IGN Doesnt Think MGS4 Ranks In The Top 100 Modern Games, Do You?

A general you is still stating the "indicator" to be meaningful outside of yourself.

Simply, it is not a fair statement to say I twisted your words when you did say "you should take that as an indicator" any way you slice it. You can go on and on about what I should have thought you meant, but those are your words.

I'm just going off of what you said and did say "you should", in which case it seems reasonable that you're addressing the thread at large or a subset of people inside the thread (and you actually admitted as much). It would not be reasonable to look at words you should and infer that it was ONLY meant personally, especially when people often do project their opinion in the way that I've described.

So you remain the only person that twisted someone's words.

GreySeal9

It is a fair statement because you're acting like I'm stating a fact or something, when it simply isn't.

If my comments is direct at anyone, it would have been people who's played Portal 2. You've clearly stated you haven't, which begs the question as to why you keep arguing over pointless semantics concerning a game that you don't know anything about.

Feel free to ignore what I've explained over and over ad nauseum and keep playing the victim, but all you've done so far is making false accusations and taking words out of context.

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

A general you is still stating the "indicator" to be meaningful outside of yourself.

Simply, it is not a fair statement to say I twisted your words when you did say "you should take that as an indicator" any way you slice it. You can go on and on about what I should have thought you meant, but those are your words.

I'm just going off of what you said and did say "you should", in which case it seems reasonable that you're addressing the thread at large or a subset of people inside the thread (and you actually admitted as much). It would not be reasonable to look at words you should and infer that it was ONLY meant personally, especially when people often do project their opinion in the way that I've described.

So you remain the only person that twisted someone's words.

Gxgear

It is a fair statement because you're acting like I'm stating a fact or something, when it simply isn't.

If my comments is direct at anyone, it would have been people who's played Portal 2. You've clearly stated you haven't, which begs the question as to why you keep arguing over pointless semantics concerning a game that you don't know anything about.

Feel free to ignore what I've explained over and over ad nauseum and keep playing the victim, but all you've done so far is making false accusations and taking words out of context.

"Super Mario Galaxy 2 sucks, so you shouldn't take this list seriously!" is also not stating a fact, yet you admitted that the logic was absurd. I didn't act like you're stating a fact all. I know you're stating an opinion and that is clear from my responses to you.

How am playing the victim? You did put words into my mouth by stating that I took the MC average as my own opinion when I didn't. That is the truth and stating that is not playing the victim. By this logic, when you falsely accused me of twisting your words, you were playing the victim as well.

You have not demonstrated how I've taken your words out of context. You're simply trying to get me not take your "you should" statement at face value. Backpeddling basically.

Also, how can you accuse me of taking your words out of context when you've never addressed how you put words into my mouth as far as my opinion and the MC average? That seems blatantly hyprocritical, especially considering I quoted your own words but you've just ignored my request for you to prove that I took the MC average as my opinion.

[QUOTE="Gxgear"]

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

A general you is still stating the "indicator" to be meaningful outside of yourself.

Simply, it is not a fair statement to say I twisted your words when you did say "you should take that as an indicator" any way you slice it. You can go on and on about what I should have thought you meant, but those are your words.

I'm just going off of what you said and did say "you should", in which case it seems reasonable that you're addressing the thread at large or a subset of people inside the thread (and you actually admitted as much). It would not be reasonable to look at words you should and infer that it was ONLY meant personally, especially when people often do project their opinion in the way that I've described.

So you remain the only person that twisted someone's words.

GreySeal9

It is a fair statement because you're acting like I'm stating a fact or something, when it simply isn't.

If my comments is direct at anyone, it would have been people who's played Portal 2. You've clearly stated you haven't, which begs the question as to why you keep arguing over pointless semantics concerning a game that you don't know anything about.

Feel free to ignore what I've explained over and over ad nauseum and keep playing the victim, but all you've done so far is making false accusations and taking words out of context.

"Super Mario Galaxy 2 sucks, so you shouldn't take this list seriously!" is also not stating a fact, yet you admitted that the logic was absurd. I didn't act like you're stating a fact all. I know you're stating an opinion and that is clear from my responses to you.

How am playing the victim? You did put words into my mouth by stating that I took the MC average as my own opinion when I didn't. That is the truth and stating that is not playing the victim. By this logic, when you falsely accused me of twisting your words, you were playing the victim as well.

That statement is absurd because you made a statement about SMG2, I never did that. Using an extreme example, and an inaccurate one, doesn't even begin to compare to what I said. I don't have to defend a made-up claim that you thought up.

You brought up metacritic, I didn't. All the site does is create an aggregate score averaging reviews across the board with drastically different scoring scales. If you were going to double back on the fact it's not about the score differences then you should have said it earlier. Pointing out the fact that you used metacritic as a basis for your opinion is not putting words in your mouth.

[QUOTE="dreman999"]

[QUOTE="Mozelleple112"] finalfantasy94

I wouldint call it logic just more simple. SO yea MGS3 has a more simple and straight forward plot then the other MGS,but that doesint make it better.

LOL at people who actually thinks Portal 2 is better than Portal.

Gxgear

Sarcasm, right? :?

Gxgear

We're not comparing to Mass Effect and Bioshock. We're comparing to films when we talk about Oscars.

Do you really think the story in MGS4 stacks up to the kind of films that win Oscars? If so, what about it makes you think that?

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

[QUOTE="Gxgear"]

It is a fair statement because you're acting like I'm stating a fact or something, when it simply isn't.

If my comments is direct at anyone, it would have been people who's played Portal 2. You've clearly stated you haven't, which begs the question as to why you keep arguing over pointless semantics concerning a game that you don't know anything about.

Feel free to ignore what I've explained over and over ad nauseum and keep playing the victim, but all you've done so far is making false accusations and taking words out of context.

Gxgear

"Super Mario Galaxy 2 sucks, so you shouldn't take this list seriously!" is also not stating a fact, yet you admitted that the logic was absurd. I didn't act like you're stating a fact all. I know you're stating an opinion and that is clear from my responses to you.

How am playing the victim? You did put words into my mouth by stating that I took the MC average as my own opinion when I didn't. That is the truth and stating that is not playing the victim. By this logic, when you falsely accused me of twisting your words, you were playing the victim as well.

That statement is absurd because you made a statement about SMG2, I never did that. Using an extreme example, and an inaccurate one, doesn't even begin to compare to what I said. I don't have to defend a made-up claim that you thought up.

You brought up metacritic, I didn't. All the site does is create an aggregate score averaging reviews across the board with drastically different scoring scales. If you were going to double back on the fact it's not about the score differences then you should have said it earlier. Pointing out the fact that you used metacritic as a basis for your opinion is not putting words in your mouth.

The only thing different the SMG2 comment was the game. Other than that, the comment expressed the same sentiment as yours.

You implied that I took their opinion as my own. I didn't as I never expressed an opinion about the game, which they did. I expressed an opinion about your logic and used MC as part of my argument. Nowhere did I adopt their opinion.

So, yes, you did put words into my mouth. You implied that I took their opinions as my own, which I didn't as I never stated an opinion on the game and the game is the only thing they had an opinion on.

It would be more honest to just admit that you misinterpreted my use of Metacritic instead of trying to twist both my words and your words. It is not the end of the world to admit a mistake.

[QUOTE="Gxgear"]

Sarcasm, right? :?

dreman999

We're not comparing to Mass Effect and Bioshock. We're comparing to films when we talk about Oscars.

Do you really think the story in MGS4 stacks up to the kind of films that win Oscars? If so, what about it makes you think that?

The funny thing is that Bioshock was a film, it would have a high chance to win an Oscar.

You do realize I'm talking about Portal 2 right? It's a good game, but not better than Portal as a game. The whole experience is quite linear, with all the puzzles offering a single possible solution. It's a step back from Portal where there's multiple ways to clear a room, which is one of the most memorable things for me from the original. Portal 2 may have clocked in several hours longer, but a good portion of it is artificially extended with sections where you just walk from point A to point B with not much happening. Overall it just didn't feel like the game's improved, just wrapped together in a nicer overall package.

[QUOTE="dreman999"]

[QUOTE="Gxgear"]

Sarcasm, right? :?

Gxgear

We're not comparing to Mass Effect and Bioshock. We're comparing to films when we talk about Oscars.

Do you really think the story in MGS4 stacks up to the kind of films that win Oscars? If so, what about it makes you think that?

The funny thing is that Bioshock was a film, it would have a high chance to win an Oscar.

You do realize I'm talking about Portal 2 right? It's a good game, but not better than Portal as a game. The whole experience is quite linear, with all the puzzles offering a single possible solution. It's a step back from Portal where there's multiple ways to clear a room, which is one of the most memorable things for me from the original. Portal 2 may have clocked in several hours longer, but a good portion of it is artificially extended with sections where you just walk from point A to point B with not much happening. Overall it just didn't feel like the game's improved, just wrapped together in a nicer overall package.

Those quote chains don't have anything to do with Portal. They are in response to somebody else's comments about MGS4 and Oscars. Somebody accidently quoted you when it was me who made the comment.

LOL at people who actually thinks Portal 2 is better than Portal.

Gxgear

[QUOTE="Gxgear"]

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

"Super Mario Galaxy 2 sucks, so you shouldn't take this list seriously!" is also not stating a fact, yet you admitted that the logic was absurd. I didn't act like you're stating a fact all. I know you're stating an opinion and that is clear from my responses to you.

How am playing the victim? You did put words into my mouth by stating that I took the MC average as my own opinion when I didn't. That is the truth and stating that is not playing the victim. By this logic, when you falsely accused me of twisting your words, you were playing the victim as well.

GreySeal9

That statement is absurd because you made a statement about SMG2, I never did that. Using an extreme example, and an inaccurate one, doesn't even begin to compare to what I said. I don't have to defend a made-up claim that you thought up.

You brought up metacritic, I didn't. All the site does is create an aggregate score averaging reviews across the board with drastically different scoring scales. If you were going to double back on the fact it's not about the score differences then you should have said it earlier. Pointing out the fact that you used metacritic as a basis for your opinion is not putting words in your mouth.

The only thing different the SMG2 comment was the game. Other than that, the comment expressed the same sentiment as yours.

You implied that I took their opinion as my own. I didn't as I never expressed an opinion about the game, which they did. I expressed an opinion about your logic and used MC as part of my argument. Nowhere did I adopt their opinion.

So, yes, you did put words into my mouth. You implied that I took their opinions as my own, which I didn't as I never stated an opinion on the game and the game is the only thing they had an opinion on.

It would be more honest to just admit that you misinterpreted my use of Metacritic instead of trying to twist both my words and your words. It is not the end of the world to admit a mistake.

Just like you misinterpreted my meaning? You should do well to take your own advice.

Frankly why you even brought up metacritic is confusing, because it has zero relevance to my views. The only explanation is that because you have zero experience with the game itself, so using that might lend you some credibility. It doesn't. If you even took the time to compare both titles in discrepencies, with who reviewed them, the number of reviews, then it should be clear why metacritic isn't reliable at all. Even just considering the facts that one was part of a collection while the other is a retail release, gives an idea of why they would be treated differently.

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

[QUOTE="Gxgear"]

That statement is absurd because you made a statement about SMG2, I never did that. Using an extreme example, and an inaccurate one, doesn't even begin to compare to what I said. I don't have to defend a made-up claim that you thought up.

You brought up metacritic, I didn't. All the site does is create an aggregate score averaging reviews across the board with drastically different scoring scales. If you were going to double back on the fact it's not about the score differences then you should have said it earlier. Pointing out the fact that you used metacritic as a basis for your opinion is not putting words in your mouth.

Gxgear

The only thing different the SMG2 comment was the game. Other than that, the comment expressed the same sentiment as yours.

You implied that I took their opinion as my own. I didn't as I never expressed an opinion about the game, which they did. I expressed an opinion about your logic and used MC as part of my argument. Nowhere did I adopt their opinion.

So, yes, you did put words into my mouth. You implied that I took their opinions as my own, which I didn't as I never stated an opinion on the game and the game is the only thing they had an opinion on.

It would be more honest to just admit that you misinterpreted my use of Metacritic instead of trying to twist both my words and your words. It is not the end of the world to admit a mistake.

Just like you misinterpreted my meaning? You should do well to take your own advice.

Frankly why you even brought up metacritic is confusing, because it has zero relevance to my views. The only explanation is that because you have zero experience with the game itself, so using that might lend you some credibility. It doesn't. If you even took the time to compare both titles in discrepencies, with who reviewed them, the number of reviews, then it should be clear why metacritic isn't reliable at all. Even just considering the facts that one was part of a collection while the other is a retail release, gives an idea of why they would be treated differently.

You have not demonstrated that I misinterpreted your meaning. You have simply said that you meant something than what you typed. That's not a miseninterpetation on my part, it's either a miscommunication on your part or backpeddling.

I brought up Metacritic because I'm wanted to show that the notion that it's better than the first is not that radical to where it would seem like something worthy of laughter. Perhaps it wasn't the best point, but there's no reason to twist my words to mean something they don't.

Dear god no. I could see MGS on the list, maybe near the bottom...but none of the others deserve to be on the list.

[QUOTE="Gxgear"]

LOL at people who actually thinks Portal 2 is better than Portal.

drinkerofjuice

You also didn't have to pay full retail for it. Look up a couple of posts for a more detailed explnation.

The co-op was a great addition for sure, but it alone doesn't "stomp" anything. Not to take anything away from the co-op campaign, but with 2 people in play it also meant the solutions had to be more specific and easier interpreted. It shows with puzzles featuring only 1 possible solutions, and a lot of visual queues to reduce the level of difficulty. Another thing that didn't sit well was the loading time, which is mitigated in the single player mode by the character's one-sided dialogues.

[QUOTE="drinkerofjuice"][QUOTE="Gxgear"]

LOL at people who actually thinks Portal 2 is better than Portal.

Gxgear

You also didn't have to pay full retail for it. Look up a couple of posts for a more detailed explnation.

The co-op was a great addition for sure, but it alone doesn't "stomp" anything. Not to take anything away from the co-op campaign, but with 2 people in play it also meant the solutions had to be more specific and easier interpreted. It shows with puzzles featuring only 1 possible solutions, and a lot of visual queues to reduce the level of difficulty. Another thing that didn't sit well was the loading time, which is mitigated in the single player mode by the character's one-sided dialogues.

The whole point of a puzzle game is to have only one solution...

I also don't get why you "LOL" at anyone who thinks Portal 2 is better than Portal, since it's clear that most people agree that Portal 2 is the superior game.

[QUOTE="Gxgear"]

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

The only thing different the SMG2 comment was the game. Other than that, the comment expressed the same sentiment as yours.

You implied that I took their opinion as my own. I didn't as I never expressed an opinion about the game, which they did. I expressed an opinion about your logic and used MC as part of my argument. Nowhere did I adopt their opinion.

So, yes, you did put words into my mouth. You implied that I took their opinions as my own, which I didn't as I never stated an opinion on the game and the game is the only thing they had an opinion on.

It would be more honest to just admit that you misinterpreted my use of Metacritic instead of trying to twist both my words and your words. It is not the end of the world to admit a mistake.

GreySeal9

Just like you misinterpreted my meaning? You should do well to take your own advice.

Frankly why you even brought up metacritic is confusing, because it has zero relevance to my views. The only explanation is that because you have zero experience with the game itself, so using that might lend you some credibility. It doesn't. If you even took the time to compare both titles in discrepencies, with who reviewed them, the number of reviews, then it should be clear why metacritic isn't reliable at all. Even just considering the facts that one was part of a collection while the other is a retail release, gives an idea of why they would be treated differently.

You have not demonstrated that I misinterpreted your meaning. You have simply said that you meant something than what you typed. That's not a miseninterpetation on my part, it's either a miscommunication on your part or backpeddling.

I brought up Metacritic because I'm wanted to show that the notion that it's better than the first is not that radical to where it would seem like something worthy of laughter. Perhaps it wasn't the best point, but there's no reason to twist my words to mean something they don't.

If you didn't use metacritic in the way that I felt (which I explained) was laughable , then you're exmpt from that comment aren't you? But obviously I've stirred something there, or we wouldn't still be here debating semantics.

I dont have to demonstrate anything. I've already told you, and explained in detail what I meant. If you're just choosing to ignore it then so be it. Doesn't change the fact that you misinterpreted. How do I even attempt to backpeddle when you're just cherrypicking certain things I've said and use it out of context?

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

[QUOTE="Gxgear"]

Just like you misinterpreted my meaning? You should do well to take your own advice.

Frankly why you even brought up metacritic is confusing, because it has zero relevance to my views. The only explanation is that because you have zero experience with the game itself, so using that might lend you some credibility. It doesn't. If you even took the time to compare both titles in discrepencies, with who reviewed them, the number of reviews, then it should be clear why metacritic isn't reliable at all. Even just considering the facts that one was part of a collection while the other is a retail release, gives an idea of why they would be treated differently.

Gxgear

You have not demonstrated that I misinterpreted your meaning. You have simply said that you meant something than what you typed. That's not a miseninterpetation on my part, it's either a miscommunication on your part or backpeddling.

I brought up Metacritic because I'm wanted to show that the notion that it's better than the first is not that radical to where it would seem like something worthy of laughter. Perhaps it wasn't the best point, but there's no reason to twist my words to mean something they don't.

If you didn't use metacritic in the way that I felt (which I explained) was laughable , then you're exmpt from that comment aren't you? But obviously I've stirred something there, or we wouldn't still be here debating semantics.

I dont have to demonstrate anything. I've already told you, and explained in detail what I meant. If you're just choosing to ignore it then so be it. Doesn't change the fact that you misinterpreted. How do I even attempt to backpeddle when you're just cherrypicking certain things I've said and use it out of context?

I didn't cheerypick anything. That was your entire quote verbatim. I don't believe I misinterpreted. I believe your backpeddling because you realize your logic is just as flawed as the logic in my SMG2 comment.

The only thing you've stirred is annoyance in implying that I use Metacritic in such a way because you're not going to convince anybody you weren't talking about me since you were addressing my comments.

[QUOTE="Gxgear"]

[QUOTE="drinkerofjuice"] The co-op alone stomps what the original game provided. Unlike the original game, Portal 2 wasn't just a tease.UnrealLegend

You also didn't have to pay full retail for it. Look up a couple of posts for a more detailed explnation.

The co-op was a great addition for sure, but it alone doesn't "stomp" anything. Not to take anything away from the co-op campaign, but with 2 people in play it also meant the solutions had to be more specific and easier interpreted. It shows with puzzles featuring only 1 possible solutions, and a lot of visual queues to reduce the level of difficulty. Another thing that didn't sit well was the loading time, which is mitigated in the single player mode by the character's one-sided dialogues.

The whole point of a puzzle game is to have only one solution...

I also don't get why you "LOL" at anyone who thinks Portal 2 is better than Portal, since it's clear that most people agree that Portal 2 is the superior game.

Have you played games like Scribblenauts, or even classics like Tetris? Not all puzzle games fit the same mould. Let's not even talk about the puzzle genre; even with the original Portal, it allowed for some freedom as to how you want to approach and solve the puzzle. 1 solution puzzles was definitely the intention of Portal 2, which is why it's a step back from Portal 1.

It's clear? How so? Most people didn't even give Portal 1 a shot, and just adapted critic's opinions as their own. Moost people just agree because it's the only one they've played.

It feels so odd watching an intellegent argument take place on SW, rather than the usual back-and-forth bickering.

[QUOTE="UnrealLegend"]

[QUOTE="Gxgear"]

You also didn't have to pay full retail for it. Look up a couple of posts for a more detailed explnation.

The co-op was a great addition for sure, but it alone doesn't "stomp" anything. Not to take anything away from the co-op campaign, but with 2 people in play it also meant the solutions had to be more specific and easier interpreted. It shows with puzzles featuring only 1 possible solutions, and a lot of visual queues to reduce the level of difficulty. Another thing that didn't sit well was the loading time, which is mitigated in the single player mode by the character's one-sided dialogues.

Gxgear

The whole point of a puzzle game is to have only one solution...

I also don't get why you "LOL" at anyone who thinks Portal 2 is better than Portal, since it's clear that most people agree that Portal 2 is the superior game.

Have you played games like Scribblenauts, or even classics like Tetris? Not all puzzle games fit the same mould. Let's not even talk about the puzzle genre; even with the original Portal, it allowed for some freedom as to how you want to approach and solve the puzzle. 1 solution puzzles was definitely the intention of Portal 2, which is why it's a step back from Portal 1.

It's clear? How so? Most people didn't even give Portal 1 a shot, and just adapted critic's opinions as their own. Moost people just agree because it's the only one they've played.

No. There was only one solution for the puzzles in Portal. End of Story.

[QUOTE="UnrealLegend"]

[QUOTE="Gxgear"]

You also didn't have to pay full retail for it. Look up a couple of posts for a more detailed explnation.

The co-op was a great addition for sure, but it alone doesn't "stomp" anything. Not to take anything away from the co-op campaign, but with 2 people in play it also meant the solutions had to be more specific and easier interpreted. It shows with puzzles featuring only 1 possible solutions, and a lot of visual queues to reduce the level of difficulty. Another thing that didn't sit well was the loading time, which is mitigated in the single player mode by the character's one-sided dialogues.

Gxgear

The whole point of a puzzle game is to have only one solution...

I also don't get why you "LOL" at anyone who thinks Portal 2 is better than Portal, since it's clear that most people agree that Portal 2 is the superior game.

Have you played games like Scribblenauts, or even classics like Tetris? Not all puzzle games fit the same mould. Let's not even talk about the puzzle genre; even with the original Portal, it allowed for some freedom as to how you want to approach and solve the puzzle. 1 solution puzzles was definitely the intention of Portal 2, which is why it's a step back from Portal 1.

It's clear? How so? Most people didn't even give Portal 1 a shot, and just adapted critic's opinions as their own. Moost people just agree because it's the only one they've played.

And you know this how?

[QUOTE="Gxgear"]

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

You have not demonstrated that I misinterpreted your meaning. You have simply said that you meant something than what you typed. That's not a miseninterpetation on my part, it's either a miscommunication on your part or backpeddling.

I brought up Metacritic because I'm wanted to show that the notion that it's better than the first is not that radical to where it would seem like something worthy of laughter. Perhaps it wasn't the best point, but there's no reason to twist my words to mean something they don't.

GreySeal9

If you didn't use metacritic in the way that I felt (which I explained) was laughable , then you're exmpt from that comment aren't you? But obviously I've stirred something there, or we wouldn't still be here debating semantics.

I dont have to demonstrate anything. I've already told you, and explained in detail what I meant. If you're just choosing to ignore it then so be it. Doesn't change the fact that you misinterpreted. How do I even attempt to backpeddle when you're just cherrypicking certain things I've said and use it out of context?

I didn't cheerypick anything. That was your entire quote verbatim. I don't believe I misinterpreted. I believe your backpeddling because you realize your logic is just as flawed as the logic in my SMG2 comment.

The only thing you've stirred is annoyance in implying that I use Metacritic in such a way because you're not going to convince anybody you weren't talking about me since you were addressing my comments.

If you didn't feel that comment describes what you were doing, then you would have defended it. You didn't, and talking about it now just seems fishy.

You're wrong and misinterpreted, simple as that. When I'm explaining myself you just choose to ignore it. Hence the cherrypicking. Your SMG2 comparison is completely off because you made a judgement on the quality on the game, I made a comparison between the sequel and the original. Just because your logic is wrong doesn't mean you can extrapolate that to what I've said. Still arguing pointless semantics...

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

[QUOTE="Gxgear"]

If you didn't use metacritic in the way that I felt (which I explained) was laughable , then you're exmpt from that comment aren't you? But obviously I've stirred something there, or we wouldn't still be here debating semantics.

I dont have to demonstrate anything. I've already told you, and explained in detail what I meant. If you're just choosing to ignore it then so be it. Doesn't change the fact that you misinterpreted. How do I even attempt to backpeddle when you're just cherrypicking certain things I've said and use it out of context?

Gxgear

I didn't cheerypick anything. That was your entire quote verbatim. I don't believe I misinterpreted. I believe your backpeddling because you realize your logic is just as flawed as the logic in my SMG2 comment.

The only thing you've stirred is annoyance in implying that I use Metacritic in such a way because you're not going to convince anybody you weren't talking about me since you were addressing my comments.

If you didn't feel that comment describes what you were doing, then you would have defended it. You didn't, and talking about it now just seems fishy.

You're wrong and misinterpreted, simple as that. When I'm explaining myself you just choose to ignore it. Hence the cherrypicking. Your SMG2 comparison is completely off because you made a judgement on the quality on the game, I made a comparison between the sequel and the original. Just because your logic is wrong doesn't mean you can extrapolate that to what I've said. Still arguing pointless semantics...

Would you please stop with this kind of nonsense? You said that in addressing me and what I said about MC wasn't that.

As for the second comment, you said what you said, regardless of how you want to try to present it after the fact.

When I used the SMG2 example, I was showing how it doesn't make sense to say the list is not credible based on personal opinion. That is all you were doing with your Portal example. And now you're trying to pretend you were only talking about it being an "indictor" to you personally even though you said "you should".

It simply doesn't wash and you words are what they are regardless of any post-commment spin.

[QUOTE="Gxgear"]

[QUOTE="UnrealLegend"]

The whole point of a puzzle game is to have only one solution...

I also don't get why you "LOL" at anyone who thinks Portal 2 is better than Portal, since it's clear that most people agree that Portal 2 is the superior game.

UnrealLegend

Have you played games like Scribblenauts, or even classics like Tetris? Not all puzzle games fit the same mould. Let's not even talk about the puzzle genre; even with the original Portal, it allowed for some freedom as to how you want to approach and solve the puzzle. 1 solution puzzles was definitely the intention of Portal 2, which is why it's a step back from Portal 1.

It's clear? How so? Most people didn't even give Portal 1 a shot, and just adapted critic's opinions as their own. Moost people just agree because it's the only one they've played.

No. There was only one solution for the puzzles in Portal. End of Story.

I've solved the same rooms with more than 1 way, so you're right: it's not up for debate.

MGS4 was probably not on the list since you can't just go into it and have fun, doesn't work that way. Learning about the 10 page plot and such is boring and time consuming and not fun for me. I beleive they made a good choice. In retrospect, the list all together is pretty bad :/

Looked at number #1- Ignore my previous statement, it should have made the list

[QUOTE="Gxgear"]

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

I didn't cheerypick anything. That was your entire quote verbatim. I don't believe I misinterpreted. I believe your backpeddling because you realize your logic is just as flawed as the logic in my SMG2 comment.

The only thing you've stirred is annoyance in implying that I use Metacritic in such a way because you're not going to convince anybody you weren't talking about me since you were addressing my comments.

GreySeal9

If you didn't feel that comment describes what you were doing, then you would have defended it. You didn't, and talking about it now just seems fishy.

You're wrong and misinterpreted, simple as that. When I'm explaining myself you just choose to ignore it. Hence the cherrypicking. Your SMG2 comparison is completely off because you made a judgement on the quality on the game, I made a comparison between the sequel and the original. Just because your logic is wrong doesn't mean you can extrapolate that to what I've said. Still arguing pointless semantics...

Would you please stop with this kind of nonsense? You said that in addressing me and what I said about MC wasn't that.

As for the second comment, you said what you said, regardless of how you want to try to present it after the fact.

When I used the SMG2 example, I was showing how it doesn't make sense to say the list is not credible based on personal opinion. That is all you were doing with your Portal example. And now you're trying to pretend you were only talking about it being an "indictor" to you personally even though you said "you should".

It simply doesn't wash and you words are what they are regardless of any post-commment spin.

That sounds like exactly what you're doing, using metacritic and then denying the fact that it implies anything. You're right, the nonsense has to stop, it just needs to be said to the right person. Arguing about semanatics on SW is as ridiculous as it gets, but I'm not the one who started it.

You keep saying that my comment should mean one thing, when I've explicitly told you that it doesn't. I didn't just start saying this now, it happened many posts ago where it was explained which you have conveniently ignored until now.

[QUOTE="UnrealLegend"]

[QUOTE="Gxgear"]

Have you played games like Scribblenauts, or even classics like Tetris? Not all puzzle games fit the same mould. Let's not even talk about the puzzle genre; even with the original Portal, it allowed for some freedom as to how you want to approach and solve the puzzle. 1 solution puzzles was definitely the intention of Portal 2, which is why it's a step back from Portal 1.

It's clear? How so? Most people didn't even give Portal 1 a shot, and just adapted critic's opinions as their own. Moost people just agree because it's the only one they've played.

Gxgear

No. There was only one solution for the puzzles in Portal. End of Story.

I've solved the same rooms with more than 1 way, so you're right: it's not up for debate.

If you can provide proof, then I might believe you. But regardless, neither Portal or Portal 2 are the kind of puzzle games that are supposed to offer more than one solution.

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

[QUOTE="Gxgear"]

If you didn't feel that comment describes what you were doing, then you would have defended it. You didn't, and talking about it now just seems fishy.

You're wrong and misinterpreted, simple as that. When I'm explaining myself you just choose to ignore it. Hence the cherrypicking. Your SMG2 comparison is completely off because you made a judgement on the quality on the game, I made a comparison between the sequel and the original. Just because your logic is wrong doesn't mean you can extrapolate that to what I've said. Still arguing pointless semantics...

Gxgear

Would you please stop with this kind of nonsense? You said that in addressing me and what I said about MC wasn't that.

As for the second comment, you said what you said, regardless of how you want to try to present it after the fact.

When I used the SMG2 example, I was showing how it doesn't make sense to say the list is not credible based on personal opinion. That is all you were doing with your Portal example. And now you're trying to pretend you were only talking about it being an "indictor" to you personally even though you said "you should".

It simply doesn't wash and you words are what they are regardless of any post-commment spin.

That sounds like exactly what you're doing, using metacritic and then denying the fact that it implies anything. You're right, the nonsense has to stop, it just needs to be said to the right person. Arguing about semanatics on SW is as ridiculous as it gets, but I'm not the one who started it.

You keep saying that my comment should mean one thing, when I've explicitly told you that it doesn't. I didn't just start saying this now, it happened many posts ago where it was explained which you have conveniently ignored until now.

Only you said that bit about taking a Metacrtic score as one's own, which I didn't do. You keep trying to avoid being held accountable for your words and calling attempts to point out what you said and how it is inconsistent with what I said "semantics".

I don't accept your explanation because I don't think it is trustworthy, especially considering that you've been dishonest about my comments about Metacritic. I think that my interpretation was correct (because that's what your actual words support; your actual words don't jive with your alleged meaning) and your explanation to me seems like an attempt at trying to pretend you didn't say something you clearly said.

I judge what people say, not what they say they meant. If what they say they meant matches up with what they said, then I believe it. But that is not the case in this situation.

[QUOTE="Gxgear"]

[QUOTE="UnrealLegend"]

The whole point of a puzzle game is to have only one solution...

I also don't get why you "LOL" at anyone who thinks Portal 2 is better than Portal, since it's clear that most people agree that Portal 2 is the superior game.

GreySeal9

Have you played games like Scribblenauts, or even classics like Tetris? Not all puzzle games fit the same mould. Let's not even talk about the puzzle genre; even with the original Portal, it allowed for some freedom as to how you want to approach and solve the puzzle. 1 solution puzzles was definitely the intention of Portal 2, which is why it's a step back from Portal 1.

It's clear? How so? Most people didn't even give Portal 1 a shot, and just adapted critic's opinions as their own. Moost people just agree because it's the only one they've played.

And you know this how?

No answer for this? :?

[QUOTE="UnrealLegend"]

[QUOTE="Gxgear"]

Have you played games like Scribblenauts, or even ****cs like Tetris? Not all puzzle games fit the same mould. Let's not even talk about the puzzle genre; even with the original Portal, it allowed for some freedom as to how you want to approach and solve the puzzle. 1 solution puzzles was definitely the intention of Portal 2, which is why it's a step back from Portal 1.

It's clear? How so? Most people didn't even give Portal 1 a shot, and just adapted critic's opinions as their own. Moost people just agree because it's the only one they've played.

Gxgear

No. There was only one solution for the puzzles in Portal. End of Story.

I've solved the same rooms with more than 1 way, so you're right: it's not up for debate.

MGS4 doesn't need to be on the top 100 games.

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

[QUOTE="Gxgear"]

If you didn't feel that comment describes what you were doing, then you would have defended it. You didn't, and talking about it now just seems fishy.

You're wrong and misinterpreted, simple as that. When I'm explaining myself you just choose to ignore it. Hence the cherrypicking. Your SMG2 comparison is completely off because you made a judgement on the quality on the game, I made a comparison between the sequel and the original. Just because your logic is wrong doesn't mean you can extrapolate that to what I've said. Still arguing pointless semantics...

Gxgear

Would you please stop with this kind of nonsense? You said that in addressing me and what I said about MC wasn't that.

As for the second comment, you said what you said, regardless of how you want to try to present it after the fact.

When I used the SMG2 example, I was showing how it doesn't make sense to say the list is not credible based on personal opinion. That is all you were doing with your Portal example. And now you're trying to pretend you were only talking about it being an "indictor" to you personally even though you said "you should".

It simply doesn't wash and you words are what they are regardless of any post-commment spin.

That sounds like exactly what you're doing, using metacritic and then denying the fact that it implies anything. You're right, the nonsense has to stop, it just needs to be said to the right person. Arguing about semanatics on SW is as ridiculous as it gets, but I'm not the one who started it.

You keep saying that my comment should mean one thing, when I've explicitly told you that it doesn't. I didn't just start saying this now, it happened many posts ago where it was explained which you have conveniently ignored until now.

[QUOTE="Gxgear"]

[QUOTE="UnrealLegend"]

No. There was only one solution for the puzzles in Portal. End of Story.

UnrealLegend

I've solved the same rooms with more than 1 way, so you're right: it's not up for debate.

If you can provide proof, then I might believe you. But regardless, neither Portal or Portal 2 are the kind of puzzle games that are supposed to offer more than one solution.

Like the other person just mentioned, there are multiple ways to solve rooms. All the proof you need is on youtube.

[QUOTE="Gxgear"]

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

Would you please stop with this kind of nonsense? You said that in addressing me and what I said about MC wasn't that.

As for the second comment, you said what you said, regardless of how you want to try to present it after the fact.

When I used the SMG2 example, I was showing how it doesn't make sense to say the list is not credible based on personal opinion. That is all you were doing with your Portal example. And now you're trying to pretend you were only talking about it being an "indictor" to you personally even though you said "you should".

It simply doesn't wash and you words are what they are regardless of any post-commment spin.

GreySeal9

That sounds like exactly what you're doing, using metacritic and then denying the fact that it implies anything. You're right, the nonsense has to stop, it just needs to be said to the right person. Arguing about semanatics on SW is as ridiculous as it gets, but I'm not the one who started it.

You keep saying that my comment should mean one thing, when I've explicitly told you that it doesn't. I didn't just start saying this now, it happened many posts ago where it was explained which you have conveniently ignored until now.

Only you said that bit about taking a Metacrtic score as one's own, which I didn't do. You keep trying to avoid being held accountable for your words and calling attempts to point out what you said and how it is inconsistent with what I said "semantics".

I don't accept your explanation because I don't think it is trustworthy, especially considering that you've been dishonest about my comments about Metacritic. I think that my interpretation was correct (because that's what your actual words support; your actual words don't jive with your alleged meaning) and your explanation to me seems like an attempt at trying to pretend you didn't say something you clearly said.

I judge what people say, not what they say they meant. If what they say they meant matches up with what they said, then I believe it. But that is not the case in this situation.

Heh, you choose to ignore because you have no response to it. By cherrypicking arguements you pretty much made you less trustworthy than anyone else here. You brought the whole metacritic part up as proof for something that is irrelevant to something I said. Bitter about my comments about people misusing metacritic? Should have explain yourself from the start. Giving a vague response then saying you don't mean what it was implied is just another way of avoiding taking responsibility of your own words. You can't pick out specific parts of my posts and attack that, ignore everything else, then accuse me of being untrustworthy.

The words do mean what they say, go back and read it. Twisting the words and trying to put the new meaning in my mouth is all of your doing. Before you start pointing fingers try to hold some accountability of your own.

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

[QUOTE="Gxgear"]

Have you played games like Scribblenauts, or even classics like Tetris? Not all puzzle games fit the same mould. Let's not even talk about the puzzle genre; even with the original Portal, it allowed for some freedom as to how you want to approach and solve the puzzle. 1 solution puzzles was definitely the intention of Portal 2, which is why it's a step back from Portal 1.

It's clear? How so? Most people didn't even give Portal 1 a shot, and just adapted critic's opinions as their own. Moost people just agree because it's the only one they've played.

GreySeal9

And you know this how?

No answer for this? :?

Why would I need an answer for it? It's an observation made from talking to people about Portal and from their admissions.

[QUOTE="Gxgear"]

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

That sounds like exactly what you're doing, using metacritic and then denying the fact that it implies anything. You're right, the nonsense has to stop, it just needs to be said to the right person. Arguing about semanatics on SW is as ridiculous as it gets, but I'm not the one who started it.

You keep saying that my comment should mean one thing, when I've explicitly told you that it doesn't. I didn't just start saying this now, it happened many posts ago where it was explained which you have conveniently ignored until now.

dreman999

If you read a couple posts up I've given my reasons:

You do realize I'm talking about Portal 2 right? It's a good game, but not better than Portal as a game. The whole experience is quite linear, with all the puzzles offering a single possible solution. It's a step back from Portal where there's multiple ways to clear a room, which is one of the most memorable things for me from the original. Portal 2 may have clocked in several hours longer, but a good portion of it is artificially extended with sections where you just walk from point A to point B with not much happening. Overall it just didn't feel like the game's improved, just wrapped together in a nicer overall package.Gxgear

Just saying it has better ______ doesn't necessary make it better, nor are those valid reasons. Not saying you're wrong on all those accounts, they just weren't explained at all.

[QUOTE="DarkLink77"]

MGS4 was crap. Besides, if you paid attention to the article, they were only putting one game from each franchise on the list, and they chose Peace Walker.

Serioussamik

Okay kinda stepdown from MGS 3 but come on,definitely not crap.

There are just people with awful taste in games.If you say MGS4 is crap you have no clue what your talking about.Sure you may dislike it or something, thats ok, but calling a game that ranked a perfect score in so many places"crap" is simply ignorant and shows how much you know what a good game is.

MGS4 is not a 10 imo but still its a great game.

Doesn't change the fact that IGN praised as one of the finest gaming experiences OF ALL TIME, adding that they would have given it 11/10 if possible.

It's my favourite game of all time, so yes, I think it does.

[QUOTE="Gxgear"]

[QUOTE="UnrealLegend"]

No. There was only one solution for the puzzles in Portal. End of Story.

Phazevariance

I've solved the same rooms with more than 1 way, so you're right: it's not up for debate.

MGS4 doesn't need to be on the top 100 games.

It's IGN. I've finally learned to listen to what other people have been saying about them for a long time.

IGN has no credibility.

I personally don't approve of them for the s***** DNF review, and putting Angry Birds over Crysis.

ChubbyGuy40

Credibility? All these sites are, are opinionated sites.. If you want to be objective about it, you shouldn't trust any gaming site that tries to rate games on a scale like IGN and gamespot does.. They give absolutely no real method to how they come to these conclusions what so ever in the score and how the review does the game..

[QUOTE="Mozelleple112"][QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

Sarcasm, right? :?

GreySeal9

We're not comparing to Mass Effect and Bioshock. We're comparing to films when we talk about Oscars.

Do you really think the story in MGS4 stacks up to the kind of films that win Oscars? If so, what about it makes you think that?

While MGS4 would rank really low on my list of favorite games, I find it hard to believe that any gaming site would not have it in a list of 100 best games. Considering how much love and hype the fanboys always give it.

Doesn't change the fact that IGN praised as one of the finest gaming experiences OF ALL TIME, adding that they would have given it 11/10 if possible.

metalgear-solid

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

[QUOTE="Mozelleple112"] Absolutely not. The quality of the story, acting, cinematography, ending, intro, voice acting etc makes even games like Mass Effect / Bishock look bland and boring in my opinion. I've been spoiled. Mozelleple112

We're not comparing to Mass Effect and Bioshock. We're comparing to films when we talk about Oscars.

Do you really think the story in MGS4 stacks up to the kind of films that win Oscars? If so, what about it makes you think that?

They give absolutely no real method to how they come to these conclusions what so ever in the score and how the review does the game..

sSubZerOo

Anyone that is upset with this top 100 list, go ahead and make your own. Make a top 100 list that everyone will agree with every selection you make. Chances are you won't even find 1 other person that will agree with all of your selections.

Why do you some how think IGN HAS to have some list where everyone will agree with? How is this list some how not credible because you don't agree with something. Your list is just as credible as everyone else.

[QUOTE="finalfantasy94"]

[QUOTE="dreman999"]Because MGS3 had everything MGS4 had but with a more logic plot and then Added peace walker on top of it....

dreman999

I wouldint call it logic just more simple. SO yea MGS3 has a more simple and straight forward plot then the other MGS,but that doesint make it better.

imo I still think MGS4 is a better game then 3. I dont know how the hand thing makes anything different. It sure didint bug me.

It does, screw ign.

Best stealth/action game I have played this gen.

Oh FFS! They only included the most recent game from each series they thought was good, so they put in Peace Walker instead. THEY SAID AS MUCH AT THE BOTTOM OF THE LIST

Oh, SW. You never cease to amaze me. :roll: