pezus said:
Aldro said:
Barozi said:
pezus said:
Argh_College said:
Ajescent said:
Argh_College said:
Game is with 88 on meta? how many reviews ? these days 88 is amazing! Day1 |
Since when?
|
Since 2010 they are way more agressive they way they review games, look at Uc3 or Gears 3 per example, they are better than their prequels but they have less critical aclaim.
|
LBP2, infamous 2, Killzone 3 as well.
|
And GT5 and Halo Reach and the list goes on.
|
Ever thought maybe it has to do with originality? I mean obviously when you first play the game, they're like "omgbbq".
Once a game gets uber praised like example Uncharted 2, devs take evolutionary steps rather than revolutionary ones. When you nail the formula and you get praised, you'd be mad to change it much. Which is why KZ3 is so much lower than KZ2. It's almost a step back in a way whereas those that do it decently only get like -2 to -4 "penalty" xD.
|
UC2, KZ2 weren't exactly original though.
|
Well my bad how about "new" to the gen?
Killzone 2 really introduced this uber .. sluggish ..feel in a time when Call of duty was rising.
Uncharted 2 had this set piece shit going on that honestly felt quite new for me. I remember at the time comparing it to MGS4 but thinking that UC2 really allowed you to actually play whilst things happend (you sort of had more control, eg the train sequence and the chopper bringing down the house).
New/unique/original/different/gay
I DONT KNOW WHAT TO CALL IT but they did something that was praised and ofcourse they continued to do so in their sequels but they were introduced here.
Hence why they were rated high and in order to keep people pleased, they made a similar game only better in scope yet ofcourse we knew what to expect.
