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

[Michael-5]

o_O.Q said:

Michael-5 said:

o_O.Q said:

Michael-5 said:

Uncharted was designed to be a single player game. The gameplay isn't built to accomodate for MP. In single player most targets rush to cover and hide. AI is programed to flank you, but for the most time you fight in a relatively narrow straight line, and stay in cover playing with grenades. In MP everyone is running and gunning. People only aim from distances, and no one uses cover. It's very difficult to aim at a moving target, and bullets don't even slow down targets running directly at you. Multiplayer was forced onto Uncharted to generate sales.

I mean, do you know anyone who is buying Uncharted 3 for it's multiplayer? That's because it's average and only there to extend the gameplay of single player fans.

TPS in ME2 is about the same quality as in UC2. If it's substandard in ME2, you are just critisizng UC. Both games are hybrid genres.

Also I would hardly call the RPG elements in ME2 substandard. The atmosphere and character interactions in this game are set better then any game I have ever played.

As for the rest, I agree. However is better enough to justify perfect? You expect UC3 to be better then UC2, if it wasn't you would treat it like most people treated New Vegas.

so therefore your reason for it being tacked on and generally your percieved flaws of the game however much you may preach them like they are fact just boil down to your opinion...

awesome, well in mine uc 2/3 have the best multiplayer i've ever played in a game... so i guess the question that comes up now is who's opinion is more relevant? your's, mine or the reviewer's?

"Both games are hybrid genres."

yup doesn't mean that the mechanics for one game in the genre shared by both aren't better than the other, but if in your opinion they are even well thats your opinion

"However is better enough to justify perfect?"

no game is perfect the reviewer even says so at the end of the review but he says that what the devs accomplished with this game in his opinion ranks it as one of the best games ever made hence the score

"I mean, do you know anyone who is buying Uncharted 3 for it's multiplayer?"

um yes...

Perfect means everyone will find it perfect. Any serious person who plays multiplayer will see UC3 multiplayer on it's own won't push consoles. It's average, it's there for the fans to extend their game time.

This is 1 review, and the reviewer himself says that MP isn't perfect, but it's better then UC2. My arguement is that better =/= perfect, and the game should not get a perfect score. Almost no game should, IGN has been handing them out like candy this gen.

In his opinion it is one of the best games he ever played. One of the best, isn't 10/10. 10/10 is the best. Get my complaint? He does this multiple times in the review, specifically for multiplayer. He mentions flaws, but ignores them in the score.

Let me rephrase that last question....Do you know anyone who is buying Uncharted 3 specifically and only for it's multiplayer? Many people who buy Halo, Gears, CoD, Battlefield, and even Lost Planet 2, but it for only it's multiplayer, but games like Dead Space 2, Bioshock 2 and Uncarted 2/3, multiplayer is a bonus. It's tacked on, and average. Had the game not included multiplayer and been 2 hours longer instead, then I wouldn't argue the 10/10, but that's not the case.

No game that isn't the best deserves 10/10, that's the bottom line.

"Perfect means everyone will find it perfect."

wow i had no idea so you mean for instance if i said that ocarina of time in my opinion does not deserve a 10 and is one of the most overated games of all time in my opinion that you would be wrong? or is everyone supposed to fall into your line of thinking?

"Had the game not included multiplayer and been 2 hours longer instead"

did you get the game early? otherwise how can you possibly know how long it'll take you to play through it? the other thing is that even if you see it as a bonus feature are you really saying that it would be better to completely drop a feature that some may find value in just because you personally don't see the value in it?

"He mentions flaws, but ignores them in the score"

he also says in the score as i said above that no game is perfect or in other words every game has flaws and clarifies that the 10 is not a sign of a flawless game but of a game of the highest quality by the criteria he is rating the game by...

"No game that isn't the best in my opinion deserves 10/10 in my opinion, that's the bottom line." fixed

you see this is where you keep failing to grasp the concept of opinion... the person reviewing the game obviously found more value in the game than you  

Ocarina of Time is probably the closest game to deserve a perfect, but not everyone will like it. So how am I wrong?

The reviews said the game is 8 hours long, and more importantly "shorter then Uncharted 2." So I can estimate the length of the game. However that's besides the point, MP in UC3 is nothing more then average, and hurts the game. The reviewer himself said so. I'd rather have a pure single player game, but MP is in everything now to extend value

I disagree about this being the highest quality. IGN gives out 10's too easily nowdays. Gametrailers does much better reviews, and gives much fairer scores.

No game deserves 10/10. How many movies on IMBD have a score above 9.5/10? Zero? Have you not followed the industry and it's over-inflated game scores?