read the polygon review and overall it seemed pretty reasonable. One thing I did especially notice was his gripe about the gunplay and how it wasn't very good in the single player. I watched the review video to see what it meant and I am guessing it's because there is no auto lock in single player? then he mentions how the aiming problem is fixed it in multiplayer. Something tells me that Naughty Dog purposely wanted the gunplay in single player to be much more difficult in the single player than it is multiplayer to give it a realistic vibe perhaps?
read the polygon review and overall it seemed pretty reasonable. One thing I did especially notice was his gripe about the gunplay and how it wasn't very good in the single player. I watched the review video to see what it meant and I am guessing it's because there is no auto lock in single player? then he mentions how the aiming problem is fixed it in multiplayer. Something tells me that Naughty Dog purposely wanted the gunplay in single player to be much more difficult in the single player than it is multiplayer to give it a realistic vibe perhaps?
I'm actually glad to hear that it's different from multiplayer. The multiplayer videos looked really dull to me. I hate bullet sponges. Was that part of the gripe?
Not to say anything about this game, but maybe i'm just cynical but does it feel like certain developers have cracked the whole games reviewing system?
Like some magic sauce that makes your 8-8.5 game to a 10/10 reviewed game.
something about pressing the right buttons for your typical hyperbole spewing reviewer.
This is not irrelevant. It's valid to bring up the fact that they've received a ton of money from Microsoft and have demonstrated this behavior a lot in the past.
Calling into question the reliability of a witness is relevant when the issue is whether to trust the witness. It is irrelevant, however, to call into question the reliability or morality or anything else about a person when the issue is whether that person's reasons for making a claim are good enough reasons to support the claim.
The reviewer has played the game. Something pretty much none of us has done. Even if they were biased in the past, it's very possible their review could have logical points that is reflected in the score.
Not to say anything about this game, but maybe i'm just cynical but does it feel like certain developers have cracked the whole games reviewing system?
Like some magic sauce that makes your 8-8.5 game to a 10/10 reviewed game.
something about pressing the right buttons for your typical hyperbole spewing reviewer.
I don't read him often, but I always enjoy the sheer extent of how little he gives a shit about anything comes across. I can't recall any review of his I've agreed with, but it's great to have that kinda voice out there. It's much more the kind of stuff you'd read from actual critics of other media instead of enthusiast press.
You are right. He is probably the only legit critic in the video game world. Even when I disagree with him, I ultimately realize, after reflection, that he was spot on.
And the infamous "Chick Parabola" is one of the most astute game design observations I have ever heard. (The Chick Parabola is the phenomenon, particularly seen in some strategy games, where the curve of fun maximizes once you learn all the mechanics, and then drops after that since you end up just beating up on uninteresting AI)
If this game is as good or dare I say better than U2, then ND sits atop my best developer of this gen hands down. What an amazing generation for them, I never even played a single game of theirs on the PS2.
Makes you wonder who will rise up next gen and take the crown. Probably someone we least expect.
Not to say anything about this game, but maybe i'm just cynical but does it feel like certain developers have cracked the whole games reviewing system?
Like some magic sauce that makes your 8-8.5 game to a 10/10 reviewed game.
something about pressing the right buttons for your typical hyperbole spewing reviewer.
The reviewer has played the game. Something pretty much none of us has done. Even if they were biased in the past, it's very possible their review could have logical points that is reflected in the score.
Sure, but look at what's going on here. We have scores of reviews with perfect or very high scores. We have one that's under an 8 and it happens to come from a site that we have all suspected for a long time of holding some bias because of (actual) money they have received. We also have examples of other reviews from the same guy that seem pretty out of place. Then again, all of those things could be true and he could just genuinely not have enjoyed the game. Do those things PROVE that the review is inaccurate? Nope, but we can sure as hell call it into question. It's like clouds before a storm or something, there's no rain yet but you should still get your umbrella out instead of arguing about whether or not it's going to rain.
We're not taking this guy to court for an inaccurate review or anything. We're (as has been done a lot in the past) calling the site's credibility into question. This is just another drop in the bucket and it deserves to be discussed. What's going on here is that people are trusting Polygon less and less, not that we're trying to poopoo on them for being mean to a video game.
Not to say anything about this game, but maybe i'm just cynical but does it feel like certain developers have cracked the whole games reviewing system?
Like some magic sauce that makes your 8-8.5 game to a 10/10 reviewed game.
something about pressing the right buttons for your typical hyperbole spewing reviewer.
I'm pretty sure I remember hearing some reviewer call Metroid Prime the Citizen Kane of gaming or something like that. We can't have 2 Citizen Kane's can we?
I didn't like Kane that much either. Godfather I is one of my favorite movies of all time. DAT Al Pacino. Also they shouldn't reference Citizen Kane, but Casablanca because that's the greatest movie of all-time. Or Vertigo. In my opinion, that is.
Some doubting on polygon cause they gave 7.5 and they have been shady.
Some doubting on 10/10 cause bioshock recieved as well and because their has been meltdown so the game might not be good ?.
Both are entitled to have such opinion, cant we people just get around together ?
It sucks to see some members who just came to this thread just to point @ polygon or citizen kaze or the ten on ten.
