PeterDuck / Member

Forum Posts Following Followers
821 459 221

PeterDuck Blog

Gamespot did it again, What am I doing on this website?

Here I was thinking: "okay 3 days passed and still no console review of the Battlefield 3, perhaps they are working out the differences between PC and console versions". But no, we got the same copy and paste crap we usually get.

Seriosuly now, I was still under the impression that gamespot was slightly better than this. I was anticipating an intellectually honest review from them in regards to battlefield 3 on consoles and the only difference was (aside from a couple more different sentences that were not important):

"As you might expect, the PC version of Battlefield 3 still boasts better visuals and larger matches than its console counterparts, but competitive multiplayer on the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 is incredibly addictive, immersive, and exciting"

HUH? Really? And the PC version is not addictive, immersive and exciting? NO MENTION of the 64 player limit as opposed to 32 player limit at all? (CORRECTION 24 player limit) And the photo-realistic graphics on he PC version holds no sway either? no extra emblem was added or subtracted in between the cross-platform reviews?

So what are they going to give Witcher 2 when it comes out on Xbox? 9.0 too? I bet they will say something like: "The free DLCs and the massive 1GB patch that added new missions, modes, the arena mod all culminate on this wonder of a console, the smooth transition from PC to this wonderful 6.5 year old console is astounding to say the least, ergo we give it 9.0!"

this is so sickening. I can't help but complain, but there is little else I can do. I'll just flame and give 1.0 rating to both PS3 and Xbox versions of the game. I think I will aslo start migrating towards PC-friendly websites in the future or at least HONEST websites that review cross platform games separately and take into account the various differences.

RAGE. Final Thoughts :|

Ok so I beat Rage a few days ago and I've been doing some thinking.

For starters I still like the game. I did not have any techincal issues with the game at the time of launch maybe because I had a retail version. All I had was an occasional slow texture loading when looking around in some areas. However, after the STEAM update a couple of days ago i started getting blu screens of death. Eventually, I had to have my old crappy medium tower case replaced with a new Antec Full Tower and all problems went away. I know that when I really like the game I try to get as many achivements/trophies for it as possible. There's a thin line between enjoying the game for what it has to offer and just being an achievement wh0re. It first happened with METRO 2033 (where I got the 100% achievement and at the same time absolutely loved the game). Now I know that RAGE is going to get another playthrough from me, a rushed playthrough on easy however just to get all recipies and cards.


I will still say that the extremely detailed graphics were well done, I took about 200 screenshots. HOWEVER, the graphics still feel 'static'. It's always daylight, the sky does not change, the SSAO sun rays are nonexistent, there's no dynamic lightening, 95% of shadows are pasted on the textures (hence the high FPS). The only real shadows are those of moving vehicles, enemies and some miscellaneous items. The indoor graphics are much better however. There's volumetric smoke, steam pipes hissing with gas when you shoot them, water drips, sparks, but not much else. But hey, when was the last time that we saw a new engine, right? It's cartooney and at the same time "new stylie", but it COULD be better. All they have to do is add the above mentioned things and use it for DOOM 4.


The gameplay is everything in this game. The controls are smooth and you will be able to easily kill hordes of mutants with a wingsticks and some custom made ammo. I'd have to say that almost every other kill felt as satisfying as a kill in Killzone 2 and 3. The enemies roll over, evade, use the environment to slide, hide, retreat, advance, communicate with each other, hit each other (mutants accidentally do that), and die in amazingly flamboyant fashions.

The BAD:

Ok so the story is still pathetic. The ending was horrid. The last 30 minutes felt rushed and too fast paced to warrant any interest. Even DOOM 3 had a better story. I just hope that the DLC will make up for the story and let us play single player more. However, the Co-op missions are a blast and they sort of fill in the blanks in the main story in my opinion. These missions are not just about running a gunning, but also about cunning. You can flank your enemies, lure them, use RC car bombs, oil barrels; you can go on the offensive and you can (or rather have to) defend when they counter-attack en force. There are 7 missions and all of them are fun to play. More so, the missions are harder than the single player campaign which is good.


Does anyone remember that GS article that mentioned the special Sewers mission and how only those who purchased a new copy of the game could play it? Well, let me tell you something that Gamespot didn't, the mission lasts 2-3 minutes on Nightmare difficulty. I kid you not. The initial installation showed that the mission was at 333 MB capacity so I assumed it was a worthy enough mission, it's not. You kill about 50 mutans and get a few hundred bucks as a reward. DONE. Ergo, purchase a used copy and save money.


I would most certainly enjoy team deathmatch here. I am not a big multiplayer person. The only multiplayer games I play are Battlefield 2 BC as well as GOW 3. However I just know that I would enjoy RAGE's multiplayer because of great environments as well as gameplay which is the crown of RAGE. All they had to do was throw in the rare secondary weapons like wingsticks and car bombs and you could have a great experience, alas.

Overall, as I stated in my review, the game by itself probably deserves around 8.5. A lot of work went into RAGE, some of it was sloppy however. In the end, I enjoyed the game a great deal, the only drawback is that the game did not sit well with so many PC gamers mostly because of the initial graphical issues. Since they are fixed, I believe the game deserves another chance.

LA Noire is on 3 DVDs for the Xbox version (and gamespot censorship, again...)

Gamespot did it AGAIN.

I wonder why gamespot hasn't mentioned that inconvenient fact on their review; they also didn't mention anything about the PS3 extra free mission.

This really makes you wonder about the advantages of Sony's Blu Ray disc, doesn't it?

Plus they should bring the old decimal rating sytem back.

I also like how gamespot automatically deletes my topic about this on LA Noire Xbox forum within MINUTES after I post it - twice in a row.

Gamespot's review of Witcher 2

still hasn't happened. Day 5 - STILL NO REVIEW. You mean to tell me that one of the GS employess couldn't bring their own copy of Witcher 2 so they could review it? You mean to tell me that gamespot couldn't call CD Project and ask a copy of the game? - the game came out in Poland a week before the offical release. Or Maybe CDProject does not favor sites like gamespot because CDProject is all about tendering after PC players? mainly in Europe?

Anyways, I think that GS logistics is messed up when it comes to getting games and revieiwing them on time (PC games that is). I don't know how bad the beauracractic procedure is, but it looks pretty bad.

I guess at this point it does not matter as much if GS posts a review or not or anytime soon or ever. The user ratings are already off the charts and the amount of hype generated so far will be enough to put the game in the game of the year contender list.

But it is interesting to see what GS will give Witcher 2. After all, this is a PC exclusive, right? at least as for now. And since very few people in the world play PC, like a couple of dozen of people, then there's no need to review it anytime soon, right?

Anyways, I'm just poking fun at the whole thing. Perhaps GS wants to complete the entire gave two times over in order to find as many minor insignificant issues so they could pile them all together and give this game a 9 an 8.5 or less. Or maybe they want to abstain from giving a review and wait for the game to be ported to consoles so they could copy and paste the same review to PC and both consoles to make the main consituent console player base feel good. Or maybe they simply don't want to anger and agitate the console players with an instane 9.5 or 10 rating of Witcher 2.

This is annoying. COME ON GAMESPOT, Tell us what you think of this PC-EXCLUSIVE title before the game is humiliated and ported with minimal video settings to the consoles.

Gamespot comment censorship

OK. I know that gamespot sometimes deletes trolly comments. And just recently I filled out the GS survey commemorating them on their moderating abilities and keeping trash talkers at bay, while realizing that in the past GS even deleted some of my comments that started flame wars on the boards, because apparently people could not help but answer me and I could not help but reply in return.

But now, I realized that they deleted my comment on the recent Reality Check article.

My comment went along the lines of:

"Ah please. We know that in most if not all cases GS reviews the XBOX version of the game first and then applies the same rating to PS3 and PC. Hell, in most cases the PC version of even the newest games dont get a review"

That doesn't look like an overtly trolly comment. And even if it is, there are plenty more trolly and offensive comments that were directed to gamespot on the same board without constructive criticism.

I remember getting a reply from this moderator JusticeCovert explaning that they only review the version of the game that they get first, without explaning why they apply the same cross-platform rating to games.

I think this moderator comment is also gone. So GS moderators pick and choose which comments to address and then they delete the initial comment as well as their reply without letting everyone see the exchange publicly?

This is retarded

I just cancelled my paid monthly subscription, just waiting for the billing period to run out...

Supporting PC Exclusives and bracing for Witcher 2.

Ok, so I've decided to go with the collector's edition for Witcher 2. Well, my gf is getting it for me to be more precise, but if she wasn't, I'd still buy it. I hear the price on the street is $ 130.00.

So I was thinking that it is a good idea to buy PC only exclusives even if they aren't that good. Which is why I was going to buy the New Jurassic Park game, until they decided to dumb it down and release it this fall jointly with the consoles. Then came next game, Shadow Harvest (PC exclusive), made by a small German company. Needless to say, the game is atrocious, and it does not even deserve an elaborate review. So much for supporting PC-only exlusives and wasting $ 40.00. I've also enjoyed the ARMA II series.

The main idea is, of course, fighting the piracy and making small strives towards restoring PC gaming back to its former glory. In the case of Witcher 2, the developers are going to get more $ from the collectors edition, and I am all too happy to contribute to that.

I am already happy that the next Battlefield game is going to be more superior on PC because of the larger multiplayer.
After Witcher II, I guess can only brace for another PC exlusive this year, Diablo III.

My only real hope is that Witcher II does NOT make it to consoles, and I'm happy the first one didn't make it there either...

Same cross-platform game ratings by Gamespot

Someone please explain this to me.

Just Cause 2, Fallout New Vegas, Metro 2033, Dragon Age: Origins, Lost Planet 2 and only a few other games have received a higher rating on PC than on consoles, for obvious reasons like better controls, better graphics, anti-alising, better stability, less bugs etc.

Oblivion 4 got a higher rating on consoles despite the fact that you can mod the hell out of Oblivion 4 on PC and enhance it greatly - something that the consoles can never do.

GTA 4 is understanable, it was and is a horrifibly unoptimized port to PC.

Sniper:Ghost warrior also got a higher rating on Xbox for some reason.

SC: Conviction also was a horrible PC port with insane lag spikes and no microphone support.

So why do games like Dead Space, Mafia 2, Fallout 3, Crysis 2 and many many many other games receive the same rating on PC, PS3 and Xbox despite the fact that the graphics for one are always going to be better on PC without even mentioning the modding abilities that obviously don't count as pluses by the Gamespot staff reviewers?

There is absolutely no way that Crysis 2 can produce the same experience on PS3, Xbox and PC.

I do understand the practical reasons of mostly reviewing games on Xbox by the Gamespot staff and then applying the same rating to PC and PS3. Hell, sometimes they never even review the PC version of the game, ever.

UPDATED, May 15, 2011

So now, they GS gave brink on PC and Xbox the same rating even THOUGH in their PC review they mentioned that the PC fares better than xbox in terms of graphics and server connectivity.

Exploiting PS3 - Using XFPS in Killzone 3

Ok, this is my first blog, so I'll be short. I just need to get something off my chest.

So I bought XFPS for my PS3. For those of you who don't know, XFPS is a device that allows you to connect a mouse and a keyboard to your PS3.

Needless to say, for the past 3 days I have been top 1 in 90% of multiplayer matches. And that is despite the fact that I am still not able to get rid of the mouse smoothing effect. So even though the mouse does not work as well as I expected it to yet, I am still able to rack up insane kills. Getting 10 kills in a row without dying is a piece of cake now.

The anger and frustration of my opponents shows. Sometimes when they get to kill me, they empty their magazines into me releasing their anguish.

The reason why I finally decided to buy XFPS is because I hate playing FPS games on a controller. I always hated it, I am a PC gamer at heart. Playing FPS games on a controller is a chore and work for me. Gears of War is bearable because it's a third person shooter and the cover system is easy though unrealistic since you are magically able to see everything around you, which isn't precisely the case in Killzone.

So my question is this: is no one taking advantage of XFPS in console shooters? Why are XFPS even allowed? aren't they considered cheats because XFPS is a definite exploit.

I wonder if more people will take advantage of using XFPS in console shooters.

  • 18 results
  • 1
  • 2