@danoman64 "...but HMCC was given 9s and 10s across the board, most reviewers just ignored the server problems for HMCC. Hell i even remember people asking for Chris Watters of Gamespot to be fired for giving the game an honest review, stating the online problems and giving HMCC a 6." To be fair, you should be looking towards MS' staging here. Similar to a lot of shooters (COD being one), Master Chief Collection press reviews were heavily c...
10 years, and we're basically at the half-way point since the signing.
It didn't download for me, oddly enough. Just played several games a couple hours ago without any notification popping.
"...but I haven't even started on Knack 2" Pretty simple solution: put everything else in your life on hold until you complete that transcendent title. ;)
So...the cost of your soul? :P
I'm replying here to say I agree as well. :)
"He worked at Treyarch wow, wonder what maps or games he worked on Black Ops 1-3?" Now I get the feeling he doesn't have any right to judge.
-"Which is why I focused on the number of positive vs the number of negative rather than the scores themselves." Okay. I've taken notice of that, which I still covered within an earlier response about giving no credence to metacritic users to begin with (ratings, reviews, stats, whatever) outside of a very specific context. And why relying on them as some gotcha for more critical reviewers being 'wrong' does nothing. -"Well,...
-"The disparity is in the positive numbers - 9 vs. 153 critic/user written reviews. And come on... you know that the number is going to mathematically even out when that 6.5 user rating score is based off of 1106 user ratings." Well, what you wrote previously wasn't really made clear in respect to written reviews. And no...I don't rely on a user rating 'evening out' based off 1000+ user ratings b/c unreliable community averages can be sporadic on ...
I hope everyone enjoyed the blog. Please feel free to leave your comments and/or questions below! Whether you want to comment in Part 1 or 2's comment section is up to you. More opportunities to discuss the game is fine by me! :D
I mean...a disparity between 54 vs. 65 (critic/user) doesn't really strike me as that remarkable. It's of even less consequence to me when considering I give no credibility to metacritic user reviews. But if such an untrustworthy source as metacritic users is enough to determine a game's success to you, why wouldn't critics hold more weight in this instance too? -"The game was dumped on for being a "kids" game by some people. that's dump...
Sorry about that. This one shouldn't get that error message: http://www.metacritic.com/g... -"there's nothing wrong with any of the things you cited that would have been mentioned in those "reviews." I mean...you're literally just spouting your opinion against said "reviews" when that's not even the reason people have been respondi...
To answer your question above: http://www.metacritic.com/g... Take a look for yourself at the harshest critics here. Story, gameplay, and graphics are all criticisms literally mentioned in some of those descriptions.
You're looking at the wrong critical reviews if that's what you've gleaned from them.
I recall matthewmatosis giving this game some high praise. Probably a really good Myst successor.
Eh...what's a little radioactive fallout on your chips, anyways?
Actually, they're in talks with Sony about Minecraft cross-play now. http://www.gameinformer.com...
Absolutely it has. Judging by some of the comments here, they're not the only ones to change course on this issue.
"Sony has always been interested in cross-play, even with MS." Considering this same issue has cropped up with Rocket League -- i.e. servers which would be specifically hosted BY the developer and not MS -- you're utterly incorrect.
You mean you avoid all online communities entirely? Mighty impressive in this day and age.
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.