Comments that don't warrant a thread

[AndrewTS 0]

free 1 year subscription to egm: https://www.zdmcirc.com/forms/secure/EGM_joystiq_Partn.html

[Mike wanna be 0]

Fuck, I just paid for a 2-year renewal.

By any chance can I sign up for this to get another year tacked on, or will I just get 2 magazines a month, or will it just yell at me?

[Scroby 0]

So is there any way for me to get on the COD 4 Xbox 360 beta? I tried it at a friends house the other night and freaking loved it! I want a beta code!

[LaParkaMarka 0]

For anyone that played through FFXII:

 

[Scroby 0]

I actually really liked Goldeneye's single player as well as it's multi-player. Overall I just found Goldeneye to be a really great game over all. It was diffently one of the N64's funniest games to play.

 

Odd typo. Unless there were some cutscenes I missed.

 

If Nintendo would be able to sort out the legal issues, Goldeneye would be worth buying even at a "premium" price (i.e. an extra 100-200 Wii Points). Anyone who has downloaded an N64 game on VC knows that the games no longer have such ridiculous blurring. Textures are far clearer and crisper. Couple that with classic controller support (dual analogs) and you have a game that will look and play better than it did on its native hardware. Although, rumble would probably be out...did GE have rumble? I didn't really make much use of it on N64 aside from Starfox since I had to shove that big clunky rumble pack into the pad.

....Smartass

[DrVenkman PhD 0]

Well, the mode with tank turrets on people's heads WAS pretty funny.

[Scroby 0]

your not helping either.

[BUTT 0]

That's what you get for using a word that doesn't exist.

[Star Ocean 3 0]

What about his not helping either?

[DrVenkman PhD 0]

I just saw a commercial for the DVD release of "Bloodrayne 2". Didn't even have a clue that was being made, even for DTV. And it's apparently going to be followed by a 3rd!

 

I miss the days of "Mortal Kombat".

[AndrewTS 0]

Bloodrayne 2 comes with a copy of the pc Bloodrayne...1.

 

Kind of like Bloodrayne the movie came with Bloodrayne 2 for PC.

 

That's real value.

[Thoth 0]

Anyone else besides me have a Steam ID? Now that Steam is a lot more like Xbox Live, it would be cool to have some people on my buddy list.

[KingPK 0]

Even if I didn't work there I'd mention this, but Toys R Us is having their yearly Buy 2, Get a 3rd free games sale this week.

[NYU 0]

I just read somewhere that today was the last day for the Buy 2, Get 1 Free sale. Is that true? If it is.....that wouldn't be good, considering I just found about it by reading PK's post five minutes ago.

[KingPK 0]

I noticed them putting the signs up for it on Friday. Maybe it was just a weekend thing.

 

This week's newspaper circular advertises a bunch of similar sales on a bunch of toys, so I have to believe it is going to go on through the week.

Edited September 24, 2007 by KingPK

[AlexPuma 0]

GameSpot officially lost their last bit of credibility with their Halo 3 review:

 

GameSpot on Metroid Prime 3 (8.5):

 

BAD: Doesn't do much different than the previous two Metroid Prime games.

 

In the end, you may not be able to shake the feeling that you've done all this before, but it will still make you grateful for how great it is at its core.

 

GameSpot on Halo 3 (9.5):

GOOD: Satisfying storyline that simultaneously provides closure while making you wonder what will happen next

 

For example, the gameplay doesn't stray too far from Halo 2, which, in turn, didn't exactly reinvent the original Halo.

 

So, Metroid Prime 3 is "more of the same" and gets docked for it... and Halo 3 "stays true to its roots" and gets praised for it. I see double standards here.

[World's Worst Man 0]

Everyone is losing credibility for the Halo 3 reviews to be honest. The 1UP review accurately depicts a number of the failings in the game, but the guy gave it a 10/10 anyway. Some of the other reviews just ignored the issues altogether and gave it ridiculous scores. The stupid scores are ok if the review is actually worthwhile (ie. it addresses all aspects of the game), but to ignore clear flaws is rather misleading I would think.

 

Although in the case of a double standard, it's possible that the reviews in question were done by two different people. I'm not sure that's the case in this instance, but it has happened before.

[AndrewTS 0]

GameSpot officially lost their last bit of credibility with their Halo 3 review:

 

GameSpot on Metroid Prime 3 (8.5):

 

BAD: Doesn't do much different than the previous two Metroid Prime games.

 

In the end, you may not be able to shake the feeling that you've done all this before, but it will still make you grateful for how great it is at its core.

 

GameSpot on Halo 3 (9.5):

GOOD: Satisfying storyline that simultaneously provides closure while making you wonder what will happen next

 

For example, the gameplay doesn't stray too far from Halo 2, which, in turn, didn't exactly reinvent the original Halo.

 

So, Metroid Prime 3 is "more of the same" and gets docked for it... and Halo 3 "stays true to its roots" and gets praised for it. I see double standards here.

 

 

You left out the funniest part about that, in the Halo 3 review:

 

By Jeff Gerstmann, GameSpot Posted Sep 23, 2007 12:00 pm PT

[Matt Young 0]

Even if I didn't work there I'd mention this, but Toys R Us is having their yearly Buy 2, Get a 3rd free games sale this week.

 

Since you work there, you should know that that was/is not the annual sale. The annual B2G1 sale is always at the end of October, and takes place this year from October 28th-November 3rd.

[Anya 0]

They were reviewed by two different people.....

[Vanhalen 0]

Steam ID:Vanhalen2007

[AlexPuma 0]

They were reviewed by two different people.....

 

To be fair, I used a more recent review from GameSpot. If you want something from Jeff, I can pull more quotes that Jeff pulled out of his ass.

 

Legend of Zelda: Twlight Princess [8.8] - Yes, THAT review.

 

Objectively speaking, it's still a little disappointing that the series hasn't evolved much at all with this latest installment. You'll almost certainly enjoy the game for its terrific puzzles, colorful characters, and compelling story, but at some point the feeling of nostalgia crosses the line and holds this game back from being as unbelievably good as some of its predecessors. So as impressive of a game as it is, Twilight Princess seems like it could have been so much more with a few presentational updates and more effective and interesting uses of the Wii's unique control scheme.

 

Legend of Zelda: Majora's Mask [8.3]

 

Majora's Mask is a great game, but it isn't for everybody. Even though it uses the same engine that drove Ocarina of Time, and the gameplay is the same on the surface, the adventure is extremely different. Some will appreciate the game's differences, while others will find the game's focus on minigames and side quests tedious and slightly out of place.

 

So... Jeff rags on Twilight Princess for being "more of the same" (The same thing he praised Halo 3 for) and rags on Majora's Mask for being too different.

[Anya 0]

He didn't rag on MM for being too different. He warned some might not like the changes. Which is true, a lot of people didn't. Being different is only a strong point when the changes are good.

 

Halo 3's "more of the same" refers to just 2 other games with the first only like 6 years old. Zelda is another story, even if you just count OOT.

 

 

Anyway, some games stay fresh and exciting longer then others. Metroid Prime's strength isn't it's core gameplay like Halo, most of it's appeal is things like atmosphere, puzzle solving, exploring and boss fights. That kind of thing is going to get stale fast if they use the same formula. I haven't played 3 but 2 did.

[EricMM 0]

Well, I never really played 1 or 2, so 3 should be all fresh and new. Huzzah!

 

And if having a videogame reviewer as a friend has taught me anything, it's that you shouldn't trust videogame reviews.

[AndrewTS 0]

Halo 3's "more of the same" refers to just 2 other games with the first only like 6 years old. Zelda is another story, even if you just count OOT.

 

The (entire) Halo series is "more of the same" if you play much in the way of FPSers...

 

Anyway, some games stay fresh and exciting longer then others. Metroid Prime's strength isn't it's core gameplay like Halo, most of it's appeal is things like atmosphere, puzzle solving, exploring and boss fights.

 

Core gameplay definitely is a strength for Prime 3 because of the controls.

 

Halo's strength is its core gameplay? I'd dispute that. It's solid, but it's not innovative, the level designs are often good but not exactly mind blowing, and of course it has more limited scope than Prime as far as objectives (go here, blow this up. Kill this guy).

 

I can't think of anything the Halo series did that Half-Life didn't do 9 years ago, except for the massive firefights, recharging shield, vehicles, and dual-wielding.

 

Besides, you said yourself that no Halo 3 scores are going to be bad, nor even above average. They will all be extremely high.

[Anya 0]

I don't know why you're bringing up lack of innovation and then listing 3 or 4 things it did first or did better then anyone else first. There's also the weapon swapping. I don't really care about that though. The point is that Halo is an old, simple formula but it still works. There's two kinds of "more of the same". That and more of the same that means it feels worn out or archiac. When you read the reviews with the proper context you can see what Jeff is saying, like when he brings up Zelda TP's nostalgic feeling.

[World's Worst Man 0]

Halo 3 might be the same formula as Halo 1, but it improved on many aspects of the formula. A better selection of weapons and a more interesting and varied level design being the first two things that jump out at me. How it compares to Halo 2 I cannot say, since I never bothered with it after the mediocrity of the original game. I'd say the bigger problem with the game is that it was seemingly made only for people who played the previous games. No attempt was made to explain the story from the previous two installments, or give hints on what you're supposed to do in certain situations. The plot was basically a sad attempt to put a serious, dramatic story into a campy sci-fi super-soldier game, so it wasn't a big deal. But not knowing how to approach certain situations early on kind of sucked.

 

Comparing the MP3 and Halo 3 reviews is funny though, because I'd be hard-pressed to name one area where Halo 3 was better than Metroid Prime 3. If a reviewer is going to blast a game just for being similar to it's predecessors - without actually examining whether or not there were significant improvements - he should probably maintain that standard for all games though. I would say that would be a rather silly line to take though. Halo 3 and MP3 both had enough differences from their predecessors, or improvements on the formula, to be excluded from that criticism. This isn't a Zelda TP situation where the entire game, right down to the environments and combat, feels exactly the same.

[Anya 0]

Honestly I think it's just lazy and cliche gaming journalism writing then a double standard or some evil agenda.

[AndrewTS 0]

I don't know why you're bringing up lack of innovation and then listing 3 or 4 things it did first or did better then anyone else first.

 

Maybe one of those was actually an innovation, the rest were things that were innovated by Half-Life 2 and copied by many, many others.

 

There's also the weapon swapping. I don't really care about that though. The point is that Halo is an old, simple formula but it still works. There's two kinds of "more of the same". That and more of the same that means it feels worn out or archiac. When you read the reviews with the proper context you can see what Jeff is saying, like when he brings up Zelda TP's nostalgic feeling.

 

Who said anything about Zelda? You. I honestly don't care about the 8.8 business, but rather some of the things that Gamespot published regarding the whole matter, including that childish tirade the head editor put out. But hell, I'm biased of course.

 

My point is that First Person Shooters aren't a tiny genre with only a select few good titles. The field is jam-packed with many,many other similar games. I'm saying the competition is stiffer for a FPS, and Halo isn't really forced to meet or exceed its competition in the genre, because it's Halo.

 

Likewise, Bioshock...which I absolutely *love*, and probably is my Game of the Year...got ridiculously high scores. 90s. 95s. I think an 100 here and there. I think it's a great game. The atmosphere, visuals, art design, controls were all great, but its core gameplay elements were very derivative. It was an outstanding game to be sure for lots of reasons, but it wasn't nearly as innovative as every review outlet gave it credit for. Maybe it deserved a more humble score for it...but nobody really gave it one, except for Edge.

 

OTOH, there aren't many games that directly position themselves to compete with Zelda on its own terms, it being a mesh of an RPG, action, and adventure title. Ever since Ocarina to present, the list of similar titles is small and relatively lacking in quality. The only similar titles on the same level as far as quality would probably be Beyond Good and Evil and Okami. If the games are still among the/the best around (they are), it doesn't matter what system the last game is on. Similar games may not have evolved much either, perhaps; what standard are you holding it to, then?

 

Criticizing a game/series for lack of innovation when it retains solid gameplay and incredible polish is a cop out. While I disagree with AlexPuma a lot, the fact that it's solidly a good thing in one review and a bad thing in another is hypocritical. Yes, it is obvious there's a different reviewer, but that just betrays the loose or non-existent standards of the publisher. And in the case of Jeff, it is one reviewer using it as a point against a game, and then letting a ridiculous score slide for some roster update sports game.

 

Honestly I think it's just lazy and cliche gaming journalism writing then a double standard or some evil agenda.

 

This would probably be the correct answer.

 

Review scores are a complete joke. They're arbitrarily assigned for the sake of people with short attention spans, written mainly from writers with short attention spans and questionable credibility and credentials.

[Ripper 0]

Likewise, Bioshock...which I absolutely *love*, and probably is my Game of the Year...got ridiculously high scores. 90s. 95s. I think an 100 here and there. I think it's a great game. The atmosphere, visuals, art design, controls were all great, but its core gameplay elements were very derivative. It was an outstanding game to be sure for lots of reasons, but it wasn't nearly as innovative as every review outlet gave it credit for. Maybe it deserved a more humble score for it...but nobody really gave it one, except for Edge.

 

Why does a game have to be innovative to be a great game. The two things don't necessarily have to go hand in hand.