slowmo said:
Xoj said:
slowmo said:
Xoj said:
slowmo said:
Xoj said:
slowmo said:
MAG is a average shooter with a unique premise, the score wasn't obviously less than other reviews so you're just bitching because they had a different view of one of your favourite current games. Games TM gave Assassins Creed 1 a score of 4, did I cry about it, no I read the review and decided I could live with the downsides. As it happens the reviewers opinion was wrong on the score but is pros and cons hit the nail on the head that he wrote in the review.
The bias overspilling your words makes your rant have very little value to me, you have no proof of them favouring 360 ports of games as you've not bothered to get ACTUAL numbers of games they did this on in any issue, let alone the one you're upset about.
Ever considered that the fact they get to play the best games on all consoles is why they don't score some PS3 exclusives as high as you would like? |
says the guy wit halo on their avatar
pretty much all FPS on consoles are average, certain there noticeable quite bias since Mw2, halo:ostd never go below a 8 get average ;_;
|
Either you're very bad at FPS on consoles or you really haven't played many. My avatar has nothing to do with my opinion and Halo isn't even one of my favourite games this generation. If you call Bioshock, Orange Box, COD4, Halo 3 average then frankly, I know now how little your opinion means on the FPS genre.
For the record ODST was worth a 8 but then again I'd know that having played it through fully, also most reviews tend to agree with my viewpoint.
Looking at the tags under YOUR name though its easy to see why you would want to try and bait and troll me, just shoo please.
|
certainly as far as innovation bioshock deliver in something halo 3 doens't, storytelling. but MAG have 256 battles never seen in a console before.
and it was you that starting calling MAG average without even playing it, i was in beta.
|
I believe I stated it was an average FPS with a unique concept, how is that statement wrong? Every review seems to agree with me pretty much. Perhaps if more people in the beta had provided better feedback instead of kissing ass with developers then the game would have been even better. Beta's in FPS games are a double edged sword because people spend more time trying to bend games to fit their playstyle rather than actually bug finding. The only advantage a public beta gives you is an idea of how the netcode will perform.
Halo 3 did bring some innovation to console FPS games, I suggest had you played the game you would know this.
|
i did halo 3 simply followed halo 2, mingle all the things many FPS had and put them together.
split screen = golden eye, and many of the features were on FPS like CS and UT,
|
Did it happen to mingle all those things together in a cohesive package unlike nearly every other shooter out there by any chance?
Saying forge, theatre and the pretty much unparalleled online stat tracking didn't bring anything new to the table is rubbish, you don't like the game then thats fine but don't come in here talking FUD about it.
By the way, it happened to scoop this too:
http://www.edge-online.com/news/halo-3-scoops-edge-award-interactive-innovation
|
LOL many of those features were on many games before, it didn't bring anything new.
it's just mingle them together, UT had mods that gave it many of features halo added
