twilit said:
Or option 3.) the reviewer that just did not enjoy The Conduit as much as you. |
others aside, how do you enjoy a game that you can't even control right? =) you option 3 also falls into option 2, because people who rate it like shit always have problems with the wiimote in their review which is a major lawl point for me =D
dahuman said:
others aside, how do you enjoy a game that you can't even control right? =) you option 3 also falls into option 2, because people who rate it like shit always have problems with the wiimote in their review which is a major lawl point for me =D |
What about the reviewers who do like the controls but find the game boring and monotonous or don't like it as you do for whatever reason? It seems like those guys are left out a lot.
I would trust Edge's review more than IGN when it comes to this game. My impression is that IGN got a little too close to this game (pushed to get it a publisher, got many exclusives, became its champion, etc). When there's that kind of relationship and it's given a good score you need to keep that in mind and look at what others say about it.
twilit said:
What about the reviewers who do like the controls but find the game boring and monotonous or don't like it as you do for whatever reason? It seems like those guys are left out a lot. |
haven't read one in the lower score area that hasn't bitched about the controls yet =).
dahuman said:
haven't read one in the lower score area that hasn't bitched about the controls yet =). |
I agree with dahuman.
This is just one case where I just cannot see how thier low scores are justified. Call me biased if you want, call the revies "just their opinion". However, your opinion cannot interfere with facts. Reviewers have the tendency to distort the two and turn opinion into fallacy and exhibition of facts into agenda.
This game looks good to me, and I will buy it. I just feel bad for the potential customers unfortunately skewed into not buying it because of tarnished reviews.
Leatherhat on July 6th, 2012 3pm. Vita sales:"3 mil for COD 2 mil for AC. Maybe more. " thehusbo on July 6th, 2012 5pm. Vita sales:"5 mil for COD 2.2 mil for AC."
RolStoppable said:
Well, it's always the best to ask people who actually had to pay for the game if you want an honest opinion instead of the easily manipulated "professionals" who might give a higher or lower score depending on the swag or the expectation/hope for exclusive information on a future game of that developer. The general consensus seems to be that The Conduit is overall a solid game with a lacking singleplayer mode which a good online multiplayer mode makes up for. That and the fully customizable controls. The game seems to be worth its money for FPS fans who want to play one on the Wii. Not everyone likes the game, but the majority apparently does. |
Wait a minute! I looked this post over few times and noticed no sarcasm.
Rol? Are you being?....
*Dare I say it*
Serious?!?!!?
Leatherhat on July 6th, 2012 3pm. Vita sales:"3 mil for COD 2 mil for AC. Maybe more. " thehusbo on July 6th, 2012 5pm. Vita sales:"5 mil for COD 2.2 mil for AC."
| Legend11 said: I would trust Edge's review more than IGN when it comes to this game. My impression is that IGN got a little too close to this game (pushed to get it a publisher, got many exclusives, became its champion, etc). When there's that kind of relationship and it's given a good score you need to keep that in mind and look at what others say about it. |
excelelnt post Legend, i completely agree with you. Isn't it strange how IGN pushed the game to get a publisher, hyped the game till no end, then revealed games from HVS first than anyone else, and also how they gave the Conduit the highest rating? And the funniest part is how can IGN's review be taken seriously when both Matt and Bozon are in the games credits.... that alone takes makes IGN's review look fishy.
Ari_Gold said:
excelelnt post Legend, i completely agree with you. Isn't it strange how IGN pushed the game to get a publisher, hyped the game till no end, then revealed games from HVS first than anyone else, and also how they gave the Conduit the highest rating? And the funniest part is how can IGN's review be taken seriously when both Matt and Bozon are in the games credits.... that alone takes makes IGN's review look fishy. |
^
If you haven't played it how do you know if IGN's review is fishy? Since I have, I can tell you that I agree they did over rate it and maybe they were slightly compromised, but most people who have the game will tell you that these 4.0 reviews are just crazy. That basically says the game is below average, unplayable, or broken. And everyone who says it is just opinion is just ridiculous too. Its called journalistic integrety. Even if a reviewer doesn't like a genre or a given platform, they should be reviewing the games on technical merit based on how well it stacks up on a given platform and target demographic. If the critics can't separate their personal feelings about a genre, platform, or game geared toward a specific demographic then they don't need to review games within those categories.
Now Playing!
^ This is you!
Edge is so random. They reckon they're the toughest reviewers out there and then they go and give Prototype an 8, despite all its flaws.
I still can't get over how they gave Far Cry 2 and FEAR 2 an 8 and Killzone 2 a 7.
| bardicverse said: I've never heard of this mag, not common on most shelves at the shops I guess. |
Its a European mag, and its really popular.
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2025 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
