Dno on 22 December 2009
| binary solo said: At this point in the console cycle, with a growing number of multiplat titles that perform almost identically on both consoles there really is no excuse for a game such as this to be so badly gimped on one console. If the differences are as large as IGN describes then it's really not an acceptable situation. Multiplat games with serious performance problems on one console ought to get really hammered by reviewers. In fact I'd say IGN went easy on Bayonetta PS3 with an 8.2. It should have been sub 8. When a reviewer says things like "very disappointing" and "a lot of problems" and "excessive slowdown and load times" and "unacceptable" then either the reviewer is guilty of exaggerating (possible) or the game is only worthy of a <8 score and possibly even a <7. Doing a poor job at porting a game should be an automatic 2 points off any review IMO. The game certainly isn't worth buying a 360 for, and I was unlikely to buy it for PS3. I'm pretty much certain not to buy it now. I'm also somewhat surprised at the 360 score, there were some global criticisms that for me would put the better version of the game into the 9.0 range. 9.5 is a score for a game that is tight in every way, with basically no discernable flaws. I do like that IGN give a non-averaged overall score, but it does throw up some incongruities some times. Seriously, an 8.0 for presentation and the game still merits a 9.5? If that was the case then I'd be expecting the elements that the game does very well to score 10's to counter balance that one relative flaw (not that an 8 is bad, 8/10 is still good, just not great/amazing). Enjoy the game 360 folks. |
great post you beat me to it >.< 
