radiantshadow92 said:
I could go to any game and say it was bad. For example, i could go on a killzone 3 thread and say the grapchics suck, do they suck though? NO. However, if i were to give examples as to why i think the graphics suck, then maybe my statements can hold. His however, have no evidence or examples. I would simply like some. And i don't think his score should count unless he does. |
We have two people in this thread who gave the game a 9.5 without stating any reason. According to the rules in the OP those two shouldn't count - if any - not non-gravity's score. Did anyone judge the numerous 9.5 or higher scores in this thread? No, and we shouldn't.
I could easily start a redundant discussion and say that many of the scores posted here are ridiculously high IMO and that I disagree with them, but I don't as it's obvious that most VGC members who played HR liked it much more than I do. I always respect other people's opinions and don't question them. (BTW: the reason I consider HR only as a decent game are pretty much the same as mentioned in details in this thread by Maxwell. For me HR is a graphic adventure game and I compare it to the more than 50 games from this genre I played over the past 20 years - to me HR is a nice adventure game, but nothing special).
Did anyone question the only sub 5 score posted so far in this thread, even though the member stated his pro and cons along with his vote? Yes, you did, but I think you shouldn't.
If you start to question other people's opinions, if you start to suspect people to be insincere and to down-vote a game on purpose, then these ranking threads don't make any sense and we can all agree that only the people who loved the game should be allowed to vote.
