Gamespot Review up

[Lacan]

I thought this was interesting.

 

 

 

LOL

Our favorite reviewer, Kasavin, gives Paper Mario a 9 in graphics.

The characters are 2d, btw.

[Master_Splinter]

Pretty typical considering the massively inflated Halo 2 review in relation to the original KOTOR score. One of the reasons I don't take the numeric score into account when buying a game. It should be a crime that this type of prostitution has an effect on game sales.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I thought the review was pretty fair all things considered. Though I can't say that until I play the game. Just to clarify, gamespot scores ARE NOT based on one reviewer, but rather an average of them. And one person gets the privilege of doing a video/written review of the game.

 

Halo's score was not "inflated". Halo 2 had a reasonably great storyline for Single Player, but the game is meant for multiplayer, which is where the game shines. It completely revolutionized mp gaming for the xbox, and there's no denying the greatness of it *something tells me you haven't played it mp*

 

And just so we're all on the same page...this game wasn't given a 6 in graphics because it's a sequel where the graphics weren't improved. It was given a 6 because it's a sequel, where in their opinion, the graphics are WORSE than the first game.

 

I won't be playing the xbox version, but I hope they fix some issues for the PC version

[manifestus]

It's interesting that so many people are pissed about the score. If you scour most forums, I wonder how many people over-estimate the scores?

 

I reviewed games awhile back for fun (actual reviewing; corporate pre-release stuff, not this buy and review it crap), and if you tried appeasing all the folks out there, you'd never win. My reviews were both a general indicator of how the game stacks up to the competition within and outside the genre. As I've noted, it's always easier to review hardware than software. Hardware you just get faced with the facts -- software reviews you get to deal with the "intangibles". Bleh.

 

For example, some games with basic graphics (Exile 3 comes to mind) definately gets shafted, even though they have fundamentally sound gameplay. I for one enjoyed Exile 3 far more than a game such as ... Diablo II, but there's a solid difference in scores. You can't make everyone happy, so at least try to stay consistent.

 

I'm thinking that gamespot decided to drop the graphics score because:

1) They said there aren't any substantial improvements in graphics over Kotor 1.

2) There are framerate issues and bugs (clipping, graphical glitches, etc) that are worse than the first game.

3) The engine has aged another year. And it wasn't exactly optimized much. We're not talking about Baldur's Gate 1 to 2 here.

 

And probably other stuff. But hell, you were going to buy the game regardless right? The review is meant to give readers (and if the score is high enough the publisher + developer gets some extra publicity to add to their website) who weren't necessarily going to run out and grab the game an idea what the hell they should expect -- who knows.

 

And a score above 8 isn't bad at all. Morrowind ran away with an 8.8 and took RPG game of the year honors (I think ... should quote me on this since I didn't reference it to make sure).

 

Just my 2 cents.

[manifestus]

I knew Greg Kasavin was going to review TSL. That guy is such a douche. I have never once agreed with a review of his. The guy gave Fable an 8.6 and TSL an 8.5. 

 

Cheers!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Pretty typical considering the massively inflated Halo 2 review in relation to the original KOTOR score. One of the reasons I don't take the numeric score into account when buying a game. It should be a crime that this type of prostitution has an effect on game sales.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

On the note of game sales ...

 

Of course numeric score has an effect on game sales ... care to explain why Battlezone did so poorly? Or Thief? System Shock?

 

Why did FROGGER (jeez!) do so well when the reviews were horrid?

 

Since in general, the highly rated games are actually pretty darn good, it gets bought up. Halo 2 would have been snapped up regardless of the reviews. Did you take a look at the pre-ordered numbers?

 

Furthermore, Halo 2 is a great FPS.

[Lacan]

I thought the review was pretty fair all things considered.  Though I can't say that until I play the game.  Just to clarify, gamespot scores ARE NOT  based on one reviewer, but rather an average of them.  And one person gets the privilege of doing a video/written review of the game. 

 

Halo's score was not "inflated".  Halo 2  had a reasonably great storyline for Single Player, but the game is meant for multiplayer, which is where the game shines.  It completely revolutionized mp gaming for the xbox, and there's no denying the greatness of it *something tells me you haven't played it mp*

 

And just so we're all on the same page...this game wasn't given a 6 in graphics because it's a sequel where the graphics weren't improved.  It was given a 6 because it's a sequel, where in their opinion, the graphics are WORSE than the first game. 

 

I won't be playing the xbox version, but I hope they fix some issues for the PC version

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yes, in fact I have played multiplayer (no, not with XBL, with friends). What did they revolutionize? A new ranking system? They didn't even add Bots to the MP, which many were expecting. But it is unreasonable to have a game, 3 years in development, and come out with a 10 hour single player and cliffhanger ending. Halo was pretty good as far as shooters go, Halo 2 was hype. It's reflected in the hardcore fans' disappointment.

[Lacan]

On the note of game sales ...

 

Of course numeric score has an effect on game sales ... care to explain why Battlezone did so poorly?  Or Thief?  System Shock? 

 

Why did FROGGER (jeez!) do so well when the reviews were horrid?

 

Since in general, the highly rated games are actually pretty darn good, it gets bought up.  Halo 2 would have been snapped up regardless of the reviews.  Did you take a look at the pre-ordered numbers?

 

Furthermore, Halo 2 is a great FPS.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Hey, if you're pissed about my Halo 2 comments, just say so. I didn't say that a bad review always kills a game, just that it has an EFFECT, however great the magnitude, on sales. I don't agree that highly rated games are generally pretty darn good, and I didn't say Halo 2 needed good reviews to sell. Stop putting words in my mouth.

 

I'm just saying what alot of fans have said.

 

BTW, wtf is wrong with you. That rant was barely coherent in regards to my comments.

[Master_Splinter]

Yes, in fact I have played multiplayer (no, not with XBL, with friends). What did they revolutionize? A new ranking system? They didn't even add Bots to the MP, which many were expecting. But it is unreasonable to have a game, 3 years in development, and come out with a 10 hour single player and cliffhanger ending. Halo was pretty good as far as shooters go, Halo 2 was hype. It's reflected in the hardcore fans' disappointment.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Fair enough. I don't think that's really the issue of this post though.

And I think it's safe to say that everybody on this forum is going to thoroughly enjoy this game

[Lacan]

Yes, in fact I have played multiplayer (no, not with XBL, with friends). What did they revolutionize? A new ranking system? They didn't even add Bots to the MP, which many were expecting. But it is unreasonable to have a game, 3 years in development, and come out with a 10 hour single player and cliffhanger ending. Halo was pretty good as far as shooters go, Halo 2 was hype. It's reflected in the hardcore fans' disappointment.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Fair enough. I don't think that's really the issue of this post though.

And I think it's safe to say that everybody on this forum is going to thoroughly enjoy this game

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I hope so.

[manifestus]

Alright ... this is stupid.

 

The idea for sequels is:

Don't fix what ain't broken. At the same time, make it work as smoothly as before. Halo 2 followed that formula, and added some things that were interesting.

 

Kotor 2 does the same.

 

Halo = 9.7; Halo 2=9.4

Kotor = 9.1; Kotor 2 = 8.5

 

So a .3 difference and a .6 difference

Big deal. I care about the storyline, so to me, the graphic glitches are an inconvience. In general, as long as the game isn't suddenly a 7 when I'm expecting 8 to 9, I'll sift the reviews to see if major CTD's or experience breaking problems (fps of 4 for example) issues have propped up.

[Naso]

Don't compare it to Halo. Halo is an aberration. It's not that good. The MP is ok, and it is "revolutionary" because there isn't anything else decent of that type for the consoles. It's like if you went to McDonalds and got a moderately decent piece of prime-rib you'd be impressed, even if the prime-rib wasn't that good. With Halo it's further accentuated because more xboxers are young and haven't seen this kind of thing, or the many far superior games, on the pc.

[GhostofAnakin]

Just watched the gamespot video review. The footage of the game look alright, but then again I only played KOTOR I on the PC, so I have no idea how these graphics compare with KOTOR I XBox graphics.

 

The reviewer seems to insist that the PC has amnesia, even after it's been explained numerous times that he/she doesn't have it. Which makes me wonder if the reviewer has a full grasp of what's going on in the game. All in all, though, apart from the score they gave the graphics, the rest of the categories seemed to do very well.

[Bastilla_Skywalker]

what the heck does gamespot think they are doing?:angry: is that all gamespot gave KOTOR 2? 8.5 they have made a very big mistake! GGGGGRRRRR!... KOTOR 2 deserves better the 8.5.....they have offically lost a gamer......gamespot s*** period!

 

 

 

:angry::angry::angry::angry::angry::angry: GRRRRRR

[GhostofAnakin]

what the heck does gamespot think they are doing?:angry: is that all gamespot gave KOTOR 2? 8.5 ll they have made a very big mistake GGGGGRRRRR KOTOR 2 deserves better the 8.5.....they have offically lost a gamer......they s*** period!

 

 

 

:angry::angry::angry::angry::angry::angry: GRRRRRR

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Uh? Did you happen to read the entire review and listen/read the reviewer's reasons for the score?

[Leferd]

what the heck does gamespot think they are doing?:angry: is that all gamespot gave KOTOR 2? 8.5 ll they have made a very big mistake GGGGGRRRRR KOTOR 2 deserves better the 8.5.....they have offically lost a gamer......they s*** period!

 

 

 

:angry::angry::angry::angry::angry::angry: GRRRRRR

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Uh? Did you happen to read the entire review and listen/read the reviewer's reasons for the score?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

To tell the truth, I really didn't see anything wrong with the review. Based on what Chris A. said, he got atleast one fact wrong with the amnesia bit...but it seemed like a decent enough review. He praised the good parts and talked about the graphics problem. Overall, it was a very favorable review which should reinforce those who are already fans and would be recommended to those who really enjoyed the original.

 

My God, and people had a cow when IGN gave a 9.3...

[GhostofAnakin]

To tell the truth, I really didn't see anything wrong with the review. Based on what Chris A. said, he got atleast one fact wrong with the amnesia bit...but it seemed like a decent enough review. He praised the good parts and talked about the graphics problem. Overall, it was a very favorable review which should reinforce those who are already fans and would be recommended to those who really enjoyed the original.

 

My God, and people had a cow when IGN gave a 9.3...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

That's what I meant...I wasn't sure if my response to Bastila Skywalker illustrated that or not.

 

I was trying to say she should read the reviewer's reasons for giving it the score he did, instead of immediately wanting his head on a platter.

[Leferd]

Funny thing too...

 

If you read the IGN and Gamespot reviews side by side without looking at the scores, Kassavin's review was more positive than Goldstein's. Yet people were dwelling on the Gamespot score while ignoring what was written while the reverse was true for IGN's.

[GhostofAnakin]

Actually people seemed to be getting in to a frenzy over the IGN score as well, namely the score in graphics, despite the high overall score.

[Setzer]

I have no gripe with it being given a 8.5 score, as stated in my post, I just don't think the Graphics score is justified.

[Bastilla_Skywalker]

Im sorry I didn't mean to get off my head like that...I just think KOTOR 2 should deserve better even thugh i haven't played it

[GhostofAnakin]

Im sorry I didn't mean to get off my head like that...I just think KOTOR 2 should deserve better even thugh i haven't played it

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Why? That's a rather weak assumption.

 

Atleast if you've played it, then it would be your personal opinion versus the reviewer. But as it stands, it's your assumptions against someone who has actually played it.

[Bastilla_Skywalker]

well even with out playing it ...kotor 2 still deserves better

[GhostofAnakin]

There's sound logic.

[Leferd]

Critiquing reviews is like criticizing the Academy on Oscar night. I guess it can be cathartic.

 

Heh.

[Darth Nemisis]

Just watched the Video review......from now on i'm never listenign to anything anyone says about anything else. It looked excellent to me. So what if it looks the same as KOTOR......the game play looks amazing as always, and the few cutscenes we saw looked great! Gamespot can F*** themselves, they are just as clueless as the Bestbuy guy!

[Leferd]

We encountered a number of minor issues during the course of the game, such as characters who'd occasionally pass through walls (no, it's not a Force power), or dialogue options that would unexpectedly throw us back into the same dialogue loop. And the game doesn't really look any better than the original, but since it tries to get away with a few new graphical effects, its frame rate is often even worse, sometimes plummeting down into the single digits during some of the more-hectic battles. Given that the game's character models and relatively small environments aren't particularly detailed or attractive to begin with, this is rather unfortunate, since a role-playing game of this caliber really deserves better. On the other hand, the lightsaber action you'll be seeing frequently throughout the second half of the game is impressive, and the characters you'll be speaking with look reasonably good, mostly because their lips (again, if they have lips) are properly synced with their speech. All things considered, The Sith Lords looks fair at best. Fortunately, graphics aren't what's most important to a high-quality RPG.

 

 

^ from the review.

 

Sounds like a fair critique of the graphics to me. Of course, I haven't played it, but both IGN and Gamespot have the same problems with the graphics. They never said that graphics was the deal breaker. But their concerns about it are legitimate.