First Max Payne 3 Reviews are now live!!!

Computer and Video Games give it an 8.0

http://www.computerandvideogames.com/347292/reviews/max-payne-3-review-slick-bloody-beautiful-but-not-without-its-flaws-review/?page=1#top_banner

IGN gives is a 9

http://www.ign.com/articles/2012/05/14/max-payne-3-review

Will get a 9 at GS. It's Rockstar.

Although, since it is a TPS, I can see things going differently considering Rockstar is known for their openworld games.

Yeah, but IGN gives every big game a 9...

Also:

Downers:

Far too long - after 6-7 hours, you've seen everything it has to offer

computerandvideogames

A game being longer than 6 hours is a bad thing now ? :?

Anyway, 8s and 9s are exactly what I expected. Can't wait to play the game myself

Yeah, but IGN gives every big game a 9...

Also:

[QUOTE="computerandvideogames"]

Downers:

Far too long - after 6-7 hours, you've seen everything it has to offer

R4gn4r0k

A game being longer than 6 hours is a bad thing now ? :?

It is if the game has nothing new to offer after that.

I think this should be in the Hype thread.

Got my copy am So ready to go home and play.

It is if the game has nothing new to offer after that.

Icarian

But shooters are by definition repetitive. It's always the same thing over and over again.

[QUOTE="Icarian"]

It is if the game has nothing new to offer after that.

But shooters are by definition repetitive. It's always the same thing over and over again.

[QUOTE="Icarian"]

It is if the game has nothing new to offer after that.

R4gn4r0k

But shooters are by definition repetitive. It's always the same thing over and over again.

Which is why shooters usually are shorter than others. Of course developers can always try to offer more varied environments, enemies, set pieces, missions to make it more interesting.

you can always add vehicle sections and on rails sections to make the game better though.see halo reachmems_1224

Yeah, Rage does that too and really well I might add.

Still Rage fellt repetitve too after the 12 hours I played it, but I never thought 'oh this game is too long'. I went 'Nice, finally a shooter that lasts longer than the average'

Which is why shooters usually are shorter than others. Of course developers can always try to offer more varied environments, enemies, set pieces, missions to make it more interesting.

Icarian

Indeed and I love that. It's just that at 6 hours a game seems hardly worth it at full price to me. Even if its just artificial stuff to lengthen the game like you said I'm all for it (unless it totally doesn't fit in the story). Sure, shooters focus more and more on Multiplayer these days but there is only so many multiplayer games you can play at a time (well for me at least).

While on the other hand I play a lot of Singleplayer games at the same time.

[QUOTE="mems_1224"]you can always add vehicle sections and on rails sections to make the game better though.see halo reachR4gn4r0k

Yeah, Rage does that too and really well I might add.

Still Rage fellt repetitve too after the 12 hours I played it, but I never thought 'oh this game is too long'. I went 'Nice, finally a shooter that lasts longer than the average'

Yeah, but IGN gives every big game a 9...

Also:

[QUOTE="computerandvideogames"]

Downers:

Far too long - after 6-7 hours, you've seen everything it has to offer

R4gn4r0k

A game being longer than 6 hours is a bad thing now ? :?

Anyway, 8s and 9s are exactly what I expected. Can't wait to play the game myself

Gametrailers gives it a 7.6. Ouch.

http://www.gametrailers.com/video/review-hd-max-payne-3/730060