Game Reviews

[DAIR]

I often read game reviews and think "WTF, How on earth did this game receive such a good score?"

Lets take Kane and Lynch 2. The first game was crap (I only played the demo), so I had a good feeling that the sequel would be just as bad (in my opinion). Unfortunately, I was correct. The game was just as bad.

However, the game received mixed review :S . OXM gave it 9/10...... Whereas IGN gave it 7.0. I personally thought it shouldve received less than that. Its a real shame because iirc these (K&L Developers) were the same guys who made the GREAT Hitman games (btw I think they need to bring this game back).

Anyway, am I the only one who thinks reviews can sometimes be influenced by Cash?

How important are previews and reviews to you?

 

[McBunny]

all reviews can be influenced by cash just read what whifi and what tv !

 

[Silent_Scone]

I think it was gamespot that got a right spanking for slating Tomb Raider Legends when that was launched? It got taken down quite quickly. Eidos do pay them a fair wedge

 

[DAIR]

I think a few years ago I wouldve been gullible enough to treat reviews as law. These days I tend not to fall for the hype.

I like to base my decisions on demos and previous games.

 

[Snakey]

I believe they were the ones who did the Hitman games.T

The question is asked why do they choose to make a sequel to a sub-par game who nobody really wants to play, when fans are crying out for another Hitman game...

 

[treemanx]

Whose OXM? PSM3 gave it a s**t review

 

[Brand86]

The only reviews I trust are from GameCentral on the Metro website (formerly on Teletext). They are spot on IMO. IGN I listen to too a fair deal but sometimes when they get extra coverage for previews they end up over inflating scores, like Halo Reach is wicked but they gave it 10/10 - it's not ground breaking enough to score that highly.

 

[Christopher]

Reach is dog sh*t. I tried to like it.

 

[jongsr4]

I think it was gamespot that got a right spanking for slating Tomb Raider Legends when that was launched? It got taken down quite quickly. Eidos do pay them a fair wedge

I think it was actually the Kane and Lynch review

The site had been heavily sponsered by the publishers of Kane and Lynch for some time and then they did this review..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5FuJ81sDR2o

I think the guy was fired straight after this review

 

[Brand86]

It's definitely NOT...it's a great game. Maybe you just aren't very good at it, in which case it would be frustrating.

 

[James172Cup]

i get most of my reviews/opinions from various game forums, rarely rely on magazine reviews.

 

[DAIR]

It's definitely NOT...it's a great game. Maybe you just aren't very good at it, in which case it would be frustrating.

Far from it. I like to give credit where credit is due. Regardless of now difficult a game it.

F1 2010 is the most difficult racer I've played in years. Doesnt make it crap game. In fact its the best F1 game ive ever experienced.

 

[Brand86]

Well to say Reach is anything less than very good is just plain wrong - there is no single element you could criticise, apart from maybe the story in the campaign being quite simplistic - but after Halo 3 I was pleased to be able to follow this one. The mp is superb - so many option, so balanced. I don't think it is perfect, but it is very good.

 

[Brazo]

I'm currently going reach a chance. I liked the way they built the tension in the first scene where you were hunting the covenant. Only disappointment was when you found them, they were so damn cute lol! Good graphics and sound though.

 

[Danny Lee]

Well to say Reach is anything less than very good is just plain wrong - there is no single element you could criticise, apart from maybe the story in the campaign being quite simplistic - but after Halo 3 I was pleased to be able to follow this one. The mp is superb - so many option, so balanced. I don't think it is perfect, but it is very good.

nope, sorry, reach was poor

far too easy - i jumped straight into it on legenedary and it was not challenging. i was at least looking forward to some achievements based on your score on each campaign level like halo 3 had, but no, none of that.

i used to love turn on on the skulls (once u found them - another thing they just handed you on a plate in reach) to restrict the ammo enemies drop and also to make them harder and use cover more, that was not only fun but actually made the game a challenge - the going thru each level trying to get enough points to get the achievements

new weapons? nope (modded battle rifle is not imo a new gun) - mp is outdated imo - but its safe to safe for MP i do preffer BC2 and COD so am bound to say that

 

[DAIR]

Never played any of the Halo games. So I cant comment.

Currently waiting to see NFS' review. One wonders whether it'll turn out to be another hyped EA game that fails to deliver!