Posts on Current Forum | Archived Posts
|
|
|
||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
| Frequently Asked Forum Questions | |
|||
|
||||
|
|
|||
| ||||
| ||||
| ||||
| Search Older Posts on This Forum: Posts on Current Forum | Archived Posts | ||||
| ||||
| ||||
| ||||
| Re: Halo 3: Past, present and Future | |
| Posted By: Rox <rox_da_fox@spray.se> | Date: 8/20/07 10:09 a.m. |
In Response To: Re: Halo 3: Past, present and Future (Draganos) "They" is the wrong term to use, though. Usually they let the same one editor review an entire series, and they do have genre-specific reviewers that only review certain types of games. Might be that their sports reviewers are fanatic lunatics. I wouldn't know, I don't play sports games, and I most definitely don't bother reading about them. But in general, Gamespot so far have had a total of TWO video reviews I haven't agreed with to 100%. I can't remember which ones now, but I remember I counted two. I say video reviews because it's actually much easier to tell what the editor is trying to say if you can watch him and hear the tone he's using when describing a certain feature or quality. But if in doubt, I just look at both Gamespot and IGN. They never point out the exact same things. IGN, I believe, are much harsher about some things, and I'm not sure why but I get the feeling when reading their reviews that they present things as fact, while Gamespot generally has a more subjective feel. Gamespot are also very good at pointing out specific things they like and dislike, which makes it easier for a nitpicky gamer, like myself, to figure out if a game is worth a try. If something gets a comment about bad camera or short lifespand in the "The Bad" box in the beginning of a review, I can just move right on, because I can't really tolerate things like that anymore. But wait, you say they praised NHL 2k7 despite NHL 07 being better? NHL 07's rating was 0.1 lower than 2k7's... And two of their three negative points about 2k7 was that the gameplay was too similar and it had too few new features. Meanwhile NHL 07 gets a "cool innovation" in its positive box. Just by looking at the score and those notes, it seems to me that 2k7 is good in the same way the last game was, but there's nothing new, and NHL 07 is maybe a bit less polished but more innvoative. Sounds clear to me that if you want the same game as before but better, you'd go with 2k7, and if you want new, cool stuff, you go with NHL 07. Unless a different system has gotten a radically different rating, which isn't unusual... Both these reviews are for 360. Yeah, there we go, 07 for the PC and PS2 got 7.1 instead of 8.2. Let's find out why! They say everything (graphics and sound) is practically unaltered from the last game and the cool innovative feature is much more limited than on the 360 version. Looks like they made the same version for PS2 and PC but the 360 got a polished, updated one. Seems like a fair score to me. I wouldn't call that bashing. Wow, how can I type this much about... a game site?
| |
|
| Replies: |
| Halo 3: Past, present and Future | Nitro288 | 8/19/07 9:49 p.m. |
| Re: Halo 3: Past, present and Future | Draganos | 8/19/07 10:13 p.m. |
| Re: Halo 3: Past, present and Future | Nitro288 | 8/19/07 10:31 p.m. |
| Re: Halo 3: Past, present and Future | Draganos | 8/20/07 7:32 a.m. |
| Re: Halo 3: Past, present and Future | Rox | 8/20/07 10:09 a.m. |
The HBO Forum Archive is maintained with WebBBS 4.33. |