Dead Space : IGN gives it an 8.7
- Thread starter bluerahjah
- Start date
Recommended Videos
In my opinion i almost never rely on the good folks at IGN, I feel that there reviews are often one sided, but i do often pay attention to the "reader reviews" but even that's unreliable at best.
-but regardless of what anyone says I'm getting Dead Space, and even if it sucks I'm going to lie to myself and say it's wonderful and that it was worth my 60 bucks (Self deception is awesome!!!)
-but regardless of what anyone says I'm getting Dead Space, and even if it sucks I'm going to lie to myself and say it's wonderful and that it was worth my 60 bucks (Self deception is awesome!!!)
it doesn't change the fact that once you know the plot, theme & dangers of the game, there will be significantly less of an unknown to fear, and you will see a reduction in repeatability.harhol post=9.73884.815944 said:
The only way around this would be to design several vastly different stories & outcomes, something that would take up way too many resources at the time, and probably hinder suspension of disbelief.
As such, I believe that claiming poor repeatability is an unfair criticism of a horror game. That's the only thing I'm saying.
EDIT: I don't really know why I'm saying it, I honestly think the game looks pretty mediocre.
Hopefully that's just because the trailers doesn't really translate the feel.
Remember the order folks! If a review posts a review of a game you don't agree with (even if you haven't played the game) your observation flow must follow the established pattern.
1: They are corrupt.
2: They are retarded.
3: The reviewer does not apreciate the genre and therefore should not review the game (one of my favourites)
4: Numerical scores are worthless.
5: Site in question is worthless.
6: All reviews are worthless.
1: They are corrupt.
2: They are retarded.
3: The reviewer does not apreciate the genre and therefore should not review the game (one of my favourites)
4: Numerical scores are worthless.
5: Site in question is worthless.
6: All reviews are worthless.
you forgot 7. I hope Yahtzee reviews this soon and roasts it.Decoy Doctorpus post=9.73884.816859 said:
Bollocks is it. It's like saying only a mascochist should review a punch in the balls.harhol post=9.73884.817092 said:
"It's a lot of fun you guys. You should try it"
If you've actually played it, good for you for having the only worth while opinion here. As to IGN. First, you should always look to more than one source for a review, second you should give little creedance to the numerical value and just read what they have to say. The IGN reviewer said "Horror fans rejoice" and really liked it. So it was a good review. I think the games biggest flaw will be that it will appeal to a smaller audience than say COD4 only because of its genre. If you are a fan of Horror/action a-la RE4 (which had no horror to it) this could be a really good game for you. But don't trust me just yet I haven't played it, I preordered and need to pick up my copy. **shakes at desk at work in fetal position staring at the clock thinking "will 5:00 never come"**Goon165 post=9.73884.817124 said:
Yeah, i'm pretty sure that I'll get Dead Space. "Horror fans rejoice" and 8.7 are 'get the game' points for me.
Myeh. MGS4's actual game length is a flaw.
I also prefer it when games get lower scores as opposed to inflated mediocre scores. Killer 7 had an intriguing story and a great degree of style but it was fundamnetally broken. I think even taking into account what it gets right I'd still give it no more than a 6/10.
The problem is (and I don't want to go too deeply into this because I'm doing a Doctorpus M.D update on it) gamers get negatively conditioned by decent games with shitty elements. Like how Pavlov's dog repsonds to a bell ringing by salivating. The same principle applies to games, gamers have learned to percieve shitty things (like crap controls and camera angles in survival horror games) as positive aspects of a game.
A site like IGN hosts reviews for the average gamer, not the genre enthusiast. While resident evil 4 may not be the best survival horror game out there, it is a very good game regardless, having a general review written by an enthusiast would result in a lower score than would be fair. IMO.
(Sorry if this doesn't make sense. I haven't had a wink of sleep)
I also prefer it when games get lower scores as opposed to inflated mediocre scores. Killer 7 had an intriguing story and a great degree of style but it was fundamnetally broken. I think even taking into account what it gets right I'd still give it no more than a 6/10.
The problem is (and I don't want to go too deeply into this because I'm doing a Doctorpus M.D update on it) gamers get negatively conditioned by decent games with shitty elements. Like how Pavlov's dog repsonds to a bell ringing by salivating. The same principle applies to games, gamers have learned to percieve shitty things (like crap controls and camera angles in survival horror games) as positive aspects of a game.
A site like IGN hosts reviews for the average gamer, not the genre enthusiast. While resident evil 4 may not be the best survival horror game out there, it is a very good game regardless, having a general review written by an enthusiast would result in a lower score than would be fair. IMO.
(Sorry if this doesn't make sense. I haven't had a wink of sleep)
i listened to 1up fm. and they said that they would like to give it an A(guessin that close to a 9 or so). but lets also not forget that everybody see's games differently. People hate assasins creed i love it, people love WoW i really dont. So just take scores w/ a grain of salt and when in doubt trust your instincs and play the game. It really fits into the more "rent" catagory anyway, its only like 10 hours long - not alot of bang for my buck ya no?