The Simspons Arcade game gets a 3 here on GS.

Guess it didn't aged well.:(

Since I going to get it for free with PSN+ throughI still going to give it a try.

Well im getting it for free soon thanks to PSN so i wont complain :D

Wait! why did GS review this HD game and not god of war collection? sly collection? ICO collection? beyond good and evil HD? i dont get it :?

Wait! why did GS review this HD game and not god of war collection? sly collection? ICO collection? beyond good and evil HD? i dont get it :?

finalstar2007

I remember playing this in the Arcade back when i was like 8 :shock:

Wow Tom Mcshea is an embarrasment as a reviewer.

Its not a good game because it sticks true to the original and gives us the game we all loved in the arcade but now with online multiplayer?

Looks like Tom McShea had another lousy day at the office.

Wow Tom Mcshea is an embarrasment as a reviewer.

Its not a good game because it sticks true to the original and gives us the game we all loved in the arcade but now with online multiplayer?

WilliamRLBaker

Looks like the other reviews are a lot more positive. Maybe Tom was too harsh on this one... Well either way I still going to try it anyway.

I just don't understand how Tom Mcshea became such a prominent reviewer for GS. He's such a negative and opinionated reviewer it's crazy. Oh I found this small insignificant aspect so against my view of what this whole series should be so low score. Now he writes that even if you have good memories of the game than don't get it because it's just one of the worst games ever made.

It's Mcshea failing as a reviewer again. No way in hell it's that bad.

What a stupid ass review. So you're going to give it a 3.0 for staying true towards the original? Well, might as well give pacman a 2.0 while you're at it. I didn't even realize it was a McShea review until I read that in this thread, but I probably should have guessed that attention whore was the one to give it that sort of score.

I remember playing this in the Arcade back when i was like 8 :shock:

zarshack

I remember playing this Konami cIassic, playing with friends was a must, and I have waited a long while for this port to PSN and XLBA.

This review was McShea'd, lol. I don't know why he's complaining about the story, and I don't think he played it with friends. I am pretty sure though, he will be giving at least one AAA this year, since Halo 4 is due this year.

This Simpson's game was a quarter muncher (like X-Men, TMNT, et cetera), not sure what he expected after all this time. Even Gamespot.com's reviews of TMNT and X-Men don't reflect this type of nostalgia review, nor does Metacritic's scores of the game so far. However, it's possible he's right, the game is just awful, and he's the outlier critic helping us, but his justifications are very poor.

Glad it's free for PS+, I am looking forward to the 4 player co op couch gameplay. :P

whats funny is that it has all the usual Mcshea review quarks chiefly being the contradictions and massive ones.

the pro of the game is that it stays true to the 90's arcade game, but doesn't have an expansive story and can be beat in 40 minutes....theres a reason it can be beat in 40 minutes...YOU DONT HAVE TO FEED IT QUARTERs almost every single 90s arcade game could be beat in 40 minutes trust me I went to alot of arcade auctions where they had most of the cabinents set to free play I would beat 50 games in 2 hours cause I could just keep going and no arcade game in the early 90s had expansive stories...

Lol, Tom McShea is a joke. The guy clearly just looks for attention with his reviews. He intentionally tries to stand out from the rest of the pack. It's a shame that 1 guy can ruin the image of an entire website like that.

What do you expect from Tom McShea? He's seriously the biggest shock reviewer I've ever seen.

He should have reviewed this game with nostalgia goggles on to appease the forum posters. Another old game that doesn't live up to todays standards. Nothing to see here. MFDOOM1983

He should have reviewed this game with nostalgia goggles on to appease the forum posters. Another old game that doesn't live up to todays standards. Nothing to see here. MFDOOM1983

[QUOTE="MFDOOM1983"]He should have reviewed this game with nostalgia goggles on to appease the forum posters. Another old game that doesn't live up to todays standards. Nothing to see here. TransFishers

New article: In defense of the 3.0

the reviewer is right, i never put more than 2 or 3 quarters in the thing back in the day and passed it up to play the five other arcade titles exactly like it every time.

if xmen and turtles and simpsons was in the same place nobody i knew would have ever played simpsons.

and that happened even after me and most of my friends had completely finished xmen and turtles.

Read Tom McShea, didn't bother with the review. I'll check other sites, though it doesn't look like a game I'd be interested in.

This summarizes McShea's review.

Well, it's a bad game. The comments on the video do seem to agree. Better see how well it holds up when it comes out later people. You never know how a game will turn out until you have the game installed on your system of choice and you are playing it.

Seems like a simple case of it didnt age well and it wasnt a great game (unless you wear nostalgia goggls) to be begin with.

[QUOTE="TransFishers"][QUOTE="MFDOOM1983"]He should have reviewed this game with nostalgia goggles on to appease the forum posters. Another old game that doesn't live up to todays standards. Nothing to see here. MFDOOM1983

[QUOTE="sammyjenkis898"]Just beat it. 3.0 means that game is borderline unplayable. He holds it up to a standard that shouldn't be held. Oh well.WilliamRLBaker

Has to be XBLA since the PSN version hasn't come out yet.

Just beat it. 3.0 means that game is borderline unplayable. He holds it up to a standard that shouldn't be held. Oh well.sammyjenkis898

I thought that was 1.0 and a 3.0 meant it's playable but seriously, seriously bad.

Looks like God McPerfect strikes again with his opinions that everyone should believe.

Can't believe they're charging $10 for this.

Should be $1 max.

Tom does it again!

[QUOTE="MFDOOM1983"]

[QUOTE="TransFishers"] By your logic every virtual console game should have been scored a 1.0 when they were still reviewing them.WilliamRLBaker

Stilll getting it

Wait! why did GS review this HD game and not god of war collection? sly collection? ICO collection? beyond good and evil HD? i dont get it :?

finalstar2007

Because they hate the PS3. Obviously.

Wat...

"Plays just like the arcade original"

Then they give it a 3? Alright Gamespot, that is just straight up stupid. It's supposed to be a straight up remake. If plays exactly like the original. Perfect. We want no more. Give it an 8/10 and say it's good because it's exactly what you are expecting but the price may be high for what you get. Done deal.

3.0 = bad game and in by no way is it a bad game.

Wat...

"Plays just like the arcade original"

Then they give it a 3? Alright Gamespot, that is just straight up stupid. It's supposed to be a straight up remake. If plays exactly like the original. Perfect. We want no more. Give it an 8/10 and say it's good because it's exactly what you are expecting but the price may be high for what you get. Done deal.

3.0 = bad game and in by no way is it a bad game.

Wasdie

You have to remember that they have to at least use a current gen benchmark.

If they give it a 8.0, it would be misleading to new buyers that it's a good game when in fact, it really is not.

The fact of the matter is, combat is shallow + game is too short hence a 3.0.