Akiyoshi said:I don´t understand the Official Xbox Magazine, they give green (positive) score to every, and I repeat every crappy (Well I am not stupid, I know what the word Official means and thus why is every review I have seen so far positive)game but when it comes to Witcher they give it 8.5 (Which not bad of course and thus this might look like a bit of overreaction) because there is an information overload (You want complex game and then...well you are overloaded with information?), infrequent new gear (lol) and some parts are ill-advised.
Anyway I can´t understand the "objectivity" of some reviews...because for me when someone says that he is overloaded with info while playing RPG, from whatever angle I look at it a can´t agree and in my eyes it is stupid.
and other thing was not being able to save game at some points he clearly didn't realise he was in a battle xD
HomemComH said:That OXM review...
How? HOW IS THAT POSSIBLE? The bloody numpties.
www.cdaction.pl: 8.5 (X360 version)
+excellent story and atmosphere
+unique non-linearity
+pacing
+graphics - 90% of the time
+phenomenal music
-controls
-interface adatped not too well for consoles rather than made from scratch
+excellent story and atmosphere
+unique non-linearity
+pacing
+graphics - 90% of the time
+phenomenal music
-controls
-interface adatped not too well for consoles rather than made from scratch
Controls and interface seems to be mentioned in most reviews as needing work.
Still nice that they are getting good reviews though.
Still nice that they are getting good reviews though.
I can´t help it - sometines I just find reviewers ignorant. I just finished reading IGN review and I am, well disappointed. Don´t get me wrong I visit IGN regularly (with Hrej.cz it is actually only gaming site that I visit), great shows, and good reviews, and I like Keza MacDonald who has made the review, but to write that Witcher 2 is one of the best looking Xbox games and than give it 8.0 in graphic, that is a bad joke (A joke because this is the site where 10s and 9s fly around very often, which is normal after all on 90% of review sites). Also I can´t shake off the fact that she was reviewing a port rather then the game on Xbox itself and by this I mean comparing it to PC just too often (I understand tha comparing is in place, since it is a adaptation), to say that it is just not as good as on the PC is stupid, because compared to modern 2012 PC Xbox is a little monkey which I guess is clear to anyone.
In general reviewers should be more dedicated and less influenced by hype (I think no matter where you work, you should do things properly). I mean Skyrim was totally broken on PS3, you weren´t able to play the game after few hours!!! How it is then that it got 10 ? (I don´t argue about the quality howerer. I own Skyrim myself and though I don´t play it really often and I am not a real fan, I totally understand why people love it so much... funny that I find Twilight the same) And Witcher 2 got 8.5 with only con being the "occasional graphics tearing and texture pop in".
To wrap it all, I think when it comes to technical stuff (not art and dising...I mean look at Rayman Origins, never played it, but I have seen it with my own eyes and it is just beautiful), reviewers should aproach consoles with the best knowledge of their possibilities - that´s the only way of ensuring objectivity.
In general reviewers should be more dedicated and less influenced by hype (I think no matter where you work, you should do things properly). I mean Skyrim was totally broken on PS3, you weren´t able to play the game after few hours!!! How it is then that it got 10 ? (I don´t argue about the quality howerer. I own Skyrim myself and though I don´t play it really often and I am not a real fan, I totally understand why people love it so much... funny that I find Twilight the same
) And Witcher 2 got 8.5 with only con being the "occasional graphics tearing and texture pop in".To wrap it all, I think when it comes to technical stuff (not art and dising...I mean look at Rayman Origins, never played it, but I have seen it with my own eyes and it is just beautiful), reviewers should aproach consoles with the best knowledge of their possibilities - that´s the only way of ensuring objectivity.
I grit my teeth with anger when I see those damn 8,5/10 reviews. All those reviewers always argue (not without a point) that it is a good score. But firstly - why not give a perfectly good score of 8/10 to DA2 which was very far from perfect. Or ME3. Or many other games that constantly get 9-10/10. And secondly - those reviews fail to mention anything that would justify such a score. Occasional texture pop-in? Minor interface annoyances? How does this make a complex, mature (one of a kind, there are just no games like this) game with awesome graphics (any better looking RPG out there? nope; any better looking game on xbox? nope).
I'm not saying that buying good reviews is happening very often, but all it takes is send nice gifts along the copy of the game. There is just no reasonable way to explain why the "big players" are often getting absurdly high ratings despite numerous bugs, annoyances and much worse fan response.
Gogogo CDPR, I really hope for above 90 metacritic.
I'm not saying that buying good reviews is happening very often, but all it takes is send nice gifts along the copy of the game. There is just no reasonable way to explain why the "big players" are often getting absurdly high ratings despite numerous bugs, annoyances and much worse fan response.
Gogogo CDPR, I really hope for above 90 metacritic.
This is from the Nowgamer review (9/10) :
Score Breakdown
Graphics
9.7 / 10
Sound
8.8 / 10
Gameplay
8.7 / 10
Longevity
7.8 / 10
Multiplayer
N/A / 10
Overall
9.0 / 10
What? Just 7,8 from 10 for longevity? What the hell?.. Let me see - one walkthorought can took you 35 - 45 hours, but you must play it atleast twice to see most of the game, which makes it about 70 - 90 hours to complete.. but you still didn't see all the content this game has, so what the hell Nowgamer ? Not to mention the reviews in which the game is criticized for the UI and controls - and what Skyrim? I tried to play Skyrim with mouse + keyboard = not a good idea.. then i switched to gamepad = yeah, it's better than M+K, but far, far from good (with mods the most annoying things are gone, but still not to much intuitive).. but you know, that's the price that CD Projekt Red must take for now
Score Breakdown
Graphics
9.7 / 10
Sound
8.8 / 10
Gameplay
8.7 / 10
Longevity
7.8 / 10
Multiplayer
N/A / 10
Overall
9.0 / 10
What? Just 7,8 from 10 for longevity? What the hell?.. Let me see - one walkthorought can took you 35 - 45 hours, but you must play it atleast twice to see most of the game, which makes it about 70 - 90 hours to complete.. but you still didn't see all the content this game has, so what the hell Nowgamer ? Not to mention the reviews in which the game is criticized for the UI and controls - and what Skyrim? I tried to play Skyrim with mouse + keyboard = not a good idea.. then i switched to gamepad = yeah, it's better than M+K, but far, far from good (with mods the most annoying things are gone, but still not to much intuitive).. but you know, that's the price that CD Projekt Red must take for now
Oh god... review rage time. I'm particularly guilty of it, so I'll avoid reading most of them. Why are video game reviews so bad? There is almost a direct correlation between developer budget (or marketing budget) and critical reception. I have followed a lot of gaming sites in the past and I'm currently down to just two (eurogamer and RockPaperShotgun) because gaming sites are generally so much hype and so little actual information. However, when reading the eurogamer review, I had to question my own decision once again. I'm not talking about the score (that one little number is often so insignificant that it should be left out), but about the text. Now there's a writer who enjoys writing fan fiction... his review may be a beautifully written story, it contains almost no information or useful criticism as far as the game itself is concerned.
Why do we still care about video game 'critics'? The system is clearly so bad (reviewers have had no official education as a journalist/critic and are almost always just gamers that pretend to be professional, while being paid by the very gaming industry whose products they are supposed to review) that I sometimes fail to understand how gamers are still interested in it. I for one will probably stop by at Eurogamer only for Digital Foundry from now on, because that review unkindly reminded me that their reviews and 'news' are hardly informative. There are probably those who follow gaming news and trends mainly for the entertainment value, but not me.
Why do we still care about video game 'critics'? The system is clearly so bad (reviewers have had no official education as a journalist/critic and are almost always just gamers that pretend to be professional, while being paid by the very gaming industry whose products they are supposed to review) that I sometimes fail to understand how gamers are still interested in it. I for one will probably stop by at Eurogamer only for Digital Foundry from now on, because that review unkindly reminded me that their reviews and 'news' are hardly informative. There are probably those who follow gaming news and trends mainly for the entertainment value, but not me.
There seems to be a guy going through all the review sites leaving same bad comment "...hell its not even the best rpg released that day"
He is really annoying me now
He is really annoying me now
misho87233 said:
Review count only one walkthrough and it's ok for me (most of players play only once). And I don't think that it's 35-45. It took me 28h (it was vanilla version so it will be longer now for few hours) to beat Witcher 2 and I like to play as long as I can (exploring everything, doing all quests etc.). So 7,8 is fair score for longevity for RPG. Remember that 7.8 is still a high score.
Aver said:
Saying that, say, Skyrim has better longevity is absurd. Go buying herbs from one vendor, make potions and sell it to another. PErfectly valid Skyrim quest! You could play TW2 with such quests forever!
If you count real content in all the other RPGs it's not much more. They might have much more combat (but TW2 isn't a hack'n'slash), more repetitive quests, but when it boils down to real content TW2 simply wins.