What's with the mixed review scores?

#1 Posted by ValValence (45 posts) -
Having given this game a once through, I feel like it's about an 8, maybe a 7.5 if you're feeling mean because it's got some issues, the voice acting is particularly bad and some stuff just didn't work, but it's a good game with a great AI interesting world and really cool guns and UI. What I don't get is how some review sites are giving it a 9 or a 10, and others are giving it a 5 or a 6.
#2 Posted by ghstbstr (8774 posts) -

Having given this game a once through, I feel like it's about an 8, maybe a 7.5 if you're feeling mean because it's got some issues, the voice acting is particularly bad and some stuff just didn't work, but it's a good game with a great AI interesting world and really cool guns and UI. What I don't get is how some review sites are giving it a 9 or a 10, and others are giving it a 5 or a 6.ValValence

The different review scores is just because everyone has their own opinion, and that is why these reviews don't matter. What matters is if it is a game that you will like or think that you will like. Since this is a sequel if like the first then most likely you will like this one, if not than you won't.

#3 Posted by Seven_Force (328 posts) -
Personally I think playing PC is a big advantage over the consoles for this game (as well as 2033). Also, a lot of people gave it poor reviews without playing it based on the DLC controversy.
#4 Posted by ValValence (45 posts) -
Personally I think Gamespot did one of the most obvious Paid Reviews in the history of reviews, having the amazon equivalent of a "Buy it Now" button right next to the review, banner ads plastered for it, and downplaying some of the flaws. This game doesn't really need it either, it would probably get solid 7-9 scores easy, with a lot of 8's, it's just transparently sleazy.
#5 Posted by DeViLzzz (2144 posts) -

You need a bitching pc to play this game and maybe that has soured some people on the game and therefore you get some mixed review scores.

#6 Posted by Gankstar_VX84 (34 posts) -

as an avid lover of all things fps, I personally loved this game, I'd put it up there with the greats, I found the AI to be the weaker part of the game, and the stealth bits particularly easy, mixing throwing knives with headshots allows u to satisfying drop large groups without being spotted at all, the watchmen charge directly at you and you just blast them, I found the mutant diversity to be lacking, and the bosses particularly uninspired in terms of tactics required to defeat them, that being said the first playthrough for me was brilliant, but i can't evven get as far as rescueing pavel in repeat playthroughs, cuz it's just samey and easy, which imho puts it several steps below half life games, original crysis (atleast jungle sandbox levels), etc but as far as current gen fps goes, definitely refrseshing.

#7 Posted by ValValence (45 posts) -

You need a bitching pc to play this game and maybe that has soured some people on the game and therefore you get some mixed review scores.

DeViLzzz

 

I can run it well and think it's a good game, but I think maybe Gamespots infomercial of a review was paid to bump up the score a little, given that they have an Amazon check out button right next to the review and plastered banner ads around it at launch.

 

And then there was this, which made me wish I had waited to purchase then bought it before I said anything.

 

GameSpot+Amazon+Paid+Review+Price+Shift.

#8 Posted by Gelugon_baat (19360 posts) -

You may want to notice that not a lot of people are not giving much credence to your allegations about paid reviews, ValValence. There are more people that are inured to such rants than you would think. ;)

That said, you may want to be reminded that different reviewers may well perceive the game differently.

#9 Posted by ValValence (45 posts) -

You may want to notice that not a lot of people are not giving much credence to your allegations about paid reviews, ValValence. There are more people that are inured to such rants than you would think. ;)

That said, you may want to be reminded that different reviewers may well perceive the game differently.

Gelugon_baat

 

But I never said the review was paid because I disagreed with the score, that's what most people seem confused by. I actually more or less agree with the score. The issue is that the review is made like an infomercial to sell a product, there were banner ads all around it, and an amazon buy button next to it.

On top of that, we know GameSpot has had paid review scandals in the past, and even fired someone for giving an honest review for Kane and Lynche 2.

#10 Posted by Gelugon_baat (19360 posts) -

But I never said the review was paid because I disagreed with the score, that's what most people seem confused by. I actually more or less agree with the score.ValValence

That's some fantastic weaseling-out there. :lol:

The issue is that the review is made like an infomercial to sell a product, there were banner ads all around it, and an amazon buy button next to it.ValValence

Learn to use ad-blocking tools.

On top of that, we know GameSpot has had paid review scandals in the past, and even fired someone for giving an honest review for Kane and Lynche 2.ValValence

That's a gratuitiously embellishing statement. ;)

#11 Posted by ValValence (45 posts) -

That's some fantastic weaseling-out there.Gelugon_baat

Only if you didn't understand that me calling it a paid review had nothing to do with whether or not I agreed with the score.

#12 Posted by Gelugon_baat (19360 posts) -

Only if you didn't understand that me calling it a paid review had nothing to do with whether or not I agreed with the score.

ValValence

So you are just here to throw accusations that this-and-that review is paid off then? :roll:

#13 Posted by zfakta (241 posts) -

Having given this game a once through, I feel like it's about an 8, maybe a 7.5 if you're feeling mean because it's got some issues, the voice acting is particularly bad and some stuff just didn't work, but it's a good game with a great AI interesting world and really cool guns and UI. What I don't get is how some review sites are giving it a 9 or a 10, and others are giving it a 5 or a 6.ValValence

 

Bad voice acting? I suppose you think two worlds had good voice acting....Or maybe you only enjoy Sean Connery's voice. I suppose they could have cast Jim carrey, Morgan Freeman and Viggo Mortensen, and had them use terrible russian/german accents, then you would have enjoyed it.

#14 Posted by Gankstar_VX84 (34 posts) -
Then use AdBlocker plus. Because I never see Adds anywhere.
#15 Posted by fadersdream (3153 posts) -

Because it is a great, but horribly broken game.