Crackdown 3 Review Thread - MC: 60 OC: 62

[DonFerrari]

Mr Puggsly said:

animegaming said:

I don't really know what Yakuza has anything to do with this thread aside from my icon, since Yakuza and Crackdown are very different series. Its like you can't understand the fact, that a game you enjoyed is something that most people consider to be shallow, boring, forgettable, outdated, and just plain old mediocre. 

You said, "I am wasting my time playing it." It just felt ironic from the guy with a Yakuza avatar, a huge time sink that's "shallow, boring, forgettable, outdated, and just plain old mediocre." Has it changed much since the original PS2 release? I mean really?

Essentially, I'm just seeing some irony from a guy with your avatar.

I really like Yakuza, and if you or critics would think it deserves a very low score ow well I would think you are wrong but accept that perhaps Yakuza only caters to a small crowd. Wouldn't need to trash a game of your liking to prove something you like isn't good.

Chris Hu said:

animegaming said:
Okay having played some of Crackdown 3, it honestly deserves all of the 5's and 6's. It is a very bland and uninteresting game, even with Gamepass it just feels like I am wasting my time playing it when there are games that do every that Crackdown 3 does, but better.

In fact having replayed Crackdown 1 just a few months ago, I am shock how many of the flaws from that game weren't address in 3 like lock-on removes so much challenge from the game and bad the platforming can get.

"that do every that Crackdown 3" ?????? What the heck are you trying to say if are trying to make a point at least use some correct grammar.

It always surprises me how native english speakers have such a hard time understanding anything written slightly wrong (but non-native have no qualm understanding) when they can't counter.

Chris Hu said:

animegaming said:

Beat me to the punch, thanks anyways.

The are some more grammatical errors in your post.  So again if you trying to make a point at least use correct grammar.

The very old trick of forgetting the argument and focus on grammar or "you don't talk proper english". One could say you don't talk proper argument.

pokoko said:
I'm seeing a lot of the word "polished" in this thread as if it should be some kind of major criteria upon which review scores should be based.

It's not. We all know the famous phrase about polish. You can polish a bad game to a brilliant, gleaming shine and it's still a bad game.

Personally speaking, I'd rather have an unpolished diamond than a polished up rock any day of the week.

I think the term people use in that phrase is turd.

smroadkill15 said:
I've played 12 hours so far and I can say that it's not a bad game. I don't see a reason for it to have any scores below a 6. The game I would compare Crackdown 3 to No Mans Sky. The developers over promised on certain aspects and the end result wasn't what people were hoping. In this case, the multiplayer for Crackdown 3. I already said this, but the multiplayer for Crackdown is lackluster. No Mans Sky scored roughly 7/10, which is about where I would land my score for Crackdown. On the other hand, Crackdown 3's single player is exactly what I wanted and expected. Most people who enjoy Crackdown feel this way. It's easily a better game than Crackdown 2 which scored low 70's. If someone doesn't like Crackdown, then no problem. Everyone has their own taste in games. This doesn't mean Crackdown is a bad game or trash. I keep hearing these words from people who haven't even played it, and are simply parroting what others are saying. I wouldn't put 12 hours into a game if it was bad.

Haven't seem anyone saying the game is trash. What I have seem is people defending the scores are justifiable under the critics eyes and a good portion of people who played.