By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - If GTA4 isn't a 10/10 game, why did it get reviews like it did?

ZenfoldorVGI said:
I think it was a great game, that was so big it formed an anti-community of equal size. I guarantee you that there are tons and tons of gamers out there who still think GTAIV is the best game ever made.

I originally gave it a 9.5, because at the time there was really not much better than it out. Now, Fallout 3 is out, and a few other games, so I'd probably give it a 9.2. It's not a 10/10 imo, but it's within the margin for error.

Good post. I think a similar thing happened way back when Donkey Kong Country first came out, surrounded by an obscene amount of hype (for the time). 

When some people started to realise that the game wasn't necessarily the second coming, the backlash was nearly as big as the hype and much more vicious.  The people on the anti-hype train went about emphatically overstating the game's supposed shortcomings in order to 'prove' that the game wasn't worthy of the hype.  It may not have been, but it certainly wasn't worthy of the backlash.



Around the Network

Unlike other games who have the same problem with gliches/freezing/repeatable missions
GTAIV didn't get points shaved from it's final score.



If it isn't turnbased it isn't worth playing   (mostly)

And shepherds we shall be,

For Thee, my Lord, for Thee. Power hath descended forth from Thy hand, That our feet may swiftly carry out Thy command. So we shall flow a river forth to Thee And teeming with souls shall it ever be. In Nomine Patris, et Filii, et Spiritūs Sancti. -----The Boondock Saints

I found GTA4 a pain to play. Didn't like the mood of the game and the gameplay felt twitchy. I played it for around 30mins then I sold it.

My view is (of course) subjective, so I'm entitled to say that for me it was a 6.5/10 game.



richardhutnik said:
Hephaestos said:
$$$

big name means lots of clicks means $$$

and 10/10 reviews will be read by most everyone as you want to know why it's so exceptionally good.

So, because of the money, and attention the game generates, GTA4 forced reviewers to feel compelled to give the game a 10/10 review?  Is there something about GTA4 as a game, that caused people to rate it highly early, but then sour on it later?

Your words are correct, it's the Brand GTA that forced (and not a company or bribery...). The game is none the less good and worthy of a 90ies rating, but it was also a game that was there early in the gen, so it's easy to get lost in visuals and all the fancy effects.... things that don't seem as great a few months later...



OoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoOoO

Metallicube said:

I think it's pretty obvious that reviewers get paid off to jack up the score. Reviews really mean a lot from many gamers, and publishers know this so they expoit it. 

GTA4, while a fun game, is definitely not a 10. It's a 9 at best. It had plenty of flaws in the game, awkward controls, and had pretty bad replay value.

so can we say the same about Mario Galaxy 2? Or any other high rated game??? Because a good selling game and good reviews  means reviewers got paid???? Is it hard to believe that some game is ACTUALLY GOOD?



Around the Network

Rockstar had this game under a tight leash. Those who were privy to a review had to do so in very controlled conditions. Basically, Rockstar had it tied up from the get go, if this game didn't get a major score from whoever they gave access to it early on, you didn't get to release that review. Now, from there, having a game that gets early high scores creates a synergy, very few guys want to be the odd man out in all the hype, because that's the condition this current industry has created for itself.

Now, GTA4 isn't a bad game, I enjoy it to some degree. But there are issues that I have with it. I think it's unfair to me, and others that would purchase it, to have info withheld of items that I should be cautious of after purchasing the game. GTA is already an established series, so scores shouldn't really be an issue to anyone but the internet crowd. Reviewers don't need to drink the kool-aid when it comes to bringing you info, they do us more of a favor by bringing up proper concern, instead of sounding like a mouthpiece of the game's PR.



i don't think anyone i know completed it... although everyone has it. completely overrated/overhyped game!



I think people are too hard on it because it wasn't as big or varied as San Andreas. I'm playing it right now and although I would agree its not as good as San Andreas, it's still a great game and they made a lot of gameplay improvements (obviously besides graphics) compared to the PS2 era games. So far from what I've played I would still rate it in the 90% and up range.



4/10 for me, massive disappointment.



tube82 said:
i don't think anyone i know completed it... although everyone has it. completely overrated/overhyped game!

 The game is like 40 hours so they probably have ADD