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

Forums - Microsoft Discussion - too human NOT so AAA?

epinefridis on 01 July 2008
Aj_habfan said:
epinefridis said:
@Aj_habfan
1. If you don't realize who are the VAST majority, then you are blind
2. I was referring to some lame comments posted on this particular thread
3. My opinion is my own. Whats wrong with that?
4. It is just my estimation. Did I say somewhere that I played it? Oh, I get it, you just try to be smart ass!. Nice job, you did it!
5. My estimation is that these fanboys, DONT EVEN PLAY the goddamn games.

 

Stiop going to n00b sites thjen, obiouisly some sites are full of more, liek gamespot, while others are full of others. Your estimation = worthless, and your opininion sohuldn't be used for fact when you say it is an opinion. BYW, another guy said this game was shit, add it to the list,

 

Really? Do you count them? How many till now???

Seriously now. Why do you even bother when it's obvious you wouldn't even touch the game or any 360 game?

Please, let me not distract you from the other serious thread you posted  http://www.vgchartz.com/forum/thread.php?id=31482 today.

Man, this is getting ridiculous...



Around the Network
JaggedSac on 01 July 2008

LOL, I just looked at that other thread. LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL. Excuse me.



epinefridis on 01 July 2008

"None sharper than this one: over on the Eurogamer boards, one of the site's mods - a chap who claims to be a journo - says his Too Human review NDA is "against [his] human rights". He also says "this has to be the worst game I've played in the last 5 years", citing everything from the game's animation to its supposedly repetitive combat."

Something must be done with all these spoiled 15 year old chaps. The creditability of this site (which I mostly love) is really hurt. They turned trolling and bashing into a favorite hobby and the competing with each other.
Aj Habfan, are you serious mate? This is the guy you were talking about? Man, that's sick...



shams on 01 July 2008

Two thoughts:

1/ Will this be for the 360, what LAIR is for the PS3? An ultra-hyped game, that just fails to live up to expectation?

2/ Anyone else get the feeling, that the "full" game could be 30hrs long - and MS asked for it to be cut into three, so they could have three releases and make triple the money? (it may yet backfire, if not enough people buy the first :P).



Gesta Non Verba

Nocturnal is helping companies get cheaper game ratings in Australia:

Game Assessment website

Wii code: 2263 4706 2910 1099

Rock_on_2008 on 01 July 2008
shams said:
Two thoughts:

1/ Will this be for the 360, what LAIR is for the PS3? An ultra-hyped game, that just fails to live up to expectation?

2/ Anyone else get the feeling, that the "full" game could be 30hrs long - and MS asked for it to be cut into three, so they could have three releases and make triple the money? (it may yet backfire, if not enough people buy the first :P).

 

How many people are needed to buy  Too Human part 1? For parts 2 and 3 to be appeared in 09 and 10?



Around the Network
Rock_on_2008 on 01 July 2008

Parts 2 and 3 will be launched in successive years providing part 1 sells ok. Would that be 500k or 1 million?

I assume that all three parts of Too Human have already been made and are being sold separately. Upgrading the visuals for parts should be just adding a bit of polish to the games when they appear in 2009 and 2010.



windbane on 01 July 2008
starcraft said:
Loud_Hot_White_Box said:
Machina-AX said:
I wouldn't expect it to be AAA now (90+% average review score) but then again I never did. I'll keep an eye on it though, looks to be worth a rent or trial at least.

AAA doesn't mean 90%+.  Starcraft just made that up because at this time, early cycle, 360 has more 90%+ games than PS3. Convenient when, by other metrics, like average score and such, PS3 is ahead. 

And of course, the improved-in-nearly-every-way PS3 version of Overlord has a lower metacritic score than the 360 version, which goes to show that metacritic can't be used to make a static determination of a game's quality, since the PS3 version of Overlord is just better than the 360 version.

Starcraft did nothing of the sort.  Do you have a more objective means of determining a AAA standard?

You realise that its very easy to have a higher average score when you're console's software sales are so low as to not justify the porting of shovelware en masse?

As to Overlord?  Have you played each version in its entirety?  Because according to the most objective standard we have, the Xbox 360 version "is just better."

 


Man you are annoying. The 360 isn't getting shovelware "en masse" either. We all know that the metacritic score is lower because the game came out last year. The same thing happened with Oblivion, and that was universally better on PS3. Try actually reading a few reviews every now and then, and/or not being a douche...I mean spinster.



MontanaHatchet on 01 July 2008

Alright now Windbane, as annoying as Starcraft may be, there's no point in calling him a douche. It's just what he wants you to do.



 

 

starcraft on 01 July 2008
MontanaHatchet said:
Alright now Windbane, as annoying as Starcraft may be, there's no point in calling him a douche. It's just what he wants you to do.

Why on earth would I want that?

Someone blatantly took my comments out of context in a thread I hadn't entered and I defended myself in a manner that was neither personal or offensive. 

Windbane (who had nothing to do with the discussion) then started insulting me for no apparent reason. 

Yes, clearly I asked for that.

 



starcraft - Playing Games = FUN, Talking about Games = SERIOUS

JaggedSac on 01 July 2008

Congratulations starcraft, a mod called you annoying. Also...IGN liked the game, Diablo 1 and 2 were both under 10 hours. I don't remember flak about that. They are basically the same type of game. There ya go.