Miggle wrote:
Poseidon wrote:
Vilham wrote:
Please dont tell me you think bioshock had better gameplay than system shock or deus ex, because it doesnt. Uncharted is very good though, but only once through and therefore automatically gets knocked off the list.
...Did I say that? No. I didn't. Bioshock for the 360 got a
96 in total from metacritic on both PC and the 360. It had AMAZING graphics. Are you seriously going to make the incredibly daft statement that you've never seen an amazing game with amazing graphics? Try HL2, Crysis, CoD4, Gears of War...all of these games had/have next-gen graphics and all have metacritic scores of over 90.
that's because metascores are bullshit.
most of those are good games, but I don't trust metascore, half of the reviews that go in are full of shit.
People who say that are like the people who say wikipedia info is wrong. Looking for an excuse.
Do you want individual scores from well known and highly represented websites? Okay, fine. Here you go.
Crysis -
http://www.gamespot.com/pc/action/crysi … lk=topslot - 95
http://pc.ign.com/articles/834/834614p1.html - 94
http://gameinformer.com/NR/exeres/87EE9 … 83D7CD.htm - 90
And PC Gamer also gave it a 98.
I won't give individual links for the following, but you can follow the links in the Metacritic scores.
Bioshock -
GameInformer - 100 (very rarely given out)
Official Xbox Magazine UK - 100
G4 TV - 100
EGM - 100
IGN - 97
Gears of War-
G4 TV - 100
Gamespy - 100
IGN - 94
GameInformer - 95
The fact that someone can say that every single game they've played that has good graphics is shit is almost funny.
Vilham wrote:
Poseidon wrote:
Vilham wrote:
Please dont tell me you think bioshock had better gameplay than system shock or deus ex, because it doesnt. Uncharted is very good though, but only once through and therefore automatically gets knocked off the list.
...Did I say that? No. I didn't. Bioshock for the 360 got a
96 in total from metacritic on both PC and the 360. It had AMAZING graphics. Are you seriously going to make the incredibly daft statement that you've never seen an amazing game with amazing graphics? Try HL2, Crysis, CoD4, Gears of War...all of these games had/have next-gen graphics and all have metacritic scores of over 90.
Bioshock was pretty shit in terms of gameplay so yes, it wasnt amazing. HL2, amazing game, doesnt have amazing graphics though. Crysis, lol total shit. CoD4 granted very good graphics and gameplay. Gears of war lol... next your going to say halo is the best shoot to have ever existed...
People who go on reviews and not on their own opinion are morons. Ive played probably over 1000 games, i would say I know what i think a good game and a bad game are by now.
You do realise game companies have a very large amount of control over what reviewers can say. For example if a magazine says their game is shit they can withdraw any rights to exclusive reviews etc for their other games, which results in a massive drop in revenue.
The fact that you instantly put down Gears of War proves your bias towards the PS3, and would give a reasonable explanation of why you're so angry when the word Xbox, Halo or Gears of War is mentioned.
Who said I'm simply going on reviews? I've played all these games and finished all of them, and I agree 100% with the critics. Sorry if YOU can't form your own opinions. Played Bioshock, loved it 100%. One of the best games I've ever played. Played Crysis and while not the best game ever, it sets the standard for next gen graphics and gameplay. The story in general is pretty tense as well. CoD4? Played through it all and loved it. You're making no sense and grasping for argument. Then again, we've had this discussion before.
Wow, conspiracy theories much? I'm sure Marvel being the gigantic company it is would let people constantly put down the movie-based games it makes. Yeah, right. Get a clue.
Last edited by Poseidon (2008-05-06 17:57:41)