Yep, he hasn't ever met a real blond.
The series is incredibly consistent - 88 -> 96 -> 92 -> 94. The only other series in recent years I can think of that have been consistently is:
The Souls games - 89 -> 89 -> 91 -> 92 -> 89
GTA immediately came to mind though I was thinking from recent times and as GTA III / Vice City / San Andreas came from more than 2 gens behind hence why I didn't mention them.
Rockstar is INCREDIBLY consistent though.
http://communityvoices.post-gazette...5-uncharted-4-review-a-new-peak-of-the-seriesThat narrative, plus the best action gameplay in the genre, make the game an outstanding achievement. Uncharted 4 reaches the peak of what the series can be.
Just a shame FROM struggles on the tech side of things.
But they have other issues? Games are getting more and more complex, so i'm not sure that anyone are able to make everything flawless.It's not from who have like 150 ms input lag in last few games
It's not from who have like 150 ms input lag in last few games
Well of course, but really I just wanted an excuse to postDepends on the blonde and the brunette.
Blonde
Brunette
Which one would you prefer?
/s
That being said, Chloe is awful and Elena is amazing. How is this even an argument.
![]()
Holy shit man, people can be so rabid on Twitter. Glad Amy shut him down quick. For reference on what that piece of shit is loosely referring to:
![]()
Oh, no I meant of course in regards to "it depends". To each their own, but I'll take both, please!Chloe awful?
get the fuck outta here![]()
![]()
Holy shit man, people can be so rabid on Twitter. Glad Amy shut him down quick. For reference on what that piece of shit is loosely referring to:
![]()
My copy has arrived, will I be banned for playing it early in the UK?
Not that MC means what some people think, but there are other teams that have been pretty consistent, and for over two decades, not just recently.
Nintendo:
Zelda - 95->99->95->96->95->93->91
Mario - 92->91->94->92->97->97->90->93
Metroid - 92->97->92->90->91
Smash - 92->93->92
Mario Kart is pretty good too - 93->83->87->91->82->85->88(87+90 DLC packs) and so is Fire Emblem.
Valve (HL1 96, HL2 96, EP1 87, EP2 90, CSS 88, Portal 90, Portal 2 95, DOTA 2 90), Blizzard (WC3 92+88 expansion, WoW 93 and 90+ expansions, Hearthstone 88, SC 88->93->86->88) and Bioware (BG 91, BG2 95, KotOR 94, JE 89, ME 91, ME2 96, ME3 93) are pretty consistent too.
My copy has arrived, will I be banned for playing it early in the UK?
That can get you banned on PSN? since when?
My friend told me that with all the stolen copies in the UK, you can get banned for playing it early. He was probably just fucking with me. I'll risk it.
.when is the preload up?
Well, I was thinking about making a thread dedicated to waifus, but it would probably be frowned upon here, so I decided to start a #TeamElena vs #TeamChloe debacle.What's with this TeamChloe/TeamElena bobbins infesting the thread all of a sudden? Get that waifu wars bullshit outta here.
everybody knows that TeamChase is the right answer
Hello, boy!
when is the preload up?
Hello, boy!
A little over a day if it's like most games.
Review Scores are dumb. Aggregate sites like Metacritic are dumb but unavoidable. It's so lame.
WOW at that steelbook cover!!!! I'm guessing that's not happening with any American version?
Holy shit, where did you order from? Amazon.de hasn't even shipped my SE yet![]()
This thread is now depressing me, I keep checking Amazon hoping they have changed their dispatch estimate. Nope dispatching Monday.
same here but with shop to, they've even put up a note saying.
"We have just been advised by SONY that they have placed a shipping restriction on Uncharted 4 for all retailers, these will now be shipped on Monday the 9th. This should not affect delivery of the item for release but some delays can occur within the postal service on rare occasions."
why do i have to have my order with a retailer sticking to this restriction....
Aww mine was supposed to arrive today from Amazon UK.Hello, boy!
Both Special Editions in America have it..
Review scores and aggregating them are not dumb but actually a quite useful tool in evaluating games to make purchasing decisions.
The problem in these threads is that mostly that's not how the scores are used or discussed. Here, people (a) are already huge fans and will mostly get the game no matter what; (b) pay attention to and dissect things that are statistically insignificant, such as difference between 93 and 95, or the reasoning for a single review score. In these threads, scores are treated like a little sport and, for some, as fanboy fodder too. There's nothing necessarily horribly wrong with that -- as long as people are self-aware and keep that in perspective.
Metacritic is quite useful. It's a very nice pragmatic guide to what games one should buy and in what order. It's not perfect, it's not godly, and doesn't account for all tastes. However, all in all, a highly rated game will be enjoyed more by the average knowledgeable gamer than will a low-rated game. This principle generally holds; thus the system does its job.
"Review scores are dumb" is throwing the baby out with the bath water, a knee-jerk overreaction to unreasonable people not using the system the way it's meant to be used.
Some sites lamely went with "review scores are dumb" and stopped giving them out. Their reasoning for doing so don't really hold up, but since plenty of other sites remain, it's no huge loss. What amuses me is that some of those sites, such as Eurogamer, have since then adopted essentially a score system -- just not a numeric one, thus avoiding Metacritic. It's amusing, because it subtly confirms their own belief in the usefulness of scores, even if they don't like Metacritic itself, or how score scales are calibrated elsewhere (namely that game reviews average around 70 instead of 50).
Hats off to Amy, amazing to hear such kind words towards Neil and Naughty Dog after a potentially bad divorce is lovely to see.
Yeah - the Nintendo series you mentioned are great. You missed a couple of Zeldas that drop it down though - Spirit Tracks (87) and the most recent Zelda game Triforce Heroes, a 73. Also, the last Metroid game that came out is at 79 (Other M) and I expect the latest one hitting soon could be a record low for the series. Fire Emblem, Smash and Mario Kart though - so consistently high all the time and I expect the same from the NX iterations.
What saddens me on that list of Nintendo games is their lack of proper Metroid games. It's been 12 years since the last 2D Metroid, 9 years since the last first person Metroid and 6 years since the last Metroid game in general I believe. Very sad.
Bioware is fantastic as well - as an ME fan I hope for great things with Andromeda and I look forward to trying out my first Dragon Age game in Inquisition. As for Valve, happy for their success but the Valve I love and care about died: Other than Portal 2, they have made nothing remotely interesting to me in the last 7 years. Ah, the glory days of Half Life 2 are long gone![]()
I strongly disagree with this line of thinking, simply because reviews are made by gamers like us. They don't have a "degree in videogames" that sets their opinions apart from ours, and i actually believe that many people on forums have more experience or are able to judge games better than many reviewers. That's why i don't care about MC, but only about reviews from website i have reasons to trust, and those of friends who know their shit (and of course mine). An hypotetical GAFCritic for PS/Nintendo/Xbox/PC games would have the exact same weight as Metacritic.Thank you! I find the whole "review scores are useless/should be completely done away with" to be incredulous. It's such a reductive way to look at things.
The common rebuttal seems to be: "Everyone should try the game out for themselves." Which completely overlooks the predominant reason why reviews exist in the first place; Not everyone has time or means to do that.
Or the whole "metacritic (or reviews in general) is not an accurate representation of actual quality". When in actual fact, it's the closest thing we have to a tangible representation of a game's quality. More often than not, a game that receives critical acclaim is a game that's definitely worth playing. Middling/mediocre scores indicates a divisive game. And if the game is widely panned? Chances are the majority of people probably won't enjoy it much either.
"All reviews are subjective. Thus, this obviously reflects the uselessness of metacritic". This dicounts the fact that metacritic is an agglomeration of reviews and this argument tries to handwave the importance of the majority view. While it might not always be in line with an individual's personal preference, the majority view is extremely useful in determining the general consensus on a particular game. If someone doesn't think the game is that great/bad, then /they/ are the outlier.