Red Steel review




Posted by Speedfreak

So apparantly NGamer has a world-exclusive Red Steel review (my copy hasn't arrived yet). NGamer have also recently started being far stingier with review scores (they hate Golden Sun now), so the fact that Red Steel got ninety friggin' percent should pave the way for a series of positive reviews.

Looks like it's a killer app after all.




Posted by Bebop

They are very harsh with reviews now. Cooking Mama got 54, Mario Slam Basketball got 69, and the new Pokemon got 79 where they say "Asking us to play the same game for the nth time is a bit much."

Promising for Red Steel. Then again they said Call of Duty and the original Far Cry Vengence images were amazing.
Oh and Speedy, your new magazine is here.




Posted by Axis

I don't know if a 9.0 rating would make it a killer-app. I expect it to score in the 8's on IGN/Gamespot.




Posted by Speedfreak

[quote=Axis]I don't know if a 9.0 rating would make it a killer-app. I expect it to score in the 8's on IGN/Gamespot.

I don't see how you can say that after their Pok




Posted by Bebop


Quoting Axis: I don't know if a 9.0 rating would make it a killer-app. I expect it to score in the 8's on IGN/Gamespot.


IGN gave Conkers Bad Fur Day 9.9. Dont trust IGN when it comes to reviews. They dont know what they are doing.

NGmaer Red Steel review opening reads "Every game show glimpse of Red Steel was met with nervous chatter over control, graphics and griping about sword grip. Forget the glimpses. only by playing the game as it was meant to be played, from start to finish, could you ever appreciate just how fun, exciting and mostly importantly right Red Steel actually feels



Posted by Bebop

This is the NGamer review in a nut shell.
The single player isnt the longest FPS around but each level has alot of visual variety. Enviornments looks beautiful with great effects with destrcutible scenery.
It controls well.
"Weapon variety is a bit stingy" but the guns they do have are very good i.e. magnums and shotguns
The multiplayer doesnt give Timesplitters a rund for its money but, with only 4 levels, its good enough. Killer Mode issues each player a specific task via their speaker during a game which provides scenarios.
Not only making excellent use of the Wii's controlers, this is huge fun in its own right. For a launch title to get so much right is an indicator of great things to come




Posted by Axis

Well I usually hear that magazines over-rate games. Haven't heard anything about NGamer magazine. Anyways, if this is the case, then my hopes for the game have gone up a little bit.

Bebop - Conker was reviewed about 7-8 years ago. Their more recent and current reviews have been pretty spot on for the most part.




Posted by Speedfreak

[quote=Axis]Well I usually hear that magazines over-rate games.

Yes, from games websites. Sites like IGN like to act like they're the be-all end-all of gaming news and reviews. Fact is magazines get just as much exclusives as they do.




Posted by Bebop


Quoting Axis: Their more recent and current reviews have been pretty spot on for the most part.


Halo 2 anyone? What about Fable? Jak and Daxter? Anyone? Anyone at all?



Posted by Axis

Look at what Halo 2 did, it single handidly destroyed all the Xbox Live titles. I do agree that the 9.8 is a bit high, but I think that it certainly should be at least a 9.5.

Fable is about right too, I would say.

Out of all the reviews that they do, they get them right most of the time.




Posted by Bebop

No they dont. Those 3 games were examples of games they didnt get right. Halo 2 is disgusting, Fable is shocking and Jack and Daxter is headache enducing.




Posted by Vampiro V. Empire

In your opinion... because apparently tons of people absolutely adored those games.




Posted by Bebop


Quoting Vampiro V. Empire: In your opinion... because apparently tons of people absolutely adored those games.


He was saying magazines over rate games and websites dont. Ever played Fable vamp? Did it live up to the "best RPG ever forver" hype its creators said? Nope. Those are examples of overrated games. Dont even try to say Halo 2 deserved as high a rating as it got. It didnt. And come on CBF day got 9.9! Thats almost a rare perfect 10! If thats not overrating, no matter how old it is, I dont know what is.



Posted by Vampiro V. Empire

Wait, when did I argue that IGN or the like overrate games?


Oh, and it's nice Red Steel got a nine, good indication at least. But, I'll have to play it before I believe it (oh snap play to believe) because, if I remember correctly, PDZ got pretty high scores from just about everywhere at launch And look how that turned out.




Posted by Bebop

You seemed to be defending his staetment by disagreeing with mine, saying its all down to personal taste. Well schanpp I guess he didnt know that! Either way he was saying IGN and Gamespot dont overrate games. They do.




Posted by Vampiro V. Empire


Quoted post: You seemed to be defending his staetment by disagreeing with mine, saying its all down to personal taste. Well schanpp I guess he didnt know that! Either way he was saying IGN and Gamespot dont overrate games. They do.


I'm saying you believe they're garbage, yet a lot of people loved those games for one reason or another. That's about it.

And yeah, I don't care whoever is saying what. The whole "lol they overrate" argument is retarded.



Posted by Axis

I didn't say that IGN or Gamespot never overrate games. In fact, on post number 10 I agreed that they overrated Halo 2!




Posted by Bebop

Right so websites overrate games sometimes but moslty get them right, which is fine. but if magazines overrate games sometimes but get them mostly right its bad?




Posted by Axis

The common view on magazines is that they almost overrate all of their games. OPM does, OXM does, GI does, EGM does, so on and so forth. I was simply stating that I would wait for other sites like IGN or Gamespot to review it. Because most of time, their spot on with their reviews. And as mentioned before, I haven't really heard anything on NGamer. So if they're harsh on games all the time, then so be it.




Posted by Bebop

Buts it just that IGn and Gamespot, especially when it come sto launch titles, rate higher than other sites. Your basically saying to me"Thats a high score but Im going to wait for IGN and gamespot to rate it even higher".




Posted by Vampiro V. Empire

Or "I'll wait for IGN and Gamestop to review so I can get a better picture on how the game turned out." You really have no idea what their score is going to be (likely high eights) but you'll at least get a better idea of what made the game great.

Anyone who buys a game because of one review is almost foolish.




Posted by Axis

Exactly.




Posted by Bebop

As foolish as critizing a review because of its source, but waiting for more unreliable sources to comment.




Posted by Speedfreak

[quote=Vampiro V. Empire]Anyone who buys a game because of one review is almost foolish.

Not really. I've read the magazine for over ten years and have always felt they scored titles just right. If anything, their review is the only one that matters.

Anyone who pays attention to critics whom they often disagree with are fools.




Posted by Vampiro V. Empire


Quoted post: As foolish as critizing a review because of its source, but waiting for more unreliable sources to comment.


I haven't criticized anyone or anything in this thread, but OK :cookie: Also, I generally find both Gamestop and IGN to be fairly reliable if you have some general knowledge on the game beforehand. That combined with this magazine who's also fairly reliable sounds like a petty good combination. I just find it odd to ultimately trust my sixty dollars to the opinion of one source.


Quoted post: If anything, their review is the only one that matters.


So you say, and I'll trust you since I've never even heard of it until a couple days ago. It's just, for me personally, I like to read a lot about something before I go and buy it. One review is nice, especially one I know I can trust, but I like to hear about every detail, and I'll rarely get that from one source, and especially from one magazine.

Also, I find myself rarely disagreeing with whatever particular review site I wish to read. Generally they're very close if not spot on with my final opinion.


Yup.



Posted by Speedfreak

I find that amazingly hard to believe considering the differences in scores that you get from just IGN and Gamespot, let alone 1up and GamesRadar.

My point was really that you shuld just listen to the critics that really matter to you, not the average of every review. Be that a few critics or just one.




Posted by Vampiro V. Empire

Luckily they're all usually in the same boat and only differing by a couple points. Then again I'm not paying attention to the final score because that factors in things I might not even care about.

But, wait, no. I'm actually lying to make what I said more convincing and fall in line with everything else I said. Even though I have nothing to prove, nor consider this an argument that can be won. So never mind.




Posted by Speedfreak

...

Yeah I was pretty much just contesting "Anyone who buys a game because of one review is almost foolish."




Posted by Vampiro V. Empire


Quoted post: Yeah I was pretty much just contesting "Anyone who buys a game because of one review is almost foolish."


This:

Quoted post:
I find that amazingly hard to believe considering the differences in scores that you get from just IGN and Gamespot, let alone 1up and GamesRadar.


Sounds like it had to do with this:


Quoted post: Also, I find myself rarely disagreeing with whatever particular review site I wish to read. Generally they're very close if not spot on with my final opinion.


If you're still going on about that one bit, that's what quotes are for. Otherwise I have no idea what you're talking about and assume it has to do with the last thing said.

Anywho, I still stand by my statement that anyone who buys a game because one magazine told them to is pretty foolish. *shrugs*



Posted by Bebop

[QUOTE=Vampiro V. Empire]I haven't criticized anyone or anything in this thread, but OK :cookie: Also, I generally find both Gamestop and IGN to be fairly reliable if you have some general knowledge on the game beforehand. That combined with this magazine who's also fairly reliable sounds like a petty good combination. I just find it odd to ultimately trust my sixty dollars to the opinion of one source.

It wasnt aimed at you :cookie:




Posted by Vampiro V. Empire


Quoted post: It wasnt aimed at you


Maybe not the first part, but seeing as I pretty much agree with Axis and said it for him, the rest was more or less aimed at me.

:cookie: use quotes ppl :cookie:



Posted by Axis

Everything that Vamp has said, pretty much. :cookie:




Posted by s0ul

I buy 90% of my games based off of zero reviews. If you're already very interested in a game and you've been following it, one review's usually plenty to seal the deal, sometimes isn't even necessary. It's not like we haven't seen a ton on Red Steel so far, I'm getting it regardless of what any review says.




Posted by Bebop


Quoting Vampiro V. Empire: Maybe not the first part, but seeing as I pretty much agree with Axis and said it for him, the rest was more or less aimed at me.

:cookie: use quotes ppl :cookie:


Fair enough if youre speaking for Axis then. The comment wasnt directed at anyone 'criticized anyone this thread' but just the general idea that this particular Nintendo magazine was going be any more bias then launch happy IGN and Gamespot. His reasoning behind this was "most of the time Gamespot or IGn are right" which is the same for any review media. Point is those 2 websites do really overrate alot of titles, especially launch ones, and it seemed dumb for him to want to hear what they had to say. Lets be honest here, its not like those 2 sites are going to give it a low score? I mean if Fable can win them over it cant take much.



Posted by Vampiro V. Empire

Fable pretty much won everyone over. It wasn't until two weeks past launch everyone thought "oh wait, this **** sucks." Wait, actually, Fable WAS a solid eight. There's no arguing that. It was a good to great game, but it was hyped as a high nine or ten game. And I believe that's what both gave Fable (8) or close to.

Anywho, I also wouldn't say both are "launch happy," though they certainly got PDZ completely wrong. The rest were spot on or close (in terms of the 360 launch.) But that's also my opinion.

Anywho, Soul has point. When it comes to games like Red Steel, chances are you won't need a review or even multiple reviews. Though, I might. Then again I'm far from sold. But people really do seem to love the game, and this review just furthers that.


Edit: Wait, IGN game Fable a 9.3. It's so not a 9.3...




Posted by WILLETH FOR MONTHS

We should all agree that review scores are ridiculous. Read the words and remember that it's someone else's opinion, and then go and decide for yourself.

Also, Fable was bollocks and Molyneux is a hack who's still riding on the success of Black and White.




Posted by Vampiro V. Empire


Quoted post: Read the words and remember that it's someone else's opinion, and then go and decide for yourself.


Bingo. Which is more or less what I said in this jumble of words.

oh, and B&W isn't even that great. Fable 2 is going to be another flop, just like B&W2 was.



Posted by WILLETH FOR MONTHS

yeah, I didn't read any of the posts except the first few, and then scrolled down and managed to catch 'Fable 2' somewhere in the scrolling.




Posted by Axis

I thought Fable was a good game. Thing is for me, I didn't get caught in any of the hype at all. I heard about the game about 5 months before it came out. So I didn't hear all the mumbo jumbo PM had to say about the game. This time around though I'm going to take everything with a grain of salt. Only way I'll believe what the man says is when gaming sites get their hands on the game and can confirm it. Fable for me was about a 8.5.




Posted by WILLETH FOR MONTHS

I picked it up a few weeks ago, and had heard next to nothing about it either. It SUCKED.