Yeah but that's kinda what he does, he points out these things (and blows them up a little bit for laughs), and then you decide whether you can still live with them being in the game or not. I'd still buy the game. I'd still buy most games that have something about them that interested me in the first place.unholyavenger13 said:he seemed to be nitpicking a little bit
i never saw any of those glitches and he didnt say anything about the walking controls in his gta4 review
all those flaws he called the game out for i never really cared about
I think the glitches were literally on a case-by-case basis. I had alot of friends conplain about glitches and I had none. My friend rode in a straight line from Hennigan's Stead to Escuela (not joking) through rock and over water, but the game was fine for me.danpascooch said:It did bother me that money is useless, and Yahtzee made a lot of good points.
But I have to say, I didn't encounter a single one of the weird glitches he mentioned, scratched disk, perhaps?
Yeahhh... the sooner you realise that people can be equally satirical in their responses the better. I generally wait for the extra punctuation to get his genuine opinion on gaming. My point about the much maligned glitches is my own personal observation though so I feel entitled to mention it.Edward123454321 said:He's a comedian, not a critic, the sooner you stop taking his reviews seriously, the sooner they become more amusing, trust me, I've stopped taking him seriously for about 4 vids now, and I'm enjoying ZP more as a result. >_<junkmanuk said:Jesus ZP I just don't know what you want from games these days. You cry out for proper sandboxing and when you get it you criticise it for being a timesink. As for complaining about mountain lions doing what mountain lions do. I.e. hunt in packs and attempt rip you open?! You gave your horse a goddamn name for goodness sake - how much more sandboxy can it get?!
Oh, and I really haven't experienced any of the glitches or bugs that are so vehemently described in this review despite playing for about 20 hours. I really think they're overblown.
Dude... Communism... Really? The Guerilla group red faction was CALLED red faction because they were on Mars, the red planet. Why Mars? Because that's the setting they used. There was no communism involved, it's just how the game was created.Therumancer said:-Snip-
I'm sorry for skewing your words a little, but I don't feel that I was that far off the mark.SonicKoala said:"Beautifully written and atmospheric" does not translate to "looks pretty" - writing has absoloutely NOTHING to do with graphics, nor does atmosphere; a game can have relatively mediocre graphics and still have great atmosphere. Your misinterpretation of my original comment is absoloutely baffling.My1stLuvJak said:Really? You didn't think he'd say that one of Rockstar's games was pretty?SonicKoala said:Hm, he spent the overwhelming majority of the review hating on the game, and then at the end we hear the words "beautifully written and beautifully atmospheric" - have to say, didn't see that coming. Regardless, it really seems like this game is worth checking out.
I love how you're taking that as a *OMG, I should take a look at this game*. There are many things in this world that are pretty to look at, but for videogames, that is the absolute last quality I need to have. You should read some other articles on this site, like the one "Experienced Points" that talks about graphics and how we don't need to progress any further in that department. I don't like to feel like a game is purposefully wasting my time - for me, riding through pretty landscape with little to nothing in the way of distraction is beyond boring. Not to say that I always need purpose in a game, but the only time where inbetween travel is fun is in Shadows of the Colossus; where I'm expected to find my way around without someone holding my hand, without a map, and, further, I will find a gargantuan boss to crawl all over and slay at the end of my journey.
Secondly, he said other things about the game other than "it looks good" - I'm not thinking about checking out the game because it looks pretty, I really don't care that strongly about graphics, but I'm glad you felt the need to be loquacious and post your little blurb on the relative unimportance of graphics when it comes to delivering a positive gaming experience.
And I read every little thing this site has to offer, thank you very much. Please, before you respond to somebody in the future, could you please read what the person actually said, and then post something which is actually relavent to that original comment.
Can't really see why you're being a dick about this, mate. Everything is an opinion, even the articles from experianced points. We all have different opinions, and he happened to interpret your post to say something. If it's off the mark, be a nice person and explain where you're coming from, do not slander people. Why take a debate about a videogame to such a personal level? How were they supposed to know you read EVERYTHING? They posted a suggestion.SonicKoala said:"Beautifully written and atmospheric" does not translate to "looks pretty" - writing has absoloutely NOTHING to do with graphics, nor does atmosphere; a game can have relatively mediocre graphics and still have great atmosphere. Your misinterpretation of my original comment is absoloutely baffling.My1stLuvJak said:Really? You didn't think he'd say that one of Rockstar's games was pretty?SonicKoala said:Hm, he spent the overwhelming majority of the review hating on the game, and then at the end we hear the words "beautifully written and beautifully atmospheric" - have to say, didn't see that coming. Regardless, it really seems like this game is worth checking out.
I love how you're taking that as a *OMG, I should take a look at this game*. There are many things in this world that are pretty to look at, but for videogames, that is the absolute last quality I need to have. You should read some other articles on this site, like the one "Experienced Points" that talks about graphics and how we don't need to progress any further in that department. I don't like to feel like a game is purposefully wasting my time - for me, riding through pretty landscape with little to nothing in the way of distraction is beyond boring. Not to say that I always need purpose in a game, but the only time where inbetween travel is fun is in Shadows of the Colossus; where I'm expected to find my way around without someone holding my hand, without a map, and, further, I will find a gargantuan boss to crawl all over and slay at the end of my journey.
Secondly, he said other things about the game other than "it looks good" - I'm not thinking about checking out the game because it looks pretty, I really don't care that strongly about graphics, but I'm glad you felt the need to be loquacious and post your little blurb on the relative unimportance of graphics when it comes to delivering a positive gaming experience.
And I read every little thing this site has to offer, thank you very much. Please, before you respond to somebody in the future, could you please read what the person actually said, and then post something which is actually relavent to that original comment.