[QUOTE="rock_steady_bla"][QUOTE="Storm_Marine"]

What exactly do you mean by that?

What about it?

[QUOTE="rock_steady_bla"]and yes i own and beat galaxy, and that was the best imo up until i played this game. It has everything that galaxy was missing, which was COHERENT gameplay in which everything just makes sense and makes you want to complete every part of every level just because of the way it is designed kinda like mario 64.Storm_Marine

What exactly do you mean by that?

[QUOTE="blue_hazy_basic"]Kind of why I wish GS had never moved away from the ten point decimal system Kevin. I mean a 9.3 and a 9.7 might not seem like that big of difference but to me they was quite a distinction in the "greatness' of that game if you know what I'm saying and it gave the reviewers a bit more leeway. Oh well just a minor thing.Next-Gen-Tec

What if I want the best console?

2-10-08

I never seen a reviewer post this much in a forum before none the less system wars, I hope more reviewers does the same its kinda cool.

Santesyu

The little stuff adds up.

I remember when I was playing ME for the first time, and I would discuss the game with Bethany back when she was here. Half the time we talked I spent b***hing about dumb interface issues and Mako issues. How the same architect apparently designed every building on ever planet, and how every planet had the same exact gravity. How easy it was to get party members stuck on things. How annoying the texture pop-in was, how I couldn't believe Bioware didn't program the thresher maws to spawn a certain distance away from the player. Those things aren't necessarily bad on their own, but they work in tandem. They contribute to a sense that the little loose ends weren't tied up. And Mass Effect, as great as it is, didn't tie up enough loose ends to make it superb in my eyes.

The PC version brilliantly fixed enough issues to reach that pinnacle. The question is always there, no matter what the game: How much do the little things matter? There's no right or wrong answer--it all depends on how much it affects the experience. But when I told Bethany I was wavering between an 8.5 and a 9, she was shocked: I'd spent so much time complaining!

And really--aren't the little things the things that separate the good games from the great ones? Polish this thing up over here, tweak something over here, adjust a sound effect, and so on? And if I just hand out 9s like candy, what happens when something comes and blows that game away. Case in point: What if we'd given a 9 to NFS: Shift? What happens, then, when a far superior game like Forza 3 comes along? What happens if I give Risen a 9, and then something outclasses in it every sense, like Dragon Age? We've left no room to distinguish between a good game and a superb one. That's why I need to be constantly aware of what standards are by playing as many games as I can. If I give Mass Effect a 9, I'm essentially saying, hey, this game is on the level of KOTOR, or Neverwinter Nights. And I didn't feel that was the case. But I still felt--and feel--that Mass Effect was really great. But when something extraordinary comes, like Demon's Souls or Dragon Age PC, I have a way of distinguishing these games by saying, hey, this rises above what came before, and sets a standard.

I vote no. I mean, the guy gave Assassin's Creed a higher score than Mass Effect for crying out loud.