| sales2099 said: Yes...because let's not use past experiences as a base to make practical estimates. /sarcasm lol...anyone out there also think you used the "you didn't play X game yet" cliche as a means to avoid a losing debate? Ya me too. "better" game being subjective = I am a sore metacritic loser, yet will priase metascores when they suit me (LAST OF US META FTW!!!!!) Your method ignores history and likes to play blissful ignorance until proven right or wrong. lol no......that isn't how society works. We USE history to learn and gauge how future events could play out. Based on the past, Evolution makes pretty games with shallow gameplay (Motorstom IP) and Playground has established that they are a 80's capable meta developer of racing games. |
have you ever played a motorstorm game or a wrc game and not just base your opinion solely on a meta score or in your case what you saw in wiki? likewise, has a game ever been better to you personally than what meta was given for it? lol.. talk about someone who doesn't know what they are judging.. so your opinion on evolution games, which you clearly grabbed from wiki'n evolution studios, because apparently you have no clue how their games play, is great for practical estimates? sure..
so based on both games not being out, you can already tell which game is going to be better? what psychic powers you must have.. and a shame too because you only use those powersin a game sales forum to make predictions of how "good" a game will be.. lmao.
as oh yes.. 1 game is substantial history enough to gauge future games.. wow.. must of missed that in practical gaming 101.
say what you want.. as of now.. Playground = 1 hit wonder. Evolution = 13 years making good racing games. it's too easy seeing through your fud..
Man.. I hate it when your girl has to leave my place to come back to you..
