Gamespot gives Mercs 2 a 5/10...

[QUOTE="W1NGMAN-"][QUOTE="BioShockOwnz"][QUOTE="ReaperV7"][QUOTE="Solid_Snake1221"]

Wow :? Aaron Thomas should really just stick to sports games. Mercs 2 is easily a 7.5-8.0 game, and Ratchet: TOD should have been reviewed much higher as well. The GS staff should really make sure the reviewer is actually competent enough to accurately judge the game.

Verge_6

I agree.....to many games that deserved a higher score......at least by adding a .5 to each of their current scores.......like ratchet and clank quest for booty, infinite undiscovery, spore and this game...enough is enough..

Amen. I used to be fanboyish and laugh when PS3 exclusives flopped, but anymore, I'm a gamer, and I hate to see games getting criminally and royally messed over.

Fixed)

Wanna tissue?

Awww how cute, have a little soft spot for Bioshockownz I see:)

OK, I've just read the review and (stupid glitchspot giving me HTML errors so I can't quote):

---------

Enemy AI is horrific. If you're injured you can just run behind a building to regenerate--soldiers won't make much of an effort to find you. They won't even go to great lengths to shoot you if you're right next to them, often standing there oblivious to your shooting them. When you have to destroy a specific piece of equipment or vehicle, sometimes the easiest thing to do is stand next to or get inside of it and let the bad guys blow up the very thing they're supposed to be protecting.

The problems just keep on coming. Helicopters will vanish with you in them; turrets will float in midair; people you're supposed to rescue will drown themselves or run face-first into the helicopter rather than get in; and allies will shoot at you for no reason. Combat falls flat because shooting guys takes longer and is more difficult than simply running up to them and killing them with one punch; helicopters will often drop off support troops on rooftops, where they'll either get stuck or plunge to their deaths. Enemy soldiers respawn in gun towers even after you've taken over an outpost; they can shoot through walls and often appear out of thin air, too. Civilians will run right in front of you when you drive, costing you 5 grand each time you hit them; your helicopter pilot will sometimes fail to show up, or will drop your cargo where you can't get to it. You might even be unlucky enough to have the game crash during a load screen; or to be told that you're dead when you clearly have health left, forcing you to restart. You might even lose progress due to a save game failing. The list of bugs and problems really is staggering.

------

If that list of bugs really is true then this game deserves a 5.0. The game should no way have been released like that and giving it a higher score would basically say it's perfectly fine for developers to release unfinished games. Sure, you might not have come across all of those bugs, but the fact they exist in the first place is quite shocking.

Awww how cute, have a little soft spot for Bioshockownz I see:) W1NGMAN-

And I could replace it with 360 and apply it to one of your posts, my friend.

Wow. One of my most anticipated titles this whole year.

no more credibility amirite?air_wolf_cubed

There wasn't any to begin with. Doesn't mean we can't laugh at a flop, though.

Am I the only one who actually goes to find who wrote the review BEFORE I even take anything that Gamespot has to say?

Seriously, I don't need to read the review of a guy who says "too much variety" is a bad thing in a platformer.

elbow2k

I find that people always take that too much variety quote out of context. He was essentialy saying that the game had alot of pointless features and additions that went nowhere and took away from the focus of the game.

People just boil that down to too much variety just to make the criticism sound less legit than it actually was.

I personally thought Aaron Thomas was dead-on about Ratchet & Clank, especially about the difficulty.

I haven't played Mercs 2 yet, but if it's anything like the first one, I probably won't like it. I thought the first one was way overrated.

Anyway, I actually don't take people seriously when they cry about reviews. They always get so emotional, especially with Ratchet and Clank. I'll just play the game (probably rent it) and see if I think the review lines up with my opinion of the game.

It's perfectly possible that I'll think the review is off base, but after actually agreeing with Aaron Thomas is spite of all the crying about Ratchet and Clank, I'm not so quick to write him off.

Gamespot's rating of Mercenaries 2 is well under the average among other media sites listed. Average user ratings is far higher as well. Its pretty easy to see this game is way underrated and unreliable accurate by Gamespot.

I will still get this game.

Gamespot's rating of Mercenaries 2 is well under the average among other media sites listed. Average user ratings is far higher as well. Its pretty easy to see this game is way underrated and unreliable accurate by Gamespot.

I will still get this game.

Jd1680a

So wait, GS should rate games at, or around the average of what the other reviewers are rating them at, and if they rate too far above or below that average they are unreliable and innaccurate?

What the hell is that? And to the poster I quoted, I'm not just singling you out, but also talking to all the others in this thread who are saying the same kind of thing.

Why can't a reviewer just post what he thinks of a game, and then you choose to agree or disagree? Why do you have to bring averages into it?

You people are saying one thing out of one side of your mouth, and something completely different out of the other side.

On the one hand, you want honest reviews. On the other, you want reviews that don't deviate from the "safe zone".

Now which do you really want? You can't have both, so make up your minds. :|

damn man, this made my day. This is why i like Gamespot. They like to flop everything o.o and its quite fun to see it happen ^_^

i LOVE flops rofl

i said it b4 and ill say it again. GS gives low scores to get hits. it's all BS

Utensilman

Even though GameSpot PROVED in the video review that there are ugly bugs, glitches, horrible animations, and repetitive gameplay. It was ALL there for anyone to see. The games looks horrible. No one can say that GS made anything up this time.

[QUOTE="Utensilman"]

i said it b4 and ill say it again. GS gives low scores to get hits. it's all BS

AvIdGaMeR444

Even though GameSpot PROVED in the video review that there are ugly bugs, glitches, horrible animations, and repetitive gameplay. It was ALL there for anyone to see. The games looks horrible. No one can say that GS made anything up this time.

I've said there are bugs and issues with the game, but I also saw the same thing in Assassin's Creed, so why can't Gamespot reviewers have some guidelines across the board and remain consistent?

[QUOTE="AvIdGaMeR444"][QUOTE="Utensilman"]

i said it b4 and ill say it again. GS gives low scores to get hits. it's all BS

BioShockOwnz

Even though GameSpot PROVED in the video review that there are ugly bugs, glitches, horrible animations, and repetitive gameplay. It was ALL there for anyone to see. The games looks horrible. No one can say that GS made anything up this time.

I've said there are bugs and issues with the game, but I also saw the same thing in Assassin's Creed, so why can't Gamespot reviewers have some guidelines across the board and remain consistent?

You saw the same thing in Assassin's Creed. If someone else doesn't, how do they know it exists? Reviews are based on the reviewer's experience with the game, not yours, not mine, or anyone elses. How is anyone supposed to know what everyone else experienced?

It's like people want Aaron to say: "Well, I saw this glitch but I'm not sure if it'll be the same for everyone so I shouldn't write about it."

Stop standing up for it. They get paid to do a job, one that should remain consistent.

Um... Does anyone notice that the complaints about the mission design and the repitition can be applied to... i dunno... GTA4? Racing missions, deaths which require you to drive all the way back to the mission, temptation to make your own fun which results in severe concequences, freedom of choice which results into a few choices, yea... GTA4....

(Disclamer: I really liked GTA 4 and thought it was really well made, i'm just confused at the inconsistant demerits...)

I think i'll still get it. By the time it's 30$ it'll be all patched and it will probebly be awesome, and I don't know what he's talking about the explosions, they look amazing.

What WHAT?

I havent read the review yet, but I think the reviewer misses the f-ing point.

Repedative missions?

The whole point of Mercs 1 was how you could be creative and do a variety of things to complete missions.

If you want to run and gun or wing it with airstrikes you can do it, but its going to impact on your gaming expeirence each time.

Im still buying it - I liked the first enough to buy the sequel.

But damn 5/10, that is just unjustified to me.

Ill have to play the game myself to find out.

I still think that GSs reviews nowadays are unbalanced. Either too high or too low. Hrmmm ill see

edit*

Read the review and it just seems to jump on things and totally blow them out of proportion, to the extent that it becomes gross exaggerations, compared to outher review out there.
Its averaging 75 on metacritic right now, so it getting a 5/10 pass seems rediculous as far as im concerned.

Honestly, i dont know what GS is on nowadays.

Someone's been pissing in their cheerios for much too long.

GS keeps it real. no tolerance for bugs/gliches

Delayed a whole year reminds me of the time Lair got delayed almost as long. And its around same score, haha. Go figure.

GS keeps it real. no tolerance for bugs/gliches

Delayed a whole year reminds me of the time Lair got delayed almost as long. And its around same score, haha. Go figure.

LOXO7

Mercs 2 does not have game breaking control issues....

GS keeps it real. no tolerance for bugs/gliches

Delayed a whole year reminds me of the time Lair got delayed almost as long. And its around same score, haha. Go figure.

LOXO7

and Oblivion (the broken a.i., and whatnot).

So much for zero tolerance.

GS keeps it real. no tolerance for bugs/gliches

Delayed a whole year reminds me of the time Lair got delayed almost as long. And its around same score, haha. Go figure.

LOXO7

Oh really? Then why did they give a good score to the buggiest and glitchiest game this generation, with an awful framerate, Two Worlds?

lucky I picked up spore insteadbigLLL

Both for me! :)

[QUOTE="LOXO7"]

GS keeps it real. no tolerance for bugs/gliches

Delayed a whole year reminds me of the time Lair got delayed almost as long. And its around same score, haha. Go figure.

skrat_01

and Oblivion (the broken a.i., and whatnot).

So much for zero tolerance.

That was the Old GS. When Gears 9.6 and Oblivion 9.6/9.3. Increments of .5 might have something to do with it nowadays

[QUOTE="skrat_01"][QUOTE="LOXO7"]

GS keeps it real. no tolerance for bugs/gliches

Delayed a whole year reminds me of the time Lair got delayed almost as long. And its around same score, haha. Go figure.

LOXO7

and Oblivion (the broken a.i., and whatnot).

So much for zero tolerance.

That was the Old GS. When Gears 9.6 and Oblivion 9.6/9.3. Increments of .5 might have something to do with it nowadays

WTF? It was this generation :?

Oblivion and GeOW would have got 9.5 when rounded to the .5 system.

Your appraisal makes no sense at all.

[QUOTE="LOXO7"]

GS keeps it real. no tolerance for bugs/gliches

Delayed a whole year reminds me of the time Lair got delayed almost as long. And its around same score, haha. Go figure.

BioShockOwnz

Oh really? Then why did they give a good score to the buggiest and glitchiest game this generation, with an awful framerate, Two Worlds?

Or even better! Alone in the Dark got a 6.5.... what?????

Old GS?

WTF? It was this generation :?

Oblivion and GeOW would have got 9.5 when rounded to the .5 system.

Your appraisal makes no sense at all.

skrat_01

hey captain i dont work for gs, so this is just speculation, but maybe GS making a few changes with getting rid of peoples, and rating games with .5 and introducing GS Wide makes me think that the people have gotten a few words from their superiours on how to rate games now, from when they did originaly This Generation.

2008 is nowhere near as good as anyone originally thought it was going to be.

Four more months left to prove me wrong.

DeathScape666

It started good....But latly man it has gone down hill

LMAO

another flop! haha

[QUOTE="Utensilman"]

i said it b4 and ill say it again. GS gives low scores to get hits. it's all BS

AvIdGaMeR444

Even though GameSpot PROVED in the video review that there are ugly bugs, glitches, horrible animations, and repetitive gameplay. It was ALL there for anyone to see. The games looks horrible. No one can say that GS made anything up this time.

Who watches the reviews or reads them. When all you have to do is look at the number and then complain.

I have been guilty of this myself. But this review makes me wonder after watching the video. I think I may have been jumping the gun a little too much.

O'well just one less game to get latter there still many more out I need to play.

Oh yes! Once again I am right about a game! Lyphe2k's spidey senses never decieve him. Saw it coming a mile away. Mark my words - Dead Space, Far Cry 2, Killzone 2 and the new Silent Hill will fall into the same fate.Lyphe2k

why killzone dont jinx it

OH NO YOU DIDN'T

/annoying mercs commercial

Why are some people happy about games flopping? What is funny about seeing a good game get completely trashed by a reviewer?

Anyways all of that stuff could easily be fixed by patches.

Am I the only one who likes gamespot's reviews nowadays?

I mean, the more flops the better O-o