rxtfo's comments

Avatar image for rxtfo
rxtfo

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By rxtfo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j_xjBAd5G84


Avatar image for rxtfo
rxtfo

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

I guess next time consumer's should just keep quiet and not buy the system at all? C'mon Orth, you should be happy about a vocal consumer base.

Avatar image for rxtfo
rxtfo

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By rxtfo

@Falzonn @lordofallgamers I agree with you Falzonn that reviewing based on the time or trends isn't a bad thing, I just feel they don't do it consistently. I know it's a different genre than this game but look at the Loot Action RPG's

Diablo 3, Borderlands 2, and Torchlight 2 all got the same score? Really? I think it's either lazy review work or something else has to give. I also really hate using the Madden CoD card, but it's honestly the 3000 pound gorilla in the credibility room. I'm not bashing the reviews, just the consistency. If a game is bad it's bad, but just use the same guidelines for the reviews, and keep them consistent.

Avatar image for rxtfo
rxtfo

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@megadeth1117 That's fine and great, but the reviews here lately have a gross lack of consistency. It has nothing to do with them bashing a game of my preference or them praising one of their preference. They don't hold all games to the same standards, and punish ones of certain flaws, and praise others for the same flaws.

See Diablo 3 vs Torchlight 2 and Borderlands 2. The genre is irrelevant, what is relevant is the gross lack of consistency in general from GS lately.

Avatar image for rxtfo
rxtfo

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@lordofallgamers @Lhomity He's saying that GS does not have consistency on their reviews which is the the truth. If anything, it seems they review games on their personal taste rather than how the whole of the game is. Case in point, the "Feedbackula" on how they review games based on how they fit into the scope of time in which other games are made aka what else came out in the same year. They have no problem giving the repetitive dynasty warriors games a score of 4.5 for being stagnant, but CoD and Madden get higher score but do the same thing?

Holding one game accountable for major flaws and omitting the flaws for other games for it is inconsistent.

Avatar image for rxtfo
rxtfo

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

LOL Gamespot reviews, you guys lost me at "Call of Duty 99" gets a 8.5.

Avatar image for rxtfo
rxtfo

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By rxtfo

@Wedge55 I agree here 100%. This company was brand new and sold over a million units for its first ever released game, which to be honest, is pretty damn good for a first effort. Very shady to promise a company X amount of dollars and then take it all away when it's first game is not the next Minecraft (sales wise). As far as the dev cost of a second amalur game (non-mmo), Im sure they would be significantly less due to the fact the game engine is established and they could hash out a more polished version of the first game as it's sequel. 38 Studios was never given a real chance and that's very unfortunate for 400 American workers, as well as many gamers who will no longer be able to enjoy their products.