Too Human should squeak in at a 9.0 here at GS. It will be close. But it should.

I strongly feel if GS takes the time and waits a day or 2 after release to review the game like they normally do on big games. They should come to the conclusion that Too Human is of AAA caliber.

Once the reviewer brushes off the idea of wanting to button mash with the A button. And start to get accustomed to the analog stick. It should be very easy to see the high production values and just truly how deep this game is.

If GS reviews this game properly it should slide in at a 9.0 very close but it should. Because if we had the old system I could see it getting an 8.8. But if they hold true and round up it should end up at a 9.0 AAA.

And another thing gamers really should not be frowning on the new concept of analog stick for Too Human. Since when has innovation been bad. Heck the Wii does motion control and that gets praised. So Too Human should be treated the same. Because once you master the analog stick it's truly sweet. So the reviewer should keep this in mind.

8.0 to 8.5...still a day one purchase for me.

I'm thinking 8.5. the thing is, like the free DLC for Crackdown a month or so after release would have brought the score up; If SK truly does make the 4 player available a few months after release they probably robbed themselves of the AAA.SecretPolice

Honestly i can see why they say 2 player is better. I think that will be fine. I mean it's already chaotic with just one player with 4 it will be a mess sometimes. I think this is why they choose 2 player it had nothing to do with could they or framrate. It was all about they tested it and tested it. And came to the conclusion that 2 player ended up funner and more balenced.

[QUOTE="SecretPolice"]I'm thinking 8.5. the thing is, like the free DLC for Crackdown a month or so after release would have brought the score up; If SK truly does make the 4 player available a few months after release they probably robbed themselves of the AAA.Dur_Rocky

Honestly i can see why they say 2 player is better. I think that will be fine. i mean it's already chaotic with just one play with 4 it will be a mess sometimes. I think this is why they choose 2 player it had nothing to do tih could they or framrate. It was all about they tested it and tested it. And cam to the conclusion that 2 player ended up funner and more balence.

I could see players I want to play with setting some strategy with 4 players where 2 go one way and 2 another and meet up for tough battles or bosses or just b/c you want too.

Yes, IMO, it would have been a better idea to let the player choose 4 or 2 player.

Me thinks there's more here with SK's choice then meets the eye. ;)

Wait, the game being hyped AAA ?

Wait, the game being hyped AAA ?

Swift_Boss_A

some were...the game looks fun, and i really liked the demo, but i don't think its everyone's cup of tea. not AAA, IMO.

8 max. 7.5 if there is justice in the world.

Assassin's Creed got 9.0 but who really thinks it deserves the score it got?

8 max. 7.5 if there is justice in the world.

Assassin's Creed got 9.0 but who really thinks it deserves the score it got?

excelR83

I do... not everyone is the same, The majority of this damn board hate on Assassin's Creed for no reason...

I'm going to say a very solid 8.5. though 9.0 certainly isn't "pushing it", it all boils down to what the reviewer thinks. rating the demo alone, i'd give it (the demo) a 7

But going past the demo, assuming all the things i've heard are true, I'd say the full game easily scores 8.5. thats what it looks like to me. That isn't saying it's bad. 8.5 is actually a good score, and I think it fits this game well.

[QUOTE="excelR83"]

8 max. 7.5 if there is justice in the world.

Assassin's Creed got 9.0 but who really thinks it deserves the score it got?

sam280992

I do... not everyone is the same, The majority of this damn board hate on Assassin's Creed for no reason...

[QUOTE="excelR83"]

8 max. 7.5 if there is justice in the world.

Assassin's Creed got 9.0 but who really thinks it deserves the score it got?

sam280992

I do... not everyone is the same, The majority of this damn board hate on Assassin's Creed for no reason...

It is boring and repetitive would be the main reasons.

[QUOTE="sam280992"][QUOTE="excelR83"]

8 max. 7.5 if there is justice in the world.

Assassin's Creed got 9.0 but who really thinks it deserves the score it got?

Vaasman

I do... not everyone is the same, The majority of this damn board hate on Assassin's Creed for no reason...

And I agree, too. I love Assassin's Creed. Yes, it does get repetitive, but every game is repetitive to me. People bash any game that scores high, because they feel like their opinion is the definitive truth.

[QUOTE="excelR83"]

8 max. 7.5 if there is justice in the world.

Assassin's Creed got 9.0 but who really thinks it deserves the score it got?

sam280992

I do... not everyone is the same, The majority of this damn board hate on Assassin's Creed for no reason...

agreed, i really liked AC

No. AA is the highest Too Human will come in at.BioShockOwnz

Agreed. While it may, perhaps, be my own personal GotY, I don't think it'll score AAA...

[QUOTE="sam280992"][QUOTE="excelR83"]

8 max. 7.5 if there is justice in the world.

Assassin's Creed got 9.0 but who really thinks it deserves the score it got?

wmc540

I do... not everyone is the same, The majority of this damn board hate on Assassin's Creed for no reason...

It is boring and repetitive would be the main reasons.

It wasn't THAT repetitive. It was, but not nearly as bad as most of this board makes it out to be.

And everyone says the combat was mindless and lacked depth... Well, you COULD win by just mashing, but that was so that it wasn't overly difficult. But, it also had some really elaborate and intricate combos and ways to fight.

Just so everyone this board understands this... NOT EVERY GAME IS MADE SPECIFICALLY FOR THE HARDCORE. SOME GAMES ARE MADE TO BE FUN. MOST ACTION GAMES AREN'T GOING TO HAVE NINJA GAIDEN OR DEVIL MAY CRY LEVEL DEPTH TO THE COMBAT

The story was good, the production values were very high, and overall the game as a WHOLE was definitely deserving of a 8.5-9.0

[QUOTE="wmc540"][QUOTE="sam280992"][QUOTE="excelR83"]

8 max. 7.5 if there is justice in the world.

Assassin's Creed got 9.0 but who really thinks it deserves the score it got?

horrowhip

I do... not everyone is the same, The majority of this damn board hate on Assassin's Creed for no reason...

It is boring and repetitive would be the main reasons.

It wasn't THAT repetitive. It was, but not nearly as bad as most of this board makes it out to be.

And everyone says the combat was mindless and lacked depth... Well, you COULD win by just mashing, but that was so that it wasn't overly difficult. But, it also had some really elaborate and intricate combos and ways to fight.

Just so everyone this board understands this... NOT EVERY GAME IS MADE SPECIFICALLY FOR THE HARDCORE. SOME GAMES ARE MADE TO BE FUN. MOST ACTION GAMES AREN'T GOING TO HAVE NINJA GAIDEN OR DEVIL MAY CRY LEVEL DEPTH TO THE COMBAT

The story was good, the production values were very high, and overall the game as a WHOLE was definitely deserving of a 8.5-9.0

Yeah, It seems like everyone in this board needs the combat in a game to be as hard as possible for it to be fun.

[QUOTE="sam280992"][QUOTE="excelR83"]

8 max. 7.5 if there is justice in the world.

Assassin's Creed got 9.0 but who really thinks it deserves the score it got?

wmc540

I do... not everyone is the same, The majority of this damn board hate on Assassin's Creed for no reason...

It is boring and repetitive would be the main reasons.

How is it boring? You probably never even played it and agreed mindlessly with the majority who hate it.

[QUOTE="wmc540"][QUOTE="sam280992"][QUOTE="excelR83"]

8 max. 7.5 if there is justice in the world.

Assassin's Creed got 9.0 but who really thinks it deserves the score it got?

horrowhip

I do... not everyone is the same, The majority of this damn board hate on Assassin's Creed for no reason...

It is boring and repetitive would be the main reasons.

It wasn't THAT repetitive. It was, but not nearly as bad as most of this board makes it out to be.

And everyone says the combat was mindless and lacked depth... Well, you COULD win by just mashing, but that was so that it wasn't overly difficult. But, it also had some really elaborate and intricate combos and ways to fight.

Just so everyone this board understands this... NOT EVERY GAME IS MADE SPECIFICALLY FOR THE HARDCORE. SOME GAMES ARE MADE TO BE FUN. MOST ACTION GAMES AREN'T GOING TO HAVE NINJA GAIDEN OR DEVIL MAY CRY LEVEL DEPTH TO THE COMBAT

The story was good, the production values were very high, and overall the game as a WHOLE was definitely deserving of a 8.5-9.0

No, no, AC was pretty bad dude, let's not get it twisted. You do the same 4 or 5 actions the entire game. The subquests are the same 4 things over and over (it seriously reminded me of the open-world Spider-man games), the assassinations are only unique because of the setting and the amount of dudes around. The last few boss kills were pretty fun, even tense, like the one that happens at that speech/rally/hanging, whatever it was, where you have to climb down towards the stage to git er done.

The production values were just alright to me. Texture pop-in and horrible framerate hiccups ruined the graphics for me. The soundtrack was amazing, but the whole audio production sounded like it was being played underwater through a gramophone. Jesper Kyd's soundtrack didn't get to breath, there was never enough clarity in any of the dialogue. The combat was different, because it was all based on timing, but it was way too simple. You are surrounded by 14 guards, and you know you will kill them all without breaking a sweat. The horse traveling from town to town was a totally tacked-on waste of time, just to make the game world seem a little bigger. The paths the horse runs on are about as linear as a 2D side-scroller. AC is only fun when you're running across rooftops and indiscriminately killing guards and punching civilians.

Too Human is at least as flawed, and it's just as hyped. I see a lot of parallels between the two games. New-gen ideas coupled with old-gen ideas and the result isn't always pretty.

Wait, the game being hyped AAA ?

Swift_Boss_A

not really the majority thinks it will be A-AA

I've never heard anyone say "squeak" in at, lol.

Anyway, 8.5 or 9. My prediction.

Oh yeah, and then there is AC's whole take on the "stealth" genre: you hold X (or A) to pray, and in doing this, you can hang around TWO FEET from the body you just killed AS LONG AS YOU WANT, and the guards will not be the wiser. When you DO catch a case, you scramble to a rooftop and find a cabana to hide in for 10 seconds and they go huh whuh wheredhego?!? There is no threat metre, no way to just duck into an alleyway and hide. GTA3 had a better evasion system. Imagine if AC was as polished as MGS4. A REAL stealth action game, with a much better combat system, smoother graphics, more than 3 voice actors for the entire game, real cutscenes instead of that lazy crap where you're stuck in a 6x6 room and can *gasp* change the camera angle.

It just seems like it was rushed out the door so they could recoup some of what they put into it. It feels very unfinished. I am a sucker for the subject matter so I can't bring myself to trade it in, but I was pretty disappointed. I followed the game since well before the current-gen consoles were even on the market, and it really didn't deliver.

No, no, AC was pretty bad dude, let's not get it twisted. You do the same 4 or 5 actions the entire game. The subquests are the same 4 things over and over (it seriously reminded me of the open-world Spider-man games), the assassinations are only unique because of the setting and the amount of dudes around. The last few boss kills were pretty fun, even tense, like the one that happens at that speech/rally/hanging, whatever it was, where you have to climb down towards the stage to git er done.

The production values were just alright to me. Texture pop-in and horrible framerate hiccups ruined the graphics for me. The soundtrack was amazing, but the whole audio production sounded like it was being played underwater through a gramophone. Jesper Kyd's soundtrack didn't get to breath, there was never enough clarity in any of the dialogue. The combat was different, because it was all based on timing, but it was way too simple. You are surrounded by 14 guards, and you know you will kill them all without breaking a sweat. The horse traveling from town to town was a totally tacked-on waste of time, just to make the game world seem a little bigger. The paths the horse runs on are about as linear as a 2D side-scroller. AC is only fun when you're running across rooftops and indiscriminately killing guards and punching civilians.

Too Human is at least as flawed, and it's just as hyped. I see a lot of parallels between the two games. New-gen ideas coupled with old-gen ideas and the result isn't always pretty.

excelR83

sure, but you could say the same for Gears of War or Halo 3. i'm not giving you a hard time, just saying.

[QUOTE="excelR83"]

No, no, AC was pretty bad dude, let's not get it twisted. You do the same 4 or 5 actions the entire game. The subquests are the same 4 things over and over (it seriously reminded me of the open-world Spider-man games), the assassinations are only unique because of the setting and the amount of dudes around. The last few boss kills were pretty fun, even tense, like the one that happens at that speech/rally/hanging, whatever it was, where you have to climb down towards the stage to git er done.

The production values were just alright to me. Texture pop-in and horrible framerate hiccups ruined the graphics for me. The soundtrack was amazing, but the whole audio production sounded like it was being played underwater through a gramophone. Jesper Kyd's soundtrack didn't get to breath, there was never enough clarity in any of the dialogue. The combat was different, because it was all based on timing, but it was way too simple. You are surrounded by 14 guards, and you know you will kill them all without breaking a sweat. The horse traveling from town to town was a totally tacked-on waste of time, just to make the game world seem a little bigger. The paths the horse runs on are about as linear as a 2D side-scroller. AC is only fun when you're running across rooftops and indiscriminately killing guards and punching civilians.

Too Human is at least as flawed, and it's just as hyped. I see a lot of parallels between the two games. New-gen ideas coupled with old-gen ideas and the result isn't always pretty.

clone01

sure, but you could say the same for Gears of War or Halo 3. i'm not giving you a hard time, just saying.

Yes but at least they try to hide the fact that you just keep doing the same thing, and the skill level changes threw the game...

The game wont get over a 8.5,

Its no gears of war or MGS4

[QUOTE="excelR83"]

No, no, AC was pretty bad dude, let's not get it twisted. You do the same 4 or 5 actions the entire game. The subquests are the same 4 things over and over (it seriously reminded me of the open-world Spider-man games), the assassinations are only unique because of the setting and the amount of dudes around. The last few boss kills were pretty fun, even tense, like the one that happens at that speech/rally/hanging, whatever it was, where you have to climb down towards the stage to git er done.

The production values were just alright to me. Texture pop-in and horrible framerate hiccups ruined the graphics for me. The soundtrack was amazing, but the whole audio production sounded like it was being played underwater through a gramophone. Jesper Kyd's soundtrack didn't get to breath, there was never enough clarity in any of the dialogue. The combat was different, because it was all based on timing, but it was way too simple. You are surrounded by 14 guards, and you know you will kill them all without breaking a sweat. The horse traveling from town to town was a totally tacked-on waste of time, just to make the game world seem a little bigger. The paths the horse runs on are about as linear as a 2D side-scroller. AC is only fun when you're running across rooftops and indiscriminately killing guards and punching civilians.

Too Human is at least as flawed, and it's just as hyped. I see a lot of parallels between the two games. New-gen ideas coupled with old-gen ideas and the result isn't always pretty.

clone01

sure, but you could say the same for Gears of War or Halo 3. i'm not giving you a hard time, just saying.

No, you really couldn't. Gears and Halo are lightyears better than AC in everything but being an open-world sandbox game.

If you had like 3 total weapons in Halo, you only fought grunts, there was only 2 or 3 environments, which all looked the same anyway, everyone was voiced by the same voice actor putting on a funny accent, the graphics regularly lurched and struggled, and the game was 6 hours long with no multiplayer, then you would almost have a point.

No, you really couldn't. Gears and Halo are lightyears better than AC in everything but being an open-world sandbox game.

If you had like 3 total weapons in Halo, you only fought grunts, there was only 2 or 3 environments, which all looked the same anyway, everyone was voiced by the same voice actor putting on a funny accent, the graphics regularly lurched and struggled, and the game was 6 hours long with no multiplayer, then you would almost have a point.

excelR83

true, but your character did upgrade in parkour and combat abilities throughout the story, which did impact gameplay. look, i'm not saying it was that great of a game, even though i personally enjoyed it (certainly didn't deserve the score it got here - i would have bought 7.5-8.0 myself). and please understand that i'm not putting the title in the ranks of gears or halo, but video games are largely dictated by repetition. granted, that repetition is often cool enough to justify the entire game (gta4 is a good example of this).

as far as the graphic lurches, i honestly didn't really see any. did have a couple, but nothing that broke the game for me.

[QUOTE="Vaasman"][QUOTE="sam280992"][QUOTE="excelR83"]

8 max. 7.5 if there is justice in the world.

Assassin's Creed got 9.0 but who really thinks it deserves the score it got?

BioShockOwnz

I do... not everyone is the same, The majority of this damn board hate on Assassin's Creed for no reason...

And I agree, too. I love Assassin's Creed. Yes, it does get repetitive, but every game is repetitive to me. People bash any game that scores high, because they feel like their opinion is the definitive truth.

I agree with all of you, people here just doesn't know what a good game is, one of the things I've learned here is People here always complain about anything.

[QUOTE="excelR83"]

No, you really couldn't. Gears and Halo are lightyears better than AC in everything but being an open-world sandbox game.

If you had like 3 total weapons in Halo, you only fought grunts, there was only 2 or 3 environments, which all looked the same anyway, everyone was voiced by the same voice actor putting on a funny accent, the graphics regularly lurched and struggled, and the game was 6 hours long with no multiplayer, then you would almost have a point.

clone01

true, but your character did upgrade in parkour and combat abilities throughout the story, which did impact gameplay. look, i'm not saying it was that great of a game, even though i personally enjoyed it (certainly didn't deserve the score it got here - i would have bought 7.5-8.0 myself). and please understand that i'm not putting the title in the ranks of gears or halo, but video games are largely dictated by repetition. granted, that repetition is often cool enough to justify the entire game (gta4 is a good example of this).

as far as the graphic lurches, i honestly didn't really see any. did have a couple, but nothing that broke the game for me.

I liked the game too. I initially gave it a 9 as well, and I won't change it now because I stand by my opinion at the time, but upon reflection it was a mess. I won't trade it in because I thought the parkour element was AWESOME, and just running around the city stabbing people is still fun from time to time... but with the amount of hype and excitement I had for this one, it really, really underperformed, to me.

8.5. I think it will be an awesome game but I'll be shocked if it gets AAA.locopatho

same

there just seems to be too many things either wrong, or not quite right with this game, though it comes together quite well

So whats the game being hyped? Someone should make a hype thread for this...sam280992

Haven't plenty been made already? Not that I'm not hyping the game, of course...

I think it'll get 8.0, interesting who is hyping it 9.0 in this thread. Very few people have hyped in AAA in a long long time. I think it'll be fun but not AAA.

(I believe general consensus for hype is AA BTW)