I know. It's almost like one of them is typically open to bribery.
Or you know its like it was reviewed by 2 different people with differing opinions.
I know. It's almost like one of them is typically open to bribery.
I am still waiting for a Wii U review. Come on, there are tens of Nintendo dedicated sites. No one, really ?
I think in the context of that quote, the EDGE reviewer is more critical of the series in general having to be "more more more" because it is no longer as slow and cerebral as Chaos Theory. In this way, he's trying to say that one guard in Chaos Theory provided more tension than say half a dozen in Blacklist because Sam Fisher is faster, more deadly, etc (except Chaos Theory already did that). I don't really get the fascination with "amg daytime, stealth is ruined" when stealth gameplay is more than just checking off boxes to see if it is dark and there is sneaking.So they've phrased it in a negative way even though nothing has changed? (If there was a brightly-lit area in Chaos Theory you could also sneak past enemies with line-of-sight stealth)
...is really one line I don't understand when every other reviewer seems to point out the fact that even if the SP story is a load of dreck and some of the action sequences are utter shit, the game shines in level design and was built for experimentation/replayability.EDGE said:Blacklists level design defies improvisation and ingenuity
edge has spoken
we can go home
I was debating picking this up for wiiU, but I just watched the game trailers review as this game looks like everything I don't like in games. Streamlined, by-the-numbers affair without interesting characters. Also looks to lack polish.
Looking at all the 9s this got and SR4 got....I don't know if I really trust 9s anymore.
- No local multi
Is this true, or is it just a case of them not implementing a way for one player to play on the TV and the other to play on the GamePad? Or is basic splitscreen not in the Wii U version either?
Without making a judgment either way on the review for Blacklist, I appreciate that Edge doesn't subscribe to the "AAA games get at least an 80% just for showing up" philosophy.
No local multiplayer at all, according to Ubi. There's still online modes, though!
I was debating picking this up for wiiU, but I just watched the game trailers review as this game looks like everything I don't like in games. Streamlined, by-the-numbers affair without interesting characters. Also looks to lack polish.
Looking at all the 9s this got and SR4 got....I don't know if I really trust 9s anymore.
Im....Im getting Hitman Absolution (review thread) flashbacks. The overall scores were a bit more inconsistent but same overall feeling of "Buy it". I hated it.
I've already bought a code of Ebay for $20 but still, I'm going into this unsure after the shitfest that was Hitman.
Yes.Every major release seems to get good grades (8-10) from the majority of websites/magazines. Except Edge, are they the only one that understand the 10 point scale?
Is the Edge review worth paying attention to?
I'm not familiar with their track record.
Interesting, thanks.Here's the answer I got from Sober when I asked the other day:
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=75710463&postcount=353
Haven't seen any new or fleshed out info.
A 6 from Edge is basically an 8/10. A 10 from Edge, by extension, is basically a 20/10.
I've got to disagree here. MGS has almost alway been a get seen-you're fucked kind of game in almost all difficulties. If you get lucky enough to escape you could continue, but no way can you take the action approach that 4 allows for.
I always ignore Edge.
Or you know its like it was reviewed by 2 different people with differing opinions.
Thus far it sounds like the same, but:
- No screen tearing
- Framerate dips
- Easier switching weapons
- No local multi
That Edge review, it seems like the reviewer is criticizing the game more because of its modern trappings rather than the game quality itself.
I know reviews are opinions and they're entitled to their own opinions, and I respect that. However, I don't like it when games are reviewed that way. Criticism for modern gaming cliche, criticism for copying another popular series, character design choices (like Dragon's Crown), or other unnecessary criticism that otherwise overlooks the most important thing about a game: is it good and is it fun?
Tomb Raider for example, some reviews thrashed it for being like Uncharted or falling under modern gaming design. But that game is amazing and a masterpiece. Those reviews are so biased and misinforming and undermines one of the best games ever made this gen.
The other reviews for Blacklist seem pretty solid though.
No offense, but Tomb Raider is exactly the worry when it comes to fans of the series staples. The game is called Splinter Cell, so how it stacks up in the series and what Splinter Cell fans can expect seems more than reasonable to include in a review.Tomb Raider for example, some reviews thrashed it for being like Uncharted or falling under modern gaming design. But that game is amazing and a masterpiece. Those reviews are so biased and misinforming and undermines one of the best games ever made this gen.
That Edge review, it seems like the reviewer is criticizing the game more because of its modern trappings rather than the game quality itself.
I know reviews are opinions and they're entitled to their own opinions, and I respect that. However, I don't like it when games are reviewed that way. Criticism for modern gaming cliche, criticism for copying another popular series, character design choices (like Dragon's Crown), or other unnecessary criticism that otherwise overlooks the most important thing about a game: is it good and is it fun?
Tomb Raider for example, some reviews thrashed it for being like Uncharted or falling under modern gaming design. But that game is amazing and a masterpiece. Those reviews are so biased and misinforming and undermines one of the best games ever made this gen.
The other reviews for Blacklist seem pretty solid though.
No offense, but Tomb Raider is exactly the worry when it comes to fans of the series staples. The game is called Splinter Cell, so how it stacks up in the series and what Splinter Cell fans can expect seems more than reasonable to include in a review.
And I'm just gonna walk away from the "masterpiece" part...
I don't think you understand what a masterpiece is.
That's a matter of degree really. Removing points because a stealth game is filled with design decisions that work against that style of play seems fair. Removing points because a game about player choice seems to restrict those choices too often also seems fair to me.You wouldn't give RE4 a 6/10 because it doesn't play like its predecessors, would you? It's the same deal here: you should judge Blacklist based on its merits (or lack thereof), not because it doesn't play exactly like CT.
What the fuck? You expect us to actually read the content of these reviews? Who sounds stupid now?People are being kind of ridiculous by inferring the Edge review is the only one that matters. Not saying Edge isn't credible, but they seem to have the outlying opinion. As for me, I never read reviews for score, but more for the info and use that to determine buy/pass. Obsession over score is something I never understood.
Wow edge
And so Blacklist has explosions and chases and extended platforming sequences and sniper missions and firstperson missions and missions against the clock and missions upon missions where being undetected feels like an exploit rather than a victory.
Good. Games are an artistic medium, not hardware appliances.That Edge review, it seems like the reviewer is criticizing the game more because of its modern trappings rather than the game quality itself.
I always feel that this is kind of a weird self-imposed construct though. Who says you have to finish a stealth game undetected? Deus Ex HR for instance really shone if you went undetected most of the time, got caught close to the exit and had to make a run for it. There's a reason spies in movies always get caught too. It creates conflict/climax at the height of buildup of tension.That sounds exactly what it looks like in the videos. Splinter Cell as a stealth game seems to be dead. my decision to skip it like the last one seems to be right.
I always feel that this is kind of a weird self-imposed construct though. Who says you have to finish a stealth game undetected? Deus Ex HR for instance really shone if you went undetected most of the time, got caught close to the exit and had to make a run for it. There's a reason spies in movies always get caught too. It creates conflict/climax at the height of buildup of tension.
I think the videos have played up the action because that's what video editors tend to do. Sure, there are a few action scenes that break up the pacing now and then, but I've been playing it pretty much pure stealth and loving it. Barely touched mark and execute and totally forgot I even had an assault rifle for a long while (and I'm never buying a shotgun in this game c'mon). Plenty of missions where being seen at all is insta-fail or destroys your bonus and brings in reinforcements.Splinter Cell as a stealth game seems to be dead.
But I have to say, watching the Rev3 review now it seems like they learned the right lessons. Weird, that some people think the stealth work well and others don't.