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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - I really don't think GTAIV is worthy of the scores

makingmusic476 on 03 May 2008
windbane said:
makingmusic476 said:
Yeah, it definitely doesn't deserve 10s. I mean, it may be great, but 10 is usually reserved for games that just can't get any better when they are released, and will probably still be great for years to come. GTAIV definitely doesn't pass the former, and the latter is debatable, imo.

I think it's still a AAA, though.

Every game has flaws, though. A 10/10 just means the game is that good compared to everything else out.

It depends on the reviewer.  For a reviewer like Play!, a 10 could be looked on in that sense.  They through out tens fairly often, and an really good game will usually get a 10.

But for a site like IGN or GameSpot?  Tens are MUCH harder to come by.  

Sites like these giving GTAIV a ten is comparable to GameSpot giving the ps2 version of THPS3 a 10 back in 2001, imo.  Sure, the game was truly awesome back in the day, but in a few years people were thinking, "What the hell?" 

Though obviously GTAIV will hold up much better than THPS3 did. 



Around the Network
windbane on 03 May 2008
kenzomatic said:
windbane said:
makingmusic476 said:
Yeah, it definitely doesn't deserve 10s. I mean, it may be great, but 10 is usually reserved for games that just can't get any better when they are released, and will probably still be great for years to come. GTAIV definitely doesn't pass the former, and the latter is debatable, imo.

I think it's still a AAA, though.

Every game has flaws, though. A 10/10 just means the game is that good compared to everything else out.


See this is where my problem is everything I know of that involves judging on a scale of 1 - 10 with decimals requires it to be perfect.

 A gymnast doesn't get a 10 because she was so much better then the others. She gets a 10 because she was perfect.


No, she appeared perfect compared to what everyone else has done. The more accurate comparison is movies, where 4 or 5 stars (whichever is highest on a particular scale) are given all the time. Also, Rotten Tomatoes where a movie is given a good or bad, and when a movie gets 100% good no one says it's perfect, just that it has a perfect rating.



Gnizmo on 03 May 2008
windbane said:
Backlash led by Wii fanboys. The guy has Nintendo in his name and Link as his avatar (toon link at that). I think it's a fair assumption.
I thnk the biggest giveaway was the comparison to Galaxy...that being a Nintendo game last I checked...

He's also apparently ignoring the plethora of other threads about THIS EXACT SAME TOPIC.

There aren't even half as many threead critisizing the game as there was threads praising it. Don't whine because the new trend is one you don't happen to like and ignore one you somewhat enjoy. Creating a new thread because you want to is standard operating procedure around here. It happened with a thousand annoying Galaxy threads, it happened with a thousand annoying Halo 3 threads, and it is not happening with a thousand annoying GTA4 threads.



Starcraft 2 ID: Gnizmo 229

makingmusic476 on 03 May 2008
Griffin said:
NintendoTogepi said:

It's very good but it's not worthy of the universal 10s. (Bribing maybe? I can't see of another way it could have gotten all of the 10s when it's just the same old GTA)

The controls are awful, the camera is pretty terrible, driving sucks, money system is almost as bad as TP's*, much less side stuff to do, glitchy, lacking features and fun stuff from previous games (where are my ambulance missions, and I seem to have lost the ability to do taxi missions because of a story related event).

I really don't see how this game could have gotten the universal praise. 10 out of 10 games are supposed to do nearly everything right, and be very innovative, and GTAIV does neither. I'm thinking bribing is possible.

What do you think? I still think it's a high 9.2-5 game but it's just not as good as said.

Compare it to something like Super Mario Galaxy which is expertly designed, with VERY minor flaws, and I just don't understand....

*It's really lousy. It's okay for the first 15% or so of the game but later on you get so much money and NOTHING to do with it. They should have let you buy houses or businesses or something. Same thing as TP's money system, except possibly even worse.


I have played the game for 40hours and have 64.7% complete, so i think i have played it enough to voice my views on the game. The camera, controls, driving all take a while to master, it took me about 2-3 hours.

The money system is not bad, and i want to know how you think you have so much money and nothing to do with it, i have about 350k right now, and have been between 300k to 400k for most of the game and i have to watch my money very close because in less then 1 hour i can be at zero with out even trying. When i die i lose 8k to 15k or something.

The game was given 10's becasue the rating system is broken they rate shitty games to high so when a game like GTa comes out and blows the others away they have no choice but to give it 10/10. SMG has been given 42 perfect scores last time i checked gamerankings which is alot more then GTA4 has gotten. SMG is an upgraded GC game, and its not very good, maybe a 7 at most.


The green I kind've agree with.

The red I don't agree with at all. :| 

 



Shura on 03 May 2008

Jajajajajajajaja, nintendo on the name and a link for avatar say much about your comment. Admit it, this will be the best reviewed game ever.



End of 2011 (made 02/01/11) 
Wii: 99.453 m
Xbox 360: 67.837 m 
Ps 3: 60.726 m

Best Games/Serie of the Generation

Around the Network
Onimusha12 on 03 May 2008

Deer god, stop giving Sony fanboys like Windbane and Griffin ammunition with threads like this. Just let the 360 and PS3 fanboys duke it out and watch from afar.



Gnizmo on 03 May 2008
Shura said:
Jajajajajajajaja, nintendo on the name and a link for avatar say much about your comment. Admit it, this will be the best reviewed game ever.

Ever? Unlikely. Up until this point? Almost certainly.



Starcraft 2 ID: Gnizmo 229

windbane on 03 May 2008
makingmusic476 said:
windbane said:
makingmusic476 said:
Yeah, it definitely doesn't deserve 10s. I mean, it may be great, but 10 is usually reserved for games that just can't get any better when they are released, and will probably still be great for years to come. GTAIV definitely doesn't pass the former, and the latter is debatable, imo.

I think it's still a AAA, though.

Every game has flaws, though. A 10/10 just means the game is that good compared to everything else out.

It depends on the reviewer.  For a reviewer like Play!, a 10 could be looked on in that sense.  They through out tens fairly often, and an really good game will usually get a 10.

But for a site like IGN or GameSpot?  Tens are MUCH harder to come by.  

Sites like these giving GTAIV a ten is comparable to GameSpot giving the ps2 version of THPS3 a 10 back in 2001, imo.  Sure, the game was truly awesome back in the day, but in a few years people were thinking, "What the hell?" 

Though obviously GTAIV will hold up much better than THPS3 did. 


I can't wait to play this game because I want to have my own opinion of it. Personally, I like the 20-point scale without decibels, or 8.5, 9.0, 9.5, 10.0. If you look back at a game and realize that for what it does it is better than anything that came before it, it should be a 10. Minor flaws shouldn't require deducting .1 points. Playing Oblivion, a game I would probably give a 10, I realize there are sometimes pop-in and framerate issues like GTA has. However, those occur so seldom that it's hardly worth mentioning. I'm sure on the PC on high setting it used to happen more, but there's a point where minor flaws do not detract from the overall game. Thinking something like "man, I sure would like a battleship offshore in GTA" shouldn't mean the game gets a .1 deduction. You could always add to a game stuff that people would find fun. Improvements are always possible. Perhaps to some people GTA IV deserves a lower score than 10, and perhaps 9.9 is easier to use when it has a minor flaw. Some reviews did that. But for those that feel that the game is just head and shoulders better than anything before it, why shouldn't it get a 10 if the MINOR flaws don't detract from the overall experience?



windbane on 03 May 2008
Onimusha12 said:
Deer god, stop giving Sony fanboys like Windbane ammunition with threads like this. Just let the 360 and PS3 fanboys duke it out and watch from afar.

Always appreciate your input. I prefer the PS3, but I'm not a fanboy. Can't wait for your next post.



kenzomatic on 03 May 2008
windbane said:
kenzomatic said:
windbane said:
makingmusic476 said:
Yeah, it definitely doesn't deserve 10s. I mean, it may be great, but 10 is usually reserved for games that just can't get any better when they are released, and will probably still be great for years to come. GTAIV definitely doesn't pass the former, and the latter is debatable, imo.

I think it's still a AAA, though.

Every game has flaws, though. A 10/10 just means the game is that good compared to everything else out.


See this is where my problem is everything I know of that involves judging on a scale of 1 - 10 with decimals requires it to be perfect.

 A gymnast doesn't get a 10 because she was so much better then the others. She gets a 10 because she was perfect.


No, she appeared perfect compared to what everyone else has done. The more accurate comparison is movies, where 4 or 5 stars (whichever is highest on a particular scale) are given all the time. Also, Rotten Tomatoes where a movie is given a good or bad, and when a movie gets 100% good no one says it's perfect, just that it has a perfect rating.


The 4 or 5 stars are numeral only and rotten tomatoes is only a percentage of positive reviews. So if all the reviews thought it was OK it would score 100%

They don't judge relative to the other contestents, maybe relative to humans but if the judge can identify one flaw they do not score a 10. 



"Back off, man. I'm a scientist."

Your theories are the worst kind of popular tripe, your methods are sloppy, and your conclusions are highly questionable! You are a poor scientist. Especially if you think the moon landing was faked.

ioi + 1