Bollocks. A game can look amazing and still play like crap. No game *deserves* high praise. None. If the game is 'meh' it doesn't matter how great it looks.
So we must have seen eachother there! What site do you write for?
Dear Fanboys,
A reviewer is entitled to his or her own opinion. Just as you are. If you love the game, go play it. What do you care if someone writes down a different opinion? Or are you so insecure you dare not read anything that might point out a different view?
Jeez! Why did it take this long? Why wasn't this in the game in the first place?
Not that it means much, but there have been stranger rumors on the net, that turned out to be true. Remember the Bungie/MS split?
About Blizzard making a console MMO: if they would, they would do it soon. Wait another year or two and the next generation of hardware is imminent. The only right moment to start a console MMO is within the next six months.
No, it's not. Reviews usually come before release, remember?
It's just one opinion. Play the game and form your own. But play it first.
I play both and find WoW to be an excellent game. But LOTRO has done some things so much better. And I am not even a hardcore LotR fan. In fact, I find the book pretty 'meh'.
But the game... Awesome.
As one of the posters in the forum remarks, it would be very possible this is the Bungy answer to Myamoto's remark that he could make Halo.
My money's on a platformer for XBLA.
Nice article. But you got to wonder about a story which main source seems to be Smash Brothers Brawl. C'mon, it's a game about Nintendo mascots fighting. It's not a pressrelease detailing big N's future games.
Marvel Online
MS will tout it. Promote it. Show it. Advertise it. Finance it. And cancel it.
Every MMO MS got involved with did not make it.
This game is a dead game walking. An ex-game. A future forgotten vaporware project. Bye APB, we will never know ye.
Well, of course the title is instant, erm, 'gold'. But given the problems they have with the licence, I would not be surprised they change that to 'GoldenBrow' or 'Eyes of Gold' or 'TGFNAGBWCCITBOTL' (The Game Formerly Known As GoldenEye But We Can't Call It That Because Of The Lawyers).
I am sure, if they make clear this is in fact GoldenEye, fans won't mind the new name. And people who haven't played the game on N64 won't care at all.
What if they revamped GoldenEye in such a way they didn't need Nintendo's permission? What if they took out Bond, and perhaps even the campaign, and just release a multiplayer game with all the maps and weapons, but sans Bond? Makes sense to me. No fuss, no rights issues. It has been done before. Even with GoldenEye. Anyone remember the first level of TimeSplitters 2? That was a GoldenEye level as well, but tweaked.
I finally got my hands on the Atari VCS 2600 joystick and I must say it isn't as bad as some of the reviews let me to believe. Sure it is limited with only one button, and the action of the stick is rather stiff. Especially in a game like Pac Man this makes taking corners difficult at first, but with practice I managed to get old Pac to do my bidding well. The red fire button is easy to reach and the whole unit feels sollid. All in all I am satisfied with this product.
I loved Perfect Dark (and by default liked Golden Eye) but I am pretty sure these games are not going to live up to my or anyone's expectations.
For one: Perfect Dark is the superior game, even though no-one seems to realize this. PD is all that GE was, but more. Better multiplayer, bots, great maps, better single player, you name it, yet everybody goes all fuzzy over GE.
So there is the rub: if you *think* GE is better than PD you have no clear view of the game...
Not documentaries.
Can you miss the point even more?