By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
geddesmond2 on 19 February 2011
Edit Thread
liu777 said:
--OkeyDokey-- said:

I think the Metascore will go up but it won't be over a 90. This really annoys me as it's clearly a better game than it's predecessor and, like LBP2, it's getting lower scores across the board. How the likes of Dead Space 2 and Assassin's Creed Brotherood get away with it while these games drop 4 or 5 points is beyond me.


Better in what ways? Better graphics and a few new bells and whistles right? In this day and age, you gotta do more then that in order to score higher as a sequel. I mean you can argue that Halo 3 is better then Halo 2, cite better graphics a more integrated online, a new forge mode, etc etc etc but thats obviously not enough anymore. They've got to do something more, something special or they will not receive a higher score then their predecessor.

Actually if you played both KZ2 and KZ3 you would know that KZ3 is better in every single way. Better graphics, improved cover system, added sliding mechanics, a brutal melle system, easier controlls, more weapons, added jetpacks, new multiplayer modes, improved classes, 3D compatible, move support, split screen co op, better level designs, better weapon sounds.

To say KZ3 deserves a lesser score than KZ2, well my friend"That is an outrage"(aye KZ3 story trailer!)

COD is the same reskined game released year after year and it still manages to score nearly the same as the year before. The same can be said with Assasins Creed. Its the same game reskined year after year with a few added improvements to the combat and game world and that game scores the same if not better by some reviewers than the previous year.

The same thing with Dead Space 2, that games exactly the same as the first game with added multiplayer,a few added weapons and suits. Its not even scary and being scary is what made the first Dead Space so great and Dead Space 2 is scoring better than the  original game, like WTF.

Fact is theres a hugh problem with the way reviews have been done latley. A lot of developers are getting punished for making improvements to there franchises and if reviewers keep doing it then developers are going to say screw it, why bother improving over the previous game when reviewers are just going to shit all over it.

The review score isn't the problem. Anything over 80 metacritic is a very good game . The problem lies with reviewers giving a 95 score  to one game and then scoring that games sequel lower even though its improved itself over the last game in the series in every single way possible.

Don't use the times have changed excuse because thats complete bullshit.