Aliens vs. Predator - Gamespot Review (5.5)

Sounds like the reviewer didn't like the controls while other didn't mind them. I've been gaming AvP and AvP2 since childhood and have beaten them countless times. I'll probably be fine with the controls and end of loving this game.

HaxxySax_7777

Personally, I haven't had any trouble with the controls in the demo, in both the PC and X-Box 360 versions of the game. However, I haven't played the full game like Kevin, so maybe they are much more difficult to use in the campaign.

The PC controls are definitely better, but I got used to them on the 360 controller just as easily.

Well... It was reviewed by Kevin v... See the Condemned 2 video review... The guy absolutley fails at reviewing.... Nah i'm only joking! I just find it hillarious how many people are complaining about it in the thread who have only either played the demo or none of the game at all.

MrJono789

Little suspicious much?

[QUOTE="Stevo_the_gamer"]]I actually don't use that smiley very often. Regardless, it's an indifferent smiley to showcase that one user is not joking around.CannedWorms

The only thing that worries me is the AI other then that i got the controls of the in alien in like 10 mins..... i think i will be picking this title up despite the 5.5

Sounds like a smash hit! A 5.5 is a great score. Only 4.5 off of perfect.

Sounds like a smash hit! A 5.5 is a great score. Only 4.5 off of perfect.

sonicare

[QUOTE="CannedWorms"][QUOTE="Stevo_the_gamer"]]I actually don't use that smiley very often. Regardless, it's an indifferent smiley to showcase that one user is not joking around.Stevo_the_gamer

[QUOTE="MrJono789"]

Well... It was reviewed by Kevin v... See the Condemned 2 video review... The guy absolutley fails at reviewing.... Nah i'm only joking! I just find it hillarious how many people are complaining about it in the thread who have only either played the demo or none of the game at all.

Little suspicious much?

[QUOTE="MrJono789"]

Well... It was reviewed by Kevin v... See the Condemned 2 video review... The guy absolutley fails at reviewing.... Nah i'm only joking! I just find it hillarious how many people are complaining about it in the thread who have only either played the demo or none of the game at all.

Little suspicious much?

[QUOTE="MrJono789"] You gotta remember, many reviewers on here do their reviews strictly to opinion and their expierience, so if Kevin V gave it a lesser score than someone else, it just means either he has higher standards, or didn't enjoy it as much. That or he has no sense of fun and nitpicks way too much, but that is his job... Oh and every GS staff member is bought off by companys to give their games high scores and the people who don't pay them get bad scores, of course i'm joking again.CannedWorms

Then again, the AVP developers have been sinking tonnes into advertisments for the game just so they can make a profit and hopefully stay in buissness, I actually saw an advert for it in the cinema when I went to see The Wolfman (They are paying me to mention it in my posts, i'm still not giving it a good score though :p) The only other time I have seen someone pay out that much for cinema advertisment was Gears 2. But still, in this economy you can't really blame someone for taking money to give a game a good score, luckily GS still has it's integrity... Unlike Kevin Costner... The ****

There definitely is room for different views. But if Halo was deciding factor -- why wouldn't publications like IGN or 1UP giving it 9.0 or above? That is SUCH a baseless, ridiculous, and absurd notion to throw out there. Hell, even Eurogamer gave it an 8.0; which is conserably more critical in most regards to most games. When you have publications like IGN, 1UP, Giant Bomb, Eurogamer, and Gametrailers handing out AA ... then Gamespot comes out with a 6.5; well, that just begs the question of "what the ****?" For example, a site came out and gave Mass Effect 2 a 7.5 -- yes, Mass Effect 2. Now, when you see that the vast majority of the reviews are above 9.0 and then a few guys hand out outlier scores. Doesn't that beg the question of "What the ****?"

Now, of course, you should have expected that Halo Wars would be slimmed down. This is Ensemble Studios we're talking about here. Did you play Age of Empires 3 or Warchiefs? I own them and play them. They're only the shadow from the greatness that stemmed from Age of Mythology and Age of Empires 2. They were stripped, or dumbed-down. Whatever the phraze you wish you use. Twas' unfortuate but the game itself was still a blast to play -- especially in multiplayer.

You never saw that it was built from the ground up for consoles? I though the game controlled wonderfully, much better than the awkward contols found in BFME2, and C&C3. Sure, such games have more expansive campaigns -- but they lacked on the multiplayer side where Halo Wars truly shines. It's a damn blast to play multiplayer on, skirmish or against other players. Because of HW's sty1e of gameplay -- action is always consistent and fun to engage in. There isn't any micromanaging for supplies, it' simplefied so the user can get supplies quickly and get going out on the battlefield so there's always offensive action.

Comparing Halo Wars to PC strategy games is the very basis of what's wrong with your thinking, and the review itself. Ensemble wasn't trying to make this like a PC RTS. They made a readily and easily accessible strategy game for console owners who can get into the game quickly and have fun with it. Doesn't that sound familiar? Oh yeah, Halo did the same thing back in 2001 for shooters.

:roll:

Stevo_the_gamer

I dont understand why everyone was so amped for this game... I didnt think it would be good from the first screens I saw. AvP is a tired theme that has rarely ever been done right. I didnt get my hopes up, glad I didnt.carljohnson3456

.. It has had two games in the last 12 years or so.... Both were great games that some one consider not only great fps's but some of the scariest out there.. How does this line up with yoru statement..

Kevin, did you play the demo before playing the full game for review? If yes, was your experience with it just as mediocre?

[QUOTE="Cherokee_Jack"]

Told you guys.

Yandere

Yep, called it also.

[QUOTE="Espada12"]

[QUOTE="Kevin-V"] Sega didn't send that version. And that, my friend, is often a bad sign. Not always. But often. Kevin-V

You guys going to buy it the PC version and review it? Or is that another one for the backburner?

What was it's hype? Even if there was actually a hype.

[QUOTE="Kevin-V"]

Oh, I recognize that there is room for lots of different takes. But I do sometime secretly wonder if the same publications would have given the same score to the game if it didn't say "Halo" in the title. My take was always a bit different. I previewed the game several times, and heard Ensemble talk about how this game was a built-from-the-ground-up console RTS--and yet I never saw that. What I saw was a PC RTS slimmed down for console controls. There is a big difference there, and it had me worried.

And I don't think that worry was unfounded. There are better strategy games on consoles. Longer, more depth, but almost as easy to control. Given the choice, I'd choose EndWar over Halo Wars, for example. It has a persistent online campaign and feels tailor made for consoles. Ensemble tried to convince all of us otherwise, but Halo Wars is just a shallow PC strategy game that happens to be on a console.

At least, that's my take.

Stevo_the_gamer

There definitely is room for different views. But if Halo was deciding factor -- why wouldn't publications like IGN or 1UP giving it 9.0 or above? That is SUCH a baseless, ridiculous, and absurd notion to throw out there. Hell, even Eurogamer gave it an 8.0; which is conserably more critical in most regards to most games. When you have publications like IGN, 1UP, Giant Bomb, Eurogamer, and Gametrailers handing out AA ... then Gamespot comes out with a 6.5; well, that just begs the question of "what the ****?" For example, a site came out and gave Mass Effect 2 a 7.5 -- yes, Mass Effect 2. Now, when you see that the vast majority of the reviews are above 9.0 and then a few guys hand out outlier scores. Doesn't that beg the question of "What the ****?"

Now, of course, you should have expected that Halo Wars would be slimmed down. This is Ensemble Studios we're talking about here. Did you play Age of Empires 3 or Warchiefs? I own them and play them. They're only the shadow from the greatness that stemmed from Age of Mythology and Age of Empires 2. They were stripped, or dumbed-down. Whatever the phraze you wish you use. Twas' unfortuate but the game itself was still a blast to play -- especially in multiplayer.

You never saw that it was built from the ground up for consoles? I though the game controlled wonderfully, much better than the awkward contols found in BFME2, and C&C3. Sure, such games have more expansive campaigns -- but they lacked on the multiplayer side where Halo Wars truly shines. It's a damn blast to play multiplayer on, skirmish or against other players. Because of HW's sty1e of gameplay -- action is always consistent and fun to engage in. There isn't any micromanaging for supplies, it' simplefied so the user can get supplies quickly and get going out on the battlefield so there's always offensive action.

Comparing Halo Wars to PC strategy games is the very basis of what's wrong with your thinking, and the review itself. Ensemble wasn't trying to make this like a PC RTS. They made a readily and easily accessible strategy game for console owners who can get into the game quickly and have fun with it. Doesn't that sound familiar? Oh yeah, Halo did the same thing back in 2001 for shooters.

:roll:

I agree Stevo... if you compare it to a PC RTS, it's not going to offer the same experience no matter how much time and energy are spent on crossing the platform rift.

If you approach Halo Wars from the viewpoint of a life-long console gamer who says "I think I'd like to try a new genre", it's a very fun experience. Like I said earlier, I don't like RTS games on PCs, but I enjoyed Halo WarsBECAUSE it wasn't like PC RTS games (and to be completely honest, because I enjoyed the diminutive Spartans running around.)

Halo Wars isan RTS for gamers who don't have any experience with or simply dislike PC RTS games. I think it succeeds in that respect. But an RTS fan isn't going to like it most likely, so I'm fine that some people chose to review it from the perspective of a PC RTS enthusiast. But any gamer who knows themselves and where they stand on particualr genres can spot this bias in the reviewer and make their own call.

I don't mind if anybody praises or bashes any given game, so long as they back it up and give you an indicator of any bias they have going in. Some of the negative reviews for Halo Wars had me excited because the author was like "I love PC RTS and Halo Wars is too rinky-dink." I was like, "I hate PC RTS games.I'm sold!"

What was it's hype? Even if there was actually a hype.

sanim02

Screw it. I'm just going to rent it.

Ah, such a shame. Aliens should still be a cool brand but they're killing it, Predator was never as classy, but it was still pretty awesome. Damn. :(

Kevin, did you play the demo before playing the full game for review? If yes, was your experience with it just as mediocre?

TreyoftheDead

[QUOTE="CannedWorms"][QUOTE="MrJono789"] You gotta remember, many reviewers on here do their reviews strictly to opinion and their expierience, so if Kevin V gave it a lesser score than someone else, it just means either he has higher standards, or didn't enjoy it as much. That or he has no sense of fun and nitpicks way too much, but that is his job... Oh and every GS staff member is bought off by companys to give their games high scores and the people who don't pay them get bad scores, of course i'm joking again.MrJono789

Then again, the AVP developers have been sinking tonnes into advertisments for the game just so they can make a profit and hopefully stay in buissness, I actually saw an advert for it in the cinema when I went to see The Wolfman (They are paying me to mention it in my posts, i'm still not giving it a good score though :p) The only other time I have seen someone pay out that much for cinema advertisment was Gears 2. But still, in this economy you can't really blame someone for taking money to give a game a good score, luckily GS still has it's integrity... Unlike Kevin Costner... The ****

I remember seeing cinima ads for metroid prime.

Kevin, did you play the demo before playing the full game for review? If yes, was your experience with it just as mediocre?

[QUOTE="sanim02"]

What was it's hype? Even if there was actually a hype.

the-obiwan

.. Ehh I give up.:P

[QUOTE="MrJono789"]

Yous actually raise a good point, with GameSpot's current advertisements of the game you would think they would be pressured into giving it a respectable score, obviously that's not the case. I commend GameSpot for not caving in to please their advertisers *cough* IGN *cough*.CannedWorms

Then again, the AVP developers have been sinking tonnes into advertisments for the game just so they can make a profit and hopefully stay in buissness, I actually saw an advert for it in the cinema when I went to see The Wolfman (They are paying me to mention it in my posts, i'm still not giving it a good score though :p) The only other time I have seen someone pay out that much for cinema advertisment was Gears 2. But still, in this economy you can't really blame someone for taking money to give a game a good score, luckily GS still has it's integrity... Unlike Kevin Costner... The ****

I remember seeing cinima ads for metroid prime.

[QUOTE="sanim02"]

What was it's hype? Even if there was actually a hype.

the-obiwan

Reading the review, it sounded like a 6.0-6.5 (really a 6.5). But yea, the demo felt cool, but just... clumsy. It was a game that sounded really cool, but after playing the demo, i had no inclination to pick it up ever again.

Ah, such a shame. Aliens should still be a cool brand but they're killing it, Predator was never as classy, but it was still pretty awesome. Damn. :(

Kan0nF0dder

[QUOTE="Kan0nF0dder"]

Ah, such a shame. Aliens should still be a cool brand but they're killing it, Predator was never as classy, but it was still pretty awesome. Damn. :(

CannedWorms

Predator 2 was an enjoyable film. It may be worth a watch, as you haven't seen it. Just don't expect anything as good as the original. ;)Doom_HellKnight

Watching the gameplay videos got me really hyped, but after playing the game, I lost the hype. The concept is great but the controls are bad, it just didnt feel right. That is what suck when you try to make a game based on good concepts sometimes it just doesnt come out right but if you are a fan then its probably not that bad

[QUOTE="Doom_HellKnight"]Predator 2 was an enjoyable film. It may be worth a watch, as you haven't seen it. Just don't expect anything as good as the original. ;)CannedWorms

[QUOTE="CannedWorms"]

[QUOTE="Doom_HellKnight"]Predator 2 was an enjoyable film. It may be worth a watch, as you haven't seen it. Just don't expect anything as good as the original. ;)MrJono789

I am gonna go do something else now (I am hoping to have Star Trek Online review up this week, so I have a lot of MMO time planned for my day), but a note about the controls. They aren't piss-poor or anything, they're just inconsistent, and the level design just doesn't always fit with what the game wants you to do. I don't like when games don't play by their own rules. The Alien campaign is full of invisible walls and ceilings in the later levels, and you never know when you're gonna go crawling up a wall without meaning to. With the predator, where you can jump is limited, but there's no obvious rule. If the game wants you to jump 30 feet, you can, but only when it wants you to. In 2010, it strikes me that FPS's shouldn't struggle with any kind of control inconsistencies. Not when so many games are so perfect in that sense that you rarely even think about it.

You can make it work for you (I said as much in the review), but the game never feels quite right. If you've played shooters before, you'll know what I mean when you play. It's all the little stuff. I fell into a crevasse in the marine campaign and couldn't get out and had to reload. A scripted event failed to happen and I spent an hour trying to figure out what to do before giving up, only to find out that it was a bug. Stupid human AI. No care taken with things like overheard quips. Am I expected to believe that a patrolling marine will say "On my way!" in response to a creepy, growly call of "mother****er" from a predator? (When you do some of the stealth stuff here, you'll really appreciate Batman: Arkham Asylum for its attention to detail when it comes to stealth level design and enemy AI; you'll see what I mean if you play.)

I was disappointed. I adored the first two games. Multiplayer is fun, but it's not the kind that will keep you involved for long, though if the license is your big thing, you'll probably get more mileage. I do like Infection a lot; I could see myself popping in the game every so often for a round or two. If you like the Horde mode type of thing, I'd probably be more inclined to go with ODST's Firefight than the similar mode in AVP.

Ever since I played that Crap Multiplayer Demo, I knew it was gonna be garbage.

http://www.gamespot.com/xbox360/action/aliensvspredatorworkingtitle/review.html

http://www.gamespot.com/ps3/action/aliensvspredatorworkingtitle/video/6250849/aliens-vs-predator-video-review?hd=1

5.5

I'm very disappointed to see a franchise with so much potential failing on delivering. Well, at least we have the old Aliens vs Predator games.

Stevo_the_gamer

yah i played the demo of this on steam and it was pure garbage.

I begin to question reviewer metrics when solid, albeit dated games are getting low scores while the newer, less refined games seem to be getting AA and AAA ratings. I would gladly take a decently polished, run of the mill game (AVP) any day over a game with glaring technical problems (Mass Effect 2). Then again, I guess we just have different ideas of what makes a virtuous game.Vandalvideo

I begin to question reviewer metrics when solid, albeit dated games are getting low scores while the newer, less refined games seem to be getting AA and AAA ratings. I would gladly take a decently polished, run of the mill game (AVP) any day over a game with glaring technical problems (Mass Effect 2). Then again, I guess we just have different ideas of what makes a virtuous game.Vandalvideo

I begin to question reviewer metrics when solid, albeit dated games are getting low scores while the newer, less refined games seem to be getting AA and AAA ratings. I would gladly take a decently polished, run of the mill game (AVP) any day over a game with glaring technical problems (Mass Effect 2). Then again, I guess we just have different ideas of what makes a virtuous game.Vandalvideo

I love how so many people are trying to defend this Disgrace of a franchise and garbage of a videogame......

Give Kev a break, Just because IGN UK (which likes everything) gave it a good score, doesnt mean that GS doesnt know how to review now. haha