At least it was a better review then ign. Well there you go. The only 2 important sites(2 me) rated this game bad. Guess i will not be buying it. Might still rent it just to see why everyone hates it so much.
I never expected it to score well on any of the reputable sites, so far ive been right, although i have played games i enjoyed that got rated a 6.0, which does not stand for terrible, it means the game can be fun but has major problems, 6.0= OK, 1.0= terrible.
I do agree a 6.0 is not a good score but IMO a 7.5 is a good score, 8.5 means very good and 9.0+ means great.
It bugs why gamers these days think anything under a 9 is crap, maybe its because they want 9.5 exclusive games to run over to system wars and go "NA NA NA NA NA".
Finally they get a game right, i been telling everyone for ever this game would never crack a 6.5 or 7 and that was being nice. I dont know what people saw in this game at all. its a shame they pushed it back to have this outcome,
couldn't find the page... could you give me the link? i want to see what they had to say. There were certain things i didn't quite understand about the way IGN reviewed it. Certain points they raised seemed kinda dumb.
I'm not surprised it got this score the bar for shooters has been raised ever since Call of Duty 4 was released and with games Like Resistance 2 on the way I think most PS3 gamers would rather wait for that
For those who actually read the review (instead of just saw the rating), you would know that GS's only major complaint (or at least of which was expressed in that review) was the bad AI. If it can be patched/redone somehow, I guarantee it would be an 8.0+ game.
Log in to comment