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

Forums - Gaming - How would you feel if someone gave Killzone2 a 7 without seeing multiplayer

ZenfoldorVGI on 26 June 2009
Carl2291 said:
vaio said:
Carl2291 said:
He basicly says the game looks like crap... and to be honest, its not exactly the best looking Wii game (although it makes Golden Eye look like SMB)

Black on PS2 looks better than it imo.

And, not to mension 5hours 13 minutes to beat it... on his first time through, is rather shocking. People were complaining about Terminator: Salvation, why not about this?

Maybe because thats not what we have issues with?

 

You have issues with some guy from the internet, because of his opinion of the game.

Seriously, you are complaining about the review... but with the actual state the review is in... id be happy with the 7, as it should be much lower.

Maybe, as a business man, I take comments from others a little too seriously. I do most of my communication over email. That said, I would say everything I've said here to this person's face, and I would be absolutely right in doing so. Do I have a problem with someone in a magazine(not the interenet, btw)? Hell yes. I'm sorry if caring about other people's ignorance and malice makes me uncool, but when I see people flaming and hurting others(Conduit developers/fans) with their words based upon false pretenses, then I will speak out everytime, and I have this time. I'm sorry you couldn't stand with me. I'm right in this, btw. Read my OP.



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
ZenfoldorVGI on 26 June 2009
Carl2291 said:
mhsillen said:
I agree with op
He did the review without playing a major componant of the game thats lie

I think something should be done by gamepro
I feel like being OC about this

IGN UK and AU reviewed MGS4 without playing online.

And those reviews only gave 9.9 and 9.5. I sense an injustice! I demand a re-review!

Did they blame the PS3's price for the deduction of .1 point? If they did, you might have a point.

A. Numerical scores are not the point here. The tone and inflection of the review text is. Read it, you will see the big deal then.

B. Conduit was highly touted for its multiplayer. That was the main selling point actually.

C. Yes, not playing a game completely, and then reviewing it, is an injustice. Even in this case. The reviewer doesn't know what he/she is talking about, and is, by definition, ignorant of the game s/he reviewed. It wasn't touted in the MGS4 case, because the review was on the positive side.

D. The biggest injustice here is the large amount of time spent flaming the Wii-mote, graphics on Wii, and other things Nintendo, with very little time spent playing, actually talking about the Conduit. Despite all that, he saw fit to give it a low review based, admittedly, upon his dislike of the Wii.

 

While your attempts to equate this to other injustices and marginalize it is perfectly acceptable, it is, in the end, incorrect. If I would have know about it, would have spoke out against the MGS4 reviews as well. Numerical reviews mean nothing when you are ignorant of some major features of the product you are reviewing.



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.

Carl on 26 June 2009
vaio said:
Carl2291 said:
vaio said:
Carl2291 said:
He basicly says the game looks like crap... and to be honest, its not exactly the best looking Wii game (although it makes Golden Eye look like SMB)

Black on PS2 looks better than it imo.

And, not to mension 5hours 13 minutes to beat it... on his first time through, is rather shocking. People were complaining about Terminator: Salvation, why not about this?

Maybe because thats not what we have issues with?

 

You have issues with some guy from the internet, because of his opinion of the game.

Seriously, you are complaining about the review... but with the actual state the review is in... id be happy with the 7, as it should be much lower.

You should really look into some reading comprehesion classes, I stated i have no problem with the number ha assigned, I am actually suprised it got that good grade considering what he wrote and that he didnt even try the full game and he skipped the cutscenes while giving the story a bad review and so on.

Again my biggest problem is this part here:

I'm not sure who I should blame for The Conduit's shortcomings. Do I blame the developer for making a rather generic shooter with a convoluted storyline that isn't as epic or mysterious as it wants to be or do I blame Nintendo for creating a console whose lack of hardware power essentially handcuffs every developer who tries to create a "next-gen" game for it?

Maybe i missed that bit, but it IS 2am here, so i have an excuse. And no, i dont need reading comprehension classes.

Sure, its a really bad review... but at the end of the day, hes a reviewer... for a big(ish) magazine/site, and its his opinion of the game.

He might troll a bit on the Wii-mote and the Wii... but if he thinks that the game could have been better, if not on the Wii... then thats what he thinks.

All this complaining about it is really un-necessary... as its only a small review, for what seems to be a mediocre game.



                            

ZenfoldorVGI on 26 June 2009

Yeah, but it's not about this game. What happens when he does it again, and again, and again, for the Wii now, but for other games in the future, just because he doesn't like how much horsepower a console has.

What happens when he stops admitting that he didn't play most of the game?

He shouldn't be allowed to review games if he's not going to play them Carl.



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.

Carl on 26 June 2009

Wait... has he been like this in past reviews?



                            

Around the Network
Lolcislaw on 26 June 2009

Facts are some so called "journalists" in the gaming Media are just mere fanboys that have a certain agenda, and when they do not want to like something they will find a way to spin it. And the Wii is hated by the hardcore to the extent that some people will make a fool out of themselves just to prove something (Wii Music IGN Review anyone?).

If a review writes a decent review, after checking an entire game without previous agenda and ends up not liking it, its fair enough, but if they do a shit job they deserve to be criticised, regardless on which platform is that game.



Chairman-Mao on 26 June 2009

After reading this review there's no way I'm playing the Conduit. /sarcasm

Dude I don't give a shit about reviews. If I like the game I'll play it. Two of my favourite games on the PS2 were the original Killzone and Driv3r which both got pathetic reviews, that didn't stop me from playing them.



_RKO_ on 26 June 2009
ZenfoldorVGI said:

Cancel your Gamepro subscriptions NOW!

You are about 3 years too late.



dahuman on 26 June 2009
psrock said:
vaio said:
psrock said:
dahuman said:
psrock said:
vaio said:
psrock said:
ZenfoldorVGI said:
psrock said:
I'm sorry but this is getting on my nerves. It's one fucking review, and most of the people complaining are the same people who told ps3 fans to calm down after the Infamous Eurogamer review.

Where were you after Lair, Haze, Rachet, Uncharted, Killzone got bias reviews? It happens to all consoles, and we are wrong for overreacting to someones opinion.

Yeah the wii get blasted for its lacked of power, duh, just like the PS3 get blasted for being expensive and hard to develop for.

Wrong, the infamous review wasn't blamed on the PS3, this review is directly stated in the review that its low score is blamed on the Wii, and also, the reviewer said he didn't even play the multplayer.

Why do people who always start off with the words "I'm sorry" end up saying things out of frusteration, rather than calm clarity. You can see the difference, just think about it.

 This whole thread is made out of frustration, you are crying over a review From Gamepro, damn. And please do tell me why the wii cannot be blame for the conduit not loooking as good as it could have been?

You tell me how we cant blame any console game for no looking as good as it could on pc?

why not?  it appens all the times.

not in reviews, I don't think people deduct points because PC looks better in reviews lol, where are you getting at exactly?

it's just one review, and it got a good score. And he said he didnt like the graphics, infomous and prototype got point deducted for not looking stellar, big deal.

now you are just arguing for the sake of arguing, no one said anything about what he thinks of graphics or what number he gave the review.

It´s the way he said things in the review and this:

I'm not sure who I should blame for The Conduit's shortcomings. Do I blame the developer for making a rather generic shooter with a convoluted storyline that isn't as epic or mysterious as it wants to be or do I blame Nintendo for creating a console whose lack of hardware power essentially handcuffs every developer who tries to create a "next-gen" game for it?

That shouldnt be in any review proffesional or not.

I am a PS3 owner, i know about insults, you guys are making a huge deal out of nothing. What's sad is gamepro got more popular and hits because fanboys went crazy over a game. The biggest issue should be the fact he did not play the full game, yet the focus is on the shot on the wii, give me a break.

I'm pretty sure it wasn't just fanboys o_O you make it sound like it's ok to write bad contradicting review articles and then ask people to pay for it, that, is not ok man. People are all over him not because they are fanboys, it's because it's a horrible article to publish in general lol.



dahuman on 26 June 2009
Shadowblind said:
dahuman said:
Carl2291 said:
He basicly says the game looks like crap... and to be honest, its not exactly the best looking Wii game (although it makes Golden Eye look like SMB)

Black on PS2 looks better than it imo.

And, not to mension 5hours 13 minutes to beat it... on his first time through, is rather shocking. People were complaining about Terminator: Salvation, why not about this?

The art style is totally crap imo, I've been saying that since day 1 actually, I was always hyped about the control for a console game. I don't know what difficulty he was playing on but it was probably pussy beta build mode, put any game on a relatively easy setting and skipping cut scenes will result in finishing the game faster, not to mention his build wasn't the final so the AI might act differently as well. btw Black doesn't nearly look as nice as The Conduit when in motion, not to mention that game is darker in general, making it easier to cheat the system where Quantum 3 is all real power.

Wait, this game was supposed to have an art style? What??? o_O

my thoughts exactly, and I constantly have "Halo" in my head when I play it, and I don't like Halo very much which is a big minus for me but it does control really well once you are used to it, the reaction speed is godly just like a PC shooter.