8.5 Great!

9.4/10

certainly not 8.5 Gamespot = gaming n00bs
 
Subz said:
going by gamespot's pc game reviews is just lunacy.

Quoted for emphasis

If you are willing to take the time to let yourself get lost into Doom 3, you will enjoy Doom 3. It is worth the $55 price tag. Even the multiplayer isn't as terrible as gamespot makes it out to be.

I would rate Doom 3 9.2/10.
 
Subz said:
GAME SPOT BLOWS. do not go by their opinion.
its a stupid console-gaming-noob site. dont listen to them.

Hehe, that made me laugh.

Halo was the first game to prove that it's possible to make a good 3d shooter for a console, and the plot is scifi-opera at it's best. The gameplay is smooth and enemy AI and graphics, or at least AI, were better than in most PC games. Without Halo the first steps of X-Box would have been painful.


edit: what the hell is wrong with the quote?
 
Seppo said:
Subz said:
GAME SPOT BLOWS. do not go by their opinion.
its a stupid console-gaming-noob site. dont listen to them.

Hehe, that made me laugh.

Halo was the first game to prove that it's possible to make a good 3d shooter for a console, and the plot is scifi-opera at it's best. The gameplay is smooth and enemy AI and graphics, or at least AI, were better than in most PC games. Without Halo the first steps of X-Box would have been painful.


edit: what the hell is wrong with the quote?


you forgot the / at the end.

it should have been
Code:
[QUOTE=Subz] 

GAME SPOT BLOWS. do not go by their opinion.
its a stupid console-gaming-noob site. dont listen to them.

[[B]/[/B]QUOTE]
 
Subz said:
GAME SPOT BLOWS. do not go by their opinion.

everother site and magazine gave doom3 90-100.

Gamespot gave doom3 same score as painkiller and 10 less points than FARCRY!..its a stupid console-gaming-noob site. dont listen to them.

doom3 deserves a 9.3. they gave deus-ex a 8.5 also. They suck at PC gaming reviews. they rate halo higher than any fps.
You forgot UT2004... they gave it 9.4 :dozey:
 
they gave tony hawk 3 a 10.0 ...thts the only game to get 10.

lmao
 
Gamespot gave doom3 same score as painkiller and 10 less points than FARCRY!..its a stupid console-gaming-noob site. dont listen to them.

First of all: Painkiller was simply perfection in what it set out to do and how it executed. IMO, Painkiller is a throwback to the original id software games (Doom, Wolfenstein, etc). FarCry is, in my opinion, a pretty engine, a Jurassic Park meets HL concept, and a real disappointment to my ATI-friendly computer setup.

Doom 3 would be rated by me as follows: Graphics: 10. Fun: 8. Playability: 7. Plot: 8. It's a pretty, pretty game, and you need to PLAY THE GAME before you go by some .com review. Hell, anyone who buys games based off reviews is just asking to be let down.
 
Hehe, that made me laugh.

Halo was the first game to prove that it's possible to make a good 3d shooter for a console, and the plot is scifi-opera at it's best. The gameplay is smooth and enemy AI and graphics, or at least AI, were better than in most PC games. Without Halo the first steps of X-Box would have been painful.


edit: what the hell is wrong with the quote?

Halo is perhaps the best console FPS, but by Gamespot, it's the best FPS out there!
 
Subz said:
they gave tony hawk 3 a 10.0 ...thts the only game to get 10.

lmao

uh guess you missed the reviews of Chrono Cross and Zelda 64 which both got 10. You should look harder next time. :upstare:
 
Murray_H said:
Is it bad of me not to have heard of that?

Not really. It's an RPG so if you don't like those I wouldn't be surprised.
 
I believe Half Life 2 will do well in the ratings department. I think it will get slightly higher reveiw scores than the first( which is damn near 100 lol). AS for Doom3. I though Gamespot rated it too low. I find they tend to be biased towards their favorite genres. It has the best graphics out of any game there is right now and the sound is great. The gameplay is simple and can get repetetive. Basically since the game is an exaxct replica it should get the same reviews the old Doom recieved. The old Doom ratings were better than the ones the new one recieved.
 
After playing Doom 3 my hype for HL2 calmed down a bit but D3 had already lost the battle with HL2, I tell you.

Maybe the gamespot's rate isn't just but what the reviewer said about the game is true, thus I quite agree with the rate of 8.5. It's quite fair (maybe even too fair :dozey: )
 
I liked doom3 alot, but the graphics seem to be made for viewing from about 30 feet away. As soon as you step close the res is terrible.
 
I noticed that too evil, even on high the textures look really low resolution. I heard it was to save memory for the normal and bump mapping.
 
I'm playing doom 3 right now (taking a break). Its so hard to play for a long period at a time. Its scary as hell for the first half hour, but then you get used to it and it starts to be depressing. I'd give it a 9.2 but im not done yet. I'm at the part where you get the rocket launcher =-)
 
no matter how many times this game is delayed, the end result will be a better game than DOOM 3.. (IMO)
 
I truly think Half-life 2 will be VERY VERY good.. and will receive a 9.4+

mark my words..it's time for all the whiners to be shut up, and see the truth here..
 
knowing lame-spot, they will give halflife2 atleast 9-8 points less than whatever halo2 gets, regardless of how good or not it is.
 
Halo sucks, why is everyone so pumped on that ghey game..

I think tribes is better than halo..
 
The UK PC Gamer gave it a 90%, there's a lot to this verdict, for example in the period from the US review it has lost 6%, so:

a) Does this mean by the UK release date it'll be a 84% game
b) Americans prefer Hell 6% more than British people

:naughty:

Anyway, the screenshots really show the best and worst of the game, the res in some pics is truly awful (the cherubs especially), yet when viewed from the correct distance and in the correct light (especially with the nifty flashlight fx), it really does shine.
 
Back
Top