Not as horribly bad as her recent reviews but still an annoying read. Worst reviewer at gamespot. Easily.
This topic is locked from further discussion.
Not as horribly bad as her recent reviews but still an annoying read. Worst reviewer at gamespot. Easily.
That's my worry too. I like that they called this game out for being more of the same -- not a bad thing, just not necessarily moving anything forward -- but I fear COD: Ghosts will introduce a dog, fish swimming away and better graphics and get hailed as some sort godly game you must buy now.
That's not a bad thing to mention in the body of the review....I just don't think it should major points for it. The game should be scored based on the game itself and not expectations.
I disagree. If you're releasing a brand new game in a series, but it offers nothing new, then it should absolutely be docked. It's like when a movie sequel comes out and you get the same exact plot (Hangover 2, Hangover 3) with tired jokes/gags/plots, but a new location. That's absolutely a reason to dock a game some major points. It can still be fun, and it can still be a great game to people who are fans of the series, but why make a sequel when your brand new big budget game might as well have been an add-on pack?
Why should it be docked? If you liked the first Hangover chances are the sequels will entertain you. That doesn't mean everyone is going to like it...but you should rate all medium as stand alone. It's fine to say it's more of the same so people that don't want more of the same know to stay away....but if the games is executed well....it's executed well. Period.
Keeping with the Hangover theme, they copy pasted the plot of the first one in the second and third. If this series entertains you, why do you need a review of 4/5 stars to tell you that you're going to like it? If this if your first Hangover movie, why should you spend 20 bucks to take the family to see it when the first was better, funnier and cheaper than the "new" version? See the reasoning? Reviews of the Hangover movies went from "must see" to "its OK" to "this one is terrible..." and they're right to do it -- and fans of the movie still ignored it and paid money to see it. They knew what they were getting.
You can't rate all medium stand alone, particularly in video games where the first game is usually a building block for the second. I understand your thought process, but the reality is that after 6 Call of Duty Games in X amount of years, if you see minimal improvement you should call it out knowing that it probably won't alienate the fan base -- unless of course they live to have their opinions validated by a number from some random person, which happens all too often in games.
If a game is executed well, but it's the same thing you bought 12 months ago, why praise them for just barely clearing the bar instead of completely raising it? Especially when it's two different teams working on 2 year cycle?
Two different schools of thought here.
No offense intended to reviewers but I take their reviews (good or bad) with a grain of salt.
I prefer hearing from those who don't make their livelihood working for gaming magazines, websites, etc..,
Although I am only an hour or so in, I am thoroughly enjoying this game and that's all that matters.
Any news on the combat/strealth challenges or what replaces the riddler puzzles/trophies for this game? Those are the aspects I care about the most and I don't hear people talk about them much
Not as horribly bad as her recent reviews but still an annoying read. Worst reviewer at gamespot. Easily.
Easily. 9/10 + for games that are equivalent to DVD bonus games, but a 6/10 for a real game that is mechanically sound.
If GS is going to start playing this game, then I hope to see BF4, AC4, CoD: Ghosts, Mario 3D World, and Donkey Kong score no higher than a 7 for each.
From what I got, the only reason it's rated low is because it is incredibly similar. Might check out at a price drop.
Has anyone heard the saying "If it isn't broke, why fix it?" Asylum, City and Origins remind me of the Metroid Prime series in that each game had small changes and improvements over the last but ultimately all were strikingly similar to the point where the you are familiar in what you needed to do. Sure, the similarities are there when you play Origins but what series doesn't have them?
@Solaryellow: I actually feel like Arkham City is one of the most improved sequels I have ever played. Literally every single aspect of City was several levels above Asylum. I feel like the problem with making a sequel to Arkham City is that maybe that it's standards are set too high. Before anything was announced on Arkham Origins, I seriously believed that not even Rocksteady could top what they did. All that's left are minor tweaks.
Sounds like it's still a good game but there's nothing really new except the story.
My question is does it warrant a low review score than? I mean bigger games have gotten the pass. If Cod Ghosts is the same as it's predecessors will it get a similar score to this or will it get the pass that it always has?
Sounds like it's still a good game but there's nothing really new except the story.
My question is does it warrant a low review score than? I mean bigger games have gotten the pass. If Cod Ghosts is the same as it's predecessors will it get a similar score to this or will it get the pass that it always has?
Yeah I was thinking the same thing actually, it really depends on the person I suppose, personally I don't see the problem with giving a game a good score if it's still enjoyable, even if it is similar.
Sounds like it's still a good game but there's nothing really new except the story.
My question is does it warrant a low review score than? I mean bigger games have gotten the pass. If Cod Ghosts is the same as it's predecessors will it get a similar score to this or will it get the pass that it always has?
Good question. I'd prefer if the bigger games don't get a pass anymore. Annual rehash that still plays well cuz it's the same game again? Give it a 6!
Normally this reviewer gets a bit preachy and political for my taste, but this criticism of predictability and nothing new is valid imo, and I hope it starts to get used more and more, because plenty of games are deserving.
Carolyn sucking as a reviewer as usual, but at least this time she is being a shining example of the hypocrisy of game reviewers.
Where was the 6 for MW3 when it gave us way more of the same just done worse? Too many series get praise every single iteration regardless of actual merit, yet they go and dock a game this majorly for the same crap that the rest of the big titles never get held accountable for.
Welp, maybe next time the devs need to just toss some money to GS to get that 9/10.
Carolyn didn't review MW3. If she had I'm sure she would have given it a low score.
Sounds like it's still a good game but there's nothing really new except the story.
My question is does it warrant a low review score than? I mean bigger games have gotten the pass. If Cod Ghosts is the same as it's predecessors will it get a similar score to this or will it get the pass that it always has?
Great Sig.
I miss team Silent :(
Well she only gave Luigis Mansion Dark Moon a 6.5. I will say the framerate is pretty bad and whilst it hasn't really changed in terms of combat it isn't really a bad thing just not taking it to the next level. The other two games which are massive successes also gave this game a challenge but overall I think this game is still a solid 8. I thought Gametrailers gave it a fair review.
What was the SW hype for this?
Not made by Rocksteady/10
Don't believe there was official hype. There seems to be a trend lately of people calling such and such a flop, without any hype. Never was how it worked from my memory.
Sounds like it's still a good game but there's nothing really new except the story.
My question is does it warrant a low review score than? I mean bigger games have gotten the pass. If Cod Ghosts is the same as it's predecessors will it get a similar score to this or will it get the pass that it always has?
Great Sig.
I miss team Silent :(
Thank you! I highly Miss team silent as well.
Seens like they are being very harsh just for the kicks (or clicks). This gen has been all about repetition for maybe six years, and just now they figure they should slash points on account of that? Eh, well at least they are improving. But it's hard to take her reviews seriously after that Gone Home game.
Sounds like it's still a good game but there's nothing really new except the story.
My question is does it warrant a low review score than? I mean bigger games have gotten the pass. If Cod Ghosts is the same as it's predecessors will it get a similar score to this or will it get the pass that it always has?
Good question. I'd prefer if the bigger games don't get a pass anymore. Annual rehash that still plays well cuz it's the same game again? Give it a 6!
Normally this reviewer gets a bit preachy and political for my taste, but this criticism of predictability and nothing new is valid imo, and I hope it starts to get used more and more, because plenty of games are deserving.
I agree whole heartily and though I play whatever the hell I wanna play, reviews do matter in some light.I think they've made a decision to write reviews from a reflective standpoint rather than a factual standpoint. Think about it... They believe they're writers at heart, so they're doing what fuels their ID.... They're writing reviews that put themselves at the center of the review. It will never work on a mass level because we want to read the facts not the fluff... I also believe they've begun to use the scores to increase the hits... Shit the numbers never even line up with the content of the review...I think they're pretentious because they are actually pretentious... ( A borrowed though from someone <3) *cough*Cough* Eroica
Funny, Sessler agrees with Carolyn. The game is redundant and lacks innovation.
Yet Rev3 gave it a 4/5.
You don't need innovation for a game to be "good," i.e. 7.0/8.0. 6.0 is a mediocre score; I don't think a game that has solid mechanics should be labeled mediocre just because it's not reinventing the wheel like Asylum and City did.
And to clarify, I think if a game has good mechanics, it deserves a good score. But hey, GameSpot as of late has taken a page from Gawker media and decided to go for click-baiting exclusively.
Cutting off 4 points for that?
What the hell, Carolyn?
I'm honestly getting irritated by this whole "oh, boo hooo, nothing NEW, nothing INNOVATIVE" complaining going on these days.
Ace Attorney Dual Destinies had 2 points cut off because its Bad is "n/a". Damnit "n/a", it's such a game-breaking flaw! The scores on Gamespot are starting to become completely senseless and arbitrary.
Cutting off 4 points for that?
What the hell, Carolyn?
I'm honestly getting irritated by this whole "oh, boo hooo, nothing NEW, nothing INNOVATIVE" complaining going on these days.
Ace Attorney Dual Destinies had 2 points cut off because its Bad is "n/a". Damnit "n/a", it's such a game-breaking flaw! The scores on Gamespot are starting to become completely senseless and arbitrary.
Starting? They've been that way for a while. I lost confidence in their reviews about 2 years ago.
Cutting off 4 points for that?
What the hell, Carolyn?
I'm honestly getting irritated by this whole "oh, boo hooo, nothing NEW, nothing INNOVATIVE" complaining going on these days.
Ace Attorney Dual Destinies had 2 points cut off because its Bad is "n/a". Damnit "n/a", it's such a game-breaking flaw! The scores on Gamespot are starting to become completely senseless and arbitrary.
Well, everyone knows games don't just start at 10 and get deducted for each flaw, but there should be some points written under the "bad" column.
I can't take reviews seriously from a site that gave gta v a 9/10.
regardless of reasons, at least 9/10 is a good score. 6/10 is crazy. The game is not that bad.
From what I got, the only reason it's rated low is because it is incredibly similar. Might check out at a price drop.
Ok, so what if it's looked at as an expansion with more than enough content to make it full price.
Unless COD gets a 6, I'm gonna call bullshit on this one.
Carolyn should be fired.
No you're dead wrong, COD brings something new every year
AO brings about as much new stuff to the Arkham series as the CoD games, or the Assassin's Creed games... It's not a complete rehash like many are saying, but it's certainly not on the level of Arkham Asylum to Arkham City (nor did WB ever claim it was).
And this is why review scores are so pointless to me.I already know I'm going to enjoy the hell out of this game just like I did the other two.
Also,I'm looking forward to COD Ghosts scoring a 5 this year due to it being the same game they've been making forever,lol
Two words:
Carolyn Petit
Wait for the second opinion before deciding whether or not to get it. From other opinions, it sounds like it's Arkham City 2. Which apparently is a bad thing now.
The more I read and watch about this game, the more excited for it I suddenly am. Quite liked Sessler's review.
Ditto.
I'm surprised the guy did not complain about th elack of females.
Whether or not this game is bad it's still very difficult to take reviews from gamespot seriously.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment