| Easily the best GTA | 22% | 22% - 23 | ||||
| It's the best GTA, but it could be better | 31% | 31% - 33 | ||||
| Vice city was better | 6% | 6% - 7 | ||||
| San Andreas was better | 13% | 13% - 14 | ||||
| SA and Vice city were better | 4% | 4% - 5 | ||||
| As good as the previous GTA's | 1% | 1% - 2 | ||||
| Haven't decided yet | 18% | 18% - 19 | ||||
| Other | 0% | 0% - 1 | ||||
| Total: 104 | ||||||
Last edited by Vilham (2008-05-06 18:10:01)
Everyone in the gaming industry also reads IGN and GameInformer, but their reviews aren't valid? Only the places YOU like are valid is what I've determined you think.Vilham wrote:
Yeah you might want to check out what gamasutra is before you make opinions. EVERYONE in the gaming industry reads gamasutra...
Actually you might want to reread your first post, no you didnt, you based your claim of the meta scores...
these are the people who gave halo 3 a perfect score.Poseidon wrote:
http://www.gamespot.com/pc/action/crysis/review.html?sid=6182739&tag=topslot;title;1&om_act=convert&om_clk=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.
What? GameInformer gave Halo 3 a 98 and IGN gave it a 95. 95 from IGN is good, but it's not "the best". Halo 3 is a good game, but incredibly overrated to what people think is a Godlike status. But that doesn't mean it's not a good game. I enjoyed the campaign thoroughly and it's not one of the most played games on XBL next to CoD4 for no reason.Miggle wrote:
these are the people who gave halo 3 a perfect score.Poseidon wrote:
http://www.gamespot.com/pc/action/crysis/review.html?sid=6182739&tag=topslot;title;1&om_act=convert&om_clk=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.
The fate of the 360 rested on halo 3, do you think microsoft didn't throw money at reviewers?
sure, but the reason is that the 360 selection sucks.Poseidon wrote:
What? GameInformer gave Halo 3 a 98 and IGN gave it a 95. 95 from IGN is good, but it's not "the best". Halo 3 is a good game, but incredibly overrated to what people think is a Godlike status. But that doesn't mean it's not a good game. I enjoyed the campaign thoroughly and it's not one of the most played games on XBL next to CoD4 for no reason.Miggle wrote:
these are the people who gave halo 3 a perfect score.Poseidon wrote:
http://www.gamespot.com/pc/action/crysis/review.html?sid=6182739&tag=topslot;title;1&om_act=convert&om_clk=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.
The fate of the 360 rested on halo 3, do you think microsoft didn't throw money at reviewers?
Saying console games are hugely overrated is an ignorant statement. Just because you don't like them that much doesn't make them overrated.Miggle wrote:
sure, but the reason is that the 360 selection sucks.Poseidon wrote:
What? GameInformer gave Halo 3 a 98 and IGN gave it a 95. 95 from IGN is good, but it's not "the best". Halo 3 is a good game, but incredibly overrated to what people think is a Godlike status. But that doesn't mean it's not a good game. I enjoyed the campaign thoroughly and it's not one of the most played games on XBL next to CoD4 for no reason.Miggle wrote:
these are the people who gave halo 3 a perfect score.
The fate of the 360 rested on halo 3, do you think microsoft didn't throw money at reviewers?
The PS3 selection sucks.
Console games are hugely overrated merely because the majority of "gamers" use consoles and if halo is the best 360 game, it must be the best game ever.
They have nothing on the pc.Poseidon wrote:
Saying console games are hugely overrated is an ignorant statement. Just because you don't like them that much doesn't make them overrated.Miggle wrote:
sure, but the reason is that the 360 selection sucks.Poseidon wrote:
What? GameInformer gave Halo 3 a 98 and IGN gave it a 95. 95 from IGN is good, but it's not "the best". Halo 3 is a good game, but incredibly overrated to what people think is a Godlike status. But that doesn't mean it's not a good game. I enjoyed the campaign thoroughly and it's not one of the most played games on XBL next to CoD4 for no reason.
The PS3 selection sucks.
Console games are hugely overrated merely because the majority of "gamers" use consoles and if halo is the best 360 game, it must be the best game ever.
Seriously your such a moron sometimes... www.gamasutra.com DO YOUR RESEARCH! It doesnt do reviews!Poseidon wrote:
Everyone in the gaming industry also reads IGN and GameInformer, but their reviews aren't valid? Only the places YOU like are valid is what I've determined you think.Vilham wrote:
Yeah you might want to check out what gamasutra is before you make opinions. EVERYONE in the gaming industry reads gamasutra...
Actually you might want to reread your first post, no you didnt, you based your claim of the meta scores...
Right.
Last edited by Vilham (2008-05-06 20:58:18)
And seriously you can't argue with insults. I've found the least intelligent people on these forums are the ones who can't argue without intelligence. You'd think someone who's registered on these forums as long as you would atleast SOME debating skill, but you obviously have none.Vilham wrote:
Seriously your such a moron sometimes... www.gamasutra.com DO YOUR RESEARCH! It doesnt do reviews!Poseidon wrote:
Everyone in the gaming industry also reads IGN and GameInformer, but their reviews aren't valid? Only the places YOU like are valid is what I've determined you think.Vilham wrote:
Yeah you might want to check out what gamasutra is before you make opinions. EVERYONE in the gaming industry reads gamasutra...
Actually you might want to reread your first post, no you didnt, you based your claim of the meta scores...
Right.
Reviews are HEAVILY effected by publishers.
erm, I think you are going a bit overboard there Miggle. Cant be bothered putting down an argument against you right now, but you cant slat Console games as they have been the backbone of the gaming industry for many years now.Miggle wrote:
They have nothing on the pc.
If those games were on the pc, they would fail miserably.
Everything in the majority of console games has been done on the PC better before.
O yeah sorry I guess the fact that everything on the site comes from people in the industry... so yeah it must be a lie if it comes from someone who deals with this sort of thing every day! Again DO YOUR RESEARCH! And lol trying to claim I cant argue without insults, you started insulting me long before I called you a moron, which tbh is my right and is after all only my opnion.Poseidon wrote:
And seriously you can't argue with insults. I've found the least intelligent people on these forums are the ones who can't argue without intelligence. You'd think someone who's registered on these forums as long as you would atleast SOME debating skill, but you obviously have none.Vilham wrote:
Seriously your such a moron sometimes... www.gamasutra.com DO YOUR RESEARCH! It doesnt do reviews!Poseidon wrote:
Everyone in the gaming industry also reads IGN and GameInformer, but their reviews aren't valid? Only the places YOU like are valid is what I've determined you think.
Right.
Reviews are HEAVILY effected by publishers.
I wasn't talking about it doing reviews. You say you get your information off of gamasutra.com and claim THAT'S valid, but when I base some of my opinions off of reviews (although not my WHOLE opinion) and not just ONE review, a COLLABORATION of reviews, you claim mine aren't valid. It's not a one way street, kid.
That is what you said, you based your opinion on metacritic, end of arguement....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.
Wow wow wow, some company's does not equate to the industry. Consoles have kept a few company's afloat, allowing them to produce mediocre games and yet still get good sales because its the best the console has, there are a few killer games each year on the console like GTA, Halo, MGS, SSB, Zelda, its not until last year where alot of PC games got released on console that they truly became a solid platform, before that they were just a bit of multiplayer splitscreen side entertainment with sports games keeping them afloat.theDude5B wrote:
erm, I think you are going a bit overboard there Miggle. Cant be bothered putting down an argument against you right now, but you cant slat Console games as they have been the backbone of the gaming industry for many years now.Miggle wrote:
They have nothing on the pc.
If those games were on the pc, they would fail miserably.
Everything in the majority of console games has been done on the PC better before.
Last edited by Vilham (2008-05-07 07:02:59)
Never been to a US hospital without insurance?SEREMAKER wrote:
I think its better not the best
I lose the story of the background of Niko bc I get caught up with everyones elses shit ... I wish they involved more plot twists and criss crossing other plots with his
Dark ------- its very dark (even with making it brighter, its still dark)
cops .......... are everywhere ....... crusing along on the big island I can pass 3 cop cars at 1 light .......... and theres one on foot every 5 feet
vehicles ----- they need some major tuning
fuckin hospitals bills ......... I've payed out like $30,000
Sorry man have to disagree with you here.Vilham wrote:
Dont get me wrong, they have massively boosted the game industry's growth over the past 10 years but the industry would still be there is they weren't. I would say console games were the miracle growth of the industry.
The problem is that most people listen to their friends and the media, which are constantly saying things about consoles. Few people know enough to understand that PCs are better. Up until about a month ago all my friends used to play their 360s religiously, I showed them TF2 and now half the school plays it.theDude5B wrote:
Sorry man have to disagree with you here.Vilham wrote:
Dont get me wrong, they have massively boosted the game industry's growth over the past 10 years but the industry would still be there is they weren't. I would say console games were the miracle growth of the industry.
The reason I am saying that consoles are the backbone, is down to the fact that they are a hell of a lot cheaper to buy and easier to use than a PC. This has been the success of the console over the PC, and as a result the gaming industry has grown to where it is today.
Look back to the 80's when there were TV shows about computer games, i.e Games Master. These shows were all about consoles, even though some of the games were absolute tripe. If it were not for the Mega Drive, SNES (16-bit gaming) then I dont think software developers would have been able to continue producing games like they have been.
Sure during the 80's there were some big PC titles out, but again there was a lack of people who would of had a PC and been able to play these games.
The guys at microsoft would claim different: "Overall, I think the platform itself is incredibly healthy, and there's more developers on Windows than on any other platform, especially when you look across casual, subscription, MMO, Korea, China...there's an explosion there. There's a huge opportunity, and by far, it is the biggest platform on the planet for gaming."theDude5B wrote:
Sorry man have to disagree with you here.Vilham wrote:
Dont get me wrong, they have massively boosted the game industry's growth over the past 10 years but the industry would still be there is they weren't. I would say console games were the miracle growth of the industry.
The reason I am saying that consoles are the backbone, is down to the fact that they are a hell of a lot cheaper to buy and easier to use than a PC. This has been the success of the console over the PC, and as a result the gaming industry has grown to where it is today.
Look back to the 80's when there were TV shows about computer games, i.e Games Master. These shows were all about consoles, even though some of the games were absolute tripe. If it were not for the Mega Drive, SNES (16-bit gaming) then I dont think software developers would have been able to continue producing games like they have been.
Sure during the 80's there were some big PC titles out, but again there was a lack of people who would of had a PC and been able to play these games.
...Vilham wrote:
O yeah sorry I guess the fact that everything on the site comes from people in the industry... so yeah it must be a lie if it comes from someone who deals with this sort of thing every day! Again DO YOUR RESEARCH! And lol trying to claim I cant argue without insults, you started insulting me long before I called you a moron, which tbh is my right and is after all only my opnion.Poseidon wrote:
And seriously you can't argue with insults. I've found the least intelligent people on these forums are the ones who can't argue without intelligence. You'd think someone who's registered on these forums as long as you would atleast SOME debating skill, but you obviously have none.Vilham wrote:
Seriously your such a moron sometimes... www.gamasutra.com DO YOUR RESEARCH! It doesnt do reviews!
Reviews are HEAVILY effected by publishers.
I wasn't talking about it doing reviews. You say you get your information off of gamasutra.com and claim THAT'S valid, but when I base some of my opinions off of reviews (although not my WHOLE opinion) and not just ONE review, a COLLABORATION of reviews, you claim mine aren't valid. It's not a one way street, kid.That is what you said, you based your opinion on metacritic, end of arguement....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.
Last edited by Poseidon (2008-05-07 12:26:46)
Last edited by Vilham (2008-05-07 12:43:31)
Poseidon wrote:
It's like talking to a wall.
Guess I was right, eh?Poseidon wrote:
You have the kind of "I'm right, you're wrong, end of discussion" elitist attitude that I've seen from quite a few members here.
damn Poseidon can debate like a true badass.Poseidon wrote:
Poseidon wrote:
It's like talking to a wall.Guess I was right, eh?Poseidon wrote:
You have the kind of "I'm right, you're wrong, end of discussion" elitist attitude that I've seen from quite a few members here.
Last edited by dan673 (2008-05-07 13:36:39)
So lets see.. what have you proved so far...Poseidon wrote:
Poseidon wrote:
It's like talking to a wall.Guess I was right, eh?Poseidon wrote:
You have the kind of "I'm right, you're wrong, end of discussion" elitist attitude that I've seen from quite a few members here.
This time lets try to see if you can reply as to why these games are amazing with some detail on your opinion rather than just a metacritic score and a claim its amazing.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.Poseidon wrote:
...Uncharted? Bioshock? Um..Vilham wrote:
Indeed. Screw all you graphics whores, all your desire for graphics does is kill how fun a game can be. I have yet to see an amazing game with amazing graphics, eg SA is much more fun than IV.
Last edited by Vilham (2008-05-07 14:30:12)
ya mum blew cockSealXo wrote:
The ending blew cock, And i didnt get a huge scarface mansion
It suckes because you cant get jets
not enough cheats
not enough guns
need more clothes
more safehouses.
no houses to buy
wtf am i supposed to do with 800k now?
uhhhm