By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
JazzB1987 on 07 October 2012
Edit Thread
UltimateUnknown said:
JazzB1987 said:

I love how stupid reviewers are sometimes.

They go and say :

START OF FAKE REVIEW:

"Its a great game but its not that much better than the original game. It is as much fun as the previous game but doesnt add enougn NEW stuff. But the little stuff they added is a welcomed addition."

I give it a 5 compared to the 9 the first game got.


ITS JUST BASIC LOGIC THAT A GAME THAT IS AS GOOD AND EVEN ADDS SOME NEW STUFF WHICH IS AWESOME TOO GETS A LOWER SCORE!!!! BASIC LOGIC!!!! IT IS !!!!

We dont have to worry that our review would trick people in thinking the second game is worse as the SCORE might suggest and which is def not the case its better than the first game! But I am used to the stuff already so I cant give this game a 9 again  it doesnt matter if its better.

.And because everyone on the planet played the first game they should feel like I did and so my lower SCORE will be accepted by all 7 billion people on the planet."

END OF FAKE REVIEW

Even if the prequel was quite literally the best game ever made my mankind, you can't just reskin the game and call it a sequel and hope to get the same high score for it. You should be getting marked down for having too much in common to the last game (even though the last game was the best game ever). Yes sequels to a franchise are meant to be similar to the previous iterations and have core mechanics/aspects in common, but simply copy pasting majority of the last game is not the answer. These kinds of practices shouldn't be promoted.

The changes that were made in BW2 should normally be released as dlc, not as a brand new game with a full price tag. The tweaks in movesets of pokemon and slight changes to the gameplay mechanics should really be free dlc, while the entire post game area and the additions of different pokemon formes should be paid expansion packs.

This obviously wasn't possible on the DS, but now that the 3DS is out with the ability to have dlc, I would be very interested to see if Nintendo continues this money-grabbing scheme or actually do what is right. In fact this goes not only to Nintendo, but to any other developer who does the same thing. Nintendo just seems to be too blatant.

Well BW2 is a different game but I know what you want to say and in case of Fifa 12 vs 13 it should just be DLC.  But then again not everyone owns Fifa 12 so why  should they not be able to play 13? It cannot just be DLC. It could be both a retail game and a cheap addon for people who own the previous game.

The review system is faulty and sites like gamerankings or metacritic are also stupid because they distort the value of games and individual review scores.

Unless we have  different scores ( for Singleplayer, Muktiplayer, compared to all games, compared to previous games of the same series and whatnot) and drop the  OVERALL SCORE thing   the whole system is faulty. 

I mean just look at gametrailers.  The have story gampley etc.  and after the review you see the games end -score but it is not as easy as  10+9+9+10 /4 = 9.5 . it sometimes is a 9 and sometimes a 10.Under every review you see people saying  "GT FAILS AT MATHS" because people dont know whats going on. Sure most people undertand that its not just ++++/=  but noone knows how it exactly works and I even doubt the reviewers know it lol.

And every site with similar terms (story gameplay etc.) has another standard of how to come up with the end score.  Some just do the 10+10+10+10=4. Some use more complicated methods. etc.

I mean lets say I dont care about multiplayer and a game has awesome multiplayer and  good singleplayer  how does the OVERALL 9.5 tell me how good the single player is? The end score is useless for me.
Why do we differentiate when it comes to gameplay story visuals sound but stuff like MP/SP is irrelevant? And reviewers forgetting that not everyone played the first game and therefore giving it a lower score even if its better dont help at all.

And sites where reviewer A lowers the score because the game is to similar to the previous one   and then reviwere B judges another game on its own and just mentions the small differences as a small side note make all scores of the whole side useless because they have different ways to rate a game at the same site....

Every single site needs to completely overhould their review system and we need a global standard. But that wont happen...