God ZOE2 was so amazing. Zakat? Anubis? Damn. I'd love to see the new one continue the story, and I'd love to see a competitive MP mode.
"reviewers are NEVER "payed off" to review a game"
- Halo 3 swag bags
- Trips to Europe to review MGS4
- Free Xbox 360's for certain magazine staff
- Promise of exclusive rights to early review if a score of a certain level is given
- Threatening to pull availability/coverage/marketin g of certain titles in the future if a certain review level isn't made
What do you call all this? Do people actually think that it's all abou...
"Who says a game needs to "innovate" to get a 10/10?"
Gametrailers. Edge. Eurogamer. When it suits them.
Can't wait to see the hypocrisy flying from these guys. And again, my beef is with biased review systems, not MW2, which I'll be picking up.
I agree.
And that's a jab at GR, NOT MW2, as I've only played a little of it. But I highly anticipate some review outlets that were harping "no innovation" to pull some fun hypocritical BS this week. =)
I can already tell how great their "support" is going to be for MW2. Considering the hit detection in CoD4 is STILL prevalent...
Yet more proof...
SCORES are STUPID AND WORTHLESS.
It's been run into the ground, but THIS is what bugs me -
No, Valve's opinion doesn't matter becuase they talk trash about the PS3 and HAVE NEVER DEVELOPED A GAME ON IT.
You don't want to dev on it, don't dev on it. But then don't comment on it either. That's just my two cents peoples.
"You mean to tell me that Insomniac can do better graphics then Crack in Time?"
Yes, we can.
I just find it funny, not how gamers/fanboys react, but how reviewers react. Take for example, two separate great series -
Ratchet & Clank and Halo. Halo stays the same, doesn't innovate, super high review scores! Ratchet stays the same, doesn't innovate, it gets slammed for not innovating. I just find that odd, and that's NOT to bash on Halo, just review perceptions of when it's okay, not okay to "stay the same." It's so arbitrary it's sick.
I disagree body. I think if a 30fps FPS is consistent without dips, thats just as good. MW2 looks smooth, but it sacrifices a lot (textures, effects (wait till you see the banding in the snow storm), and resolution to run as such. Yes, I love that it's so smooth, but at the same time, I won't say it's instantly better than something like Resistance or Halo.
And UC2 and KZ2 "crap" all over Gears 2 and its poor lighting/fx and heavy abuse of post processing. What's your point sir?
No screen tearing = win.
I find Halo's levels empty, yet oddly aesthetically sound and visually pleasing. When you look at Halo, you know it's Halo. That's more than I can say for 90% of post-apocalyptic shooters these days. It can't compete on a technical level with UC2 or KZ2, but for some reason it still looks solid to me.
Just fix the last gen ragdolls too please. =)
I've played it. It looks solid, but can easily be mistaken for CoD4. Some areas look gorgeous, some look really bland. The setups are really cool though, without a doubt.
Of course. If you haven't learned by now how hard the hype train roles... what's funny is when you have these same sites 2 years down the line doing "retrospectives" about how "MGS2 wasn't as good as we reviewed it." Then why did you assign it that score in the first place eh?
Oh well, all I care about is whether or not this game is any fun, and how balanced the MP will be? Turrets? Bleck. And frankly, watching the guys at work play it, it could easily be mist...
Naughty Dog - Head and shoulders above Valve.
No G3?
Crap. I Was a beast with that.
I Think the perk system is a cool idea, but I can't stand how FPS's are becoming reliant on gimmicks for the casuals instead of just being a better shot/aim than your opponent.
I really hope this game balances out, but so far I'm still a bit worried.
Please be more DOA2 hardcore and less DOA4. PLEASE. I hated how the series changed. I liked it more when it was a simple, fun party game.
No. Sometimes I want to play with people way better than me so I can learn/get better. It's OKAY to lose online, gasp.
That's 1 LOL for Gametrailers being hypocrites.Talk about calling it.
And that's 1 LOL for the idiot fanboys who think people being upset has ANYTHING to do with the quality of the game itself. Once again, it's NOT THE SCORE. Say it with me...
It's the MEDIA'S ENTIRE LACK OF CONSISTENCY. Not TWO weeks ago, we were told that a game that doesn't innovate cannot get above a 9.3. Now it can. Explain.
Only fools stand behind review scores. Now I'm off to pick...