First they bash Lair and now this - EGM hates PS3.

LOL.

So, let me get this straight. All these years they promoted Sony and made up all kinds of BS to slobber all over them. They were pro-Sony! Now, suddenly, you claim that they hate them?:lol:

I see the download being useless at this price.

http://www.joystiq.com/2007/08/03/warhawk-dated-august-28th-digital-and-retail-prices-announced

I can't believe the news on the upcoming EGM Warhawk review:

http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3161677

They'll honestly drop the game's rating if it's a penny over $30 downloadable over the PSN. I for one am buying this on blu-ray to get a second headset for co-op online play.

ISA_Scum

haters wanna hate, lovers wanna love

so be it

haters wanna hate, lovers wanna love

amourkiss

But I don't want... none of the above I want to piss on you !

[QUOTE="MADVLAD123"]Hey shadowrun was a multiplayer only game and it cost 60 dollars. That definately hurt its rating. Multiplayer only games should be 10-20 dollars MAX. KoreanX

Battlefield disagrees with you

I can't believe the news on the upcoming EGM Warhawk review:

http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3161677

They'll honestly drop the game's rating if it's a penny over $30 downloadable over the PSN. I for one am buying this on blu-ray to get a second headset for co-op online play.

ISA_Scum

looks like another PS3 flop...damn when will the PS3 get a blockbuster game ?? never maybe

Lemmings can deny it all they want, but I think with the multiple sources of evidence we cows have dug up over the past year, it's obvious industry media sources hate on the PS3.

ISA_Scum

[QUOTE="MADVLAD123"]Hey shadowrun was a multiplayer only game and it cost 60 dollars. That definately hurt its rating. Multiplayer only games should be 10-20 dollars MAX. ISA_Scum

FOr fully customizable characters and warhawks (air assualt vehicles), both online and offline multiplayer and the ability to take two (may be more) people on the same PS3 online at a time and it's only worth $20 max? I'm paying full price and all for that headset, but I have no issues doing so just for the game itself.

Shadowrun itself was really hit hard on gameplay from a lot of reviews I read. Hence the bad scores.

[QUOTE="DSgamer64"]And why would anyone with a right mind base a review off the online price of the game? That just seems like the most retarded logic that one could come up with.Forza_2

I have no idea what you just said.

PS: The game has been confirmed to be 40 bucks on the PSN. Go check the PSblog.

:lol: You need to learn to read then cause that is plain as day, what I just said.

Why would anyone knock a game's scorefor the price? If the game is good and is a quality title then it should be worth the money, if not then they have every right to lower the scores, but that should be for the game, not because of the price. If Shadowrun gets an 8.0 or whatever and has almost no single player for 60 bucks, Oblivion gets like 9.5 or whatever and for PC it was 80 bucks at release time and sayWarhawk gets a 9.0 or something like that. Does Shadowrun deserve the score it got because it was mainly online? Hell no, but if you can be kept happy with just playing online then it is worth the money you spent. Oblivion has no realmultiplayer so should it have recieved the scores it got? Depends on the value of the game, if you can get lots of fun game time out of it then no dout it is worth the money you paid. The same can be said for Warhawk though and people fail to realise this. For a 40 dollar game, if it is complete crap with horrible gameplay and no single player, is there justification for buying an online only game for that price? I do not think so. Even if Warhawk does not have single player it will still be fun and I am sure people who love online games will enjoy playing it, much like Unreal Tournament is really online heavy and the single player in previous games was lackluster, much like Shadowrun.

Why would anyone knock a game's scorefor the price?

DSgamer64

Reviewers do it all the time. (Including GameSpot's)

Next question.

[QUOTE="MADVLAD123"]Hey shadowrun was a multiplayer only game and it cost 60 dollars. That definately hurt its rating. Multiplayer only games should be 10-20 dollars MAX. ultima-flare

1up gave Shadowrun an 8.0 when it costed $60, but complains about Warhawk costing more than $30. I don't see why 1up doesn't just base the review off the Blu-Ray version. That is the one that probably 80% of consumers will buy anyway.

That right there tells me something is wrong - did they drop Shadowrun by a full point for costing 60 bucks? In that case, it was going to score a 9.0? Yeah.. right.

EGM hates ps3?????........no, they hate crappy games :P

Lets say a game gets a raiting of 7.0...

lets say that game is 25 dollars...

now lets say that same game is 60 bucks

does it deserve a lower raiting??

yep. it does... all those questions were rhetorical.

what score did they give shadowrun?Stall0wn3d

8.0...

http://www.1up.com/do/blogEntry?bId=8299344&publicUserId=4561231

[QUOTE="Prid3r"]

And I wanted to ask , What is the anime name of your second gif ?

Forza_2

What is it ?

its called Midori no hibi or midori days.

I don't believe you.

My intitial reaction though..... "egm can hate ps3, but gamespot can't be biased against wii at all?"

If it's any consolation they didn't give Blue Dragon a goodscore either.

[QUOTE="-Sora"]

oh noes teh biased, *whine* *whine* *whine*

ISA_Scum

Lemmings can deny it all they want, but I think with the multiple sources of evidence we cows have dug up over the past year, it's obvious industry media sources hate on the PS3.

For good reason. It's not like it's unwarranted. Sony have made many mistakes with the PS3 this gen.

I'm not sure why some of you guys are claiming that there was a conspiracy against Lair. EGM stated that the controller system was flawed in Lair. Shortly thereafter Lair pushed back its release to change the tweak controller scheme. It sounds like EGM actually did EGM a favor.

:lol:

the mighty Warhalk sound more like a XBL arcade game.

So is GamePro and IGN any different?

I'm running out of game sites and Mags to read, because of fear that they are lieing....

I know no company is perfect, but which is more truthful? I tried to find out myself, but I am only a new member, anyone here who has been a long time member?

Good ! Gamespot hates wii and LOVES the 360. Every site has preferences.

Just another reason to say **** 1up and EGME_x_i_l_e

it's pretty sad when people start crying bias when a magazine reviews a game and gives is a bad score---of course it's bias. Well, none of you have played the game, so sorry for trusting the review over your own bias. BUT when a magazine gives something a great score, they're usually the first to site the magazine and source. Why is that? Gotta love those ignorant, blind fanboys.feryl06

I played the beta and it was pretty damn good so im gonna buy it on blu ray

[QUOTE="E_x_i_l_e"]Just another reason to say **** 1up and EGMzero_snake99

Not ognna lie... but you dont know what youre talking about.

[QUOTE="-Sora"]

oh noes teh biased, *whine* *whine* *whine*

ISA_Scum

Lemmings can deny it all they want, but I think with the multiple sources of evidence we cows have dug up over the past year, it's obvious industry media sources hate on the PS3.

Right all the gaming websites are biased are they?

See the light,your wrong and everyone else is right,now go sell your ps3 and buy a 360 already.

EGM saying they'll drop the score of Warhawk if the PSN price is over $30 is complete crap..

i can see the logic in this decision if PSN was the only means to purchase Warhawk.. but PSN is in fact an option for purchasing Warhawk.. the other option is buying a harddisk copy of Warhawk for $60 that is bundled with bluetooth headset valued at $40..

do the math.. paying $60 for a hardcopy of the game that's bundled with a $40 valued bluetooth headset puts the Warhawk game at about $20 for those who plan to buy the game from a local retailer.. but if you're not interested in a blutooth headset or a hardcopy of the game, you can buy the game via PSN for the rumored price of $40 (not sure if it's confirmed yet) and save yourself 20 bucks over the retail offering...

what's the problem?.. :?..

bottomline, EGM cant alter their review score based on a single PSN pricepoint when there's an even better value in the retail store pricepoint.. the logic is fundamentally flawed..

and yea, i feel that Warhawk should cost $30 on PSN aswell.. regardless of that, i still planned to buy the hardcopy rather than the PSN download.. especialy with $40 PSN price, i'll be buying the $60 bundle since it's obviously the better value.. most would agree.. so at that point, who cares?... :?.. why should EGM alter the review score of this game based upon a PSN pricepoint that wont even affect a majority of the consumers?...