lans
Newbie
- Joined
- May 13, 2004
- Messages
- 2,969
- Reaction score
- 0
Gamespot awards HL2 best shooter!
- Thread starter lans
- Start date
The Monkey
The Freeman
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2004
- Messages
- 16,316
- Reaction score
- 16
Didn't they just awarded it best PC Game? Well, another award to add to the collection. 
Mountain Man
Newbie
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2003
- Messages
- 2,248
- Reaction score
- 0
It beat Halo 2!
Next up is Gamespot's platform awards. For Best PC Game, Half-Life 2 is in the running against Chronicles of Riddick (is this game really that good?), Rome: Total War, Unreal Tournament 2004, and World of WarCraft.
I think it'll either be Half-Life 2 or Rome: Total War.
Next up is Gamespot's platform awards. For Best PC Game, Half-Life 2 is in the running against Chronicles of Riddick (is this game really that good?), Rome: Total War, Unreal Tournament 2004, and World of WarCraft.
I think it'll either be Half-Life 2 or Rome: Total War.
The Monkey
The Freeman
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2004
- Messages
- 16,316
- Reaction score
- 16
MaxiKana said:
It has won both the best Action Game and Best Shooter. It's looking good!
Mountain Man
Newbie
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2003
- Messages
- 2,248
- Reaction score
- 0
Gamespot hasn't announced their platform awards (i.e Best PC Game) yet.The_Monkey said:
The Monkey
The Freeman
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2004
- Messages
- 16,316
- Reaction score
- 16
Mountain Man said:
Yeah, I was thinking of best Action game...or something.
The Monkey
The Freeman
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2004
- Messages
- 16,316
- Reaction score
- 16
lans said:
Which site awarded Dog as the best character?
f|uke
Newbie
- Joined
- Sep 20, 2004
- Messages
- 2,669
- Reaction score
- 1
Both Doom 3 and Halo 2 were nominated for "Biggest Dissapointment"
http://www.gamespot.com/gamespot/features/all/bestof2004/day3f_7.html
http://www.gamespot.com/gamespot/features/all/bestof2004/day3f_7.html
PvtRyan
Party Escort Bot
- Joined
- Jul 17, 2003
- Messages
- 10,026
- Reaction score
- 1
f|uke said:Both Doom 3 and Halo 2 were nominated for "Biggest Dissapointment"
http://www.gamespot.com/gamespot/features/all/bestof2004/day3f_7.html
This and this thread are another addition to the enigma called "Gamespot".
Inconsistency all over. Halo 2 awarded with a 94% and called a disappointment (no matter what Gamespot says, a 94% is never a disappointment) and HL2 got heavily criticized in the review, and called 'not living up to the expectations (ie: disappointing)' yesterday and it wins Best Shooter. Are you still following it?
How can you trust their reviews/opinions when it's all so inconsistent when you compare them?
Mountain Man
Newbie
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2003
- Messages
- 2,248
- Reaction score
- 0
Don't think Gabe would much care for them at that point either.PvtRyan said:
Seppo
Tank
- Joined
- Feb 27, 2004
- Messages
- 4,562
- Reaction score
- 0
I think the overall GotY will be a tough battle between Half-Life 2 and Rome: Total War. Since Halo 2 didn't win the best shooter category, how could it competite with Half-Life 2 in the Game of the Year category. This is a relief, since I was personally thinking that Halo 2 was Half-Life 2's toughest challenger.
subtlesnake
Newbie
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2003
- Messages
- 502
- Reaction score
- 2
Halo achieved 97%, and considering the massive expectations placed on it's sequel I think you could consider 94% disappointing.PvtRyan said:
Again, the score of 9.2 for HL2 is enough to give it the top shooter award, but not enough to distinguish it from other PC offerings this year. Considering we're talking about a title that was almost hyped up to be the best PC game ever, Gamespot have some reason to be disappointed.
Ghost Freeman
Newbie
- Joined
- Sep 17, 2003
- Messages
- 1,054
- Reaction score
- 0
Because dear god, Gamespot's views on this whole GOTY shebang are only opinions.
KagePrototype
Tank
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2003
- Messages
- 6,356
- Reaction score
- 1
PvtRyan said:
Because the reviews are individuals' opinions, while these award are decided by a commitee of sorts.
No, that was just spun up by the community.
Interesting... GameSpot FPS ratings for 2004:
Halo 2: 9.4
Unreal Tournament 2004: 9.4
CoR: 9.3
FarCry: 9.2
HL2: 9.2
MP2: 9.1
And HL2 won Best FPS of the Year award. Obviously the ratings between platforms is arbitrary (what is great on the GCN for a specific genre may not be great on the PC for the same genre due to technical limitations abilities, like tvs vs monitors or keyboard/mouse vs controller), but it would seem that even on the same platform the ratings are only superficial also... or how else do we explain that with three games with better scores losing out for FPS of the year?
I know, I know... CoR was listed under "Action" game, UT2004 is a multiplayer FPS, and Halo 2 is an Xbox game... but you know what? HL2 is also listed as an Action game, UT2004 is still a FPS and both games have SP and MP, and Halo 2 is still a FPS.
Guess it all goes to show that rating #'s mean nothing (that is why mags like Next Gen went with a 5 star system... if it was good it got a 4, if it was great a 5--and all 5 star games were great, but individual tastes may differ). Oh well... I am glad for HL2... and the truth be told this has been a great year for games. The TRUE winner = GAMERS!
Halo 2: 9.4
Unreal Tournament 2004: 9.4
CoR: 9.3
FarCry: 9.2
HL2: 9.2
MP2: 9.1
And HL2 won Best FPS of the Year award. Obviously the ratings between platforms is arbitrary (what is great on the GCN for a specific genre may not be great on the PC for the same genre due to technical limitations abilities, like tvs vs monitors or keyboard/mouse vs controller), but it would seem that even on the same platform the ratings are only superficial also... or how else do we explain that with three games with better scores losing out for FPS of the year?
I know, I know... CoR was listed under "Action" game, UT2004 is a multiplayer FPS, and Halo 2 is an Xbox game... but you know what? HL2 is also listed as an Action game, UT2004 is still a FPS and both games have SP and MP, and Halo 2 is still a FPS.
Guess it all goes to show that rating #'s mean nothing (that is why mags like Next Gen went with a 5 star system... if it was good it got a 4, if it was great a 5--and all 5 star games were great, but individual tastes may differ). Oh well... I am glad for HL2... and the truth be told this has been a great year for games. The TRUE winner = GAMERS!
KagePrototype
Tank
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2003
- Messages
- 6,356
- Reaction score
- 1
Acert93 said:
They didn't have the same guy review each game, and the winner was chosen by a commitee of sorts. I think that explains it pretty well.
HadouKen24
Newbie
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2004
- Messages
- 316
- Reaction score
- 0
It's not going to happen that way. The GotY at Gamespot is decided between the games who get the award for the best on their platform. If HL2 doesn't beat out Rome: Total War for best PC game, it won't be in the running for GotY.
I predict that the best PC game will be either HL2 or WoW. GTA:SA and Halo 2 are easy winners in their respective categories. From there, I think it's a tossup between the game awareed Best PC Game and GTA:SA.
K
Keyser.Soze
Guest
Yeah, I saw that earlier today. GTA:SA won best action game.
KagePrototype said:
While I know that is what sites say (not just GameSpot), the fact is these reviewers are backed up by GameSpot (or IGN, GameSpry, PC Gamer, etc...). If the other editors disagreed then it no longer reflects the company, which begs the question why GameSpot would have a review that does not reflect the majority of the staff/company. Now that makes no sense at all.
Also, note that at Gamespot games rating above 90 get an "Editors' Choice" award, not an "Editor's Choice" award, clearly indicating that there is a group consensus.
I think the point is these guys are GameSpot employees representing the GameSpot POV. GameSpot does not provide alternative points of view (IGN does), and therefore present a unified expression. The fact games receive an editors' choice award, and not an editor's choice award, is indicative of the feelings of GameSpot in general. So there is a devil's advocate
You have a good point, but there is the other side Ok, that aside, I think you are right--GameSpot has different editors with different feelings. That explains a game with a lower ranking beat out 3 games with higher rankings.
Which takes us back to the point why a lot of people dislike GameSpot: the entire rating system is ARBITRARY. It has no real meaning at all if there is no coherency within the system. Logic dictates that 9.4>9.2. The fact is CoR came out AFTER HL2 and got a BETTER rating (9.3). If a 9.2 game is better than a 9.4 game in the same genre, well, logic dictates that the 9.2 game is rated to low, the 9.4 is too high, or that the ratings are totally messed up and useless. In this case, I think it is a little of all three. The entire rating system is bogus to begin with--my contention.
Since it is bogus, but presented to consumers as a method to compare the QUALITY of a title, then I think it is fair to take issue with it. Remember, these rating numbers are supposed to represent how good a game is... to have a big list of ratings with no baseline or consistancy really is telling imo.
Oh well... HL2 is a great game and the other games are also great. I do not want to take away from some of this years other great games also (FarCry, WoW, Halo 2, CoR, PainKiller, RTW, Dawn of War, Tribes, and even Doom 3). REGARDLESS of how GameSpot or how anyone else rates these games, they were all good for what they set out to do and appeal to a certain segment of gamers. Gamers owned this year.
