http://ps3.ign.com/articles/119/1192319p1.html

Dead Island probably won't win any game of the year awards. It's got visual bugs, the controls take a bit to feel normal, and the presentation in general isn't up to snuff. But the game gets a lot right. There is a huge world to explore, thousands of zombies to kill, and tons of side quests to take. Here on the other side of a 25-hour playthrough -- where I skipped a lot of side quests after Act 1 -- I'm anxious to get back into Dead Island, and despite the game's flaws, that's not something I say often.

7.0	Presentation The story is a bit flat. It's easy enough to upgrade your weapons and such, but there's no flair to the menus.
7.0	Graphics Environments and zombies look good, but clipping and texture loading are issues. Cutscenes are stiff.
8.0	Sound Every time I came to a new area, I'd listen for zombie action. I don't think I'll forget the cries of a zombie chasing me anytime soon. Sound cuts out every so often on PS3.
8.0	Gameplay There are tons of quests to take, you build out your version of the character, and weapon mods keep combat interesting. The melee fighting is fun but takes getting used to.
8.5	Lasting Appeal If you can get over the game's stumbles and appreciate what it does right, you have a long campaign with online options to try out.

Overall 8.0 great!

I wish they didn't round review scores to the nearest 0.5

That's a pretty mediocre score these days, the way he talked about the game made it seem a lot better than the final review score. I'm undecided, guess I'll wait for more reviews.

brendude13 said: I wish they didn't round review scores to the nearest 0.5 That's a pretty mediocre score these days, the way he talked about the game made it seem a lot better than the final review score. I'm undecided, guess I'll wait for more reviews.

I'm with you man, only idiots buy games rated below 9.0.

I don't really see what the difference of having a score of an 7-8-8.2 or an 8 would do for you. I like it because they're just giving a general ball park. It's hard to quantify why you think game in a 1-100 scale is better. it's much easier to quantify 1-20.

And if an 8 is mediocre the game scale is completely broken. Which I think it somewhat is.

This game looks somewhat neat...

Chrizum said: brendude13 said: I wish they didn't round review scores to the nearest 0.5 That's a pretty mediocre score these days, the way he talked about the game made it seem a lot better than the final review score. I'm undecided, guess I'll wait for more reviews. I'm with you man, only idiots buy games rated below 9.0.

I hope that was sarcasm...

brendude13 said: I wish they didn't round review scores to the nearest 0.5 That's a pretty mediocre score these days, the way he talked about the game made it seem a lot better than the final review score. I'm undecided, guess I'll wait for more reviews.

it is?? since when lol

Damn its between this and resistance 3.

brendude13 said: I wish they didn't round review scores to the nearest 0.5 That's a pretty mediocre score these days, the way he talked about the game made it seem a lot better than the final review score. I'm undecided, guess I'll wait for more reviews.

Since when is an 8 a mediocre score? 8 out of 10 = mediocre? I don't understand it. 

Chrizum said: brendude13 said: I wish they didn't round review scores to the nearest 0.5 That's a pretty mediocre score these days, the way he talked about the game made it seem a lot better than the final review score. I'm undecided, guess I'll wait for more reviews. I'm with you man, only idiots buy games rated below 9.0.

ROFL Spot on dude, people nowadays are s..... not too bright when it comes to reading reviews. It is the fans who have the bad perception. WKC was in the 7's or so, but I thouroughly enjoyed it giving it a low 8 (good in my book since I spent about a 100ish hours), then you have overrated crap like ODST that scores 9's when it's a rehash of 3 with inferior characters (compared to master chief) in super short sp campaign. Review scores are scewed based on how much pubs and devs give as "incentives" to websites. My suggestion is check the forums for GAMERS not fanboys, and see what scores they give certain games and WHY those scores are given, as opposed to seeing a number and disregarding the game because it's not a 9.5. If we went by that then Xenogears sucked (got 8ish on gamespot), or perhaps FF XIII is the second coming since it got a 39/40 in Famitsu. people have to stop being sheep and read and see which reviewers you can relate to the most.

Score seemed fine to me an 8 is a good score.