“Get those Orbs, Agent!”
"Crackdown 3 is kinda terrible…..and I can’t stop playing it." Confucius say "To those who are famished, cracker is feast."
Confucius also say: to those who don't listen to bullshit, truth is joy... For those who actually purchased game and play it, know truth, and those who merely chime into others opinions without owning or playing, great is the spouting of shit...
One is not required to buy and play the game in order to figure out if the game is good or not. With enough research, you could figure out if the game is the one for you without spending a dime.
I loled pretty hard
Spencer say: "To those who listen to BS, lies are joy" Do you just assume that the people criticizing it have never played it? Like all those reviewers who played it and said it wasn't good? Are you saying that BS is only BS if it doesn't line up to how you feel about something?
Not gonna lie, I hated on this game so hard. After getting 6 months of the game pass for a total of $20, I’ve been able to try games I’d never give the time of day. And there has been mostly disappointment, but this game has been a pleasant surprise. Not at all talking shit, I never touch my Xbox anymore. I probably would more if I had an X, but I don’t. But I spent 10 hours straight yesterday playing this shit, and will probably spend a few tonight. It has what many games forget to have. FUN. I wish it looked better, cause it does kinda look like ass, One X or not. But they managed to still make it more enjoyable than a lot in recent history.
Much the same story. As much as I loved the original, that was years ago, and 3 looked bad...terrible first impression, and then suddenly, it was 5 hours later and I was still playing it. It appears that video games can occasionally be bad and fun.
I think this is the thing with crackdown it's just a turn your brain off and have fun type of game and I agree with you there has not been to many of them around this gen. Yes it's not the best ever game but its a pickup and play type of game and for someone who now dose not have time to game like I did due to having a little one Ives lived playing this game each night and put an hour or 2 into it before little one has woken up.
What is this assumption that games that do more somehow aren't also fun? This notion that a simple game is fun, thus should be held up as examples of great gaming, are somehow more fun than games which push the envelope on many fronts. dunno if this is what you're saying yourself, but I notice a lot of people seem to imply that just because a game is fun, that it's somehow better than things that are much bigger, complex, and often implied to not be fun because of that. Not to name specific titles, but I think you know what I'm getting at. I can have fun with almost any game. I can sit here and play Angry Birds or Tetris for hours on end. They're fun and addictive. But it doesn't mean they'll leave a lasting impression on me for the long term, or go down as something I feel I would have missed out on if I didn't play them. They're not must play games, they're good time wasters. I see people on here constantly lambast COD for it's simplistic pick up and play nature, but I don't see people give it credit for being fun, because it is fun in that sort of stupid turn your mind off way. Yet, it constantly gets calls that the game sucks, or the franchise needs to die.
You see people lambast COD and FIFA all the time because the people on here are idiots. There are many, many more people who have fun playing those games than the people who lambast them. That's why they are the best selling games every single year in the past decade or so. I would argue a game being fun, actually does make it a good game. That's my opinion, I think The last of Us was not a good game, the controls were clunky, the graphics were good but it was not fun to play, so to me it's not a good game. A game can have all the production value, huge budget, great graphics and still be a bad game if it's not fun.
"I would argue a game being fun, actually does make it a good game" And I'd agree with you 99% of the time. But more was riding on this game, and while it may be fun, it also comes up short in other places, which can be a distraction from the fun factor. Same goes with other games. Game may be great fun, but it's not necessarily a great game, or sometimes even a good game. Sometimes, a game just has to do more than one thing well, but i will agree that game play does, or at least should, always come first. I've just noticed this trend that in order to support lesser games as better, or more than acceptable because of the fun factor, that bigger games which are also fun, are put down for a multitude of reasons, and either implied to not be fun, or explicitly stated they aren't fun, while smaller games are fun, sometimes with qualifiers, like, "It's fun if you're playing with friends". "A game can have all the production value, huge budget, great graphics and still be a bad game if it's not fun" A statement which I have made many times in the past. However, fun is a matter of perception too, because sometimes, it's about the experience. So a game may not be pure fun in nature, but the actual experience of everything together, usually with solid game play mechanics, comes together in a meaningful way. It's usually those kinds of games which get the kind of implication that they aren't fun, and it often centers around exclusives, and such criticism isn't contained to one side.
no I'm saying when it comes to this game, that the majority of public opinion is horseshit. because they haven't played the game, absolutely. and that metacritic it's one of the worst sites in the world. it's an aggregate of people grinding an axe against things they don't like, it has nothing to do with truthfully and honestly, giving an analytical point of view of something. when it comes to public opinion or reviewers, I still have the game and I'm enjoying it very much, this is one of those rare instances where I have to speak out and speak out as loudly as I can. this game isn't getting the reviews and the credit it deserves. very few reviewers seem to just give it a straight across the board honest review. the ones that don't have some sort of horseshit agenda that they're trying to carry, or just going lower-than-average to get clicks, because that's how you get people to your site. when public opinion is high, or more specific polarizingly low. this game is easily a 7-7.5 but anyone that rates it in that category automatically gets disregarded, and a lot of the disregard/negativity is coming from people that haven't played it. "doing research tells you whether something is good or not" no, the comment section isn't research, and neither are reviews. It not being for you, or your type of game, is one thing, you want to do research the only honest research is talk with people that you can confirm have played it, someone's opinion based on something they didn't honestly play is horseshit. the comparisons with agents of mayhem cuts both ways: Agents Is a far less content heavy game, with a worse art aesthetic, that contains no multiplayer or Co-op whatsoever, and across-the-board it got just slightly higher scores.(user reviews put that a 6.2, they put crack down at 4.4, which is ridiculous, but it was a multi-platform game, whereas Crackdown 3 is an XBox exclusive. and there's a hundred comments at least that people sit and admit, "well this is because of the order 1886", or when "Xbots do this or do that" well there it is, discredits at least a good 40% of the comments right there, so...
Seems your issue is that you don't agree with those that have played it and don't think it's very good. You are taking multiple sides and lumping them into one. You say anyone that has played it isn't worth listening to if they don't think it's fun. Because while I see it can be fun, it's still not the kind of fun that would keep me engaged for the long term. So, it's fun, but not that addictive or memorable. You say the reviews are BS, because they don't give it a straight fair up review. First, I ask, says who? You? Why is that? Because they don't agree with your opinion. I'm not one to hold up reviews as the ultimate dictator of a games quality, but most of the reviews, regardless of their score, or the quality of the writing of the review itself, all seem to state the same thing, with the only variation being that some find it fun, but bland, and others think it isn't good, or bland. The reviewers themselves though are holding it up to the standard that MS itself marketed the game as, and sine MS spent most of the marketing on Terry Crews or cloud destruction, the reviewers decided to review off that, in what is probably one of the first times they've done this when they should have. Then you lump it into everyone else, who you assume hasn't played the game. But, you just assume because they haven't played it, that they can't make a decision. Game may be fun, but the level with which that may matter is going to be dictated on many levels, and like I said in my follow up, depending on the experience you were looking for, just being fun, just may not be enough. I've played the game, and by what I consider most grading scales today, I'd put the game at 6-7. But, with the disappointment of what the game delivered, versus what it promised to deliver, I'd put it closer to 5-6, and then, only with respect to that it's decent enough for a short romp, but its severely lacking in areas like level design, animation, or technical accomplishment, and that's disregarding any of the failed promised from the marketing.
Of course. You are an Xbox fan. There is nothing to be surprised about it. You have been doing it for years. All Xbox exclusive are terrible and xbots keep praising them.
@tinchotin "All Xbox exclusives are terrible"? Seriously? As opposed to every PlayStation being nothing but gold I presume? you do realise that not everything that comes out of house of PlayStation is perfect, Sony have from time to time released terrible games as well.
What in your opinion was terrible al the level of xbox exclusives? Maybe knack, but I don`t recall other failure at that level.
What other PS4 exclusives are bad? Oh try The Order 1886, currently languishing at 63 on metacritic.
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.