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

Forums - Gaming - Review Score Bruhaha:R2 critics weigh in...

ZenfoldorVGI on 04 November 2008
blazinhead89 said:
ZenfoldorVGI said:
blazinhead89 said:
darthdevidem01 said:
I am sorry but I have the RESistance 2 beta &

LBP pwns the hell out of it!

& MGS4....well lets not even discuss how greater MGs4 is that Resistance 2

 

This. And zen i thought you said reviews don't Matter , If R2 got 90 Overall or 88 Overall Its still the same Game no?

Reviews don't matter. Never said they did. All I claim is that the reviews aren't based on fanboyism. Something that apparently gets me flamed when a game you want gets only "good" reviews.

 

 

I Think the thing that got you flamed was when you said "Resitance 2 was ment to be the best game ever, Now it's only worth a Purchase". And to be fair zen, you quoted Nexzen from R2 wall, who can be taken about as serious as Rock on or Crazzyman

 

I don't remember the names of you people.

What got me flamed was based on the lie that I claimed reviews matter in this thread.

As for claiming that RE was "worth a purchase" is a quote from the article.

As for claiming that some people said it was the best game ever, at least one person said that.

Now, let me go ahead and apologize for my tone in my first post. That is what got me "flamed" not my argument, which is as solid as any NYT piece.



I don't need your console war.
It feeds the rich while it buries the poor.
You're power hungry, spinnin' stories, and bein' graphics whores.
I don't need your console war.

NO NO, NO NO NO.

Around the Network
Kasz216 on 04 November 2008
ZenfoldorVGI said:
Kasz216 said:

That is some funny damage control.  I don't think anyone thought "best game ever" though... outside of the few people who really overated RFOM and thought it was a great game... when it was just a great launch game.

 

I just quoted you a person who thought it was gonna be the best game ever.

Also, yes, claiming that reviewers are biased against the PS3 is damage control, but it's not funny to me. Neither is saying "don't listen to the lower reviews" like that article stated.

I'm having to defend myself on all sides, but I haven't gone wrong in my arguments. Not this time, and never once did I infer that review scores mattered, or that they were indicative of actual quality.

Yeah, i missed that quote.  I guess some people did say that.

 

 



ZenfoldorVGI on 04 November 2008

I've re-edited my first post to change the tone, so it doesn't seem like a passive-agressive troll like post, yet still delivers my message, and it also much clearer. Check it out.



I don't need your console war.
It feeds the rich while it buries the poor.
You're power hungry, spinnin' stories, and bein' graphics whores.
I don't need your console war.

NO NO, NO NO NO.

forevercloud3000 on 04 November 2008

I personally think R2 is better then G2 but that is just personal opinion. What is fact is that they both are at LEAST both 9+ games yet ridiculous fanboy reviewers such as GI and GameDaily are bringing the game's average down for their own personal reasons and agenda, evident in GI's review on the game.

It is blatantly present in the side bar when it comes to graphics, playability, longevity, etc Resistance 2 is a superb game. The only apparent flaw in the game from GI's own review is the weapon issue, which is not really an issue but rather the writers own personal preference being used as an unbreakable standard. And in some insane way the game's insanely robust co op and competitive campaign cannot make up for what was lost?

I call BS!



      

      

      

Greatness Awaits

PSN:Forevercloud (looking for Soul Sacrifice Partners!!!)

NYANKS on 04 November 2008
ZenfoldorVGI said:
NYANKS said:
 

 

 People say a lot of stupid crap when they are excited.  Every time a big game comes out people say things of that nature.  I mean, really? Your just quoting random people on this forum, I mean, this happens with all big games, and the hype for this game didn't come even CLOSE to Halo 3 or even MGS4.  People were harping on the 60 man multiplayer, which is it's most unique point, so this makes sense.  OMG, someone made a dumb statement on the internet, how can this possibly be?!?!?   And as for people in that thread hyping Res 2 over Gears, WELCOME to Vgchartz.  If you don't know the fanboy breakdown yet, you will soon, and it doesn't favor the 360.  I always thought gears was gonna get better scores, so if it's even I'm happy, cause they are both good.

 

People say a lot of stupid crap all the time.

Something I've heard lately is reviewers gave R2 lower scores because they are pro 360.

I disagree with that.

I've been flamed to hell and back in this thread for that belief.

The games are obviously both good. I dunno which one is better, don't care. Reviews mean nothing outside of the fanboy realm. However, my argument has nothing to do with the validity of said reviews, but instead the damage control used to discredit them.

There are plenty of other ways to discredit reviewers, than by claiming that they hate the PS3.

Okay, so your point is that reviewers are not pro 360, correct?  I agree with that, with the obvious exception of sites or reviewers that have obvious bias, but these are not significant places.  Perhaps you should frame your argument differently, because based on responses you're not getting your point across.  I will say reviewers can be pro-hype, if you catch my drift.  But no, there is no "metal gear" conspiracy going on, lol.  I think your message was just lost in the fanboyism, and maybe your wording or aggressiveness.  Just my opinion though.

 



Around the Network
ZenfoldorVGI on 04 November 2008
forevercloud3000 said:
I personally think R2 is better then G2 but that is just personal opinion. What is fact is that they both are at LEAST both 9+ games yet ridiculous fanboy reviewers such as GI and GameDaily are bringing the game's average down for their own personal reasons and agenda, evident in GI's review on the game.

It is blatantly present in the side bar when it comes to graphics, playability, longevity, etc Resistance 2 is a superb game. The only apparent flaw in the game from GI's own review is the weapon issue, which is not really an issue but rather the writers own personal preference being used as an unbreakable standard. And in some insane way the game's insanely robust co op and competitive campaign cannot make up for what was lost?

I call BS!

 

Bro, your opinion is just as valid as any reviewers.

My only problem is that you think several big reviewers are biased against the PS3, and I don't think that's true.

I could use that same excuse for Fable 2, but I know it isn't true.

Reviews are for arguing about, personal opinions are for enjoying yourself with. :P

It shouldn't bother you, but I understand review scores are a prestige thing.



I don't need your console war.
It feeds the rich while it buries the poor.
You're power hungry, spinnin' stories, and bein' graphics whores.
I don't need your console war.

NO NO, NO NO NO.

ZenfoldorVGI on 04 November 2008
NYANKS said:

Okay, so your point is that reviewers are not pro 360, correct?  I agree with that, with the obvious exception of sites or reviewers that have obvious bias, but these are not significant places.  Perhaps you should frame your argument differently, because based on responses you're not getting your point across.  I will say reviewers can be pro-hype, if you catch my drift.  But no, there is no "metal gear" conspiracy going on, lol.  I think your message was just lost in the fanboyism, and maybe your wording or aggressiveness.  Just my opinion though.

 

Very astute, and directly on point. I've attempted to change my OP, but I will edit it again after your post. My points include:

1. The article is unneeded damage control for less than perfect reviews(it implies we should ignore the low ones).

2. Reviewers aren't biased against the PS3, with very few exceptions.

3. All that said, personal opinion is what determines the quality of a game.

4. The article is filled with shady statements.

With point 3 added so that I don't imply what someone thought I did, which is: Reviews determine game quality.

I certainly probably did embellish with the 'greatest game ever' argument, except that I have heard it before, in a couple of places, lol. I'm a product of my surroundings.



I don't need your console war.
It feeds the rich while it buries the poor.
You're power hungry, spinnin' stories, and bein' graphics whores.
I don't need your console war.

NO NO, NO NO NO.

Zucas on 04 November 2008

I'm sure it's a solid shooter that shouldn't need a damage control article like this. Wonder why whoever at that site felt they needed to write this.



NYANKS on 04 November 2008
ZenfoldorVGI said:
NYANKS said:
 

Okay, so your point is that reviewers are not pro 360, correct?  I agree with that, with the obvious exception of sites or reviewers that have obvious bias, but these are not significant places.  Perhaps you should frame your argument differently, because based on responses you're not getting your point across.  I will say reviewers can be pro-hype, if you catch my drift.  But no, there is no "metal gear" conspiracy going on, lol.  I think your message was just lost in the fanboyism, and maybe your wording or aggressiveness.  Just my opinion though.

 

Very astute, and directly on point. I've attempted to change my OP, but I will edit it again after your post. My points include:

1. The article is unneeded damage control for less than perfect reviews(it implies we should ignore the low ones).

2. Reviewers aren't biased against the PS3, with very few exceptions.

3. All that said, personal opinion is what determines the quality of a game.

4. The article is filled with shady statements.

With point 3 added so that I don't imply what someone thought I did, which is: Reviews determine game quality.

I certainly probably did embellish with the 'greatest game ever' argument, except that I have heard it before, in a couple of places, lol. I'm a product of my surroundings.

 

 Eh, it happens, this place can be kind of hostile.  Then again, this IS the internet, and as you know, it's SERIOUS BUSINESS.   ;)



Garnett on 04 November 2008
ZenfoldorVGI said:
forevercloud3000 said:
I personally think R2 is better then G2 but that is just personal opinion. What is fact is that they both are at LEAST both 9+ games yet ridiculous fanboy reviewers such as GI and GameDaily are bringing the game's average down for their own personal reasons and agenda, evident in GI's review on the game.

It is blatantly present in the side bar when it comes to graphics, playability, longevity, etc Resistance 2 is a superb game. The only apparent flaw in the game from GI's own review is the weapon issue, which is not really an issue but rather the writers own personal preference being used as an unbreakable standard. And in some insane way the game's insanely robust co op and competitive campaign cannot make up for what was lost?

I call BS!

 

Bro, your opinion is just as valid as any reviewers.

My only problem is that you think several big reviewers are biased against the PS3, and I don't think that's true.

I could use that same excuse for Fable 2, but I know it isn't true.

Reviews are for arguing about, personal opinions are for enjoying yourself with. :P

It shouldn't bother you, but I understand review scores are a prestige thing.

 

That!

 

And darn you ZenfoldorVGI,Another VAILD point,You must like making me log in and quote and bold your text!

also Damage control like this makes people think that R2 is a low quality game...



*Remember when the world was supposed to end on May 21st, 2011? Well click here to see our short parody video of it [not]ending*