IGN - Uncharted 3: Drake's Deception Review!!!

[Michael-5]

oniyide said:

Michael-5 said:
Don't hate me, but I disagree with IGN's review. I think IGN give high profile games higher ratings then they deserve because it will draw more fans to their website.

The reason I say this is that multiple times in the video review, he says that multiplayer isn't perfect. He said it's a big improvement over UC2 and addictive as hell, but I've played the beta, multiplayer is average.

I think the game should have gotten a 9.5/10, like it did on GameTrailers. GT seem to give more reasonable review scores now days. IGN has changed. 3 games this gen got a 10/10 already, and before that Ocarina of Time was the only one. Too much personal preference goes into IGN's reviews.

As good as the story may be, Multiplayer is average compared to the competition. This may be an amazing game single player game, but lasting appeal should not be a 10, and overall score should not be a 10. No game, except maybe something very very well made with a very broad audience, and great replay should get a 10. The 10/10 list should be limited to GTAIV and Ocarina of Time.

Disagree? Did GT5 deserve an 8.5/10? GT gave it 9/10. They are far more reasonable when it comes to scores IMHO.

I agree with you on IGN, i remember way back in the 32bit era they were MUCH more brutal, if they gave a game a 8or 9, you bet it was worth your time. But why do you feel GTA4 and OOT deserve 10s and not U3??? You played the beta and that was just beta, for a we know they could have changed it up for launch and you didnt even touch SP, for all we know it has a better campaign than 2. OOT had no replay, its a straight SP game, why is that a ten?? GTA4, IMHO the story was boring as hell, alot of the side missions you used to do were taking out and lets be honest, how much people actually play the Multiplayer?? Its a damn ghost town when I go on. Im not trying to be a dick, just curious

Well I assume the campaign is perfect, but I don't feel a game like UC3 deserves a 10/10. GTAIV was a sandbox game. It's a game you can play for hours and hours and hours doing anything you want, and with all the experience on the PS2, they really perfected this game. However I would still say it deserves a 9.9/10 because there is no tank.

As for MGS4, I really just don't see how everyone could love the game. To some it's a 10/10, but you can't review the game for the fans, otherwise every game would get 10/10. It has flaws, it's short, load times between acts are insane, and I find the whole experience too over the top (situations are just silly at times).

Ocarina of Time deserves 10/10. It's the one game I completed to 100% as a kid, before achievements and trophies. The gameplay at the time was a decade ahead of it's time. We still see games strugling to play as smoothly and as well as Ocarina of time, and most platformers copy Zelda (and Super Mario 64 for the matter) in one way or another.

Back to UC3, playing the beta, I full out did not agree with the reviewer. He himself said it's difficult to aim at people, rewards you for too many things, and well has flaws, but it a massive improvement over UC2. Being better does not mean your perfect.

If the game is perfect, Multiplayer should have brought down the score to something between 9.5-9.8/10.

Games today get way too inflated scores. How many movies on IMDB score above 9/10? There are more great games now days then great movies, but 10/10 means the game is the best of the gen, it's a game everyone who like the genre can enjoy, and a game which introduces new elements to gaming which are just shocking. UC3 does deliver a movie like experience (I assume much better then UC2), and it may be best of the gen, especially for single player. However the replay value isn't as good as compeditors.