GamesTM No 66

[Malavon]

I noted GamesTM apology to Jade Raymond regarding the Assassins Creed review. They really should have seen that coming, either have the balls to stand by what is said or don't print it. Simple.

Seen what coming? Did Ubisoft/Raymond respond to it or do you just mean general response from "the public"?

[dvdmike]

Ubisoft banned ziff davis from any contact at all with them on any products after a bad AC review, maybe toys where de-pramed

[Welrain]

Seen what coming? Did Ubisoft/Raymond respond to it or do you just mean general response from "the public"?

Have you read the original review? It was pretty obvious Ubisoft would not respond favourably and assume this is what the apology is all about.

[gcjae]

I wonder if the relatively low score for Paradise (compared to EDGE) is because they review the online component separately. In the EDGE review they said how the single player didn't even hint at the marvelousness to be found on Xbox Live et al.

This is something that would put me off if I was considering a purchase - I hate the way that games now concentrate so heavily on mp and either cripple (see Halo 3 splitscreen) or remove the options for offline play (or rather, never develop them) so everyone has to own a console and be connected to live.

I heartily agree.

[Pirotic]

GamesTM has really gone down hill the last few issues, I don't quite know how they keep doing it but they are slowly transforming into Edge magazine, 2 months ago they had the exact same 'developer profile' even with nigh on identical wording, and the features now are almost identical as well. doesn't bode well because when they do both cover the same subject, Edge tends to come up with better content.

GamesTM 'man in japan' this month was terrible, an entire bloody page of the guy moaning about having to wait for his internet connection. and they even have the nerve to mention SF4 on the cover then have a single page of (old) information on it. Unless it manages to find it's way out from under Edge's shadow I doubt I'll be renewing my sub, seems silly paying to read the exact same news/previews I read in Edge the month before.

[James Mc Fadden]

I have "nearly" every single issue of GamesTM and have always rated it and defended it but I do agree it's not been quite the same recently. Please sort it out, don't worry about Edge. Just be yourselves.

[The Mole]

I was very very shocked to see them give Ghost Squad an 8. I think this maybe the first case where i have agreed with them on a Wii review score for a game.

[Malavon]

Have you read the original review? It was pretty obvious Ubisoft would not respond favourably and assume this is what the apology is all about.

Yeah, that's why I was interested in hearing how they responded. I figured they would, just wasn't sure how.

[Escape-To-88]

GamesTM has really gone down hill the last few issues

Agreed. I used to subscribe, but am glad I stopped a while back as I'd say the last ten issues have been utter dross. A lot of the magazine seems to lack any decent structure, and the 'retro' section appears to be getting progressively worse. Equally, they seem more concerned with printing how many industry awards they have acquired in favour of decent content.

[crocky-chocky]

Aye. I loved Games TM, but it's defo going through a weak patch. A lot of the reviews have really long winded intros that barely touch on the games. I was right with them on their Assasin's Creed review...but if they're going to apologise for it later then that's just lame.

Link's Crossbow Training - 7

Jeezis. A wee bit generous, no?

[Welrain]

Nope, it's fab, I give it a 7 any day of the week.