By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Mr Puggsly said:
DonFerrari said:

Well optmized isn't lack of bugs (that would be more like polished) is a different story then on being "heavy on assets, low on the impact". So if a game doesn't look to be pushing the technical aspects and still need a good HW I wouldn't say the code is well optimized. KH3 is made with UE4 as well as many great looking games, so I find it hard to say CD3 is the best in optmization.

There is a very big difference between not being part of the game (and we have seem critics take points from some great games from the lack of MP or SP campaign). And a game usually is considered as bad as its worse portion. So there have also been great games that lost points from having glaring mistakes on the extra content pumped in.

People disagreeing are people that really like the game and are upset with the score. 

Already said that some games have lost good points from not having a feature the reviewer wanted, and usually games lose points from extra content that wasn't good.

So if you think the MP is shitty, then it really should impact the total score and the 60 doesn't seem like unfair score.

A game should never be evaluated by how much its fanbase like it, if that was the case most games would get much bigger scores)

Again you demonstrate you don't really know much but you talk anyway. Crackdown 3 performs well, has a relatively high resolution for UE4, the presentation is sharp and clean looking, great use of effects, its not considered buggy, therefore its a polished product.

KH3 IS NOT considered polished. I assume it still has an erratic frame rate, runs on at a significantly lower resolution on base X1 and its a linear game in comparison.

Again, a game as polished as Crackdown 3 and with no glaring flaws generally don't score a 60. Less than upset, I think people find it a odd.

 

So you agree with me, critics arbitrarily decide when to ding a game for its MP or lack of? Stop bloviating and just admit I'm right.

 

I did not say a game should be reviewed based on fan opinions, that's dumb. Here's a thought, people praised Sonic Mania for just being more 16-bit era Sonic. People like NSMB because its like classic Mario games.  Mario Kart hasn't changed much since the Gamecube release. So why can't Crackdown just be more Crackdown?

Essentially you have fans that just wanted more of the same and are enjoying it. Its a polished game called Crackdown doing what its supposed to do. The critics on the other hand seem to feel Crackdown needed to change open world genre or something. I think that's where the disconnect is. Other IPs can stay the same and get praise, but Crackdown could not be that I guess.

Yes you win, I forfeit.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."