Edge: Ninja Gaiden II walks all over DMC 4 and God of War

[jasonnc80]

PooperScooper said:

jasonnc80 said:

PooperScooper said:

jasonnc80 said:

It's pretty funny that whenever a magazine or reviewer says something that goes against your opinions they are immediately labeled as bias or shills for "company xyz". Maybe the reviewer gave his "critical opinion" on a series and that's what he believes. Just because you don't agree with what he/she says doesn't make it any less valid.  Heaven forbid somebody compare a game series to another of similar genre.  Let me ask, if the games were reveresed would you be so quick to call them bias?

There is a reason why Edge is one of the top tier respected mags as far as game reviews go and one of ones I trust the most.

The action beat-em-up genre is probably my favorite type of game and I happen to agree with him. I've played all 3 series to death except GoW which I only played through once. It's a good game but I didn't enjoy the combat much at all.

If you say that NG2 is just Sigma pt 2 then you've honestly never played the second series or just tried to button mash your way through them. I've completed Black/Sigma about 4 times through and already through NG2 twice. Graphics, combat, enemy variety, and weapon balance are all miles above what was in the first installment. Some things are reduced (puzzles, platforming, accessories, and raw number of weapons) but it's like they trimmed all the excess off the original and streamlined the combat to something that is far above the other series.

DMC and GoW are good games and they offer things that NG doesn't have but for raw combat gameplay they don't compete to be honest.

 

 I think you missed the point.

How did I miss the point?

I was responding to the point made in the very topic of this thread?

If it was about the quote about "gamers should be thanking microsoft for hardcore games" then I didn't respond because I don't agree with that and think that point has already been talked about quite a bit in the thread.

 

Their credibility is effected because of what they said. Sure they are allowed their opinions, but right when they said that about MS you have to question their credibility. That was a quite biased comment and it negatively effects their journalism credibility. Now since they are less credible are they saying it's better because they are biased? Another thing is how they worded it. They can think its better. Hell that's their opinion, but right when you say "it walks all over" you have to question them again.

1. Look at sales (Gamers)

2. Look at other reviewers

They both disagree.

You can't have such a strong statement in your reviews if you don't want people arguing with you. I'm sure it wouldn't have been as much of an issue if he just said "This game is more action packed than DMC4 and Gow. I find the aspects in NG2 better than the others"

 

1. So sales defines quality now?  By EDGE's own definition NG is a more hardcore game so that would probably mean sales would be less no?  It's not that far off pace from 360's DMC4 sales but I would expect it to sale much less anyway.  The DMC series sold to a much larger userbase last gen and is less "hardcore" then the NG series.  You're fooling yourself if even at high 90% reviews that NG would have sold more then DMC.  I'm not including GoW sales because there isn't a next gen installment but like DMC they sold to a large userbase last gen and will probably do blockbuster sales on the PS3 with it's next installment because of it.  It also appeals to a bigger audience so even without that userbase sales would probably be higher.

2. Reviews (taken from gamerankings):

Next Gen titles:
DMC - 83.7%
NG2 - 83.5%

Last Gen titles:
NG Black - 94.0%
GOW1 - 93.2%
GOW2 - 92.6%
DMC 1 - 92.3%
NG Original - 92.1%
DMC 3 - 84.1%
DMC 2 - 73.0%

um...ok?

EDGE has always been very harsh in their reviews and commentary.  If you've read them for a time you've probably seen quotes and statements like this before.  Maybe not specifically but they are there.  Like I said I disagree with that part of the article but to completely label them as biased and a shill from one quote seems to be overreacting much?  I commend your post though it was much better expressed and written then a lot from this thread.  I just happen to think it was a flamebait topic to begin with.