| Original message ([an error occurred while processing this directive] Views )[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
Replies:
|
| Mosquiton 673th Post
 
Red Carpet Regular Member
  
    
    
|  "yeah, well,"
, posted Wed 26 Feb 13:57
quote:
Well, they're entitled to their opinion. I have some things I'd like to say about this game, but somebody here would probably try and assassinate me if I did. Don't get me wrong, it's fun...
Hey, I admit that GGXX isn't the perfect game. The beef I have with the review is that it has factual errors, a scoring error, and isn't very objective or useful to readers.
The review also assumes that the reader has probably experienced another game in the series (making it fairly useless for anyone who hasn't, other than chucking out that overused "samurai shodown on crack" line), yet fails to mention the drastic differences between the original games and its sequels. It also gives no specifics of the engine other than the chaining system, which it grossly simplifies. Judging from the videos though, the guy doesn't have a great grasp on the game mechanics anyway.
Brandon's comments were pretty reasonable though. I know he's on the board, so my apologies for going off on your man Chaz. I only do this like once in a blue moon.
/ / /
|
| RugalBernstein 3569th Post
Platinum Carpet V.I.P- Board Master
    
    
 
| "Re(1):yeah, well," , posted Wed 26 Feb 14:21
quote:
Well, they're entitled to their opinion. I have some things I'd like to say about this game, but somebody here would probably try and assassinate me if I did. Don't get me wrong, it's fun...
Hey, I admit that GGXX isn't the perfect game. The beef I have with the review is that it has factual errors, a scoring error, and isn't very objective or useful to readers.
The review also assumes that the reader has probably experienced another game in the series (making it fairly useless for anyone who hasn't, other than chucking out that overused "samurai shodown on crack" line), yet fails to mention the drastic differences between the original games and its sequels. It also gives no specifics of the engine other than the chaining system, which it grossly simplifies. Judging from the videos though, the guy doesn't have a great grasp on the game mechanics anyway.
Brandon's comments were pretty reasonable though. I know he's on the board, so my apologies for going off on your man Chaz. I only do this like once in a blue moon.
Admittedly, I was at work, and only skimmed the review. I'll read it more in depth later, I just happen to like Insert Credit a lot, and the whole " shooting " thing got my dander up. Bet you'd never thought you'd here that phrase here.
Best site EVER: Link Here
|
| Ferrio 536th Post
New Red Carpet Member
| "Re(2):yeah, well," , posted Wed 26 Feb 18:03:
quote:
Well, they're entitled to their opinion. I have some things I'd like to say about this game, but somebody here would probably try and assassinate me if I did. Don't get me wrong, it's fun...
Hey, I admit that GGXX isn't the perfect game. The beef I have with the review is that it has factual errors, a scoring error, and isn't very objective or useful to readers.
The review also assumes that the reader has probably experienced another game in the series (making it fairly useless for anyone who hasn't, other than chucking out that overused "samurai shodown on crack" line), yet fails to mention the drastic differences between the original games and its sequels. It also gives no specifics of the engine other than the chaining system, which it grossly simplifies. Judging from the videos though, the guy doesn't have a great grasp on the game mechanics anyway.
Brandon's comments were pretty reasonable though. I know he's on the board, so my apologies for going off on your man Chaz. I only do this like once in a blue moon.
Admittedly, I was at work, and only skimmed the review. I'll read it more in depth later, I just happen to like Insert Credit a lot, and the whole " shooting " thing got my dander up. Bet you'd never thought you'd here that phrase here.
You don't even have to read to understand that there's something very wrong about the review.
Whenever there is a category "Fighter Attractiveness" you know there's something amiss. When said category is 2x as big as the gameplay category you know something is TERRIBLY amiss.
Now I wouldn't be upset over a disfavorable review, that's fine and dandy. But this review is just plain BAD written horribly from someone that's obviously has no real grasp of GGXX.
Now I know the "should be shot" is a bit harsh, but I didn't mean it seriously. But for the author that wrote this I would suggest that he take a bit more pride in the information he wishes to bestow on his readers, and take time in reviewing a game instead of throwing only a few opinions around.
So in short:
Opinions=Good
Misleading information, factual errors=BAD
[this message was edited by Ferrio on Wed 26 Feb 18:05] |
|
|
"Re(1):yeah, well," 
"Re(1):Someone should be shot for the IC GGXX " 
