How did Harry Potter get a higher score than Duke Nukem Forever?

http://www.gamespot.com/pc/action/harry-potter-and-the-deathly-hallows-part-2/index.html?tag=result%3Btitle%3B1

It beat out Duke Nukem Forever. Goes to show GS score of Duke Nukem Forever was truly a JOKE!

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows BETTER than Duke Nukem Forever? Give me a break! :roll:

Different standards, I.E You wouldn't score an Arcade/PSN Game the same way you would a full retail game.ABCarmine

How so? Harry Potter is on Xbox 360/PS3/PC same as Duke Nukem Forever.

This is why we need to get rid of scores. Everytime a review comes out people make a thread whining about "How did this game score higher than this game!?! Reviewer is teh fail!" instead of actually, you know, reading the actual review.

duke nukem did suck though, that demo was horrible, you can tell this game has been in development for 10 years, it has really old gameplay mechanics

[QUOTE="ABCarmine"]Different standards, I.E You wouldn't score an Arcade/PSN Game the same way you would a full retail game.Xtasy26

How so? Harry Potter is on Xbox 360/PS3/PC same as Duke Nukem Forever.

also, remember GS doesnt has one reviewer only...opinions can differ... nothing wrong if one guy thinks DNF deserved 3.0 and other guy gives 4.0 to HP

and off topic:

your signature is huge, pls cut it down a bit, I understand that pc specs come in handy when dealing with other pc gamers, but Im really sure we dont need to know about things like your dvd drive

[QUOTE="ABCarmine"]Different standards, I.E You wouldn't score an Arcade/PSN Game the same way you would a full retail game.Xtasy26

How so? Harry Potter is on Xbox 360/PS3/PC same as Duke Nukem Forever.

duke nukem did suck though, that demo was horrible, you can tell this game has been in development for 10 years, it has really old gameplay mechanics

Chris_Williams

Duke Nukem Forever was an awesome game whos final product was made in 2-3 years. (Everything was scrapped and remade. It does not look like DNF from 1999-2007 at all.)

And damn near every other FPS today has "old" gameplay mechanics, but they don't get slammed for it :|

also, remember GS doesnt has one reviewer only...opinions can differ... nothing wrong if one guy thinks DNF deserved 3.0 and other guy gives 4.0 to HP

lightleggy

Very true. Although I would like to note that Kevin reviewed both games.

[QUOTE="Chris_Williams"]

duke nukem did suck though, that demo was horrible, you can tell this game has been in development for 10 years, it has really old gameplay mechanics

ChubbyGuy40

Duke Nukem Forever was an awesome game whos final product was made in 2-3 years. (Everything was scrapped and remade. It does not look like DNF from 1999-2007 at all.)

And damn near every other FPS today has "old" gameplay mechanics, but they don't get slammed for it :|

Because the Harry Potter game is better than DNF.

[QUOTE="ChubbyGuy40"]

[QUOTE="Chris_Williams"]

duke nukem did suck though, that demo was horrible, you can tell this game has been in development for 10 years, it has really old gameplay mechanics

Chris_Williams

Duke Nukem Forever was an awesome game whos final product was made in 2-3 years. (Everything was scrapped and remade. It does not look like DNF from 1999-2007 at all.)

And damn near every other FPS today has "old" gameplay mechanics, but they don't get slammed for it :|

Just gonna say the main game was totally different IMHO, but since it's pretty obvious haters are never gonna give the full game a chance it's worthless to explain.

Maybe beacuse it not as horrible as DNF.

[QUOTE="Xtasy26"]

[QUOTE="ABCarmine"]Different standards, I.E You wouldn't score an Arcade/PSN Game the same way you would a full retail game.ABCarmine

How so? Harry Potter is on Xbox 360/PS3/PC same as Duke Nukem Forever.

Oh I get, a "joke" game is now supposed get a better score than a game that's not considered a "joke" game. Just brilliant analogy. It doesn't MATTER if it's a movie based or not, if it's on the same platform in this case Xbox 360\PS3\PC then it should be judged by the same metrics as that of an another game that is on Xbox 360\PS3\PC.

also, remember GS doesnt has one reviewer only...opinions can differ... nothing wrong if one guy thinks DNF deserved 3.0 and other guy gives 4.0 to HP

and off topic:

your signature is huge, pls cut it down a bit, I understand that pc specs come in handy when dealing with other pc gamers, but Im really sure we dont need to know about things like your dvd drive

lightleggy

Then what's the point of having scores to begin with if there's "nothing wrong" in the huge discrepancy of the scoring of games.

off topic:

If you don't like my sig then look away.

[QUOTE="ABCarmine"][QUOTE="Xtasy26"]

How so? Harry Potter is on Xbox 360/PS3/PC same as Duke Nukem Forever.

Xtasy26

Oh I get, a "joke" game is now supposed get a better score than a game that's not considered a "joke" game. Just brilliant analogy. It doesn't MATTER if it's a movie based or not, if it's on the same platform in this case Xbox 360\PS3\PC then it should be judged by the same metrics as that of an another game that is on Xbox 360\PS3\PC.

obviously its better :)

[QUOTE="Chris_Williams"]

duke nukem did suck though, that demo was horrible, you can tell this game has been in development for 10 years, it has really old gameplay mechanics

ChubbyGuy40

Duke Nukem Forever was an awesome game whos final product was made in 2-3 years. (Everything was scrapped and remade. It does not look like DNF from 1999-2007 at all.)

And damn near every other FPS today has "old" gameplay mechanics, but they don't get slammed for it :|

I agree, I really liked the game. It had a old school type of gameplay mechanics which was different from the run of the mill shooters that people play today. And the PC version with the flawlessws tool which cleans up the blurry smudge makes the game look NIGHT and DAY running in 1080P with every setting set to the max when compared to the console version. It was in essence a true sequal to Duke Nukem 3D, the only difference being it should have come out like in 2005. And you are right most of what was in the game was made in the last couple of years. The game in no way shape or form looks like what it did when it was in development in the say 90's. Only the level design, and the ideas were in place.

As for those who are complaining about the demo, you are judging the game based on like 2 levels as opposed to the entire game which has much better levels.

You missed the point, DNF Had A LOT of hype, while HP Games get none, if the game is disappointing and a letdown then it will score lower than a game that had 0 hype and basically met your expectations. ABCarmine

Hype alone isn't enough togive it tat bad of a score.

It's not our fault the reviewer had really high expectations, if that's true. They should be judging by the quality of the game, not how big of a letdown it is, how it rips off other games, bashes Halo, (insert every other whiny BS excuse to downplay the game from other reviewers.)

[QUOTE="Xtasy26"]

[QUOTE="ABCarmine"] Duke Nukem was in development for 12 years and when it finally came out, well you know. The Harry Potter Game is a sorta considered a joke, plus it's movie based, so of course it's gonna score higher for doing what it basically promised, something Duke Nukem failed to do.ABCarmine

Oh I get, a "joke" game is now supposed get a better score than a game that's not considered a "joke" game. Just brilliant analogy. It doesn't MATTER if it's a movie based or not, if it's on the same platform in this case Xbox 360\PS3\PC then it should be judged by the same metrics as that of an another game that is on Xbox 360\PS3\PC.

Last time a checked a reviewer shouldn't be swayed by as you put it "hype". By that analogy people should like Justin Beiber because he has a lot of "hype".

[QUOTE="ABCarmine"][QUOTE="Xtasy26"]

Oh I get, a "joke" game is now supposed get a better score than a game that's not considered a "joke" game. Just brilliant analogy. It doesn't MATTER if it's a movie based or not, if it's on the same platform in this case Xbox 360\PS3\PC then it should be judged by the same metrics as that of an another game that is on Xbox 360\PS3\PC.

Xtasy26

Last time a checked a reviewer shouldn't be swayed by as you put it "hype". By that analogy people should like Justin Beiber because he has a lot of "hype".

I would wager that the list of games better than DNF is longer than the list of games worse then DNF. DNF is a fetid turd, Gearbox should be ashamed asking $60.getyeryayasout

Maybe you should play the full game before throwing around baseless statements.

[QUOTE="Xtasy26"]

[QUOTE="ABCarmine"] You missed the point, DNF Had A LOT of hype, while HP Games get none, if the game is disappointing and a letdown then it will score lower than a game that had 0 hype and basically met your expectations. ABCarmine

Last time a checked a reviewer shouldn't be swayed by as you put it "hype". By that analogy people should like Justin Beiber because he has a lot of "hype".

You don't judge a game based on hype. You can say it was a letdown, but it can't influence your score. If you did, Demon Souls wouldn't of scored as high as it did or receive GOTY. Same goes for many games.

[QUOTE="ChubbyGuy40"]

[QUOTE="getyeryayasout"]I would wager that the list of games better than DNF is longer than the list of games worse then DNF. DNF is a fetid turd, Gearbox should be ashamed asking $60.getyeryayasout

Maybe you should play the full game before throwing around baseless statements.

Nevermind then I retract my statement. Too many haters here who never even bothered renting the game (Even though I suggest highly against that because the console versions suck. PC is totally different.)

[QUOTE="ChubbyGuy40"]

[QUOTE="Chris_Williams"]

duke nukem did suck though, that demo was horrible, you can tell this game has been in development for 10 years, it has really old gameplay mechanics

Chris_Williams

Duke Nukem Forever was an awesome game whos final product was made in 2-3 years. (Everything was scrapped and remade. It does not look like DNF from 1999-2007 at all.)

And damn near every other FPS today has "old" gameplay mechanics, but they don't get slammed for it :|

Actually, the original people were in fact working on the game from the beginning. Guys like Greg Broussard and Scott Miller and including the guy who came up with the original Duke Nukem. In fact, after 3D Realms closed down many of the "original" guys worked out of thir homes in Dallas, TX to finish the PC version of the game. What you see is in fact a 3D Realms game. The BIG mistake they made was they kept changing the game and kept on redoing things to make the game compete with current shooters on the market. Like when they changed from the Quake II engine to the Unreal Engine. When you keep on having to redo the SAME textures and assets over and over again to make it look better, not to mention adding new things to the game, that adds years to the game, which added to it's development time. So, your statement that "original" people not working on the game is false. The PC version of the game was essentially complete in 2009. Gearbox just polished the PC version and other developers that Gearbox brought in just ported the PC version to the Xbox 360 and PS3. And from what I read the port was very poor like long load times on the console version.

[QUOTE="ABCarmine"][QUOTE="Xtasy26"]

Last time a checked a reviewer shouldn't be swayed by as you put it "hype". By that analogy people should like Justin Beiber because he has a lot of "hype".

ChubbyGuy40

You don't judge a game based on hype. You can say it was a letdown, but it can't influence your score. If you did, Demon Souls wouldn't of scored as high as it did or receive GOTY. Same goes for many games.

[QUOTE="Xtasy26"]

[QUOTE="ABCarmine"] You missed the point, DNF Had A LOT of hype, while HP Games get none, if the game is disappointing and a letdown then it will score lower than a game that had 0 hype and basically met your expectations. ABCarmine

Last time a checked a reviewer shouldn't be swayed by as you put it "hype". By that analogy people should like Justin Beiber because he has a lot of "hype".

Again you missed the point. A reviewer shouldn't be caught up in hype and what are considered expectations of others. Just like if I were to review Justin Beiber's album, I shouldn't be swayed by the fact the millions of people love him and he is selling millions of records. At the end of the day, Justin Beiber's music suck no matter if he meets the hype and expectations and sells millions of records.

I've been playing DNF for 21hrs and it's great(PC Version)

Actually, the original people were in fact working on the game from the beginning. Guys like Greg Broussard and Scott Miller and including the guy who came up with the original Duke Nukem. In fact, after 3D Realms closed down many of the "original" guys worked out of thir homes in Dallas, TX to finish the PC version of the game. What you see is in fact a 3D Realms game. The BIG mistake they made was they kept changing the game and kept on redoing things to make the game compete with current shooters on the market. Like when they changed from the Quake II engine to the Unreal Engine. When you keep on having to redo the SAME textures and assets over and over again to make it look better, not to mention adding new things to the game, that adds years to the game, which added to it's development time. So, your statement that "original" people not working on the game is false. The PC version of the game was essentially complete in 2009. Gearbox just polished the PC version and other developers that Gearbox brought in just ported the PC version to the Xbox 360 and PS3. And from what I read the port was very poor like long load times on the console version.

Xtasy26

Actually the single-player was basically finished at the end of 2009 and was in the polish stage until the end of 2010. Triptych also had to design multiplayer which Gearbox seemed to have helped out with. Triptych did the PC version while Priranha did the poor console version. The multiplayer and console ports is why it wasn't released last year.

By the way for those who don't know, Triptych is a studio made up of 3D Realms employees who got fed up with 3DR's crap. Gearbox also was started by employees from 3D Realms during the early stages of DNF. Surprisingly it seems like Gearbox had nothing to do with DNF at all except keeping the game alive and providing support to those 2 studios. When you think about it, Duke Nukem Forever never left it's original home.

What I can't believe is how old that engine is. Really in the 2-3 years they couldn't have switched to UE3 instead of a heavily overhauled UE1.x? Can't wait to see what modders end up doing with this game though. I can't wait for the sequel.

Because it's the better game not that hard to figure out.

This is why we need to get rid of scores. Everytime a review comes out people make a thread whining about "How did this game score higher than this game!?! Reviewer is teh fail!" instead of actually, you know, reading the actual review.

Phoenix534

Because it's the better game.

Well... there was probably some effort put into the HP game.foxhound_fox

I was under the assumption that game scores are rated comparatively to other similar games on similar systems.This ishow a game can score more or less from one system to the other. It comes down to the standards set by other games in the situation. **Somewhere on Gamespot describes how the games are rated, I just can't find the page atm.**

If Harry Potter was a FPS, I could understand the panic, but to the best of my knowledge, its not.

Scores are relative and the more people that know this, the better system wars will be.

Because it is a worse game

HP game is bad

DN4 is terrible and offensive to the player.

Hey, but you get to throw *****, such a wonderful addition:roll:

One game is a game that was hyped like crazy for the past 14 years and didn't end up meeting people's expectations, while anothergame is a movie game in a popular franchise that nobody on this site really cares about. They care about the books and movies more in this franchise.

just goes to show how bad the game is if its worse than a harry potter gamer