Square fell off a long time ago. The quality of their games has really been low for the past few years. Despite the score I still expect this game to sell pretty well; say about 30,000 1st day.
Squilliam said:
So what you're saying is that because Sony keeps their games off the PC is the only reason not to drop the PS3 like a flaming sack of dog turds? Anyway back to the other part - Sorry for the extra scrolling, you can blame Microsoft for that!
The Xbox 360 has 14 90+ games, whilst the PS3 only has 5, and furthermore the Xbox 360 has over 44 games with an 85+ rating whilst the PS3 only has 24. What are you gonna tell me next? That you don't play all that many games so it doesn't matter that the PS3 has fewer good games?
|
As I have consistanly voiced as a gamer, numerical score takes a severe back seat to the gamer's preference. In regards to Infinite Undiscovery in a revious thread...
"I'm going to make this blanket statement which I feel that strongly applies to this. Falling back on numerical ratings is overrated and is for sheep. One specific and very important thing I like about IGN's reveiw is that they go in depth. So aside from the numerical score, the specifics pointed out by an IGN review might not appeal to the reveiwer, but it might appeal or doesn't matter to certain individiual gamers. Some people might not be bothered by the 20% less voice acting in the cutscenes for instance. I will warn that if the majority of the reviews are in the 7.0 range, then maybe it is a 7.0 quality game. But if it becomes a 7.0 average game with ratings ranging anywhere from like 3 to 9, then I might be a "rent before you buy" scenario. If this is the case, then it's probably worth the price of the rental plus full price to own the game. That's why I do not place to much emphasis on numerical ratings because reviews are just opinions. The more detailed they are, the better. I will not buy a game because of a number, but I'll buy a game because I serve myself as a gamer."
In in regards to Too Human...
"I wouldn't wory to much about this for now. This is just one review. But if the mass majority of the reviews are like this if not lower, then I'd worry. Being a fan of the original Siren on the PS2, Siren received anywhere from a 9/10 to a 4/10 which resulted in a 70% average rating after it was all said and done. But for me, the game was worth the $5 rental and then the full $40 price tag shortly after. Let's not jump the gun, people, and don't put too much faith in numerical ratings.
And might I add that just because a game gets a high review doesn't mean that it will appeal to all gamers. Regardless of the fact that both Halo 3 and GTA4 received high ratings, some games are not just fans of a sci-fi FPS and/or a crime sim. I all boils down to a gamer's personal preference to follow their own for ther own reasons. Thsi applies to all consoles and their owners.
MMrstckball, I'm not sure what criteria VGChartz uses to determine who qualifies do be a Mod, but whatever it is you FAIL at seeing things from a gamer's point of view with such a narrow sheepish view of numerical rankings.
Hackers are poor nerds who don't wash.
of all these 360 jrpgs i only find lost odyssey interesting(and it is the only good rpg this gen imo)
|
MMrstckball, I'm not sure what criteria VGChartz uses to determine who qualifies do be a Mod, but whatever it is you FAIL at seeing things from a gamer's point of view with such a narrow sheepish view of numerical rankings. |
Exactly what did I say that you are arguing with me for? You quoted Squlliam's metacritic rankings...I didn't post them. Mind telling me what your attacking me for, again?
Back from the dead, I'm afraid.
mrstickball said:
Exactly what did I say that you are arguing with me for? You quoted Squlliam's metacritic rankings...I didn't post them. Mind telling me what your attacking me for, again?
|
I hate you! I don't get any respect around here.... 
He quoted me but only mentioned your name!
Tease.
I am just glad I can rent games on my 360. If I had to buy all the games that were 360/pc on my pc, I would be broke.
@Jordahn
Stop giving gamers a bad name and generalizing things just because its not following your view. In this day and age of good games on every console, reviews help make purchasing decisions. Of course people are going to have preferences, but reviews still distinuguish between the genres that you like.
And you are lucky to have a mod like mrstickball who will be lenient enough not to ban you for slagging one of the biggest contributors to VGChartz.
| EaglesEye379 said: @Jordahn Stop giving gamers a bad name and generalizing things just because its not following your view. In this day and age of good games on every console, reviews help make purchasing decisions. Of course people are going to have preferences, but reviews still distinuguish between the genres that you like. And you are lucky to have a mod like mrstickball who will be lenient enough not to ban you for slagging one of the biggest contributors to VGChartz. |
NO WHERE will you find that I ever said that reviews do not help with purchasing decisions. NO WHERE!!! In FACT I said...
"One specific and very important thing I like about IGN's review is that they go in depth..."
...because the only way to know about a game before playing it yourself is to get in depth info such as a review or word of mouth. So a numerical score should not be the primary deterant of buying a game, but the details of that game can be very beneficial. I wouldn't doubt that some gamers have missed out on a good buy just because that gamer allowed a 7.1 to prevent them from buying what could have been a great game to them. So how this is such a bad thing that gives gamers a bad name is beyond comprehension. And I answer to no physical man, mod or not. Nothing personal might I add. I was a gamer before I joined this site, I still am, and I see it for the foreseeable future.
Hackers are poor nerds who don't wash.
mrstickball said:
I don't think some may realize it (because I'm always here on the MS forums), but I'd like to think that I'm one of the more robust Final Fantasy players and fans out there on the boards. I started with FF1 back in the very early 90s, and have played the majority of the series - only leaving out X and IX from play (aside from the unreleased II/IIIj series), and have spent countless hour on the series. Yet the fact is, there are so many similarities between Final Fantasies, that you can argue what you want - it's still the same core game 95% of the time, as battles, skills, job classes, and augmentations are very similar from one game to another. Oh and of course, combat is almost always the same dang thing. Good example: X and X2's job classes (X2's dressspheres) - You had job classes that any one could use, in FFV, which was made in........1992 or 93, if I'm not mistaken? And FFVI did NOT have a full central party...WTF game were you playing? Once you got seltzers airship, you were free to build the party of your choice. Furthermore, although jobs weren't in VI (they were in V), Espers were used to customize each person's magical job role in the game. The only real big changes in the series were VIII's junction system, and the craptacular way of drawing magic from enemies, and XII. XII is the true evolution of the series, and an actual change to Final Fantasy's core game dynamics - the battle system. Unfortunately, it seems that Square is going back to the old aged system for their battles. It's not that I dislike the ATB system, but XII was really awesome, despite the critics. And that comes from a guy that has a copy of FF1 about 15 feet away from where I'm typing this post. Final Fantasy is like a schizophrenic cat - it keeps running back and forth to the same things "Jobs or No Jobs?" "ATB or Turn based" "Crappy storyline, or good one?" "Girly guys, or manly women?" "JRPG cliches' or real innovation?" Sansui nailed it on the head - The only constant has been the beefy production values of the series, but many other things have been the same, with minor variants that are re-hashed from older titles. This isn't to say I dislike Final Fantasy, but it makes me get very upset to see non-FF, non-DQ JRPGs get butchered in the ratings time and time again for being great JRPGs without the pedigree - something that most WRPG's don't seem to have an issue with. Tales of Vesperia, as of right now, is one of the best JRPGs I've played in quite some time...Yet the game has just above a 80% ranking on GameRankings, with most reviewers saying it's the best Tales game to date. WTF? Really? 80% is the best that the best Tales game can do?
It's like Grand Theft Auto for the sandbox genre - no matter how much another sandbox game can innovate, Grand Theft will automatically get the best scores, regardless of what it does, or doesn't do. Crackdown and Saints Row (2 off the top of my head) were awesome games, yet were about 15% lower than GTAIV in reviews...What gives?
|
I think the real problem is that most non-SE JRPGs aren't as polished and refined as the JRPGs from S-E. i.e. Lost Odyssey
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2026 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
I mean you could enjoy it even better on the PC right?
