pokeystaples
Banned
FTFY. Seriously, I am as hyped for SS as the next person, but GOTY is a stretch.
Wait...did you get me? Did I miss the sarcasm?
Titanfall Review Thread
- Thread starter VisceralBowl
- Start date
FTFY. Seriously, I am as hyped for SS as the next person, but GOTY is a stretch.
Many of them are verified purchasers and the reviews can still be read, but don't add to the review count. They seem to be legit reviews. It's very strange.
SwiftDeath
Member
Ooh I would probably buy it then but not sure why that would happen?
Surely they'll just make him a buyable skin in Dragon Age III right?
Kidding aside, when it comes to say the Oscars, nominees are chosen for numerous reasons: directing, acting performances, cinematography, originality (screenplay), set design, costume design etc.
However, the best picture category is chosen because they generally were able to qualify all those elements I listed above into a cohesive, entertaining and memorable movie-watching experience. It's what constitutes a "great movie".
Unfortunately for games we still don't know what specific elements are valued or categorized over others and what kind of games can mix all those elements together to create less-subjective game of the year. The reason? The interactive nature of games or their "inherent fun factor".
What makes a game great? The way it feels when you play? It's technical merit (a lag-free experience, despite featuring awe-inspiring assets and visuals)? Art direction? Or it's ability to turn a gamer into an addict?
Say Titanfall was nominated for GOTY or even won the thing. Is it widely recognized as fun? Sure. Is it the most technologically dubious experience in its genre? Visually, probably not. Netcode-wise, design-wise, it's arguable. In 2010 The Artist won best picture. Did it have color? No. Did the actors even talk? No. Was it an enjoyable movie-watching experience worthy of its nomination or award? To a wide consensus, certainly.
Bottom line: Titanfall is a generally considered a good game, some consider it great, but most agree it's damn fun.
However, the best picture category is chosen because they generally were able to qualify all those elements I listed above into a cohesive, entertaining and memorable movie-watching experience. It's what constitutes a "great movie".
Unfortunately for games we still don't know what specific elements are valued or categorized over others and what kind of games can mix all those elements together to create less-subjective game of the year. The reason? The interactive nature of games or their "inherent fun factor".
What makes a game great? The way it feels when you play? It's technical merit (a lag-free experience, despite featuring awe-inspiring assets and visuals)? Art direction? Or it's ability to turn a gamer into an addict?
Say Titanfall was nominated for GOTY or even won the thing. Is it widely recognized as fun? Sure. Is it the most technologically dubious experience in its genre? Visually, probably not. Netcode-wise, design-wise, it's arguable. In 2010 The Artist won best picture. Did it have color? No. Did the actors even talk? No. Was it an enjoyable movie-watching experience worthy of its nomination or award? To a wide consensus, certainly.
Bottom line: Titanfall is a generally considered a good game, some consider it great, but most agree it's damn fun.
Ryan McCaffrey finally dropped his IGN score, 8.9.
In short... yes. Mario often is.
If Mass Effect's story wasn't such as big deal, people wouldn't have flipped out over the ending (I haven't seen it yet, don't spoil me!). People were tied to the narrative for five years, and felt betrayed at the conclusion.. I don't see how that can be considered anything other than emotionally engaging.
As for GTA, that's less clear I guess, as I haven't played one since GTA2 lol. However I'm constantly told that they are some of the best presented stories in gaming today. It may not be emotional, but I did specify story-driven, and strong narrative as the features cited. GTA definitely fits that. I wouldn't consider Uncharted an emotional game either, however it is definitely story-driven.
I don't want to go too far off track with this because it's not really the topic of this thread, but really, how many games are sitting in the 90's that aren't narrative driven, compared to those that are. Then compare that with the same criteria, but for a few gens ago. The trend is ridiculously clear to me. There's are no Soul Caliburs, no Tekkens, no Tony Hawks, no Jet Set Radios, no Burnouts, no SSXs, no Unreal Tournaments, no Wipeouts and so on. Now one possible explanation for this is that all the new non story-driven games are simply far inferior to those released in the past, whilst the average story-driven is simply far better. I personally find this to be rather unlikely though.
EDIT: O..M..F..G... guys... The last place I'd expect to be hit by ME3 spoilers was this thread. WTF!
Everyone is missing the
Sony
They're fighting the good fight.
Because the internet has given a voice to a strange subset of shut-ins who realized that not only can they not socialize and develop relationships out in the real world, but they've realized that even social media has rejected their asperger-like social qualities--no offense to any of the true aspies that might have come across this post, of course.
Minecraft-on...
graywolf323
Member
actually surprised it didn't get a 9 or higher from him, was expecting more like a 9.3
Syphon Filter
Member
surprised its that low. he praised it a lot last year and earlier this year.
SwiftDeath
Member
Eh Mass Effect's story was fine but the main complaint was hovering choice over your head for 3 games and then tearing it away for no reason what so ever. Not simply because the story went in that direction
Sorry about the spoilers btw
I blame Vernia. I'll go back and spoiler tag itSorry about the spoilers btw
Don't sweat it. I blame Vernia too. *glares*
Luft Vanship
Banned
Ign's review is up
Oops someone beat me to it lol
Oops someone beat me to it lol
shikamaroooo
Member
Peanut Butter
Member
He still praised it a lot in the review. 8.9 is a pretty high score.
8.9?
Does he give any specific reason for the .1 point short of 9? Just curious, seems like a odd number to give.
Maninthemirror
Banned
Which major reviewer still has to score ?
Syphon Filter
Member
still low for a big hyped game.not even a 90.its like if halo got a 8/10
Syphon Filter
Member
giant bomb and gameinformer.
Isn't it more like if Halo got an 8.9? Which in fact would be kinda like Halo 4 having its current 87 average.
LiquidNarwhal
Banned
Can we please stop with conspiracy theories that have no basis in fact? stop hinting that it's a slanted score, stop implying that everyone is out to get Microsoft I read the same junk from you in practically every thread. The reviews for this game are fairly good, as to indicate what it is, a fairly good game.
Luft Vanship
Banned
It's odd but he knocked it for the lack of custom games
You have got to be joking. This is a troll post, right?
Almost all of those have no shot.
How is that odd? its exactly why it should lower reviews.
Throw Stick of Truth in there.
Luft Vanship
Banned
Didn't they say they would re-score games which receive notable updates? Maybe once the performance is fixed they'll put up to 9.2 or something.
HunterOfBananas
Banned
Chezzymann
Member
I think by 8.9 he means its great, but not quite amazing since it lacks basic features like custom games and doesn't have a large variety of game modes
graywolf323
Member
that was more to do with games like DOTA 2 and League of Legends where the game is constantly getting updated
I doubt they'll update reviews for things like Titanfall
That IGN review has 21k comments already, jesus
Jeff said he would give the game 4/5 stars, which on MC counts as a 80/100 obviously. That is if, the servers for the game hold up after everyone gets it.
We here are 2 hours and 25 min from TF launch, should be great, enjoying some Champions League in the meantime.
Jeff said he would give the game 4/5 stars, which on MC counts as a 80/100 obviously. That is if, the servers for the game hold up after everyone gets it.
We here are 2 hours and 25 min from TF launch, should be great, enjoying some Champions League in the meantime.
Luft Vanship
Banned
Nailed it, but it's puzzling that they would not have custom games
Um... I can only assume you meant to send this response to someone else as I mentioned nothing about a conspiracy theory, nor did I imply that anyone was out to get anyone.
I only mentioned being curious. It just seemed like a somewhat odd score.
Understandable. There is a definite lack of options at the moment.
Luft Vanship
Banned
Ign is laughing all the way to bank
Dreams-Visions
Member
yep, a masterful troll score.
I'd give it an 8.9 too. fuck this inconsistent framerate.
IOnEI Falcon
Member
Metascore back up to 87.
PanicFreak
Member
He praises it a lot in his review. Complains about the lack of modes.
-tetsuo-
Unlimited Capacity
NOT QUITE A NINE FOLKS
I would definitely agree with that. I know for me there is plenty if content to keep me happy, but lack of game modes and custom options(not being able to rename load outs is spot on), should take it down a notch.
I'll be really curious how they support this game going forward.
PlayStationboy
Banned
Say what you will about one of our largest newspapers, but The Globe and Mail is probably the only one you've listed that hasn't taken a check to promote a video game
I did say its the ones I like to ready, and they did say that the only negative was that its MP only, so if that's the only gripe and you're looking for a MP game, then you have to consider all the praise in that regard, no? Or will you stop buying RPGs based on a reviewer that scored an RPG badly because he hates the genre despite admitting the RPG part was excellent?
LifEndz
Member
The entire score system is arbitrary, but to deduct a .01 is just really really nit picky. I think they do it when they don't want a game to get an "AAA" score (9 - 9.9)
Really? Does that happen often? Surprised there are only 25 reviews up. I guess that's what happens when you purge the low ones?
They are also removing certain 5-star and 4-star reviews as well, so they're not just removing the bad ones.
http://www.amazon.com/Legitimate-Re...f=cm_cd_pg_pg3?_encoding=UTF8&asin=B00DB9JYFY
Fixed2BeBroken
Member
damn, did you really reach out to amazon over this? like...did you really care to spend your time doing this? im baffled. I feel bad for whatever customer service rep had to deal with this inquiry.
PanicFreak
Member
They said they will be adding modes for free. I'm inclined to trust Respawn given that a strong MP is all they have.
NullPointer
Member
Seems to bring up a lack of modes ("needs more gametypes stat!", "regrettably bare-bones", etc), no private matches (yet), no voting in matchmaking, and no renaming custom loadouts.
As far as the gameplay that's there goes the review was entirely positive.
That is shady as FUCK. People on there saying they are verified owners who reviewed it low and had it removed. Hard to tell what's real anywhere anymore. Why does all of this suspect shit seem to follow this game and Microsoft around.
Maybe this happens all the time but I've never heard of Amazon going on a review deleting spree, especially removing reviews from verified owners if that is in fact the case (they claim it is.)
Similar threads
- Poll