By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sony Discussion - PlayStation Nation | an HBO original

zero129 said:
DonFerrari said:

Or perhaps the reviewers really did review the game as they saw worth independent of any conspiracy theory reason for SE to not give codes to everyone?

How exactly does that disagree with what i said?. The game seems to be shit, the reviews clearly reviewed it as such. SE limiting who could review it didnt pay off for them. No where does your statement disagree with mine.

My statement disagree on the premisse that SE was selecting reviewers to induce a better score, which didn't happen. So whatever reasons and reviewers SE selected doesn't have anything to do with any allegedly score manipulation.



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."

Around the Network
DonFerrari said:
zero129 said:

How exactly does that disagree with what i said?. The game seems to be shit, the reviews clearly reviewed it as such. SE limiting who could review it didnt pay off for them. No where does your statement disagree with mine.

My statement disagree on the premisse that SE was selecting reviewers to induce a better score, which didn't happen. So whatever reasons and reviewers SE selected doesn't have anything to do with any allegedly score manipulation.

How does that disagree with "SE picking reviewers didnt pay off"?



zero129 said:
DonFerrari said:

My statement disagree on the premisse that SE was selecting reviewers to induce a better score, which didn't happen. So whatever reasons and reviewers SE selected doesn't have anything to do with any allegedly score manipulation.

How does that disagree with "SE picking reviewers didnt pay off"?

It disagree from your original intention before the scores showed off and your implication of SE picking reviewers to get a better score/reviews. Or you are going to pretend that wasn't your insinuation when first bringing the point?



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."

DonFerrari said:
zero129 said:

How does that disagree with "SE picking reviewers didnt pay off"?

It disagree from your original intention before the scores showed off and your implication of SE picking reviewers to get a better score/reviews. Or you are going to pretend that wasn't your insinuation when first bringing the point?

What intention do you mean?, my original post about this was i didnt have much hope for the game since Se was Picking reviewers who could review the game and thats never a good sign, everything after was a reply to someone who kept questioning my reasons as if i was only saying it as someone who couldnt play the game if i wanted to since i am a PC Gamer and the game is on PC that was never the case. I said all along i didnt have much hope for the game and i was right. Now like i said SE's plan of picking reviewers didnt pay off for them as they must of thought picking was going to give them higher scores. So exactly once again what point are you trying to make here?.



It seems like EA has gone above and beyond when it comes to the Dead Space remake.