you are a hypocrite. Sony is "borrowing" the motion controller idea from Nintendo. They "borrowed" the achievement idea....Netflix Facebook, Twitter, etc from MS. Good work fanboy.
good work fanboy
so now who wants to doubt the massive population of PS3 fanboys.
The same article giving SC:C a lower than average score gets approved 3 times. Flamebait anyone?
The only overhyped Halo game is ODST. Halo 1 2 and 3 delivered EVERY SINGLE time. There is a reason each game is on top of the overall bestsellers list. There is also a reason why Halo 2, which came out in 2004 just got shut down yesterday. Halo 3 still has at least 50,000 people on at all times.
You ps3 fanbabies need to stick to your very overhyped KZ2 and let the real grownups talk.
Edit:
LBP is an amazing game and was in no way overhyped.
Artistically it might have the best graphics, but for straight graphics power, UC2 and KZ2 are still the best.
These graphics plus amazing gameplay and story would equal a great title. Lets hope these two parts are just as good.
Wow 3 disagrees in 6 minutes.
GOW is a great game, but not GOTY worthy.
The Modern Warfares have pretty easy platinums. They are only single player and just take a little bit of time and the internet to help.
lol you are correct. I have not.
I still yet to disagree with a review score that IGN gives to a game that I have played.
lol fair enough. Ill give you a bubble because i already hit disagree.
I'm just saying I don't think reviewers really rush through the game. I can't say that some don't, but reviewers like IGN do a pretty thorough job. And its not the developers job to come out with some article saying "our game is 10-12 hours" when it clearly isn't.
Edit: I really don't think GOW3 has less re-playability than SC. Like you said, and I agree, GOW is very re-playable with mu...
that is a great point that i never thought of. This website is exactly like the tabloids of gaming. I always make fun of people for reading tabloids, so I am just as bad.....DANGIT
Bubbles.
great...was that after or before he talked about all the additional content that made it a 15-20 hour game...or was that after or before he talked about being on his third play-through?
Just curious.
I LOVVEED AC2, but 1 was SOOO boring by the end. Maybe because I am a completionist and had to try and find everything. I wouldn't call the game bad at all. IT was actually very good for a while. After 20 hours of looking for flags, it got boring :(
I know what your point is...and I am saying that you are wrong.
You just said it yourself, the campaign was 9 hours. Where was the 10-12 that it was said to take. So you rushed through it too? With all feelings aside about how many hours you can spend replaying the campaign, the reviewers gave the length they were SUPPOSED to give and got wrongly criticized for it. And like I said, I highly doubt that 20 reputable review sites let alone one, will lie about the length of a game e...
I'm assuming that this guy wasn't the writer of the flop that was Crysis 1. If he was, then he has no room to talk.
Beating a dead horse. Wonder who approved this article.
I also love how the "reputable" articles that get posted on here are titles like "Hey Ubisoft, 5 Hours? Keep That Sh*t!"
Good work PS3 fanboys.
if you listen to the ZTGD podcast, the guys get pissed because they were adamant that GOW3 is beat easily in 8 hours on normal setting. FYI, the guy called it the best game of the year, but he was pissed at developers for coming out with the "the campaign is actually 10-12 hours" comments. When I played GOW without using a walk-through to try and find everything, but at the same time I tried to get everything, it took me 8.5 hours on normal.
Can't speak on the real leng...
When the percentage difference is that small and one service is free while the other is charging...I think that really tells you what service is better.