Edge 207

[yesteryeargames]

W T F , metroid 9/10 would be harsh they take the piss , theyhate nintendo thats a fact

[egparadigm]

It makes a lot of sense, though, if you take into account that the previous iterations scored 9, 8 and 7.

[yesteryeargames]

i like odst allot !!!but it should have gotten a 9 and metroid only an8

[Neil]

i like odst allot !!!but it should have gotten a 9 and metroid only an8

Would agree on the ODST score, really enjoyed it from start to finish.

[Guts]

i like odst allot !!!but it should have gotten a 9 and metroid only an8

Well good for you then, because they got those scores.

And no way in hell is Mini Ninjas an Edge 7, if Wet gets 5, then MN should also be 5 the most. There's NOTHING even remotely original or well executed in Mini Ninjas, it's a really mediocre action-adventure that may satisfy younger kids.

[Eight Rooks]

Nah, Mini Ninjas I can see. Who cares if it's not original? The graphic design is stunning - sorry, but the character vignette videos are right up there with Valve's Team Fortress vids or even Pixar shorts - and the demo plays really well. I'm just not touching the whole thing at full price because every review is saying it's really, really easy and you don't really need to ever use more than one character unless the game forces you to. Doesn't make it a bad game, though.

It is a lot of 7s, however, and makes me worry a little they're heading towards the same mediocre approach to criticism that every website has taken up (Eurogamer have become notably bland of late)... The Scribblenauts score is a case in point - they were saying the controls made it near unplayable in the preview! I enjoy reading the magazine because they're about the only people I know of who're still unafraid to call a high profile game on its flaws regardless of how unpopular it'll make them; I don't mind if they want to rate Wet down, I just really can't see how they could (not that far, anyway). I still want to read it and find out and I'm still happy to pay them for the privilege rather than just browsing it in Smiths or looking it up on the net.

[ezee ryder]

WET is a 5...if you are a pretentious prick who's forgotten why they even loved videogames in the first place.

To everyone else it's a high 6, low 7.

That is a bit of a OTT comment mate, surely?!

From what I have played of the game (demo and a little bit of the full game) I would say 5/10 is pretty much spot on, unless the game gets mind blowingly amazing later on of course.

[The Mole]

Another good score for Dead Space, gonna have to look into that tomorrow when i am in town i think.

[Spatial]

There's NOTHING even remotely original or well executed in Mini Ninjas, it's a really mediocre action-adventure that may satisfy younger kids.

Then we must have been playing a different game because Mini Ninjas is incredibly well put together for what it sets out to do.

And if anyone goes into it expecting anything else than what it is, they've only themselves to blame.

[Daragon]

Wet should have been named Wet Pussy.

Game reminds me of Stranglehold, except Stranglehold should be considered a masterclass compared to this (NB: comment is made strictly on piss poor demo, full may well be awesome, but it's certainly not selling itself to me based on the afformentioned ****ty demo).

Stick to your own IPs in future Bethesda, the last thing you need is ****e sullying your reputation - the majority of the add on packs for Fallout 3 aside!

[Flabio]

5 for WET is unbelievably harsh. It's short, yes, but it's some of the best out and out unashamed fun I've had in gaming for a good long time.

It suffers more from when it's been released than the quality of the game. Stick it out in say, April, and everyone would be singing it's praises.

At the very least it's worth a rental between finishing Arkham and digging into ODST or Uncharted 2.

[InvisibleKid]

Am I the only one surprised at Edge's 9 for Demon's Souls!?

Don't get me wrong, I own it and think it's great - but 9?! That seems generous.
I'd give it an Edge 8.

[Guts]

Nah, Mini Ninjas I can see. Who cares if it's not original? The graphic design is stunning - sorry, but the character vignette videos are right up there with Valve's Team Fortress vids or even Pixar shorts - and the demo plays really well. I'm just not touching the whole thing at full price because every review is saying it's really, really easy and you don't really need to ever use more than one character unless the game forces you to. Doesn't make it a bad game, though.

You have played the demo. I've played through the whole game.

The graphic design is stunning? It's so incredibly simple and lacks totally in detail, almost the whole game takes place in same kind of forest which are just shaded differently (there's a couple of nice looking parts but mostly it's the same forest), there's zero variation in enemies (well ok, there's a BIG samurai and a small one) and all of the game's texts look like they just used Comic Sans including the title screen. Oh, and there's probably one voice actor doing all of the game's voice work. The music was good though.

Anyway, none of that actually even matters because the gameplay is so incredibly mediocre and bland that it actually hurts. It's like they weren't even trying, there's no ambition what so ever. Yes, it is incredibly easy on normal difficulty and no you don't actually have to use ANY of the five characters at all (except one of them to defeat the mentioned big samurais and I'm not even sure if that is mandatory either) since the main character is better in every way. There's not even a SINGLE cut scene in the game that would use the characters or develop them in any way. You get them and then they are there, that's it.

And last of all, I didn't say it's a bad game, I said it's a really mediocre one, hence it should have gotten five (mediocre), not seven (good).

Then we must have been playing a different game because Mini Ninjas is incredibly well put together for what it sets out to do.

Out of curiosity, what does it set out to do? Because it sure isn't an interesting story, creative gameplay, amazing graphics or great replay value.

And if anyone goes into it expecting anything else than what it is, they've only themselves to blame.

I didn't expect anything and it was still an incredibly mediocre and unambitious experience.

[Brats]

*Awaits angry Beatles brigade*

Nah, it's an opinion and a mostly fair one. They say it's slightly regressive rather than pushing the genre forward by not being compatible with the other games, and that's a fair point.

I agree the comment on Eleanor Rigby is a bit wierd (although their not the first review to make that comment).

The other point I disagree with is that they say it is less of a party game than other Rock bands because even the Beatles music is not as inclusive as other RB games. In my experience, it's the most inclusive game yet, as it's rare to find someone who hates The Beatles. That comment sounds possibly like one made from an assumption rather than actual experience.

[Skull Commander]

...... as it's rare to find someone who hates The Beatles..

Pleased to meet you