http://uk.wii.ign.com/articles/960/960344p1.html
whoa..... miracles do happen.............
=D I knew it would be the ****.
panic i'd chainsaw you but cutting through the lard would be a serious test of my patience
IGN gave *** Hand 3/10. Their opinion is not trustworthy.
The IGN Wii guys have wanted to give a good score to a Wii game for a long time now. I have my doubts as if it is really a 9 worthy game.
So, taking into account IGN's Wii-flation, it's probably an 8.
http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/wii/madworld?q=madworld
its metacritic aggregate is higher than RE5...
not too surprising since it seems as if re5 is plagued by sequelitius.
[quote=BLUNTMASTER X;934155]metacritic
Hur.
still a decent way of finding out of a game is **** or not
Really, really not.
if vamp was here he'd totally prove you wrong
I'd say Twilight Princess and he'd agree with me. Or you would. I can't remember which one of you hates it as much as I do.
Vamp thinks it's one of the better Zelda games, if I recall correctly. :cool2:
I remember him saying, before Brawl came out, that TP was the only wii game he liked playing.
[quote=BLUNTMASTER X;934323]if vamp was here he'd totally prove you wrong
Vamp doesn't prove things wrong, he declares them wrong, which just shows he has a higher metachlorine count than any of us here.
[quote=Speedfreak;934337]I'd say Twilight Princess and he'd agree with me. Or you would. I can't remember which one of you hates it as much as I do.we both thought it was pretty good though i do hold a general dislike for the last temple or two
Fair enough.
God Hand: 73 on metacritic.
Words cannot express how depressingly wrong that is. Especially with most of the higher scores coming from less significant websites and publications.
73 sounds about right for *** hand. good game, not ****ing awesome but definitely fun
Are you shitting me? 73 is below average for most review sites. That's the same score as The Force Unleashed for Christ's sake.
Lego Star Wars got an 85.
God Hand is above and beyond this garbage.
One thing I've recently learned, is that a game can be awesome, and the score of the review of the game can be high, yet the review can still be complete garbage (This is an easy thing to imagine and assume, but I actually know it now). This is the main reason why Metacritic is rather pointless. When we also consider that different sites have different guidelines for how they go about scoring a game (some represent a 5/10 as average, some a 7/10, for one), and that a lot of the editors of said websites tend to contradict the critique guidelines of their publication (from Game Informer's Paper Mario: The Thousand-Year Door to Action Button's God of War II reviews), then discussing aggregate scores really tells us nothing. It is more interesting to take an individual review and determine whether or not it's worthwhile. Essentially, whether or not their reasons for liking or disliking a game are valid. We received a "C" grade for our game from one publication. Naturally, most of our studio was up in arms at the review, but I had no problem with it, even if C to metacritic translates to a 50. Why? Because his reasons for giving the game a C, for not liking the game enough, were perfectly valid. On the other hand, we got over 50% in a magazine (greater than the C), but because his review was vague about anything that was wrong with the game, despite his greater score, I despised the review. At the same time, I hold that C grade in higher regard than some of the 80s that we've gotten that have very stupid reasons for liking our game.
With that said, I've only played a couple of stages of God Hand. My first impression of it was very positive, as the game is ridiculous in its presentation, yet faithful to 16-bit and arcade beat-em-ups of the '90s (while a lot of you played RPGs in this era, beat-em-ups and fighting games were my bread 'n butter of the day). The ability to gain new moves and place them in any of the attack buttons is very interesting, although from what I've played the enemy design, AI and level design are a far cry from games like Ninja Gaiden and God of War, offering bland, repetitive environments and dumb enemies. Spamming the strafe + roudhouse kick seems to be the optimal strategy for beating most enemies than anything else, at least thus far. I'll get several more hits in this way against an enemy before being hit back than I would with other techniques. I've been playing beat-em-ups constantly for the past few months, so I'll definitely get back to this one later.
As for Madworld, I have the same worry as I do with GH, which is the dumbness of enemies, as well as their lack of variety. I've only played through the first part, up until beating Little Eddie, but I'm interested to see how enemies can become more challenging when the grab mechanic is so slow. It feels to me that developers woul want enemies to be dumb throughout, so the Player has enough time to grab objects and stick them on enemies, followed by grabbing said enemies and throwing them against an environmental hazard. New ways of hurting enemies with objects and new environment hazards must constantly be introduced for the game to remain entertaining, so I'll have to play more and see.
The enemies get trickier with later levels, or if you boost the difficulty (by playing better, interestingly). They're still "dumb" in a sense, but I don't cosider it a disadvantage. In the same way Super Mario Bros 3 or Megaman has entirely predictable enemy patterns that still prove to be interesting challenges by their placement alone. I've found defeating an individual enemy in God Hand to be more thrilling than an enemy in God of War or Devil May Cry, partially because they're made to be more difficult but mostly because the mechanics and enemies mesh so neatly together by comparison.
By the way, Madworld apparantly has a higher difficulty mode that supposedly makes even the tutorial level a tough challenge. I'm not sure if you have to complete the game to unlock it though.
My criticism of metacritic has more to do with game critics themselves. To be honest, I don't think most of them know what they're talking about. They're prone to judging games by entirely arbitrary metrics; such as comparing a sequel to it's prequel and reasoning that it is inferior because it is different in certain ways. Such as Breath of Fire V being considered inferior to other BoF games purely because it's short, and games that belong to that particular game genre are supposed to be long. Often they can't even tell bad level design from good, and will give games like Twilight Princes and Super Mario Galaxy some of the highest ratings ever despite both titles being riddled with poor level design. What's shocking is that level design is supposed to be the single most important aspect of any game.
Metacritic might, in future, be worth more as standards improve and certain bad game design trends fall out of favour, in the same way that criticism of film improved as understanding of the medium grew. But even then it'll only be worth as much as a site like rottentomatoes.com. They'll always include scores from a critic that someone won't think very highly of in their average, so it'll only ever be as useful as an extremely rough guide. Certainly not any indicator of true quality, certainly not for any games company to decide which of their games are good (they should know that before they're even released).
The music was great, what the hell is wrong with you?
sound. music is music. point stands for the rest.
The sound consists of punching noises, screaming and explosions. What's missing, a Dukes of Hazzard horn? The texture's and environments are pretty bad I'll give you, but the animation is spot-on. You honestly can't ask for anything slicker in an action game.
I find the concept of replay value quite alien. Honestly, if a game is good I think it's worth playing again. Unlockable shit as a list of something to do should not be necessary for a game to be great. Besides, mastering it is a massive challenge alone. I can't even get to Level Die on the first stage.
I guess the story is stupid, but it's precision-engineered, laughably stupid. Is there really an action game similar to this with a story that isn't bad? Games like Devil May Cry, God of War and Ninja Gaiden commit the cardinal sin of having ridiculous stories that think they're remotely decent. It's just bad demon, greek god and ninja fan-fiction, respectively.
Most importantly the mechanics and level design **** all over most games, including braindead garbage like Lego games. The technique system is deeper than anything in God of War and it gets the honourable mention of not turning entire fights into a series of QTEs. These two points alone should get it a much higher score than that.
Hey, I think the game is great. I'm just saying it's not the type of game that fits neatly into reviews and it's horribly polarizing as is. And there's a difference between a story (lack thereof) like *** of War and one like *** Hand. One's simple and to the point and pretty basic, easy to consume and digest. The other makes little sense and it's insanely over-the-top which doesn't fly with a lot of people. And the animation is the only good thing about the graphics. But compare the sound of a Ninja Gaiden and GoW to it, it's pretty different. Sound is pretty basic, but there's definitely such a thing as quality sound. Like Halo 3 for example. Same basic sounds as any other FPS, but done amazingly.
Anyways, my point is that's a great score for said game and you can't go by overall ratings for such games anyways. Anything that's polarizing doesn't work for sites like metacritic and gamestats. One of those games you have to play for yourself since opinions differ greatly. So your use of *** Hand in this instance is poor.
Hence metacritic cannot be trusted, as it's the average opinion of jerkoffs who don't know what they're talking about. The kind of people who will happily rate **** games higher than good ones because, when broken down into their component parts, some things turn out better. That's not writing a review, that's writing a spec sheet and directly comparing it to every other spec sheet.
I saw this quote in a Gamasutra MegaMan 9 review (note: it's part of a "critical essay" series of reviews):
I think the reviewer is informing us that MGS4 isn't Parappa the Rapper. Who knew?
Really, though, cryptic or not, reviews that take a shot at certain players always come off as ***hole-ish.
[quote]It's not that Shadow of the Colossus isn't something that any gamer who is interested in it will enjoy, because they will, and thoroughly so, but it might not be one of those titles you can pass off to your ADD-suffering little cousin. But not every game is made for the Ritalin generation, Shadow of the Colossus being one of them.
I rest my case.
Then that particular critic doesn't know how to write and doesn't understand subtlety in game design. For starters, that sentence doesn't actually say that. And secondly, even shooters with stupid plots will give you a reason to shoot, it's never just for the sake of pressing buttons. In Bangai-O spirits you are shooting nameless robots because they are trying to kill you, and therefore your only possible objective is to destroy them all. In Half-Life 2 you're killing Overwatch soldiers because they're oppressive, cruel, f[COLOR=lightgreen]u[/COLOR]cking bastards. It doesn't need to specifically tell you that, it doesnt need to describe precisely what they've done; it expicitely shows you their behaviour and allows you to come to your own conclusion that they're oppressive, cruel, f[COLOR=lightgreen]u[/COLOR]cking bastards. This is a game that was released almost an entire generation before MGS4. So it's not a wholly remarkable thing, pretty much every videogame does it. Even Gears of War gives you a reason to fight in the first seven seconds of the intro cinematic, despite the dialog and plot in the rest of the game still being pretty awful.
He's either bad at writing or honestly thinks nanomachines, vampires, psychics and giant robots is the best game plot ever. Either way the point is invalid, the game's utterly unremarkable in that respect. It's convoluted fan service.
whoa... fantasy elements in a video game plot...... I'M SO ANGRY!!
why dont you jerkoff to braid's story