[QUOTE="LlFE"]

To be very frank with you, Resistance is a mediocre series. The first one only recieved good reviews because publications didn't want to come across as being biased in any way or form. The graphics were nothing compared to Gears of War, the gameplay was "meh", the story was nothing special, etc. I could go on forever but tl;dr, the game is going to be eclipsed by several other prominent shooters before this gen ends. Thanks for your time and understanding.

carljohnson3456

To be very frank with you, Resistance is a mediocre series. The first one only recieved good reviews because publications didn't want to come across as being biased in any way or form. The graphics were nothing compared to Gears of War, the gameplay was "meh", the story was nothing special, etc. I could go on forever but tl;dr, the game is going to be eclipsed by several other prominent shooters before this gen ends. Thanks for your time and understanding.

[QUOTE="LlFE"]

[QUOTE="Ravensmash"] You can easily go on that site and choose reviews that you see fit. You seem to be against any analytical examination of a game by a reviewer.skrat_01

I felt like that after reading their Mario Kart Wii review. It just seemed to go too much for styIish writing rather than a meticulous anaIisys of the gameplay. But after having read some more of their stuff, I'd say they often succeed in formulating an opinion without losing sense of styIe or sensibility. Especially their review of Super Mario Galaxy 2 was top notch, probably one of the best I've ever read, and I like how they use the scoring system like it was intended to be used (i.e. games with a 7 there are in fact really good, while games that get a 7 on IGN are often borderline passable).

DraugenCP

[QUOTE="LlFE"]

[QUOTE="Ravensmash"]Well TC, I've linked you to a Fable 3 review and all their reviews are on that site - so feel free to share with us an example.Ravensmash

i keep forgetting, SW hates fun.

lazerface216

Well TC, I've linked you to a Fable 3 review and all their reviews are on that site - so feel free to share with us an example.Ravensmash

[QUOTE="LlFE"]

[QUOTE="gingerdivid"] Provide an example of that 'kind of pretentious BS', preferably something that comes close to the comparsion you made.

gingerdivid

"...Not content to just rekindle memories of Metal Gear, the game insists on physically revisiting them, veering this way and that, back and forth in time, the fates of its characters wrenched in improbable directions."

"...That game felt like a dialogue between Kojima and the player, a determined blend of action, cinema and podcast. In contrast, MGS4 feels more like a genie struggling to find enough goodies in the lamp, slave to the demands of everyone but itself."

"Metal Gear Solid has always been a story of duty in the face of obsolescence..." (no it hasn't!)

...and that's from only the MGS4 review.

I get the feeling this was inspired by my comment in the other thread. :P

[quote="BigBoss154"]EDGE are on my "stay away" list as far as reviews are concerned. There's something about their faux, pretentious and smug writing style that pisses me off...which unfortunately tries too hard to scream out "Hey! Look at us! Over here! We're gonna try and be totally awesome and play it cool by givin' this game a beatin'!".BigBoss154

There's nothing wrong with being critical, or overly critical. However, it's the METHOD of how you present/write your critical analysis that is ultimately the deciding factor for me. And like I said in the comment above, EDGE come across as possibly the most smug and pretentious of all.

Which is why I like Eurogamer so much. Critical reviewers, don't cave in to hype, and don't have their head so far up their ass that they can't see what it is they're writing.