Who cares, reviewers tend to be uneducated twits that use games to relive there unfulfilled childhoods. They are, sadly, living their lives as deluted "leaders" of communities, holding power and influence that is, in the end, meaningless and even less worth to game publishers then a silly thing such as hype.
Some kid out there probaly LOVES that Ice Age game. Doesn that make it a Great Game to that individual? What possible classification does a reviewer have to tell that kid otherwise? They dont even know how to make a good game. Its not assimple as saying, for example, a game needs Immersion? OK, how do we make Immersion so it comes together with our other game mechenics.......Euh.......and thats were they All fall flat.
Anyway, dont want this to turn into a rant. If all game review had exactly the same score. I'd hold back, but some games get from 5's to 10's, so why would any of those opinions apply to me.
Besides, these days, all reviews tend to do is mark games down for lack of feutures. I'm surprised that they didnt think God Of War III needs a multiplayer.......Those guys hold back any Evolution for games. Its like you said, they Think JRPGs need to be a certain way, but even if i is better, if it doesnt have the things on their List, its marked down.
On last thing, I'm enjoying Final Fantasy XIII allot more then Mass Effect II. (Which I Liked.)
Log in to comment