[QUOTE="peanutbudduh"][QUOTE="lundy86_4"]
I have proven why you can't determine that. You have not proven anything, so you cannot know what the game is without playing it.
I'll put some more context into it. I see a girl walking down the street, and have a 2 sentence conversation with her. Do I walk away and determine that she has a bad personality from that instance? Or do I need something more substantial (i'm not talking about attraction, merely determining her personality). It's an impossibility, as oft times things like nerves play a role, and things are said, that are out of character. much like teh GOWIII demo is out of character due to lack of gameplay elements and story elements, along with lesser performance.
Most hack and slash games are linear (which you are using in an overplayed sense), as it's essential to the combat elements, and again you cannot determine if it has no replay value because a.) you are not everyone and cannot speak for them and b.) you must play and complete the game to determine that (for blindingly obvious reasons, which I don't doubt you are completely unaware of).
Saying Heavenly Sword deserves the score is like saying one FPS game, such as Haze, deserves exactly the same score as Halo, Crysis, Killzone 2 etc. They have different stories, gameplay elements, etc etc.
lundy86_4
That's a poor analogy. Why can't I have an opinion? I've done research on the game, I've played the demo, I've read the reviews, I've read people's opinions, I know the story, I've played the previous games too. So it's not like God of War is new to me. GOWIII is not different from the prequels because in every single review, they've said it's basically the same game. I guess I should just take their word on it right? Certainly it's not the same as meeting a girl who you've never met before and judging her on a sentence.It's an appropriate analogy actually, as the opinion would be fundamentally flawed, as not I stated you are not determining attraction, but the quality of one's personality. Which would need time together to determine.
I\ve stated this before, and it's applicable again, as the research you have done uses fractured story and gameplay elements, and offers an opinion based on an old build of the game, from almost a year before release.
Playing previous games means nothing because, if it did, games like KZ2 would be garbage, because their predecessor wasn't all that good. Makes no sense. You have to determine the game based on it's own merits aswell.
It's obvious you won't budge, even though it's been proven, repeatedly, why your opinion, and logic on this matter is extremely flawed.
You may also wish to relearn debate abilities, as it requires evidence for statements, unless they are widely known for being factually sound.
Playing previous games mean everything if the sequel is exactly the same thing. KZ2 was quite different compared to the original. The reason why I won't budge is because you haven't really said anything to change my mind. Most people here think that in order for someone to have an opinion on the game, they must play the full game and that argument is flawed. I've told you reasons why it is. I am not reviewing GOWIII, I am simply telling you what is said by everyone who has played the game and I am making the judgement of what kind of game it is out of that. I know what to expect from it, I won't be surprised when I play the full game. Believe it or not, but sometimes it just takes a few videos, reviews, impressions, and a demo to have an opinion on the game. 
Log in to comment