EGM you fail so hard.
| Tommie said: Quote from Neogaf: "The reason GT5 got a 6.5 according to the reviewer was because he felt like nothing changed. He said that it was stuck in the 90's (?) and that the menus were bad. He said it couldn't stack up to the likes of Forza and Need For Speed. He also complained about lack of damage. Oh and he said that some of the cars looked bad which distracted him during races. It was a shitty review.
Oh and this image pretty much sums up today's way of reviewing |
No. This image does not sum up today's way of reviewing at all, instead it sums up the way people see reviews today.
bah, they're not reliable at all
ethomaz said:
Nothing but LBP receive a 9 or 10... so why LBP2 receive a 8.5??? The game is way (far way) better than the first one (I know I'm early beta). |
Halo Reach improved on almost everything from Halo 3, but many sites gave Halo 3 a higher score. Why?
Because scores are not given in a vacuum. They're based on how the game is perceived AT THE TIME REVIEWED, not for all time. This score is based on the industry at the beginning of 2011 while the first had a score based on how things were near the end of 2008.
Its a really good score. A BUY score. Be happy people, for crying out loud ...
Darth Tigris said:
Halo Reach improved on almost everything from Halo 3, but many sites gave Halo 3 a higher score. Why? Because scores are not given in a vacuum. They're based on how the game is perceived AT THE TIME REVIEWED, not for all time. This score is based on the industry at the beginning of 2011 while the first had a score based on how things were near the end of 2008. Its a really good score. A BUY score. Be happy people, for crying out loud ... |
Why? Because Halo Reach changed the Halo formula for some it improved for some it didn't.. Visuals, armor abilities;.
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2025 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
