Just looked at some Wii screenshots and I quite like how the Wii version has a different art style, because it would have had difficulty with the 360/PS3/PC graphics.
I think its great that instead of trying to force something that won't workout well, the dev can find such a nice way around it. Hope it scores well on the Wii.
Went out tonight to get Ghostbusters for the 360.. owning a ps3 and 360 I usually buy the 360 versions, but the 360 version was sold out everywhere! Which i wasn't expecting.
Managed to pick up a Ps3 version though, and it's sitting here still wrapped, very hard not to crack it open and play it. But I thought i would see if any comparisons were done. Apparently there is a huge difference in graphic quality between the 2 systems so I will return the ps3 version and wait for the 360 one to come in. Still have to finish infamous anyway... but still very dissapointed. (see http://arstechnica.com/gaming/news/2009/06/ghostbusters-graphically-youll-want-to-stick-with-the-360.ars)
So I am sort of wondering why the game would receive the same score for both systems.. sure if gameplay is the same it's not that big a deal, but when there's this big a difference in graphics it should be noted and the score should reflect it, even if it's a couple points. Makes you wonder if they even play all versions of the game.
Once again the PS3 and 360 score the same. If the differences were as big a deal as some of the people here would make it seem I think the scores would reflect that.
[QUOTE="bingbaocao"] let me rephrase that then so you're implying? that a good videogame website has it's reviews similar (or at least close) to the average? i think he's pointing out that Kevin's opinion isn't some radical deviation from the norm, other people feel similarly not that there'd be anything wrong if it was. opinions cant be wrong
still no. what did you mean with your original statement?
CaseyWegner
it's just that i don't get what you mean, a guy complains about the gamespot review, you tell him that the score is on par with the average. So if you're not saying that a good review website should have it's reviews similar to that of the other media then why did you post that at all? I mean it just doesn't seem like it was the answer the guy was after
EDIT: You also used that logic on "people who bash gamespot's reviews" as you said
[QUOTE="hy4k"][QUOTE="bingbaocao"] let me rephrase that then so you're implying? that a good videogame website has it's reviews similar (or at least close) to the average? i think he's pointing out that Kevin's opinion isn't some radical deviation from the norm, other people feel similarly not that there'd be anything wrong if it was. opinions cant be wrong I agree on both ends
still no. what did you mean with your original statement?
bingbaocao
it's just that i don't get what you mean, a guy complains about the gamespot review, you tell him that the score is on par with the average. So if you're not saying that a good review website should have it's reviews similar to that of the other media then why did you post that at all? I mean it just doesn't seem like it was the answer the guy was after
EDIT: You also used that logic on "people who bash gamespot's reviews" as you said
i'm not saying anything about the quality of the review or the website doing it. it just annoys me to see people to single out a review score and bash it without realizing that it's not far from the average. it's like they think it's the only site to give a game a "low" score.
still no. what did you mean with your original statement?
CaseyWegner
it's just that i don't get what you mean, a guy complains about the gamespot review, you tell him that the score is on par with the average. So if you're not saying that a good review website should have it's reviews similar to that of the other media then why did you post that at all? I mean it just doesn't seem like it was the answer the guy was after
EDIT: You also used that logic on "people who bash gamespot's reviews" as you said
i'm not saying anything about the quality of the review or the website doing it. it just annoys me to see people to single out a review score and bash it without realizing that it's not far from the average. it's like they think it's the only site to give a game a "low" score.
it just annoys me to see people to single out a review score and bash it without realizing that it's not far from the average. it's like they think it's the only site to give a game a "low" score.CaseyWegner
Sorry Casey, but he didn't say anything about the score. You did.
He said he hasn't liked the reviews, and that doesn't necessarily have anything to do with the review score.
[QUOTE="druggyjoe3000"]
Intresting... I have not liked gamespots reviews lately
CaseyWegner
do you know what the average review score is for it? :?
still no. what did you mean with your original statement?
it's just that i don't get what you mean, a guy complains about the gamespot review, you tell him that the score is on par with the average. So if you're not saying that a good review website should have it's reviews similar to that of the other media then why did you post that at all? I mean it just doesn't seem like it was the answer the guy was after
EDIT: You also used that logic on "people who bash gamespot's reviews" as you said
i'm not saying anything about the quality of the review or the website doing it. it just annoys me to see people to single out a review score and bash it without realizing that it's not far from the average. it's like they think it's the only site to give a game a "low" score.
I feel like he was surprised the whole time at how good the game was considering it was a movie license, which we all expect to bomb.
Being a huge Ghostbusters fan since I was a kid (loved and still love the 2 movies, the Real Ghostbusters cartoon, and even enjoyed Extreme Ghostbusters) I think it's inevitable that I will eventually get this game on 360. From the few videos I've seen it looks like they got the feel of the franchise right. I may wait till it goes down in price a bit, though I did see a deal on slickdeals for $46.99 so I might have to jump on that... I've been out of the gaming loop for a while (last game I completed was Gears 2 back in November and I never even touchec the multiplayer!) due to work and other things but this might bring me back in.
Honestly the PS3 version should be .5 less than the 360 version too. and the PC version .5 less than the PS3 version. If a game is clearly better on one platform it should reflect in the score. I'm not talking about trade off of issues either...this game is clearly better on 360.
I find it interesting the GS review of the PC version made no mention of the hardware requirements, unless of course I skimmed past it.
You would think they would be noteworthy, unless of course they are not as high as people claim them to be.
xsubtownerx
4 GB of ram is recommended. Ouch.. Regardless of the OS you use. Link
I'm already aware of that, which is why I'm surprised it wasn't mentioned in the review.
Assassins Creed was rumoured as needing 3GB ram but ran just fine under 2GB, perhaps it could be the same with this? I doubt any game ported from consoles, even when badly optimized, could exceed the 32bit memory barrier on PC.
Log in to comment