Perfect Dark Zero "Blew Gamespot Away" - Page 3

Jason1 · 11-23-2005, 08:32 PM

Yea I never had a problem with Star Fox Adventures either. Its coming in at 81% from gamerankings, and IGN gave it a 9.0. I thought the ending was especially killer. Anyways, people do diss on SFA too much I believe.

Ginkasa · 11-23-2005, 10:18 PM

I like how the Xbox360 naysayer, uh, naysayer has mysteriously disappeared...

/me shrugs and walks away

Swan · 11-23-2005, 11:10 PM

I just played the 360 at the local Future Shop and...wow, I almost wanted one right then and there. No matter what the cost. I came to my senses but I may end up getting one later on...after PS3

DarrenMcLeod · 11-24-2005, 02:22 AM

When I played CoD2 at Futureshop I was impressed only by the controller.

Professor S · 11-24-2005, 02:32 AM

This is one of my favorite threads of all time for soooo many reasons. Keep it up, everyone.

GameMaster · 11-24-2005, 02:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IGN

Though there's so much to do in Perfect Dark's single player campaign, it gets tedious after a while.

Quote:

Originally Posted by IGN

While Perfect Dark Zero ushers in a fantastic set of online options and scenarios -- and we expect this to be THE online game for Xbox 360 for quite a while -- the single-player game is surprisinly lacking in originality and innovation. Five years of waiting for this? Hm... PDZ's single-player campaign adds nothing to the genre, but more specifically, the improvements made over the original are minimal and disappointing. I strongly recommend skipping playing it by yourself and instead punching through it with a friend in coop, which, smartly, is included. This game, however, shines online and will make you happy you bought it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by IGN

Presentation 5.0

It's impossible not to notice how badly the story is executed here. Cut-scenes fail to make much sense of what's going on. Menu system helps to sort out the bevy of multiplayer options.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bond

So, where are all the naysayers now? I'd assume they're going to mysteriously disappear like they always do.

I'm right here. You see the above comments? Without Xbox Live, this game is a pile of **** around 5 years in the making. Read 'em and weep.

Looks like the only one who's disappeared is you.

Game. Set. Match. Bitch.

Professor S · 11-24-2005, 02:38 AM

So IGN > Gamespot now? Hmmm, that seems to go against sooooo much of what most hardcore gamers believe. All of a sudden new sources of information have new levels of validity because they parrot what you were already thinking.

Welcome to politics of the self-fulfilling prophecy.

And Xantar, my observation of Kameo was referring to Gamespot's and IGN's reviews, both of which were well into the 8's. And actually I would place a game at 7.7 into the "good" range in general. Not all games can be life changing experiences. Sometimes good can be good enough.

And Gamemaster, for the record you are a RAVING Nintrendo fanboy, so your opinion means little here.

(I LOVE THIS THREAD. KEEP IT GOING.)

Dyne · 11-24-2005, 02:55 AM

What did Gamespot give Halo 2?

Now compare that with PD0 and your opinion of Halo 2.

I won't even deny; if Halo 2 didn't have online sometimes I wonder what score it would've gotten.

Bond · 11-24-2005, 02:55 AM

I apologize for not being able to respond to your posts on the hour. Tomorrow (today now) is actually Thanksgiving - a time when some of us travel and gather with our family to celebrate and eat yummy food. I'll respond to your fanboyish rants, GameMaster, when I have time.

GameMaster · 11-24-2005, 03:00 AM

I'm going somewhere tomorrow too. I just don't like how you and Strangler lure me into baited threads with the intention of creating a brawl. And just so you know, I received a tip-off a while ago that you two have been targeting me for quite some time with extensive plans that are made in the staff forum. So don't bother denying it.

Professor S · 11-24-2005, 03:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GameMaster

I'm going somewhere tomorrow too. I just don't like how you and Strangler lure me into baited threads with the intention of creating a brawl. And just so you know, I received a tip-off a while ago that you two have been targeting me for quite some time with extensive plans that are made in the staff forum. So don't bother denying it.

Gamemaster, I spend exactly the same amount of time "targeting you with extensive plans" as I spend watching reruns of Mama's Family and Becker. Stew on that for a while, you paranoid loon.

BTW, Miyamoto was the third gunman on the grassy knoll and Bill Gates is the second coming of Christ. Now talk amongst yourselves.

MuGen · 11-24-2005, 03:19 AM

i believe.................................... that colonel mustard did it in the study with the candle stick!

?

Typhoid · 11-24-2005, 04:30 AM

Why can people who play games not notice things are subjective?

Just because a game gets a ****ty score doesn't mean there wont be people who think its a good game.

Just because a game gets a good score doesn't mean there wont be people who think its a flaming pile of crap.

The online play is semantics, and requires no arguing whatsoever. Yes, every game would get a different score without online play, but we'll never know that score, will we? So what do we gain in guessing?

Arguing over personal opinion on who likes what games is like arguing over the flavour of purple.

Seriously, all of you need to give it up. Games are games. They're subjective. Most of you say you know that, yet you go on carrying these types of arguments and descussions that get you nowhere.

I think reviews are pure crap as it is. I dont want someone else telling me how much I'll like a game. If a game interests me, I'll tell myself how much I like the game.

And by the way, who cares how long it was in development for? Seriously. So what. The point is its done. You can buy it, you can play it. Let it go. By saying its bad because it ws in development for so long is a weak argument and is just grabbing straws.

/run "end_rant".exe

PS. None of the above statements were directed at any specific people, nor were they based solely on this forum alone.

Dyne · 11-24-2005, 04:38 AM

Just stop, Sean. Every single line of your post pisses me off. And this comment isn't directed at anyone inparticular.

Look what you've done, Professor S. Are you happy?

edit: Well let's just fan this fire more.

Quote:

The online play is semantics, and requires no arguing whatsoever. Yes, every game would get a different score without online play, but we'll never know that score, will we? So what do we gain in guessing?

Well you missed my point completely. I proposed Halo 2 only received such high scores mostly BECAUSE of online play. Everybody agrees that the story just sucked because it was rushed and included an extremely dumb cliffhanger. Also, the "pop-in" graphics didn't help, nor did the arbiter levels, which a lot of people also complained about. Having all of these faults in mind, was the gameplay really that great without online gameplay?

If Gamespot likes PD0 so much, is the liking of the online gameplay to the same degree? Such is the point of stripping off the online play out of the final score, to find out what the gameplay would score. I agree, you can't strip a game apart like that, but it's a useful tool to determine its quality in bits and pieces.

QED.

Typhoid · 11-24-2005, 04:55 AM

Quote:

Well you missed my point completely.

I told you, nothing was directed specifically at anyone. And I meant it. Like I said in the PM (I'm saying this here, so I dont have to say it 5 more times in seperate PM's or posts

) if I wanted to aim anything at anyone, I would have specifically done so, like I normally do.

I didnt say that part because you made a post on it, it was a general distaste and confusion I have gathered from a collective of other forums where people argue on for pages about online play.