Mr Puggsly said:
Right, when I see a simplistic comic bookish presentation and Sumo Digital are at the helm of a project I think AAA mega project. Or maybe you were really just impressed by the tech of buildings falling down and Terry Crews. An "unexcusable" game? Well I agree the scaling back of MP is INEXCUSABLE. But I feel the campaign is fine, its Crackdown. Is anybody arguing Crackdown 3 is a "GREAT GAME"? Not really, I hear people simply saying they're having fun with it and they don't agree with the reviews. Doesn't mean we feel its GOTY. |
It had investment, it had the marketing campaign (even placing proeminently at more than one E3), it has the big publisher behind it, it was suposed to be AAA. It failled miserably, MS just hid it in a corner so ppl would forget about it and then pretended it wasn't suposed to be a very big title that fell terribly short. In fact it kinda still is AAA, that is not a measure of quality thats a measure of investment/marketing and the game had a lot of that troughout its 5 year production cycle. I find that a game in this situation has no excuses to justify its lack of polish and for being as dated as this is.
And on the fun matter, thats entirely subjective, if ppl are having fun with it great, ppl can have fun with almost anything and tastes vary from person to person, the complainig about reviews and trying to find excuses for why the game isn't being praized is asinine tough, and I don't mean that for Crackdown 3 exclusively, it always is. The cries of underated or overated are dumb, these things are based on a consensus by very big collective of analysis by professionals, everything is rated just as they were suposed to be, one person's opinion on the matter won't change the consensus.
Last edited by DakonBlackblade - on 19 February 2019
