After playing it for a number of hours, I would agree that 8.5-9 is likely more accurate for the game. There are a few odd things, and issues that make the game kinda clunky. It is still quite enjoyable for me, but I like games that are more challenging from a tactical perspective.
I haven't played the game but from my experience a game like Dead Island will quickly drop in price. I would say wait a few months, by then it'll probably be $25 used.
superapo
I agree with this. Wait and play other games, and then go back to it later.
Difficult and subtly complex, and worth looking into. I'm finding it rather intriguing, and I've hardly explored the first area. BUUUUUUUT: it. is. difficult. You will need to have some frustration tolerance to play this game. In some ways, it reminds me of a solid fighting game mashed together with an action adventure game with elements of a solid 8bit dungeon crawler. Tactics and timing mean a WHOLE lot and go a long way, and they will be based on your overall strategy for your character, equipment, etc. Worth a 9.5? Hmmmm.... I don't know. I would definitely give it an 8.5 or greater. I wouldn't rate some of the games they've given 8.0+ anywhere near what they rated it (I'm looking at you Gears...). But, it is not for everyone. I haven't thrown my controller yet, and keep finding myself satisfied just in playing the game. Someone stated they didn't like the lack of puzzles. But the greatest puzzles to me have been solving the tactical and combative problems without dying. Yes. A game where I'm actually afraid to die. Go figure! I haven't experienced that for a LONG time, and its kinda nice!
BTW- I wish nothing but the best for these companies. I really hope they put out cool stuff, and I'll likely buy it, b/c I really want to love and enjoy them. But, I'll really think twice before buying any new games, b/c the one before it was 'lacking'.
I joined this forum tonight, after YEARS of lurking, simply to say how disappointed I was in the game Rage. Why? Because nearly every aspect of what this game said it was simply turned out to be not true and the review on GameSpot did not convey this whatsoever. I believe that this game should have been rated at best 7.0 by GameSpot's standards. The campaign was short and incredibly linear, gameplay was stiff and predictable and the story was so lackluster, it made borderland's story seem stellar! Even the touted graphics and polish was only superficial; on close inspection were pixelated and nondescript. Did anyone who played this game actually look at things like soda cans on the ground? I mean, the execution of the environment reminded me of something years old, predating other games from the genre, rather than something "cutting edge." All in all, why should the developers be at all surprised that this game received the response that it did?
I enjoy PC gaming the most, but I have primarily gamed on the Xbox 360 for the past few years. Why? Simplicity. On a console, you put in the disk and it works. No questions asked (usually), no spending an inordinate amount of time trying to get the game to work. I can get to playing a game with the time I have. However, I do play PC games whenever I can. However,I have found that attempts by developers to use services like Windows Live/steam, requiring an active internet connections, etc. have put a very big dampener on my PC gaming. I am not arguing for/against such efforts on the part of developers, beyond the fact that these things have caused so many problems on my systems, I simply don't want to deal the problems they cause or have the potential to cause. I simply can't afford the problems on my systems anymore. An unfortunate part of my reality at this point.
Log in to comment