reviewing the third game in a trilogy does seem to be a challenge for some reviewers. They seem to be caught between reviewing the game they are playing vs. the previous game they played. MSN's reviewer seems to get confused about what he is playing, similar to a movie critic who reviews a summer blockbuster against an academy award movie (you simply need to use different criteria).
Gears is a summer blockbuster...it's dialogue is perfect for that style, it's not immature or silly, it's the right dialogue for this game. Also many reviewers are confused about how to properly compare the next game in a series vs. the last. If a reviewer finds themselves saying I've been there and done that, they are using the wrong criteria. The easiest way to review the game is to ask..."is it better than the last one". So far with gears 3 that has been an undeniable yes...so a good reviewer would take the score they gave to gears 2 and go up from there. But unfortunately game reviewers aren't that practical and they do have to add controversy into their reviews to help generate hits for their sites. In the end they all say the same thing Gears 3 is better than the past two and that is the only part of the review that actually matters.
Existing User Log In
New User Registration
Register for a free account to gain full access to the VGChartz Network and join our thriving community.
