Is that a picture from EvilBoris' basement?
-
-
what on earth is the point of reviewing such an old game, irrespective of quality ?
on this site you're lucky to get discussion on many games a week or 2 after release in the first play thread so this seems a totally and utterly pointless exercise in futility.
when posting controversial reviews to gain some cheap 'rep' the idea is to aim for the release window, not miss it by several years.
what's next for review, Gears of War 1 and Super Mario 64 ?Comment
-
There's already a review of Gears 1. It went up two weeks ago*
*not really, it's been there ages.Comment
-
This is one of the best games on the 360.
I loved the campaign and t-hunt and online play are still the best I've experienced online not to mention the ranking/stats system an IMO the best lobby system of any online game.
Still each to their own I guess.Comment
-
Many people don't buy games on release, some people even buy games for consoles older than this generation. I was playing it again and noticed a review was missing from the site, so wrote one. There's no alterior motive.Originally posted by merf View PostComment
-
But it is a strange choice. If someone happened on to this site and saw your review, they'd not read / consider the review date, they'd see the score. And apparently you are the only person who thinks this was worth a 4
Comment
-
Why is everyone chucking their toys out of the pram over this? The reviewer is entitled to his own opinion and if he feels that's what the game is worth what is the problem?Comment
-
plus add to that this place pushes itself as a cutting edge, gotta have the latest game ahead of the curve import site where rabid fans pick their pre-order site based on who will send the latest game out 1 day early.
I have no view on the game at all as those aren't my thing, just find it odd and ill suited to the ethos of this place to do it so late.Comment
-
That banner though. What a stunner, eh?Comment
-
Agree with Merf. Import site. Reviewing a 3 year old game. Strange choice.
Plus I'm a little concerned about poor old old Monkey's well being. Spending 30 hours doing something you don't enjoy can't be healthy
Of course anyone can have a different opinion. I always felt though, that site reviews reflected the editorial staff of the site. It's such a strange score, and such a strange review for all the reasons already discussed.
And like any Edge thread, if there's a review score that people think is wrong, they're going to say so!Comment
-
Would look better if the guy wasn't dead center in the Vegas picOriginally posted by Spatial101 View Post
Comment
-
-
The site welcomes reviews on any game, regardless of release date, providing that it has not already been reviewed. It's happened before on many occasions.
I would also encourage people to concentrate their attention on the text of the review. If you feel – as some have already stated – that there are issues with that, then go ahead and articulate them. The review score is not decided by the writer alone, but considered by the writing staff as a reflection of the text. As such, there is certainly no basis in fact for the accusation that the score was generated in aid of controversy.
Simply saying "this game is worth more than 4/10" doesn't cut it as a critique for the review. Duncan offered a heavy verdict on the game and the score is merely a numeric representation.Comment
-
Capcom: You are wrong in the head, now I`ll have bleedin` nightmares about those kids! *brrr*
Mmm...Cutting edge isn`t an expression I`d use to describe NTSC-uk anymore, far from it. The import scene is all but dead, with only scant reminders of previous glories (the influx of shooters on 360, occasional Wii releases that`ll never make it here to name but a few) but what it does have is a collection of good writers who literally cover whatever they are playing at the time to add to the greater good.
And on a separate tip, the forum has a dedicated core of people who if a game arises, put a great deal of time and effort to get across how much they`ve enjoyed something. The Demon`s Souls thread springs instantly to mind, and caused me to purchase a copy which I`m working my way through right now *shakes fist at Darwock & co*
That this has degenerated into a "Whaa! Whaa! They reviewed an old game! WHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMBULANCE!!" type affair is rather sad IMO. as monorailpat says, concentrate on the text lovingly provided for your reading pleasure, not the score. And after that, If you want a right royal laugh, go read the superlative Jaws: The Video Game review from a few years back and guffaw accordingly. And if after that, you`re still overcome with internet rage (so so serious....) about the Rainbow Six Vegas review? Well then... go for a walk or something instead
You`ll never agree with everything written (christ, we gave Oblivion a 10 ffs...), and there`s nothing wrong with having an opinion, but tone down the attacks a little bit, as there is a very good writer here who has given off his own back and asked nothing in return.
Now if you`ll excuse me, I`m off to review of THE latest must-have title, Missile Command:
Toodle-pip!Comment
-
Very protective of each other you lot. Good for you
I think this goes to a common discussion on this forum - the use of review scores. Some hate them, and readily dismiss them as unimportant. I'm in the opposite camp. Review scores are hugely important. The text? Not so much. I think most people skip to the score then read the review if they can be arsed.
So then it comes down to this - if someone asked YOU what you thought of R6V, asked you to give it a score out of 10, with no long winded justifications or bullet points, would you say, "4"? I could see a 6, I could see an 8. No way is it a 10. That is, of course, my opinion.
My point it, never ever dismiss the importance of the score. It's the summary, it's the conclusion, it's what people talk about. Every Edge thread goes this way. Giving a game a numerical rating is perfectly valid
Comment
Comment