Worst review I have seen in a long time (borderlands 2)

[Eddie the head]

My god, this guy is an idiot. He seems to be in EA's pocket too.

He's getting paid for this, that makes me want to cry.

Wait what? He's talking about COD? And how it's better then Borderlands. Last I checked that game was owned by Activision. How is this EA's fault? Or is EA becoming like Communism? Doesn't matter if it has anything to do with the subject matter just blame them.

 

[MetallicaRulez0]

Because he typed the words 'Call of Duty'? Is that why it's a horrible review?

Because he compared an RPG shooter to Call of Duty, and complained that a co-op RPG shooter didn't have CoD multiplayer. Both absolutely idiotic statements.

 

[Moonlight Butterfly]

My god, this guy is an idiot. He seems to be in EA's pocket too.

He's getting paid for this, that makes me want to cry.

Wait what? He's talking about COD? And how it's better then Borderlands. Last I checked that game was owned by Activision. How is this EA's fault? Or is EA becoming like Communism? Doesn't matter if it has anything to do with the subject matter just blame them.

Ooops lol I was very tired when I wrote that, was just a mistake

 

[Smolderin]

(Me progessively reading the entire review)

......
....... -_-
.............. o_o
.......................0_0 w..wut?

I really need to apply where this reviewer is working, cause if there hiring reviewers like this...I will get the job in no time flat, and probably be rich within a week. But seriously...did the reviewer actually take the the time and play this game without making comparisons to CoD and Halo at every second? Dear god, this better not be a reflection of how the so called "casual" crowd views this game.

 

[Vuliev]

Everything about this comment made me laugh.

Love it.

Glad I could help.

 

[Mikeyfell]

Just for the Record this is the "worst" review you've seen because it's terribly written and not because it's a negative review right?


I know this word gets thrown around a lot but this reviewer is biased. Just like every other reviewer has their own bias. But the distinction here is that the final word on this review is specifically a statement of bias.

It may be the game for you, but if you?re in the market for a new FPS, I?d at least counsel waiting to compare it to Black Ops 2, due out in mid-November, or Halo 4, which is slated for a December release"

That's implying that these games that you haven't played yet are automatically better than this game. Which is bad writing.
While I find comparing two games that are BOTH ALREADY OUT! is a perfectly legitimate review strategy, comparing something to something you haven't played yet is wrong on many levels.

Thanks for sharing a bad review with us OP, I needed that.

 

[GAunderrated]

Just for the Record this is the "worst" review you've seen because it's terribly written and not because it's a negative review right?


I know this word gets thrown around a lot but this reviewer is biased. Just like every other reviewer has their own bias. But the distinction here is that the final word on this review is specifically a statement of bias.

It may be the game for you, but if you?re in the market for a new FPS, I?d at least counsel waiting to compare it to Black Ops 2, due out in mid-November, or Halo 4, which is slated for a December release"

That's implying that these games that you haven't played yet are automatically better than this game. Which is bad writing.
While I find comparing two games that are BOTH ALREADY OUT! is a perfectly legitimate review strategy, comparing something to something you haven't played yet is wrong on many levels.

Thanks for sharing a bad review with us OP, I needed that.

Just for the record yes it's the worst review because it was so badly written and the points were completely incoherent/biased. I have seen better arguments on gamefaqs and the escapist for why they don't like borderlands 2 and I respect their opinion because they conveyed it in a logical manner, unlike this review I posted.

 

[gibboss28]

Borderlands 2 falls short because it's missing several key elements you need to have in a 2012 first-person shooter game - most notably, a rich multiplayer online mode. There's an extremely limited four-player cooperative mode, and if you have an Xbox Live Gold account, you can team up that way, but this isn't the type of deeply engrossing FPS game the headset-wearing COD crowds gather to play months and months after release. In comparison, I read on several sites that COD: Black Ops 2 will feature up to six teams, for a total of 18 simultaneous players, in multiplayer mode.

18 players! If this guy ever sees TF2 he'll have a heart attack, never mind BF3. And I do love the "read on several sites."

God I'd hate to see what happens to him if he sees planetside 2.

 

[distortedreality]

I?d have to beg to differ on there are several genres of FPS. A first person shooter is a first person shooter to me.

What about games like Deus Ex, Thief, Mirror's Edge, etc?

Sure, they're first person, and there's shooting of a kind involved, but in no way would you call them FPS's. Admittedly that's not the same as comparing Borderlands to CoD, but i'm sure you get the point. They're completely different kinds of games, aimed at completely different markets.

My god, this guy is an idiot. He seems to be in EA's pocket too.

He's getting paid for this, that makes me want to cry.

Wait what? He's talking about COD? And how it's better then Borderlands. Last I checked that game was owned by Activision. How is this EA's fault? Or is EA becoming like Communism? Doesn't matter if it has anything to do with the subject matter just blame them.

Ooops lol I was very tired when I wrote that, was just a mistake

Don't worry - with that kind of mistake, surely you're qualified to write game reviews for the WSJ!

 

[GAunderrated]

He's a Senior Editor, no less. A search by author name on the site is telling, as well.

A generic game reviews search shows they also carry "Kill Screen" content. Here's my apples-to-apples 'review' of Adam Najberg's "Game Theory" brand reviews: let someone from Kill Screen do them for you, they can hardly do worse.

 

[Gunner 51]

Spoiler: Distorted Reality and Krantos's quotes

]

I?d have to beg to differ on there are several genres of FPS. A first person shooter is a first person shooter to me.

What about games like Deus Ex, Thief, Mirror's Edge, etc?

Sure, they're first person, and there's shooting of a kind involved, but in no way would you call them FPS's. Admittedly that's not the same as comparing Borderlands to CoD, but i'm sure you get the point. They're completely different kinds of games, aimed at completely different markets.

[I?d have to beg to differ on there are several genres of FPS. A first person shooter is a first person shooter to me. Just because Borderlands maybe set in a dreary wasteland doesn?t make it any more or less an FPS than the futuristic looking Halo, or gritty setting Modern Warfare. Whether it is an action packed FPS or not, it?s still an FPS.

I guess that's where the disagreement lies (lays?). It's less a matter of having different settings, and more about having different mechanics.

Borderland and CoD both use guns from a first person perspective, but, mechanically, that's where the similarity ends. Between the skills, loot, regions, and quest systems, borderlands sets itself apart from CoD which doesn't have any of those systems. What it does have is more focused action and narrative elements (as well as, imo, tighter controls and smarter AI) and, as stated previously, a deeper Multiplayer component.

I think a similar comparison could be made to Mass Effect and Gears of War. Both contain shooting enemies from a third-person perspective and chest high walls, but to claim they are trying to engage the player in the same way, I think, is a disservice to them both.

@Distorted Reality: I would say Deus Ex (both) was indeed a first person shooter - albeit a finely written one with first set of moral choices that I'd ever encountered in a game. Most of the shooting did take place in a first person view. Though I will agree with you on Mirror's Edge not strictly being an FPS. On the grounds I never bothered with the guns - it was far more fun to kick the snot out of the mercenaries and the authorities. (Besides, the shooting side of things seemed to be shoehorned in, to me.)

@Krantos: Even Doom had different regions, granted that they were a lot smaller with each level getting more and more infernal influence incorporated into their design. They also had loot lying around, although these took the form of power-ups like the Soul Sphere or just extraneous weaponry which would give you a small amount of ammuntion for that weapon.

I even classify Mass Effect games as third person shooter due to it's mechanics in a similar way to Gears of War. The difference between them is that the Mass Effect games are streets ahead in moral choice systems and in writing. I'm sure nearly everyone will agree that Mass Effect games have more player punches than Gears of War did.

With introspection, I get the impression that way of categorising mainly by mechanics must be something of an anachronism these days. To speak strictly for myself, anything adds to that is merely window dressing to me.

 

[Flailing Escapist]

Man, he REALLY didn't like the Doomsday trailer.

 

[Moonlight Butterfly]

snip

Haha well played

But yeah, I do get Activision and EA mixed up a lot.

I do write reviews though, just not when I'm on eight pain killers a day and half asleep.

 

[CoL0sS]

I'd probably like to think I'm better than this, but....

The artificial intelligence of the aliens and other enemies in this game is excellent, and I found it hard to outsmart and outmaneuver them

I have no problem believing that

I could probably say something smart about the review, but even Christopher Walken pissed.


PS: Also, English is not my main language, but something about wording and general composition of the review seems off to me.

 

[Moonlight Butterfly]

Because he typed the words 'Call of Duty'? Is that why it's a horrible review?

It's because he compared it to Call of Duty, it's nothing like COD. It's more like Diablo or Torchlight with guns.

 

[MeChaNiZ3D]

Gratuitous cussing? No 'rich multiplayer'? Advertising that doesn't take itself too seriously? Didn't like some of the characters? Too many weapons?

Come on, were you even trying...?

 

[GoaThief]

Because he typed the words 'Call of Duty'? Is that why it's a horrible review?

It's because he compared it to Call of Duty, it's nothing like COD. It's more like Diablo or Torchlight with guns.

To be fair of course you can compare it to CoD, there's nothing inherently wrong or incorrect about that. They are both in the same genre and share similar mechanics, of course there are other big differences too which should be commented upon.

It's the style and fuzzy-logic of this particular WSJ review which makes it so poor.