100°
Submitted by Monkeyboy 791d ago | review

Gamerstemple.com: Resistance: Burning Skies Review

From gamerstemple.com: Resist the urge to buy this game. (PS Vita, Resistance: Burning Skies) 30/100

GribbleGrunger  +   791d ago
i'm sorry but these review scores are getting ridiculous. how can this game be getting high scores and low scores of such a varying degree. and then you'll see a silly iphone app getting 9/10.
mafiahajeri  +   791d ago
Agreed this is stupid.
stevenhiggster  +   791d ago
I have the game and it is pretty good imho. No it aint great but it most definitely is not as bad as these idiot reviews are making out. It's like some sad competition to see who can give it the lowest score! imho it's a 7/10 game, no lower than that.
NastyLeftHook0  +   791d ago
true words there. +B
Blastoise  +   791d ago
I agree. Its nothing outstanding, but its a good game. Where these 2/10's and 3/10s are coming from is beyond me, its not exactly "AMY" is it?
MattyG  +   791d ago
@Blastoise Exactly. Amy got tons of scores below 5 (like Burning Skies is) and that was an infuriating, nearly broken mess. That is definitely not the case here. This game is quite playable and very fun. Critics need to be more consistent in what the mean by their scores.
HammockGames  +   791d ago
Agreed. I'm at the end of the game and enjoyed it the entire time. IMHO this is a solid entry in the franchise - not the peak of it - but pretty damn good.

My only beef was online MP - couldn't get into a game until last night, but I'm more of a SP gamer anyway.

I'd give it a 7-8, personally.

I don't get the low reviews. It looks good, plays great, the new weapons and chimera are cool. Sound is so-so. How that equates to low scores, I'm vexed.
SolidFenix86  +   791d ago
I agree here as well. I remember that iPhone game made by Epic games(the name escapes me) getting such a great score so I tried it out....It didn't appeal to me at all.
Monkeyboy  +   790d ago
It's because game reviews are opinions, quality is not a scientifically measurable attribute, there is no industry standard ratings scale, and scores are not universally comparable from one system to the next.
morganfell  +   790d ago
Industry standard? There isn't an individual site standard. From large organizations like IGN to cheap sites run from their parents basement like gamerstemple they have no standards among themselves. They damn a game for something they either praise in another game or outright ignore.

None of these places have printed standards that thoroughly explain their mechanism for reviews. Or why they go for a year without realizing the numbers 1 through 5 exist then they pick a game that almost universally is liked by the owners and they remember that the number 3 is in the base 10 system.

Clowns.

There isn't any editorial standards at all. And no editor. Actually no editor in chief - and just for gamerstemeple an editor isn't a spellchecker.

Reviews shouldn't be just opinion. These trash sites want people to visit, people as in the the public, then the games need to be reviewed for the public. For that demographic. Trust me you dumb reviewers, none of you are so likeable or charismatic that we care what you personally think.

That is the purpose of having standards for the site, to assist in minimizing the opinion ridden tripe with which we are continually inundated and instead try to provide a modicum of objectivity. Standards also allow for comparison that is more than the flavor of the day stupidity most of the sites use as guidelines.

All it means is these morons are completely out of touch with the public and the people from whom they desperately need clicks. There is no better reviewer than yourself and none better second to that than fellow gamers whom you trust.
#1.4.1 (Edited 790d ago ) | Agree(2) | Disagree(1) | Report
Monkeyboy  +   790d ago
Maybe you should have actually checked the site before writing this diatribe. I did not write this review, but I am the site's Executive Editor. The rating system used by the site can be found here: http://www.gamerstemple.com... The site is hosted in a major server farm, not a basement, and everyone on the writing staff are adults who live on their own and not with their parents. And if you truly didn't care what our writers personally thought about games, you would never have written such an angry, insult-laden, and childish response.
Diver  +   790d ago
well mr ed in chief maybe you should have checked your own link. it says epic fail page doesn't exist. thanks for proven everything morgan said. now you'll probly try to fix it real quick but you already failed hard. an people dont have to care to call you out. i dont think much of dog crap but i still curse out loud when it gets on my shoe. you been served. massive facepalm.

if you cared about gaming you write real reviews. arent you wondering why everybody thinks your review is poo? you the one that's worried spending every bubble defending you smelly review. server farm? godaddy.com isn't the cream you know.

http://i39.photobucket.com/...
#1.4.3 (Edited 790d ago ) | Agree(3) | Disagree(1) | Report
Monkeyboy  +   790d ago
That was actually N4G grabbing the period from the sentence when it converted the URL to a hyperlink. Not my fault and something that you should have been able to figure out on your own.

The rest of your response doesn't warrant a reply.
Diver  +   790d ago
ahahaha. love the page you just put up. its as useless as the review. you dont understand what it means to have a stanard with some kinda detail. you page doesn't explain crap. now p. dpnt you get that the oage shoyld have detail? an youre an editor? ahahahaha. im the king o siam.

eeps is supposed to figure out your opinion of what 'not innovative' is? see how that doesn't explain anything an still allows you just to spout off. well it its not any kinda standard hahaja. its even worse cause it shows you don't even understand detail or standards never mind not havin them. game set match to the gamers.
Chuk5  +   791d ago
maybe the game is just bad.
Rampaged Death  +   791d ago
That seems to be the point from what I have heard. I just hope developers look at this and see that it can be done but be so much better.
Ju  +   791d ago
Play the demo. It's not a 10/10, but it sure isn't a 3/10 either.
Bowzabub  +   790d ago
From what I played In the demo I'd say a solid 7/10. I'm just glad they released a demo of it, now I know I will buy it in the long run.
#2.2.1 (Edited 790d ago ) | Agree(3) | Disagree(0) | Report
teedogg80  +   790d ago
It's not bad at all. I love the hell out of it! If you got a Vita and love FPSs you MUST buy this game.
#2.3 (Edited 790d ago ) | Agree(2) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
NastyLeftHook0  +   791d ago
This game has extrememely mixed reviews.
MattyG  +   791d ago
I can see a 50 or 60, but this game is most definitly not a 30. A 30 should be reserved for and unbearable game. Sure, it's lacking in content and doesn't feel like a true Resistance game, but it is far from unbearable.
raymantalk1  +   791d ago
dunno why this game is getting low scores from some sites looks very good to me mind you i have noticed how most sony games seem to get low scores from some sites no matter how good the game is.
360GamerFG  +   790d ago
Who reviewed Gravity Rush, Uncharted games, heavy rain, killzone 2, god of war 3, lbp series if SONY games get low reviews?? Quit spreading your conspiracy theories everytime a bad sony game gets a score you don't like.
godzilla72  +   791d ago
The game is actually pretty damn good. Best fps on a handheld and controls are very tight. Gameplay and graphics are great too. I believe alot of reviewers are comparing this with the console version, which is why you are seeing some low scores.

This is close to R1 and is worth picking up. Game deserves a 7 to 8 rating, and i am very critical when it comes to games. Do not listen to some of these reviews.
arbitor365  +   791d ago
im not sure what kind of standard people are holding this game to. its just like how "star wars battlefront 2" got shit upon on the PSP.

this is the message it sends

"let that be a lesson to you, portable devs. dont try to be ambitious and work towards a console level experience on portable consoles. just pump out schlock like angry birds or the 734th rehashed pokemon game and we will give you 9s and 10s galore."
godzilla72  +   791d ago
haha, no kidding! you know, these game reviewers are being way too critical on this game. i have been playing it and enjoying the heck out of it. they are simply holding this game up against a console version, which is not right.

for a handheld fps, the game is incredible! you will not get another fps experience on any other portable, period! for that alone, the game should be getting rave reviews.

review it for a handheld experience and not a console one. it controls just as good as the console versions, so whats the deal?
DeadSpaced  +   791d ago
I'm beginning to get fed up with websites that gives scores this low. Does this game honestly deserve a score that low?

I don't think so.
Monkeyboy  +   790d ago
Some sites use a full scale rather than rating every game a 7, 8, or 9.
DeadSpaced  +   790d ago
I can respect that. But when you rate an okay game 30/100, that just seems unnecessary. It the game is broken, extremely glitchy, or has other serious problems, then they deserve the lower side of the full scale.
thebudgetgamer  +   791d ago
The game stinks.

Deal with it.
NastyLeftHook0  +   791d ago
I think your opinion stinks, Deal with it.
SolidFenix86  +   791d ago
To each their own. I think it's a pretty solid game...I'd give it a 7..7.5/10. If you go into it expecting a console experience on the Vita, then you'll be dissapointed. It's not the greatest thing in the world, but it's a nice distraction.
GuruStarr78  +   791d ago
I'm sorry, but this game's mp is broken.... even with the patch, i can hardly get into a match, let alone finish one....

The campaign was alright.. but it was WAAAYYYY too easy to platinum..

It might be the easiest platinum ever... took me one playthrough on easy!
remanutd55  +   791d ago
well i'd give an 8.5/9 sure thing the campaign is short but hey 95-98% single player campaigns in fps arent long so i think its just normal compare with others fps and i'm totally addicted to online multiplayer, i can't stop playing this thing , i think i have ran out of battery like 4 times playing online already lol, btw i'm at level 26.
TheDivine  +   790d ago
I was expecting a game on par with Retribution and Golden Abyss, and was hoping for a game as good and well made as Revelations. I didnt think sony would f*** up one of its main ip's like this. It makes me think either they dont care about the resistance ip or they dont give a shit about the vita. They just want their franchises on it to sell units, the fact its a fps with mp is all they cared about not the quality of the game and the standards insomniac set and sony bend maintained.

All it needed was 4-6 extra months to pollish it up and add some variety to the campaign. Its very obviously a budget game rushed out prob in under a year. Still i had some fun with the campaign, its a nice distaction and it does control well. The mp is great though, i will say that. If you love FPS' and MP you will love it and will EASILY overlook any shortcomings with the SP. Im mainly a SP gamer and wanted a campaign on par with the other titles (retribution included) thats why im judging so harshly. I want to make it clear though that its still fun and MP is the most fun ive had on a handheld besides Raid mode in Revelations and MP in Kid Icarus (best MP in years). Im going to murder you guys in MP right now...
Gigawatt25  +   790d ago
Seriously. Who are these idiot reviewers? A 3/10 would mean it's unplayable because of bugs. Judging from the demo, it seemed to play fine. A 7 would probably the highest I can see it receive but no less than a 5. The graphics are mediocre and the sound effects suck but the game plays well.
Monkeyboy  +   790d ago
There's no universal game rating scale. What a "3" means varies by site.
izumo_lee  +   790d ago
I have a feeling these scores are more reflective on the reputation Nhlisistic has in the game industry rather than for the game itself. These low suggest that the game is a broken unplayable mess with no means of improvements, that is far from the case.

I played the demo & i found the game to be good. The graphics are pretty for a handheld, the controls are solid (some of the touch screen stuff i can do without, though the grenade throw is very useful), the music is solid, the whole experience i had with the demo was very solid.

I am just glad that a handheld like the Vita is able to handle a FPS game with very little trouble & it only bodes well for future titles in the genre.

Add comment

You need to be registered to add comments. Register here or login
Remember
New stories
10°

Elite: Dangerous Preview on Oculus Rift DK2

24m ago - The Rift Arcade - Where do we begin when describing Elite: Dangerous? It’s just vast. Humongou... | PC
40°

Bungie Weekly Update - 08/01/2014

27m ago - DeeJ: This week at Bungie, we put the Destiny Beta into millions of players’ hands. No easy... | Xbox 360
30°

The 25 best PS4 games

1h ago - The PS4 is one hell of a system, that much is certain. But, seeing as we haven't even reached the... | PS4
40°

Lack Of Fallout 4 News Is Making People Crazy

1h ago - Skyrim Fansite writes: "Misleading articles regarding Fallout 4 news are circulating on the Web.... | PC
Ad

Study Game Design at DeVry

Now - DeVry University, is an accredited* university offering you the flexibility of over 90 locations, online courses and a wide variety of bachelor's a... | Promoted post
20°

Q*Bert Rebooted:L SteamFirst Interview

1h ago - SteamFirst: Following last week’s Review of Q*Bert Rebooted I was given an opportunity to intervi... | PC
Related content from friends