Top
1170°
6.5

Warhawk gets 6.5/10 from PSM

"A third person shooter that never quite gets off the ground" according to PSM. Scan attached.

Read Full Story >>
i91.photobucket.com
The story is too old to be commented.
Schmitty073266d ago

That doesn't get great reviews, but still fun to play.

nasim3266d ago

I played the game and nothing is more fun than it.

The BETA was super fun ,super addictive and super amazing

Omegasyde3266d ago (Edited 3266d ago )

The graphics are great but its not Bioshock.
The sound is good but its not up there with Heavenly Sword.
The game control is great, but its not as sharp as a Tony Hawk Game.
The multi-player is great but there is no ending for the game.

I agree perhaps reviewers are over thinking the reviews. Its a multiplayer only game and nothing more. Its not trying to be Halo and its Not trying to be BattleField 2042.

I didn't know games got deducted points for just being enjoyable to play. It also seems that originality means nothing to PSM as well.

EDIT: The reviewer got his AZz Owned playing it. Look at the bottom left picture( of a warhawk). Under the picture It says pretty fragile. Did the reviewer expect the warhawks to be completely indestructible? I bet he did and he is sad that his plane never got off the ground because the other "mean players" kept picking on him. Freaking Noob.

MK_Red3266d ago

Good points but I think the Warhawk demo was more fun than Battlefield 2142.
But this game has originality and a lot of other positive elements plus great online performance thanks to those dedicated servers...

Truly unfair scores. Two really bad and unfair scores in 24 hours. BioShocks 9/10 from GS and now Warhawk's 6.5/10...

Omegasyde3266d ago

I agree MK completely. This game is Digital Crack. Once your hooked, its hard to put down. Reminds me of when Halo 1 first came out, and how addicting that game was. This game deserves at least a 8.5, but not a 10/10 because well, there is no single player. People might also cry fowl because of such high ratings for a Multiplayer only game with "good" graphics.

I am interested in how Halo 3 reviews stack up in the following weeks and how many stupid comparisons between WARHAWK and Halo 3 there is going to be.

Marona3266d ago (Edited 3266d ago )

Has anyone else realized theres two pages if you have good eyes to read what it says? I can't find page 2 at all... besides that, cameras don't take pictures this small with that much bad quality.

To those disagree'ers: Seems like someone is still using those 1985 cameras. :o

chanto233266d ago

but i never expected high reviews for Warhawk...i mean i was in the beta and the game is really really fun but the graphics are not quite that good...gameplay is awesome though...i think all the review are going to be in the 7's for this game...good game though just not impressive...

HeartlesskizZ3266d ago

this game is very nice, it will be addictive to play with friends off or online

Gizmo_Logix3266d ago (Edited 3266d ago )

Word is that they scored this 6.5 because it has NO SINGLE PLAYER. Bah! Up yours PSM! That is, if it's true and not a photo shopped image scan. :P

By the way. The screen shots are from gamespot. Ooops!

http://www.gamespot.com/pag...

reaperxciv3266d ago

gamespot would rate this game

Zhuk3266d ago

Warhawk was never going to be considered a AAA title and I don't think that this review was unfair. Dont let the scores bug you or stop you from picking it up, this game though not perfect will still be a solid title to play online and chances are you'll get some enjoyment from it.

ALI-G3266d ago (Edited 3266d ago )

killers app AAAAAAAA 5/10 6.5/10

@MK-RED:BS3 fan girl who is afraid to show it: 9 is not like 6.5 plus BIOSHOCK already got 14 prefect reviews ..in ur face.. or better i say in ur neutral girly mask...EDIT:oh another 10/10 for bioshock GAMEDIALY
http://n4g.com/xbox360/News...

reaferfore203266d ago

"Two very (gleaming?) flaws damage Warhawks appeal. The first is the (submission/exmission/somethin gmission) of bots. That means you can only play this game - which costs $60 dollars - with other people and-"

I hate bots.

Where's the other page???

SorenK3266d ago

The degree of self-deception and illusion here is simply astounding. Tell yourself whatever lies you want to believe, or rationalize away the truth however you want to, sometimes the truth is too painful.

(note: the ironic part is every disagree or "-" I get is only a confirmation of my correctness--now that is some good old freudian psychology)

Kratos123266d ago

ok i am very confused right now. Who did this reviewer play with online?? Or did he review the beta? Since the game is not online and since there are no bots which is what he is ranting about and forgetting that the bots can be added anytime as a future update, what did he actually review? The full game in an empty world or the beta??

Jeremy Gerard3265d ago

Hang in there, the same thing happened to us with Shadow Run, that game was awesome but was bashed by reviewers because it had no single player and cost 60 bux, as long as you know the game is awesome screw the dam review scores.

heroman7113265d ago

thank you for not being a fanboy jeremy

+ Show (13) more repliesLast reply 3265d ago
GoLeafsGo3266d ago

Did they play by themselves or something?

DarkArcani3266d ago

I'm thinking so. One of the true easy to play fun games without getting owned the whole time. Unless (as you said) you play alone.

heroman7113265d ago

im guessing they did. ign said they were looking forward to this game and they are currently holding up a tournament for this game.
http://ps3.ign.com/articles...

chasegamez3266d ago

who ever review this must have
gotten paid off by microsoft
i play this game and this is the
most fun i hads since socom 2

Bloodmask3266d ago (Edited 3266d ago )

And people actually agree with you?? You guys really are morons.

I guess if Sony's first and second parties make a game it must automaticly be AAA. Does the cell processor make up your mind or do you?

Sony kids=funny stuff.

bluegoblin3266d ago

i dont think that ms would do that considering is PLAYSTATION magazine.
too bad for warhawk im still going to buy it.

DrPirate3266d ago (Edited 3266d ago )

For those PS3 fans disappointed with PSM's latest Warhawk review, you will find this interesting:

PSM: Independent PlayStation Magazine, Future US Inc.’s leading publication devoted to coverage of Sony’s console, has appointed Rob Smith as Editor In Chief. Prior to his position as Associate Publisher for both magazines, Smith contributed as Associate Publisher of Official Xbox Magazine (OXM) and before that, as Editor In Chief of the publication.

Interesting. I hope it's not true for the sake of me not wanting to hate on X-Box biased employees trying to screw with Sony's game...

How about a proposal. If the consensus amongst general reviews is that it's nothing more then a mediocre online game. I'll concede. It makes me feel bad that I think mediocre gaming experiences are amazing. I wonder what I'm missing out on :\

Rythrine3266d ago

That's true, he stated in his introduction 3 issues ago that he was the Editor-in-chief of PC gamer and then the Official Xbox Magazine before becoming PSM's.

Dr Pepper3266d ago

@ DrPirate

I really doubt he joined the mag to give PS3 games bad scores. I mean think about it, this is his career and what he's been doing for a long time. Not everyone has made it their life goal to bring down the PS3 and Sony.

heroman7113265d ago

@ dr pepper
u have a point but why has ign and everyone else has been praising this game? there has to be a reason. i can only think of this game being good so maybe it was a biased person . ign is holding a tournament for this game, that shows u how much they like it

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 3265d ago
MK_Red3266d ago

Wow, PSM gave it 6.5!!??I was expecting a 9 from them and at least 8 from most reviewers but with this and 1UP already talking about its price affecting their score... God help Warhawk. The game is serious fun IMO but maybe not in opinion of those reviewers.

Kleptic3266d ago

The price is reduced though isn't it?...60 for the game with extra stuff (a headset, movies, etc...sort of like the SE addition)...and the regular game is 40 I think...

It is worth every penny of either version...and is an absolute must own if you enjoy online combat games...

Now people comparing this to Bioshock...that is ridiculous...one is only single player...one is only multi...bioshock is amazing...and will probably be the best single player experience this year imo...but Warhawk will probably be the best online...

my moniter fuzzes out on that scan...so I can't read why they gave it such a low score...the Warhawk beta was the most fun I have ever had online on a console...

toughNAME3266d ago

well Lair couldnt keep up with Bioshock
now Warhawk cant either
hey maybe Heavenly Sword?

wouldnt a playstation magazine be biased???
whats up with that?

MK_Red3266d ago

I do really hope that Heavenly Sword is up to the challenge and if I'm not mistaking, PSM already gave it a 9 or higher. :)

Still, 6.5 is way too low. Even the demo alone deserved 8 and now with this being the full game...

tplarkin73266d ago

The Bioshock demo was amazing, but I still wait for the game to come out before I form an opinion. You don't know what will happen outside of the demo.

Daishi3265d ago

The only thing I can think of is that maybe the Beta let you do too much and the reviewer felt like they were playing the beta with more levels. But no fear for early adopters, downloadable content is on the way.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 3265d ago