@Druig This is true, I think it is great that Gamespot is doing a proper 1-10 rating system rather than a 5-10 rating system!

It's just really strange that they've started doing this NOW and given Inversion a score as low as 4 out of 10, the same score as a bunch of really awful movie tie-in games like March of the Penguins or Charlie and the Chocolate Factory.

In fact, stuff like the dreadful Terminator Salvation movie tie-in game got 5 out of 10, when it should have had 2 out of 10. Terminator Salavtion was a full-price game that was only 4 hours long, had no multiplayer, had just three types of enemies and consisted of the same three fights over and over again, and no attempt at a story and characters other than "kill the robots".

Just watch 5 minutes of Inversion gameplay on youtube and you'll see more fun in those 5 minutes than in the whole of Terminator Salvation, and Inversion's also got 8 multiplayer modes and the campaign can be played in co-op.

Even if you don't LIKE Inversion, at the very least it is an average "OK" game that should get a better score than crap like Terminator Salvation. It seems that the fact that the reviewer didn't like Inversion's interesting plot twist was an extra nail in the coffin. This game is a 6 or a 5 at the very worst - an average but competent game with a mixture of rough moments and some good moments. It's not a "poor" game that deserves to be lumped with cash-cow movie tie-in games.

@Gelugon_baat The story does NOT have any "finer" points that are not explicitly told to the player. It has a big plot twist 2/3 of the way through the game that explains what its really going on, and it has lots of clues earlier in the game that are consistent with this plot twist. They are not subtle clues, they are things that are supposed to make the player go "WTF" and thus "OH!" when the plot twist is revealed. The reviewer thought the plot twist made "no sense", when it's actually the thing that makes sense of everything that is strange.

And I'm no Saber "apologist". TimeShift was an extremely generic game that copy-pasted practically everything from other successful games that had come before it (Half-Life 2 and Halo mostly), a mute protagonist hero, no interesting NPC characters and practically no plot.

And yet Gamespot's own Aaron Thomas gave it a score of 6.5 because the time powers were cool. That seemed a pretty fair assessment - the game's one and only purpose is to allow you to slow or freeze time and then blow enemies to chunky pieces or steal their guns, and if that sounds like fun then the game can provide a couple of days of good entertainment.

Inversion is basically the same thing - a game made by obviously copy-pasting from other successful games, and where this time the gimmick is gravity rather than time - except that they came up with one truly original idea, the game's plot, thus preventing it from being the generic alien invasion story that people were expecting. And yet Gamespot's Mark Walton holds up the plot as being one of the game's negatives, and actually has "plot holes" as being one of the bullet points at the start of the text review.

Other review sites that gave the game 5 or 6 out of 10 mention that it has an interesting twist or they don't mention the plot twist at all, but nobody but Gamespot's Mark Walton seemed to find it confusing or dumb. Which rather suggests he simply wasn't paying attention and wandered right into the plot twist without suspecting that something strange was going on.

On the one hand I find it refreshing to see a game review site giving out scores that aren't 8 or 9 out of 10, and I wish that would happen more often, I wish reviewers would use the entire scale of 1 to 10 rather than 7 to 10, especially when a game is just a rehash of the same old stuff. But on the other hand, Gamespot would not dare give such a score to a Halo, Call of Duty or Gears of War game, so it seems that dumping a bad score on this game is just a way of making all the other 8s and 9s seem less ridiculous.

Also, it seems rather bizarre that claim you are not the sort of person who gets "upset over what others say about a video game" and yet you spend all day typing hundreds of comments defending a videogame review. Either you have very strong feelings on the matter (you thought the game was absolutely terrible and want to warn people away from it) or you just really like irritating people.

All the other review sites have given it 6, 5.5 or 5 out of 10, which seems pretty fair for a game that is a rather obvious imitation of other games, without being actually broken in some way. Gamespot has done a pretty harsh review by giving a score of 4 and calling it a poor game. Unsuprisingly, people have come forward and said that actually the game is somewhat fun and the plot twist was OK. And people that haven't played the game have watched the video review and said things along the lines of "the guy is saying lots of mean things but the footage in the video looks quite fun, actually, and not all that different from the other games I've bought and enjoyed"... and you've got to make a point of responding to every comment to say "no, it really is that bad" to absolutely everyone. Why bother? This entire comments page has filled up with your pink-haired avatar, which rather suggests you care a bit too much.

@Gelugon_baat The text review is pretty much a transcript of the video review, with just a few words different here and there. People have issues with what he is saying, not just how he is saying it.

The review (both text and video) moans that we've seen the same meat-headed protagonists and used the same weapons many times before... but the same could be said of the Gears of War, Halo and Call of Duty franchises, where each game in the franchise is basically just a levelpack with more of the same combat. This way of thinking suggests that Halo 3, Gears 3 and MW3 should all have gotten 6 out of 10 for just being more of the same (but competently made).

If Inversion FAILED to imitate Gears of War, it might be a fair criticism, but it doesn't - it does a decent good job of being another Gears of War game, but with a brand new story, superpowers, zero gravity sections, and some cool destructible cover. And it actually has a more interesting story, with a plot twist that does make sense if you aren't an idiot.

Singularity had some nice plot twists, but people criticised it for the fact that one of them was really obvious: you accidentally changed history, so unsurprisingly everything you do to fix things fails unless you go back and stop yourself changing history. The game even does a little flashback sequence to remind you what you did in case you forgot, despite being only 6 hours long. But when Inversion gives its audience some credit and does a genuine plot twist that expects you to have paid attention to the oddities in the storyline and the enemies, reviewers don't understand the twist because they don't bother to pay attention to the cut scenes or the dialogue.

Saber's previous game was TimeShift - a fun shooter that borrowed heavily from other games but was rather entertaining, and had very little plot because the game was rebuilt from scratch less than a year before release. Gamespot gave TimeShift 6.5 out of 10, and Inversion is a more interesting game than TimeShift, so 4 out of 10 seems like the reviewer took a great big crap on this game for no obvious reason.

People are upset because half of the review's criticisms could just as easily be levelled at many other modern games that are given scores of 9 out of 10. The other criticisms are about the game's story, and that seems to be because the reviewer was not paying enough attention. He says it is "full of plot holes" and that the twist is "ridiculous" and "makes no sense", while actually the plot twist is quite clever and it explains all the mysterious things earlier in the game. The reviewer finds it "incredibly unbelievable" that the Lutadores are brainless morons that somehow have sophisticated gravity technology, but that is actually an important part of the plot, the main characters remark on it quite early in the game, and it gets explained later on.

One of the best things about the game is the mystery of who the Lutadores are and where they come from. Are they aliens? Do they come from a parallel universe? Are they time travellers? Are they some military super-soldier experiment gone wrong? Are they an ancient civilisation? There are clues throughout the whole game, but you won't know the truth until you are two thirds of the way through. And yet the reviewer seems to think that this was a plot hole.

The review says the plot twist is "ridiculous" and "does not make sense"... but actually the plot twist is quite clever and makes perfect sense. Throughout the entire game the characters comment on peculiar things that suggest this isn't an ordinary alien invasion story, and the big plot twist explains everything. The game gives you lots of clues, especially when you get half way through the game, and if you are smart you might guess the plot twist about half an hour before the game reveals it.

I've watched the first half of this game on youtube; the shooting gameplay is almost identical to Gears of War... except that if you are just shooting enemies you are missing the point of the game.

You can use gravity powers to make enemies float out of cover, or smash them with objects, or throw floating blobs of flammable liquid at enemies, or smash enemies into the ground, or make them so heavy that they cannot move, or explode them with a shockwave. Also sometimes you are often floating around in zero gravity or running along the sides of buildings or ceilings, which helps spice things up, a bit like Prey or Dead Space.

The story and characters are actually BETTER than Gears of War. (I've not seen the big plot twist yet though.) Does anyone care about the story of Gears of War? But Inversion actually does a good job of making you wonder who these Lutadore invaders are and where they come from. The characters ask why dumb brutes that can barely speak have advanced gravity-based technology, and theorise as to whether they are aliens or some sort of underground civilisation, so clearly it's supposed to be a plot point. Also I think the name "Lutadores" is something the characters invent while they are stuck in a prison camp for several weeks.

This game is probably ideal for PS3 owners who have never been able to play Gears of War. And only the first Gears game was ported to PC, so if you are a PC gamer and you want more Gears of War then this will provide that. (I think the PC version is being released next month.) If you've already played all the Gears of War games on Xbox 360 then this game will seem awfully familiar as this game is effectively Gears of War 4, with a new story and characters and new gravity-powers to make things more interesting.