"The latest issue also includes a full feature on the android based console: The Ouya and also an in-depth look at the art behind Zeno Clash.
The issue also includes previews of Grand Theft Auto 5, Castlevania: Lords of Shadow 2 and Transistor."
Interesting. They gave Metro 2033 a 6/10 (yes they did..) so I guess that Metro Last Light getting a 8/10 means the game is really awesome. I can't wait to play it. The first one is the most underrated game of this generation in my opinion. I hope this one receives the critical acclaim it deserves (if it deserves it of course).
Edit: Nevermind, I misread. Still excited for Metro Last Light :D Metro 2033 was really great. It's very enjoyable to play games with such details in its universe, like Bioshock or Dishonored. IMO, a deep and solid background universe is what can make a game great.
Why didn't someone just post it so we didn't have to bother going to the site. The complete list of scores are below: Metro: Last Light 8 Defiance 5 Injustice: Gods Among Us 8 Dead Island: Riptide 3 Soul Sacrifice 6 Star Trek: The Video Game 4 Don’t Starve 6 Battleblock Theater 8 Badland 6 Solitaire Blitz 6 Zombie Road Trip 6 .____........___... .____||......||.......|___|| ||.........___||............ ||
EDGE scores are a freaking joke. They are so inconsistent.
@Crazyglues Could be due to the mods classing it as spam, which means a removed post and a warning (sad but true)
Looking at EDGE's numbers in that way that would logically make sense if you weren't aware that they can be incredibly fickle. They gave HALO: ODST a 9/10 but many legitimate GOTY candidates significantly lower scores. The common assumption is that EDGE is just tougher and only gives good scores to the very best games, and much of the time they do, but they've also made some extremely puzzling decisions in their reviews that I didn't find to be well supported by the text of the review. The fact that Shadow of the Colossus, Metal Gear Solid 4, and SPACE GIRAFFE all got the same 8/10 suggests that you should probably check multiple sources for game reviews. They also gave Gunstar Heroes a 6/10, which is widely regarded as one of the best games of its generation and my pick for best game ever released for the Genesis/ Mega Drive. EDGE aside, I do expect Last Light to be a good game based on what I've seen of it.
It seems from your disdain of Space Giraffe, you're not familiar with Jeff Minter. He's kinda like the Jerry Garcia, or Roger Waters of game design. It may not be what you kids are into with your big budget blockbusters, but the man is a true artist and pioneer, who also makes great twitch shooters. He also made some of the first games I truly loved back in the early 80s on C64, and has not lost his spark.
I didn't say I thought Space Giraffe was a bad game, so disdain is not an accurate characterization of anything I said. Nothing that I said suggests bashing of Space Giraffe or Minter himself. However, I would not put it on par with Shadow of the Colossus or Metal Gear Solid 4, two strong candidates for the best games of the past two generations. I thought it would be pretty obvious why I made that comparison, but perhaps it wasn't to you.
8 is not a bad score. Not in any way. On almost any scale it means very good. Whoever did the review simply didn't think that those games were 'Amazing'. Just very good. What's the big deal outside of 'Metascore'? Casuals don't know or care about that. True gamers do but don't care. While fanboys and trolls of fanboys toil and suffer over it.
They gave Soul Sacrifice a 6/10, WTF. SS should've gotten a 8/10!
Erm, what? Different sites have different scoring criteria. I like SS a lot (especially online, it's awesome), but depending on how you look at it, there are all sorts of annoying issues that some outlets will need to ding. EDIT: EDGE prioritise empirical quality and polish over 'fun-ness' or cool concepts AFAIK. That's not what I always look for, but it's just a number. Always great to see different opinions out there.
Totally agree with Karmic Demon!! Metro2033 was a phenominal game that really brought some interesting gameplay and survival elements into the survival horor/post apocalypse type setting.. REALLY looking forward to getting into Last Light!
While I loved Metro 2033 to bits, I'd argue that it didn't really bring all that much interesting to the table in terms of gameplay mechanics. Rather I'd say the gameplay mechanics they introduced worked well because they helped set up the atmosphere of the game. Your breathing became ragged as your filter started to run out, you'd see your visor get cracked and start to frost over. You constantly need to crank your light back up to working condition. To view your objectives you hold up a lighter to a notepad where you wrote them down. That gameplay itself wasn't that interesting from a mechanical standpoint, but they all served to reinforce the tone and atmosphere of living in a post apocalyptic environment.
I agree with @Hydralysk Mostly. What 2033 really did was it introduced elements that aren't common in a FPS and made them work. Things like shadows and stealth, turning out the lights. This was one of my favorite parts of 2033. The stealth parts. These traditionally aren't involved in FPS games, but metro made it work well.
Surprised to see that they think Star Trek is a better game than Riptide.
Who really cares they both suck?
I could never get around that stupid gas mask glitch. I had a broken one on and could not see squat.
That was a terrible glitch
Dead Island: Riptide:3 Star Trek The Video Game: 4 pretty sad folks when a movie game gets a higher score
i have been playing dead island riptide for quite a while now, and i can tell you this from the little i have played: the game is not a 3! the game is more of 6 alone and 8.5 with friends, it's so much fun!
Just out of curiosity, did they give the PC version a 6/10 or the Xbox version, because there were some serious performance problems with the Xbox version that wasn't in the PC version.
-double post error-
Did the same person review the first Metro? I never understand why people compare reviews. "IGN gave THIS GAME an 8/10 but they gave THIS GAME a 6/10? IGN is biased." No, it's just that two different people liked or disliked two different games. Reviews represent an individual's opinion, not the opinion of a publication collectively.
"Did the same person review the first Metro?" The problem with Edge reviews is we don't know who specifically typed up the review. It's always labeled "By Edge Staff."
"They gave Metro 2033 a 6/10 (yes they did..)" And? In my opinion, the 360 version or even the more-highly praised PC version, which wouldn't have had the amount of mods and updates from devs when Edge reviewed it, should be more than content with that score from the review copy shipped to them.
I really enjoy Don't Starve, and I feel like all of these negative reviews from the critics are really putting people off of it. For $15, it's one of the best indie, survival games I've played. Yes, it is pretty difficult, but it's also extremely fun. It deserves at least an 8/10. Maybe that's just me though.
Difficult but fun... well, Edge gave Spelunky a 9 back in the day, but FTL got a 7. They seem to want consistency in scoring, considering the reviews are marked as by "Edge Staff" and not one person, so I'm wondering what their actual reasoning is on Don't Starve.
The Don't Starve review is online - http://www.edge-online.com/...
Seems as if they just don't like the gameplay, it just isn't diverse enough for them. The way they describe the problems seems like a bitter commentary on life and survival more than a critique of the gameplay at first, but meh. It seems like they want a payoff in a bleaker game.
I bought it when it was still in alpha just for its artstyle, and indeed it's a really great game. It surely is quite difficult at first, you have to realize and understand the gameplay mechanics and what you should do to stay alive, but once you got it, nothing can stop you. That's basically the same way to survive as Minecraft. At first, you're a noob, so you explore, you do dangerous stuff and you die quite quickly, but you gain experience, and the more experience you get, the more you explore and discover the depth of the game.
Edge lost relevance years ago. I used to subscribe to the magazine, and respect their hard but fair scoring. I didn't always agree with it, but at least they justified why and made for interesting reading. But at some point a few years ago they started disappearing up their own backsides, possibly in an effort to try and be viewed as a more serious, high brow, publication. It just seemed like pretentious wankery to me, so I dropped my sub. Their review scores are often ridiculous and I no longer consider them a source for information when I'm considering a purchase. EDIT: And Don't Starve is a great little game for the money!!
Yet here you are
Yeah, it's interesting to see what crap they've come out with this month. Especially as its free.
Too right. Anyone that pays top dollar for that rag has more money than sense.
As an older gamer type, ie. Over 35, I like Edge's perspective. Ditto Games TM. It's not for everyone, but they've earned my respect over the years as one of the few outlets that seem genuinely concerned with elevating the medium. I don't agree with many of their scores, but respect their reasons, which they usually articulate intelligently.
I, too, am an older type gamer, but I find their approach to be patronising. It's like they've got a superiority complex just because their mag carries a hefty price tag and they don't fill it with articles about hot gaming chicks... These days I almost never buy gaming mags, but if I do I go for ones with a more down to earth, tell it like it is approach. PSM (before it got cancelled), Dengeki Playstation, and very occasionally Famitsu.
i find it hard for anything to be worse than star trek. i rented it and couldnt even finish it. its easily a 2
just try Super Columbine Massacre RPG... i will make star trek look like mass effect..
Ah, relativism. See, if that game were licensed from a well-loved sci-fi franchise and sold for sixty bucks, it would totally put that in perspective.
Metro 8/10, It's a good note!
I bought Metro 2033 like last year, but I only got to Chapter 3. I must of moved onto another game at the time. Finished off most of Deus Ex and wanted to play through Metro 2033 before M:LL comes out. Nice to see it got a good score, now I'm pretty hyped for this game. Sad to see Defiance and DI:R getting pretty low scores, was going to get them at some point, I'm just waiting for price drops.
MUST'VE a contraction of the words MUST and HAVE
Defiance is fun but if you didn't pick it up the wait should pay off as getting it cheaper never hurts. It lacks "end game" to me from an MMO perspective and isn't really a "great game" but instead a fun one (IMO) which is why I am happy with my purchase. I need to pick it up again and see if a patch has fixed some of the instances that kept bugging and could never experience fully. I also want to see what dlc turns out to be but not expecting anything really substantial till end of tv season. I can see it as something I go back to now and again more than playing constantly like most MMOs.
"Dead Island: Riptide 3" damn
Are you serious, they really gave Metro 2033 a 6 out of 10?.. heh, was probaly one of the better FPS since HL2 made its appearance. At least i enjoyed playing it on low on my HD3850 back then, among the hardest FPS if im correct, those "lizard-thingies" were tough to kill on medium/hard difficulty.
Lol, i was playing the defence level last night, where the giant mole dog things use the tunnels in the abandoned tunnel city XD Hide in corner and cry haha. good game
they gave Dead island riptide a 3...and star trek a 4. Yes this site is very credible....Even if it's a copy and paste approach for a game (very similar to cod actually), the game deserve at least a 7 (Riptide not Trek....trek diserves a 2..) It's fun and just addicting at times! It's also creepier now a round, and the zombies are much more agressive... No idea what hte complaint is on a 40$ game lol....(PC at least) Edit I'm also not even going to cmment on Soul Sacrifice...I mean it's a love or hate game, and frankly it DID NOT live to it's hype...which is too bad because the hype for it was ridiculous... if the hype wasn't there, this would've been a great game that came out of nowhere... I'd still give SOul a 7.5-8.5 Depending on how much you enjoy the monster hunter and fantasy setting.
Hope metro last ligh do well in sales. 2033 was really underrated.
I think a 3/10 for Dead Island Riptide is pretty harsh though. I am playing it right now, and While it is an absolute cut and paste from the first Game, it doesn't deserve a 3/10! It is definitley buggy here...a little glitchy there... and overall feels just like the previous Dead Island game with new weapons, a new environment, and new vehichles. Somewhere else i Think it got like a 6.5/10, which is fair.. to me, I'm enjoying the hell out of it, so it's a personal 8/10 for me, but from a critical objective standpoint, yeah.. not an amazing game. But a 3/10 is reserved for broken and unplayable games. I think Amy was the last game I can think of that got such a low score!
I gotta say after playing the Fuse demo, that game might have swayed me away from Metro Last Light. I will be paying attention to many of the early reviews on Metro...not the score but the tone and what is said in the review.
this thread and millions like it is why metric scoring should be scrapped, they are supposed give a review of whats the game about, how it play, and any issues and that is it, not add there opinion and biased scores, it totally destroys there reviews credibility by adding there OPINIONS in there reviews, we don't need to know what they think of the games
A review is, and very much should be, a subjective article. I read a review for that reviewers opinion on the game, and then I read other reviews so that I can garner further opinions. I all I want is to read how it will play, then I'll go to the Wikipedia page.
They're not reviewing a car, where technical performance is all. They're reviewing in a medium where story, art style, concept, music - as well as technical performance - play a part, and are almost entirely subjective. One mans hackneyed cliche may be another mans "post modern ironic reflection of the genre". Ditto the play mechanics can be fun to one, but tired and repetitive to another - but if they're downright broken, that will count against it even more. Much like movies and music - the artistic success/appeal of a game can often hinge on what how it engages the audience, and specifically what emotions/attachment it garners from the reviewer. Transformers had more explosions than The Godfather, higher res graphics, maybe the editing was tighter and sounds better in 7.1 surround, but it doesn't necessarily make it a better film. If that was the case, we'd all be playing tech demos.
No multi means ill wait for the $10 steam special the last game was ok but it would have been good to have more interaction with the npcs and world.
Edge have always said they would love to do away with scores anyway.. period - but a 5/10 is average and still considered good to them and a 6/10 is above average.. which is also a good score to them.. Its like IMDB, anything above 6 is still good possibly even great.
I didn't know Metro Last Light was still a thing
Don't Starve is a great game. Probably a 8 or 8.5 in my book.
Good start for Metro!
My issue with Metro was how bad it ran on PC and the lack of graphics options. Hopefully they will have corrected that this time.
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.