@TomMcShea @RenegadeGR like I said from "top of my head" so there are games that hav a really low score that I couldn't remember of but saw (its not like u can remember all the phones that Samsung released from top of your head). I also said not ALL vita games and I was being TOO general meaning there are SEVERAL that got great score/review. and a difference between .5 or 1 score is difference between B to A, which greatly affect ones perspective of the product. also when vita first came out the review abt it was "should I buy it...uummm mayb but not really" which was different reaction than other port consoles like ds,psp, etc; so I find it hypocritical to find that its "super rad" in gamespot now.
@Kunakai @RenegadeGR bugs make the game frustrating and less engaging to play not to mention it makes the player less attracted to the game(first impression). true polish doesn't always make them fun but losing character progress, unable to login, getting stuck, etc. isn't either.
@TomMcShea @RenegadeGR to Tom, "ex." vita games: acIII liberation didn't really deserve a 6.5 mayb 7 at least; graphic and gameplay was great, lag wasn't much of a problem, true story is pretty off and character wasn't as lovin but that could be said for ; kz:merc at least 8, great shooter compared to other "handheld shooters" (true knife was annoyin but story made sense if you understand it) but was compared to shooters of larger/powerful console/pc counterparts which wasn't fair. SoulSacrifice 7.5 is fair but i think 8 would've been better, repetitive yes but doesn't all rpg games involves pretty much the same quests and farming. many vita reviews (not all) I've seen (mayb got updated now cause of new website) had pretty low review (old website) that's just from top of my head (that's why I used vita games as "EXAMPLE"). now for "EXAMPLE" for online game (since GTA online is...online) I remembered "before" the new website was made LoL was reviewed I think 6 or something when it was just released. the reviewer said because it had very few character choice (no shit it just got released) and some other minor problems but it didn't really damage much of the gameplay. same problem can be said with MWO (mech warrior online) great strategic mech shooter, with no problem that might affect gameplay (well while I played it). it is still in beta so more game modes and improvements will be added but it is already getting reviewed for 6. I know mayb saying "ex. vita games" was too general bcause I didn't say ALL vita games.
no shit video games doesn't really help train you to b better shooter (especially when you use controller/mouse+keyboard) (btw I shoot real guns better than in video games wtf)
@Fitcherman @RenegadeGR there is a demand for games every year bcause the publishers said they are releasin it every year. if they didn't say that then people wouldnt b demandin or expectin it every year, and instead buyin the current game for couple/several years (if its enjoyable). I nvr said anything abt campaign in general, when I said gameplay I meant the whole thing from campaign, multiplayer, co-op, and other contents. longer campaign wouldn't drive the gamers away if the gamers bought the game for its multiplayer content. by extending and improving the "single player contents" it can attract more gamers who aren't into multiplayer. also cinematic/cutscenes sometimes can't b skipped and more costly. by extending the game from the start it can extend the life of the game countering the budget, while the developers can have more time polishing the new game.
RenegadeGR's comments