Amusing game, but I'm surprised they didn't touch more on the unfair difficulty and the unfamiliar control system. Not worth the $15, in my opinion, but still a decent game.
Cute: if "Grand Theft Auto" & "Saint's Row" had existed back in the 1980s world of video games, well they might look something like "Retro City Rampage" I guess.
GREAT Review, Carolyn. This game looks awesome and brings back SOOOO many memories. Most younger gamers don't even realize that GTA 1 & 2 both looked a lot like this in terms of graphics. In GTA your player character looked like a dot with shoulders..lol. Anyway, this looks awesome and I think I'll be giving it a shot now for sure.
Never get someone who only knows modern games to review a game dedicated to 8-bit classics. My two pence.
I think we won't be reading a review without fanboys bitching about RE6 for a long long time. Looks like everyone thinks they're better reviewers than the gamespot crew. So I recommend to these fanboys to make a website and do they absolutely thrutful and precisely accurate reviews, I bet it would be bigger than gamespot in a matter of days. Come on, there are ppl bitching like 'da gamespot crew gav a good score to the x game, ever1one know it suks so their doing dat bcos their protecting da publishear' so, if I have a different opinion regarding a game its because I'm a sell out or something like that?
this games difficulty gets really rediculous, Like the Death TV studio or whatever it's called, tons of waves of enemies, and you get a slow hitting bat with hearts being few and far between. I think I only found 1.
it's still enjoyable but there are missions in this game that make me want to throw my controller.
I guess that's another retro design choice.
I dont think older games being better then newer ones is all nostalgia they older games did do some things legitimately better then current games. The music in some snes games is far better then any music for any game I have played in the last 5 years on current systems
Why when they make games like this dont they use snes 16 bit quality graphics instead of the older crappier nes graphics? At least make the 2d graphics good.
Wasn't so sure if I wanted this game until now. Now the only problem is which console should I buy it on? Wii, Vita, or PS3?
This game looks great! I was laughing just watching the review. I can't wait to play it and be reminded of all the great things I grew up with.
Man there seems to be a huge backlash against gamespot right now on their reviews. I totally agree as it relates to Carolyn Petit - she can't get a review right to save her life. I commend Kevin for his liberal slamming of RE6. At least he had the balls to speak his mind and share the truth even if it was in complete contrast to gamers opinions and the rest of the reviewing community. At least he called into question the facts of the game - something Carolyn could learn from. She seems determined to avoid the truth, if it offends the publisher, at all costs. When shes not trying to please a publisher, shes just plain misinformation like she did with Torchlight 2. Regardless of GS's poor record of reviewing lately this game looks like an awesome retro blast
@RavenXavier agreed, this looks alot like GTA 1 & 2 but they added alot to it, I love all the references in the game.
Oh boy...its a sad day when some doesn't even know what "Smash TV" is.
@ReadingRainbow4 smash tv?
@abcdefgabcdefgz I'd bet that the SNES trend will come soon enough in the Indie gaming world as studios gain success and increase in size (of course that assumes that some indie developers actually condense into studios). It makes more sense (to me at least) that a game might be made 8 bit because it is much easier to render/create content on that resolution than higher bit games (especially when you consider time/money constraints that go into making a game).
@abcdefgabcdefgz If i remember correctly this game was made by only 1 canadian guy and it still took ages for him to release it.
you're right, the game was reviewed in one of the special retro-visions that makes the action window small to accomodate said vision, but you have the option to play without that and then it's better.
RE6 is a 2.5-3 tops..... they would be bad reviewers to give it a high score just becuase RE has blind fans that will like the next one no matter what.........
Farmville is better then RE6, and that runs true with the fans too... "Not all Blind Fanfags are RE6 fans, but ALL RE6 fans are Fanfags" <True Story!
@Gripen08 Is there a quick-time event to alleviate your pain? Quick jiggle the stick and smash some buttons a la Mario Party, maybe your tears will dry!
@Gripen08 Some of us my friend grew up on games like this and we would like to experience them again. And btw i totally agree with the reviews RE6 is crap I'll play this over re6 all the time.
@Gripen08 Let´s just rate all games 10+ so everyone can be happy, the die hard fanboys, devs and gamespot(so they don't have to suffer through the die hard fanboys rage lol)...
@Gripen08 Gamespot has more than one reviewer with different tastes, fyi. You won't always agree, but they're giving honest reviews.
@Gripen08 wellt his game is cool RE6 is shit
Yeah i thought that... not sure why either... its either all the crime... the cars, or the top down view...or maby all 3, cant put my finger on it!.... :\ :P
@Skate360 It was originally a de-make of GTAIII called Grand Theftendo revealed in 2004, then became Retro Theftendo and then this game which, after the release RetroTheftendo in 2008 was updated again and again until now...
@Seis_Siete I just bought it for the vita and as an added bonus I also have it for the ps3 thx to cross play.
@glibgbilg Why are you still here?
@glibgbilg You don't have a brain.
@philMcCrevis Avoid the truth if it offends the publisher? Respectfully, I couldn't care less what publishers think. Being honest with my readers is all that matters to me.
@carolynmichelle My issues are completely professional. The garbage below is personal and completely unacceptable. At the very least the moderator could delete that. I didn't dispute that you cover some truths in your reviews and I've never taken issue with your work until Diablo 3. I cannot understand for the life of me why their is a substantial gamer backlash against the design principles of Diablo 3. The entire loot structure, skill and development system and opponent landscape is designed to force players to use the Auction House. The grinding necessary to progress past Inferno Act 1 and 2 makes this very obvious. This is THE issue with Diablo 3 and I am not alone with this. I get that the auction house wasn't there upon release (by design I'm sure) but the grinding was. Diablo 3 was a massive disappointment to a majority of gamers yet you lavished praise on all its compromises and avoided the ugliness of the games design intent. Truth would have read something like this "grinding of this level is contrary to the spirit of the series and the labotomization of the RPG elements is likely to alienate the core fanbase of the originals"
@carolynmichelle @philMcCrevis Hey carol I don't know how you can handle some of these kids commenting with their homophobic bigotry because it really bothers me just reading them. And it's not even directed at me.I used to be bullied a lot when i was a kid for being goth. You must have a very thick skin. Anyways you are doing great, and I think you are a wonderful caring person. I can tell just by your demeanor you would be someone I'de love to know in real life. I wish all gamers were as nice as you. You are such a gifted and beautiful individual thank you for your wonderful reviews.
@glibgbilg Do I have to be for your world to make sense to you?
@glibgbilg Depends, is everyone a tranny to you?
@glibgbilg Must be hard to tell with no brain?
@carolynmichelle Ok I get it. The reviewing press looked at D3 from a more casual perspective. Normally I would never expect a critic to play all difficulty versions in a review. D3 was just so short relative to D2 and one could argue that playing through nightmare was actually finishing the game. Someone told me the real game didn't start until Inferno and while I don't agree with that, I understand it. Diablo has a very hardcore fan base. I didn't personally play D2 for 10 years but there are many that did. It is unfortunate that no one (including gamespot) did a more comprehensive evaluation on such an anticipated title. I understand this can't be done for every title but I think Diablo 3 warranted it given it's legacy. It would even be satisfying to see a post-review followup on relevant games. Anyway thanks for your thoughts!
@philMcCrevis I did not finish Inferno. I'd be very surprised if any reviewer for any major outlet did before publishing their review. We do strive to be thorough with games, but we also strive to have reviews done in a timely manner, and generally, finishing a game on all difficulty levels is not part of the reviewing process. (Similarly, with MMORPG reviews, we spend at least 40 hours with such games before weighing in, but often, players who sink dozens of hours every week into a game encounter issues with classes, the endgame, or other aspects that we did not. Alas, we cannot be expected to provide an exhaustive evaluation of every aspect of every game.) I expect that this is where the issues with reviews of Diablo III arise. You're absolutely right that the criticisms of the game you lay out are voiced by a large number of Diablo III players, and I understand the negative impact that they have on the experience of those players who were hoping to have a rewarding experience with Diablo III that lasted many, many, many hours. Most, if not all, of those players, have likely sunk more hours into the game than many reviewers were able to before weighing in.
@carolynmichelle I appreciate you sharing thoughts with me on this. The reviewing process is totally subjective and I'll never accuse someone's opinion of being wrong. I am simply trying to understand how the entire professional world praised a game at such a lavish level while, conversely, millions of gaming consumers are so violently disappointed. The most disturbing realization is that not ONE reviewer mentioned what most disappointed fans have observed - Diablo 3 is very clearly designed, from the ground up, to seriously encourage (being generous here more like FORCE) players to use the Auction House to finish Diablo 3s content. Specifically, it is extraordinarily difficult to get the gear you need to progress via loot drops. After 50 hours of gridning Act 1 and Act2 of Inferno for gear to progress the game I just flat gave up. This wasn't fun - at all. I am not in the minority. Google this and you'll find much much more of this sentiment. It's so transparent what Blizzards doing and it's offensive and very disappointing. Why did not one of the reviewers make a single comment about this? Carolyn, was this not your experience? Did you finish Inferno? Did you find that loot dropping kept up with your progress? I would sincerely appreciate your feedback. Perhaps I'm looking at this wrong - maybe the reviewers didn't fail to disclose this. Perhaps the reviewers were given a different experience by Blizzard. I'll personally buy you a new retail copy to test this theory!
@Mega_Loser @philMcCrevis You are absolutely right. I wrote a diablo 3 review pointing out this very fact - that every professional critic that I could find lavished mounds of praise on this game. They all failed to mention what has become glaringly obvious to the gaming community. Not one critic disclosed what every gamer has since learned from purchasing and playing the game. All this is to say I am not solely blaming Carolyn. This is simply the sight I have relied on for gaming information for 15+ years. The entirety of the issue I've made a few times is: How is it possible that there is such a HUGE disconnect between the gaming community and the professional gaming community on this game. That in itself is far more concerning than a single disappointing title. I'm struggling to rationalize this. There are many explanations but unfortunately, none of them bode well! Thanks for your thoughts
@philMcCrevis You're absolutely welcome to such concerns with the review. However, I was not by any stretch alone in praising the game. People like me, Brad Shoemaker at Giant Bomb, and many other writers who wrote admiringly of the game did so not because we cared what the publisher thought, but because it was what we honestly believed. You may say that, from your perspective, we got it wrong. That perspective doesn't bother me. I disagree with other critics all the time, and don't expect any of my readers to agree with me all of the time. But to suggest that we deliberately stated something we didn't believe to be true because we were concerned about offending the publisher--THAT is where you lose me.
d3 is a rather bad, dissapointing experience in gameplay, story and voiceacting and it's peculiar to see the average score of organised reviewers on, say, metacritic as high as close to 90% but consider that carol doesn't run GS alone and her d3 review was authorised by the high powers before it was released.
ATMOF the entire reviewing landscape was unreasonably favourable because d3's pre-orders were very high and it was needed for the customers to feel secure and proud for their purchase (until they realise the truth for themselves, but not blame a particular medium for that insight).
@midnight_trashh Thank you very much for the kind words. Knowing that there are readers out there like you makes it infinitely easier for me to ignore those who try to insult me because of who I am. And in fact, I believe that the overwhelming majority of GameSpot readers couldn't care less about me being me. Those who make an issue of it are a loud but small minority whose perspective is better off ignored than entertained.
@plzHoldSteady Haha, sorry. You're right. Suggestions that I don't do my best to provide honest reviews to my readers just get under my skin, is all. Anyway, thank you. I appreciate that. :)