snowdog on 05 December 2012
| superchunk said: Honestly... I really don't understand people rating this game below an 8. I say 9, but below 8 is just not appropriate. If you don't like survival horror, that's one thing and you should've done your homework before buying... or rented. But, The game makes sense in every way. Could more money been put in to art? Sure, but I'm not going to knock it much for that as its a new IP on a new console. Does anyone expect a company to invest $20million in that type of game? Maybe if this was being put on an established console with 50million users. But not for a launch title. Even given that, it still looks really good and the dark gloomy atmosphere fits it to me anyways. Kinda like an older horror movie... which is probably the intended goal. Then you add in the integration with your friends, random dev team comments in game, scares, fact that it literally gets your heart pumping with anticipation and nervousness, solid and punishing complexity, ...man its just a great game all around. All ratings should be between 8 and 9 for this game easy. |
This ^^
I couldn't have put it better myself. Any score below an 8 is an insult. It's a real shame that the GameSpot, Game Informer, The Globe And Mail (Toronto) (and who the fuck are they and why does their review score get included in the Metascore..?!?) and EGM in particular have pretty much ruined the chances of the game getting a Metascore of 80+.
If you read some of these reviews with a lower score it seems like the reviewers were expecting a CoD Zombies/Left 4 Dead/Dead Island kind of affair, when Ubisoft right from the beginning have billed it as an old-school survival horror game.
