mountaindewslave said:
I don't think anyone who is being fair and balanced in their analysis could say that in 2008 Fallout 3 didn't deserve the reviews it got, it was pretty revolutionary for the time in terms of open world and choices in a FPS perspective. Fallout 4 appears (based on what gamers have been shown so far) to be pretty promising as well. if it scores higher then it will be because reviewers and gamers enjoyed it, nothing more. if it scores lower then the same applies I find it hilarious so many people claiming that games they have never played before they expect to be 'just a little bit' or 'a lot' better than another game that they also have never played. bizarre. |
I never said that Fallout 4 would score higher JUST because of the hype and being a estabilished franchise.I said the reviewers are more propense to give it extra points because of that, not that the game wouldnt get good scores based on their merits.
And I say what Im saying based only on impressions of what i saw so far.Yeah, im probably not being too fair with fallout 4 because i never played a fallout game before(and thats actually the reason that im probably not getting it.I hate starting a franchise when they already had many intinerations, even if the stoy is self contained in the game like Fallout 4 is probably going to be), but i still think that Xenoblade X is going to be better, because thats what i get from the things I saw.We all do that, we all judge things that we didnt try before or dont know much about.And that also includes you.Its the human nature
My (locked) thread about how difficulty should be a decision for the developers, not the gamers.
https://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=241866&page=1