Official LBP2 SW Thread! GS AAAE! 9.0 - KEEP IT HERE

[QUOTE="metalgear-solid"]

[QUOTE="heretrix"]

Hey 9.0! Congrats guys. I'm not into LBP at all, but great score.

heretrix

Although I'm not into the game called little big planet, I am quite happy that such an original game has gotten the accolades it probably deserves. My heartfelt congratulations go out to the people that waited for the game to come out.

:|

[QUOTE="Desmonic"][QUOTE="Lto_thaG"]

Flop!

Lto_thaG

People actually did try to call the first one a "Minor Flop" for getting less than 9.5. System Wars has become too tame. :P

[QUOTE="IceBlazerX"][QUOTE="jimmypsn"]

I think its because Halo is abetter game and more popular.

spookykid143

I noticed that if your Sackboy gets burned or electrocuted or dies, you can always do that and restart in the check point, there's no consequence in dying in LBP2. In part one you only had like four chances.

I noticed that if your Sackboy gets burned or electrocuted or dies, you can always do that and restart in the check point, there's no consequence in dying in LBP2. In part one you only had like four chances.

gago-gago

[QUOTE="gago-gago"]

I noticed that if your Sackboy gets burned or electrocuted or dies, you can always do that and restart in the check point, there's no consequence in dying in LBP2. In part one you only had like four chances.

Giancar

I noticed that if your Sackboy gets burned or electrocuted or dies, you can always do that and restart in the check point, there's no consequence in dying in LBP2. In part one you only had like four chances.

gago-gago

[QUOTE="gago-gago"]

I noticed that if your Sackboy gets burned or electrocuted or dies, you can always do that and restart in the check point, there's no consequence in dying in LBP2. In part one you only had like four chances.

RavenLoud

I noticed that if your Sackboy gets burned or electrocuted or dies, you can always do that and restart in the check point, there's no consequence in dying in LBP2. In part one you only had like four chances.

gago-gago

[QUOTE="Lto_thaG"][QUOTE="Desmonic"] Flop?Lionheart08

People actually did try to call the first one a "Minor Flop" for getting less than 9.5. System Wars has become too tame. :P

[QUOTE="IceBlazerX"][QUOTE="jimmypsn"]

I think its because Halo is abetter game and more popular.

spookykid143

[QUOTE="spookykid143"]

[QUOTE="IceBlazerX"] That must show why Halo Reach and 3 scored higher than LBP and LBP2..... ...oh wait...it didn't. IceBlazerX

[QUOTE="IceBlazerX"][QUOTE="spookykid143"]Reach and Halo 3 both scored a 9.5

soulitane

[QUOTE="IceBlazerX"][QUOTE="spookykid143"]Reach and Halo 3 both scored a 9.5

soulitane

I know, it's impossible in this haven of intellect.soulitane

[QUOTE="soulitane"]I know, it's impossible in this haven of intellect.Stevo_the_gamer

[QUOTE="Stevo_the_gamer"][QUOTE="IceBlazerX"] It's even more offical. My opinion>critic's opinion.IceBlazerX

Follow my example?

[QUOTE="soulitane"][QUOTE="IceBlazerX"] I'm talking about the GR score. Not one website. :|IceBlazerX

media molecule deserves all the success they get, all reviews are saying it's improved in every way compared to the original. can't wait to get my collector's edition in the mail this week.

[QUOTE="IceBlazerX"][QUOTE="spookykid143"]Reach and Halo 3 both scored a 9.5

soulitane

Yeah, but also, LBP2 (so far) is outscoring Halo Reach on Metacritic, and LBP1 outscored Halo3 (and every other 360 exclusive, for that matter). LBP franchise > Halo franchise confirmed? I think so.

ianuilliam

Halo: Combat Evolved - 97
Halo 2 - 95

[QUOTE="ianuilliam"]

Yeah, but also, LBP2 (so far) is outscoring Halo Reach on Metacritic, and LBP1 outscored Halo3 (and every other 360 exclusive, for that matter). LBP franchise > Halo franchise confirmed? I think so.

waltefmoney

Halo: Combat Evolved - 97
Halo 2 - 95

[QUOTE="waltefmoney"]

Halo: Combat Evolved - 97
Halo 2 - 95

ianuilliam

Still part of the franchise.

[QUOTE="waltefmoney"]

[QUOTE="ianuilliam"]

Yeah, but also, LBP2 (so far) is outscoring Halo Reach on Metacritic, and LBP1 outscored Halo3 (and every other 360 exclusive, for that matter). LBP franchise > Halo franchise confirmed? I think so.

ianuilliam

Halo: Combat Evolved - 97
Halo 2 - 95

[QUOTE="waltefmoney"]

[QUOTE="ianuilliam"]

Yeah, but also, LBP2 (so far) is outscoring Halo Reach on Metacritic, and LBP1 outscored Halo3 (and every other 360 exclusive, for that matter). LBP franchise > Halo franchise confirmed? I think so.

Halo: Combat Evolved - 97
Halo 2 - 95

And last gen has different standards then this one. I'm showing these "LBP>>>Halo" posts to my 360 fanboy friends. I can't wait to see what excuse they make up this time. "Shooters don't go on forums". What next? :lol:IceBlazerX

There are shooters this gen that outscore LBP(BioShock), so you shouldn't compare an entire genre to a single game(or series).

[QUOTE="ianuilliam"]

[QUOTE="waltefmoney"]

Halo: Combat Evolved - 97
Halo 2 - 95

IceBlazerX

Why is there so much talk of Halo in the LBP2 thread... :/

Why is there so much talk of Halo in the LBP2 thread... :/

shinrabanshou

Cuz someone said LBP > Halo.

[QUOTE="soulitane"][QUOTE="IceBlazerX"] I'm talking about the GR score. Not one website. :|ianuilliam

So much fail in this post.

[QUOTE="IceBlazerX"][QUOTE="ianuilliam"]Pshh what are you talking about. That was last gen. ;)

[QUOTE="FIipMode"]

[QUOTE="IceBlazerX"] And last gen has different standards then this one. I'm showing these "LBP>>>Halo" posts to my 360 fanboy friends. I can't wait to see what excuse they make up this time. "Shooters don't go on forums". What next? :lol:IceBlazerX

Well don't say GS like it's one hive mind thinking the same thing. For one these games weren't reviewed by the same people, it would be easier if the same person reviewed every sequel to the series, but sadly this isn't the case and it's reviewed by different people, people with different gaming backgrounds & different opinions.

And 8.5 isn't that big of a difference from a 9.0 anyway.

[QUOTE="IceBlazerX"][QUOTE="FIipMode"] I understand that the standards change over time, but if you say A franchise > B franchise it doesn't make sense if B franchise has games in it that outscores it no matter the gen.

FIipMode

Well don't say GS like it's one hive mind thinking the same thing. For one these games weren't reviewed by the same people, it would be easier if the same person reviewed every sequel to the series, but sadly this isn't the case and it's reviewed by different people, people with different gaming backgrounds & different opinions.

And 8.5 isn't that big of a difference from a 9.0 anyway.

[QUOTE="IceBlazerX"][QUOTE="FIipMode"] I understand that the standards change over time, but if you say A franchise > B franchise it doesn't make sense if B franchise has games in it that outscores it no matter the gen.

FIipMode

Well don't say GS like it's one hive mind thinking the same thing. For one these games weren't reviewed by the same people, it would be easier if the same person reviewed every sequel to the series, but sadly this isn't the case and it's reviewed by different people, people with different gaming backgrounds & different opinions.

And 8.5 isn't that big of a difference from a 9.0 anyway.

Yes, but you don't understand: They said that ACiT was the near best in the series. So why did that score less than every single PS2 one?

And then they said that QfB was the best R&C game since UYA.

Deadlocked got a score of 8.6. QfB got 7.5

And if the first R&C game that scored a ridicously high score of 9 is better than every single other R&C game yet according to that logic when they said otherwise.

[QUOTE="FIipMode"]

[QUOTE="IceBlazerX"] I suppose so, but take R&C for example. Every single R&C game on the PS2 scored 8.5 or higher. GS said that QfB was the best R&C game yet, and that ACiT was the near best in the series. Now why did ACiT score 8.5 and the PS2 ones scored 8.5 or higher. Even DL did.IceBlazerX

Well don't say GS like it's one hive mind thinking the same thing. For one these games weren't reviewed by the same people, it would be easier if the same person reviewed every sequel to the series, but sadly this isn't the case and it's reviewed by different people, people with different gaming backgrounds & different opinions.

And 8.5 isn't that big of a difference from a 9.0 anyway.

Yes, but you don't understand: They said that ACiT was the near best in the series. So why did that score less than every single PS2 one?

And then they said that QfB was the best R&C game since UYA.

Deadlocked got a score of 8.6. QfB got 7.5

And if the first R&C game that scored a ridicously high score of 9 is better than every single other R&C game yet according to that logic when they said otherwise.

[QUOTE="FIipMode"]

[QUOTE="IceBlazerX"] I suppose so, but take R&C for example. Every single R&C game on the PS2 scored 8.5 or higher. GS said that QfB was the best R&C game yet, and that ACiT was the near best in the series. Now why did ACiT score 8.5 and the PS2 ones scored 8.5 or higher. Even DL did.IceBlazerX

Well don't say GS like it's one hive mind thinking the same thing. For one these games weren't reviewed by the same people, it would be easier if the same person reviewed every sequel to the series, but sadly this isn't the case and it's reviewed by different people, people with different gaming backgrounds & different opinions.

And 8.5 isn't that big of a difference from a 9.0 anyway.

Yes, but you don't understand: They said that ACiT was the near best in the series. So why did that score less than every single PS2 one?

And then they said that QfB was the best R&C game since UYA.

Deadlocked got a score of 8.6. QfB got 7.5

And if the first R&C game that scored a ridicously high score of 9 is better than every single other R&C game yet according to that logic when they said otherwise.

[QUOTE="IceBlazerX"]

[QUOTE="FIipMode"]

Well don't say GS like it's one hive mind thinking the same thing. For one these games weren't reviewed by the same people, it would be easier if the same person reviewed every sequel to the series, but sadly this isn't the case and it's reviewed by different people, people with different gaming backgrounds & different opinions.

And 8.5 isn't that big of a difference from a 9.0 anyway.

soulitane

Yes, but you don't understand: They said that ACiT was the near best in the series. So why did that score less than every single PS2 one?

And then they said that QfB was the best R&C game since UYA.

Deadlocked got a score of 8.6. QfB got 7.5

And if the first R&C game that scored a ridicously high score of 9 is better than every single other R&C game yet according to that logic when they said otherwise.