That is BS , UT 3 only 8.5

I lost hope in all of Gamespots reviews sooo long ago. Like before they gave Twilight Princess a 8.5.

Most Recently Mass effect a 8.5, Only reciew thats ever been right in my eyes is World In Conflict.

But yeah i dont understand gs, they give the game every other review bashed a high review. yeah assasins creed

That is BS , UT 3 only 8.5 , thats a joke right !!!! Such a inovative game shoulg get at least a 9 . Dont forget it has brought the new Unreal 3 engine and only for that it should have got more than 8.5. What do u think peeps ?!?!N0A

Innovative? It's basically the same game as previous iterations of UT(the operative word being basically). It's true though that if something is not broke why fix it? But in maintaining a tried and tested formula you won't score any points for innovation w/c can or cannot be a good thing.

The Unreal 3 Engine isn't exactly new since other games, that were released before UT3, used it already and showcased it to gamers everywhere. When something new and innovative comes out it immediately sets the bar higher and so anything else that uses that standard afterwards cannot be commended for innovation. Kudos to Epic for the Unreal 3 Engine, but commending UT3 alone for introducing the Unreal 3 engine is just nonsense.

Well what i meant is : Why did crapy game Crysis got 9.5 for its 7 hours SP game and that crap MP game , and for the bad no wait VERRY bad game optimisation and UT3 that runs like BUTA on an average RIG and has an AWESOME MP game got only 8.5 . Well for me its not that trustworthy what GS dose . :D:D ..... am I bad .... no i think I'm Pilzeboob :D:D

Just like Mass Effect ( Mass Effect deserved at least a 9.5 )

It's obvious that GameSpot gets paid by publishers to give crappy games ( Halo 3, Super Mario Galaxy ) great scores

Well what i meant is : Why did crapy game Crysis got 9.5 for its 7 hours SP game and that crap MP game , and for the bad no wait VERRY bad game optimisation and UT3 that runs like BUTA on an average RIG and has an AWESOME MP game got only 8.5 . Well for me its not that trustworthy what GS dose . :D:D ..... am I bad .... no i think I'm Pilzeboob :D:D

N0A

I gotta disagree with you on that, Crysis did deserve a 9.5 IMO :) It's a much more immersive, complete game, with better gameplay mechanics.

UT3 is just MP, that's it. I loved UT2K4 at LAN parties, and I'll love UT3 as well. But compared to Crysis, nah, it just ain't to that level.

But, if it helps, UT3 received a 9.0 from IGN! http://pc.ign.com/articles/837/837322p1.html :D

Innovative? Hah! What's so innovative?

A game that repetitive and worn does NOT deserve AAA.

Just like Mass Effect ( Mass Effect deserved at least a 9.5 )

It's obvious that GameSpot gets paid by publishers to give crappy games ( Halo 3, Super Mario Galaxy ) great scores

Darth_Kane

Just like Mass Effect ( Mass Effect deserved at least a 9.5 )

It's obvious that GameSpot gets paid by publishers to give crappy games ( Halo 3, Super Mario Galaxy ) great scores

Darth_Kane

Halo 3 and ME are both published by Microsoft, but go on and believe that there's a conspiracy behind your favourite game not getting a 10 lol, quit crying over scores, why do you care?

Haha, oh please. What's up with all these topics lately? 8.5 = A = Very Good. Quit whining because your favourite game didn't get a 9-10, a review is about the reviewer's opinion, not yours. GGKKTHXBAI.Marcinkonys

qft

[QUOTE="Darth_Kane"]

Just like Mass Effect ( Mass Effect deserved at least a 9.5 )

It's obvious that GameSpot gets paid by publishers to give crappy games ( Halo 3, Super Mario Galaxy ) great scores

Pessu

I got no problems with it ( except that the Ai was dumb ), all you had to do is clear your XBOX cache, besides everything can be solved with a patch

Why the hell did Oblivion get a 9.6 then? It had more bugs than ME and ME is better than Oblvion in EVERY aspect ( Oblivon sucked, Morrowind was much better )

NWN2 and KOTOR2 are the buggiest games ever made and they got more than 8.5

Like I said GameSpot gets paid

then they should review the patch when it comes out..right ?

Just like Mass Effect ( Mass Effect deserved at least a 9.5 )

It's obvious that GameSpot gets paid by publishers to give crappy games ( Halo 3, Super Mario Galaxy ) great scores

Darth_Kane

Please.... Unreal Tournament got a AA by numerous other reviewers as well, including PC gamer.. And Crysis is an amazing singleplayer game, that can last for quite awhile.. Not to mention there is a ton of replay value in it..

That is BS , UT 3 only 8.5 , thats a joke right !!!! Such a inovative game shoulg get at least a 9 . Dont forget it has brought the new Unreal 3 engine and only for that it should have got more than 8.5. What do u think peeps ?!?!N0A

The UT series has never been about inovation its always been about fast, intense, brutal, chaotic violence and shooting. It's really a multiplayer game following age old traditional gameplay modes but giving them some new names and twists.

Just like Mass Effect ( Mass Effect deserved at least a 9.5 )

It's obvious that GameSpot gets paid by publishers to give crappy games ( Halo 3, Super Mario Galaxy ) great scores

Darth_Kane

At least 9.5? All the technical problems it has are unacceptable on consoles. It's easy to see that you are a BioWare fan(boy) with the KOTOR avatar. I mean I love what BioWare does, but 9.5 or 10?

And Halo 3 and SMG crappy games? Ok, you really are a fanboy. It's too easy to see that you don't even own the games. I don't own Halo 3 either, but that doesn't make it crappy.

That is BS , UT 3 only 8.5 , thats a joke right !!!! Such a inovative game shoulg get at least a 9 . Dont forget it has brought the new Unreal 3 engine and only for that it should have got more than 8.5. What do u think peeps ?!?!N0A

You sound like a fanboy. What gameplay innovations exist now that didn't exist in earlier UT games? Innovation does not mean graphics.

There should be a warning on this thread, stating "Massive Amounts of Whine Inside".
GodLovesDead

Indeed. 8.5 is a good score whats so bad about it? Sure UT3 didn't innovate much (heck its graphics engine was already seen in other games) but since when 8.5 was bad?

Uhm... You guys are acting like 8,5 is bad, it's great but personally I don't think UT 3 deserves any higher.
-Same gameplay as the others
-Singleplayer sucks.

The only new thing is t he graphic. :|

[QUOTE="GodLovesDead"]There should be a warning on this thread, stating "Massive Amounts of Whine Inside".
the_ChEeSe_mAn2

Indeed. 8.5 is a good score whats so bad about it? Sure UT3 didn't innovate much (heck its graphics engine was already seen in other games) but since when 8.5 was bad?

An 85% is taken too lightlyy.. 85% in school does not equal 85% in a game ranking.. 85% is a great game one of the best out htere.. A 9.0 are rare gems that rarely ever come.. 85% is a game that every one will enjoy and some will think its their favorite game ever..

I think the score was spot on. The gameplay is really nothing new in the UT universe, it's mainly just a graphical upgrade with a few new features thrown in. That doesn't mean it's not a great game, because it is, but it didn't add enough to the UT formula to justify a higher score.

The one thing this game really needs is a new UI for the menus. It really does feel console-y. Thankfully Epic is going to take action and fix the menu system in a up and coming patch.

The difference is UT2k3 introduced a lot of gameplay innovations to the series such as fast weapon switching, double jump, dodge jump, wall dodge, etc. The only bad part of ut2k3 was the maps and lack of gametypes which is why everyone loved ut2k4 (pretty much had the same gameplay, but more content and gametypes)

Ut2k3 for its time is far more innovative and overall better game.

Its crappy how they actually RATE the games these days. Look at their gripe section, i only see one thing written there. The fact that the menu reminds them of a console game..... ( OMFG DO THEY READ ONLINE FORUMS AT ALL .... THIS IS GS, EPIC HAS SAID THEY ARE ALREADY REWORKING THE MENUS TOWARD A MORE CLASSIC SETUP think 2k4).

Now that my cruise control button is off again. They docked 1.5 points because of the menus ..... and because its repetetive ... thats like saying the toyota camary is a crap car because it has been the same for like 15 years+ ... change for the dang sake of change is STUPID. The actual game itself in its pure MP aspect is leaps bounds and jumps ahead of higher rated games such as halo 3.

I think when people review games they should do so rating against similar games ... because they b**ched about 2 things ... non-innovativeness, and crappy menus.... both have nothing to do with solid AAA gameplay and replayability. This game will be seeing light years after halo 3 is dust and halo 14 is out ... i just think the new rating system is crap ... bring the old one back so we can see why they didnt rate it higher.

8.5 is good. It's worth buying.thusaha

What really matters is how much you like the game you are playing. It doesnt matter if the game got a 9.5 or a 5.0. If you like the game you play then that is all it matters. Ive played a couple of games that got under a 7.0 rating before, I actually thought they were great.

It's UT99 with a new engine. What did you expect? That UT99 would score a 9,0 after 8 years?

I'm personally very pleased with it, but it could've been slightly faster paced it seems slower than Quake 3 and UT2004.

Its crappy how they actually RATE the games these days. Look at their gripe section, i only see one thing written there. The fact that the menu reminds them of a console game..... ( OMFG DO THEY READ ONLINE FORUMS AT ALL .... THIS IS GS, EPIC HAS SAID THEY ARE ALREADY REWORKING THE MENUS TOWARD A MORE CLASSIC SETUP think 2k4).

Now that my cruise control button is off again. They docked 1.5 points because of the menus ..... and because its repetetive ... thats like saying the toyota camary is a crap car because it has been the same for like 15 years+ ... change for the dang sake of change is STUPID. The actual game itself in its pure MP aspect is leaps bounds and jumps ahead of higher rated games such as halo 3.

I think when people review games they should do so rating against similar games ... because they b**ched about 2 things ... non-innovativeness, and crappy menus.... both have nothing to do with solid AAA gameplay and replayability. This game will be seeing light years after halo 3 is dust and halo 14 is out ... i just think the new rating system is crap ... bring the old one back so we can see why they didnt rate it higher.

ColdfireTrilogy

They review the game as it is when they recieve it. They don't review the game based on how it might be in the future. It's ridiculous to suggest that they should go read gaming forums and factor them into their reviews.

They didn't lower the score by 1.5 because of those two things. Those two things were the two standout negative things about it. Just because you don't have anything negative to say about a game doesn't mean it's overwhelmingly good. Everything can work good in a game and that doesn't make it a 10.

Enlighten us please. What exactly is so innovative about it? Introducing a new game engine alone is not necessarily innovation. It's how they use it which determines the real success of the game. Qixote

Ow come on, you're talking as if Crysis for example is very innovative and therefore has a higher score man. Both are about equal as innovative compared to their predeccesors actually... Crysis is more Far Cry-like than the dev team would admit, same goes for UT3. So my point being, why Crysis a higher score than UT3?

I think 8,5 is pretty honest and in my opinion quite correct, but if Gamespot would rate less inconsequent and more honest all games they would have rated Crysis a similar 8,5-ish score. Crysis ain't perfect at all and it even deserves some penalty points for performance issues and so on.. it seems UT3 didn't get hyped enough or got punished for it's delays or something, because concrete argumentation lacks a bit on this Gamespot verdict.

[QUOTE="Pessu"][QUOTE="Darth_Kane"]

Just like Mass Effect ( Mass Effect deserved at least a 9.5 )

It's obvious that GameSpot gets paid by publishers to give crappy games ( Halo 3, Super Mario Galaxy ) great scores

Darth_Kane

I got no problems with it ( except that the Ai was dumb ), all you had to do is clear your XBOX cache, besides everything can be solved with a patch

Why the hell did Oblivion get a 9.6 then? It had more bugs than ME and ME is better than Oblvion in EVERY aspect ( Oblivon sucked, Morrowind was much better )

NWN2 and KOTOR2 are the buggiest games ever made and they got more than 8.5

Like I said GameSpot gets paid

Agreed, Morrwind>Oblivion=suckage

GS is paid to make sure certain games get certain scores, For example they hated Postal 2 for some reason, but it was a decent game (Postal 2 is good for relieving stress;))

But this forum is about UT3, I bet it is a good game, I have UT 2004 and the original UT. They do seem to stick to the same formula, but it works. They make their games easy to play, with lower requirementsthan other games of the time, keep the same weapons and controls even some of the same characters.

UT3?UT2004>UT>Crysis because my computer probably won't run it.

Just because a game does not have many negative standouts does not mean that the games is amazing. That is the problem with UT3, it no doubt is a great game but it lacks new features or directions that when you first begin to play it makes you amazed by it.

Also Mass Effectgot an 8.5 for more than just technical issues, but also on the interface, the Mako combat and the weak exploration element, fake choices etc.

Just because a game does not have many negative standouts does not mean that the games is amazing. That is the problem with UT3, it no doubt is a great game but it lack new features or directions that when you first begin to play it makes you amazed by it.

Nikalai_88

That's what I've said a few times, and what others have been saying as well. Games do not start at a perfect 10 and get marked down from there for their flaws. But still people keep saying crap like "Oh, oh, 1.5 off for a console interface?! WTF?!"