Rpruett said:
mibuokami said:
richardhutnik said:
Godot said:
Smashed said:
Who the hell's Tom Chick? |
I hope you guys realize that this guy has actually more credibility than the usual gaming journalist as he can actually say what he thinks without the fear of being fired(like that guy at gamespot). However, it's not because he didn't enjoy the game that you shoud care.
|
Tom Chick has more credibility than most people who write over the Internet, and he has been doing this review business a LONG time. What you see with him is something he wrote. People should read the entire thing, and then base their own decisions on it. What I made out that Tom said:
1. Your main character is too short.
2. The graphic engine is AWESOME, but the art direction is bland and too samey.
3. The script SUCKS, as does the plot. It is considered worse than Gears of War 2.
Maybe I missed something. People should take things he wrote as an opinion, and move on. He has just one opinion. If you liked the demo and want to get the game, then get the game. Who cases what he says. Who cares if you are one of a few people who like the game. It is what you like. (Resist urge to make a Miner Dig Deep comment to make a point here. Err, can't. I like Miner Dig Deep. Doesn't matter if the game gets bad reviews, I like it).
|
So from the review we've learnt that a First Person Shooter had a shitty storyline and some weird height issue... Because of those two issues and the fact that it brought nothing new to the genre its not worth buying...
Wow, thats just wow, its fair to have your opinion, but this is really picking at bones... he didn't even anaylze the two most important factors to any online FPS: gameplay and multiplayer.
|
Which is why he has no credibility. Especially after claiming Far Cry 2 (Of all games) should be game of the year. This is the type of review to get hits on his site and stir up drama. Period. Someone who throws chum in the water and likes to watch people feast on it, is not credible in any way IMHO.
|
Actually I feel it is more likely that his acting background is showing through, he feels like a critic who writes for the intellectual elite (ie other critics) and not to the general public. Film critics invariably suffers from this but game reviews have traditionally understood the line between artism and audience preference.
