Read here if you are upset with gamespots review

[Deputy J Garcia]

if you watch the halo 2 video review and the half-life 2 video review you'll see that the guy rips on hl2 and h2 a lot and if you compare what he says and didn't know the scores he gave them both than you'd assume that half-life 2 was the better game, but amazingly halo 2 got a better score. hmmmm......

 

[Cauton]

I'm sorry I have to be the one to break this news to you, but the hard truth is that all games have bad points. Even Half-Life 2 will. Yes, I understand that this notion might be hard to grasp for some of you, but it's still the truth.

Personally I respect Gamespot's reviews a lot more than than I do most other review sites and magazines because they always look beyond the hype surrounding a game and give it the score they think it's REALLY worth.

Gamespot's reviewer commented on game's flaws, but still gave it a very high score. Doesn't that say something about the quality of the game? Maybe the reason so much time was spent pointing out flaws were because they stood out against the rest of the game, which from the sound of the review is very well executed.

Comparing the Half-Life 2's score with the score given to Halo 2 is pointless. If you read their review guidelines you will see that they mainly compare games released on the same plattform. So when Halo 2 gets a 9.4 score that means that it's the best Xbox FPS shooter, not that's the best FPS game ever.

So if you want to compare HL2's score with anything, you should compare it with the score given to other first person shooters. If you do that you'll see it's the highest scoring FPS released for the PC in the last year, sharing the #1 spot with Far Cry, which in no way was a bad game.

Also remember this - a review is nothing but an opinion. So what if Gamespot's score was lower than you would've liked it to. That only means that this particular person didn't like it as much as you might.

And the most important thing to remeber is that the review has actually played the game - you have not. If you come back tomorrow and say that you think the reivew was wrong - fine, I have no problem with that. But if you keep saying the same thing without even having played a single minute of Half-Life 2 your opinion is worthless.

 

[arial]

Who cares, if you think the game is bad ass then that's all that matters.

 

[alehm]

/\
Warning- Headcrab with a post count of 1 whose first post is defending a goofy review.

 

[Alyx]

I think some of you need to get off your high horses and accept the fact that HL2 might not be the perfect game you want it to be. It may have taken 6 years to make but that doesn't necessarily mean it's faultless. Sure they started the review saying it was good then put it down for generally the rest of it, but at the end of the day all it is is a review, you'll buy it anyway, (which most have) and if you like it then the review doesn't matter.

It is disappointing for people who aren't into CS, (i'd like to point out I like it) as they have no multiplayer to play as yet and don't forget this is just an 'out of the box version' so they can't review future non-existent mods or add them into the score equation without seeing them first.

Just let it be.

 

[Cauton]

/\
Warning- Headcrab with a post count of 1 whose first post is defending a goofy review.

I guess you're refering to me. I'm not as much "defending a goofy review" as I'm trying to give a little perspective. The whole lot of you act as if Gamespot's "low" score is the end of the world, and that the editorial staff should be dragged out on the street and be shot because they had the NERVE to give the game a "superb" rating.

 

[Sparta]

I'm sorry I have to be the one to break this news to you, but the hard truth is that all games have bad points. Even Half-Life 2 will. Yes, I understand that this notion might be hard to grasp for some of you, but it's still the truth.

Personally I respect Gamespot's reviews a lot more than than I do most other review sites and magazines because they always look beyond the hype surrounding a game and give it the score they think it's REALLY worth.

Gamespot's reviewer commented on game's flaws, but still gave it a very high score. Doesn't that say something about the quality of the game? Maybe the reason so much time was spent pointing out flaws were because they stood out against the rest of the game, which from the sound of the review is very well executed.

Comparing the Half-Life 2's score with the score given to Halo 2 is pointless. If you read their review guidelines you will see that they mainly compare games released on the same plattform. So when Halo 2 gets a 9.4 score that means that it's the best Xbox FPS shooter, not that's the best FPS game ever.

So if you want to compare HL2's score with anything, you should compare it with the score given to other first person shooters. If you do that you'll see it's the highest scoring FPS released for the PC in the last year, sharing the #1 spot with Far Cry, which in no way was a bad game.

Also remember this - a review is nothing but an opinion. So what if Gamespot's score was lower than you would've liked it to. That only means that this particular person didn't like it as much as you might.

And the most important thing to remeber is that the review has actually played the game - you have not. If you come back tomorrow and say that you think the reivew was wrong - fine, I have no problem with that. But if you keep saying the same thing without even having played a single minute of Half-Life 2 your opinion is worthless.

Thank you

At least someone understands

 

[Zerox]

Well, at least they gave HL2 a better score then D3.

 

[lanzemurdok]

I don't know.. main reason i was pissed off is because he talks about this game as if it was "oh yeah, heh half life 2. OMG ZELDA COMING OUT SOON!!!"

I was cool with the review.. it had good points, but it seemed to me that his score does not match his review.

 

[Imrahil]

You want to know how good a game really is?

www.gamerankings.com

It takes all reviews from websites and magazines and give an average score out of 100.

I trust this since every reviewer can have their own likes and dislikes.

Mike

 

[Ames]

So if you want to compare HL2's score with anything, you should compare it with the score given to other first person shooters. If you do that you'll see it's the highest scoring FPS released for the PC in the last year, sharing the #1 spot with Far Cry, which in no way was a bad game.

Bow down to the almighty UT2k4, king of all multiplayer games.

9.4 Gamespot.

 

[JimmehH]

I don't think Gamespot has an agenda against Half-Life 2. They have a full page advert at the back of the strategy guide for example.

It's just that that specific reviewer didn't like the game.

 

[Spartan]

well every idea in the genre has been used up apart from this new physics engone so its the last chance they got to redifine it

You're just making excuses.

also he said the AI was bad, well I think if you match it with many other games out their hl2 will easily beat it,

So you've played Half-Life 2, then? What was it like?

i guess, he doesnt give valve any credit for 5 years bloody work

A long development time doesn't mean that the game is automatically good. Again, you are making excuses.

 

[Cauton]

Bow down to the almighty UT2k4, king of all multiplayer games.

9.4 Gamespot.

Oops, you're right. I was looking at their top 100 games list and didn't notice UT2k4 in there. Still, it can be argued that UT2K4 is judged by different standards from Half-Life 2 and other singe player centric shooters.

 

[Razak]

Thank you

At least someone understands

you got to be kidding me. When you give negitive points for the games stupid little things like not answering question, or not having innovation is pretty poor.

 

[Iconoclast]

JimmehH - Try and evolve a brain. You say the reviewer didn't like the game when it got such a high score? Jesus Christ.

 

[Joeslucky22]

bunch of console qu**rs they got over there.

the guy givin the video review had a real annoying lisp when talking, fu**in halo nerd.

 

[Spartan]

/\
Warning- Headcrab with a post count of 1 whose first post is defending a goofy review.

Ok, what should a person's first post be? Is this good:

Hello everyone! I am so happy to be here, I'm a huge fan of Half-Life, and I'd really love to get a chance to suck the cocks of everyone who developed it!

By the way: Halo 2 sucks ass it's ****ing shit **** you Bungie

 

[Alientank]

Why are you guys pissed off at Gamespot? They are one of the few sites that tells it like it is and doesn't take bribes from other companies, they ragged on Doom 3 for the lack of storyline, very few other reviews did that.

I like Gamespot for the fact that they don't blow sunshine up your ass and tell you what the game is good at and what it isn't good at. He never said it was a bad story, he said that it's disappointing if you are looking for answers, as he mentioned this is sort of a "middle" chapter. He gave 9's across the board and a 10 for graphics.

Those of you who are pissed off have no right to be pissed at them at all, every game they're reviewed, they've reviewed unbiased and fairly. You may think it's the greatest game ever, because most of the guys here are HL2 fanboys, the guys over at GS sit down and don't get caught up in the hype, analyze the game, and tell you all about it.

Gamespot is one of the few credible review sites left out there. IGN always gets caught up in the hype and overscores on games I find, and Gamespy....we don't need to mention Gamespy...

It's not like Gamespot doesn't ever give extremely good reviews out, they gave THUG 2 a perfect 10, because it mastered everything it tried to set out to do on the console, and executed flawlessly, I think most of you are pissed off that one of the top rated sites out there gave it something below a 9.5

Just because the game was hyped to shit doesn't mean it'll do everything you thought it would. Doom 3 is a perfect example of this. They never bash HL2 at all, they just say that the story isn't all they had hoped for, stop crying.

 

[InvaderScooge]

Just wanted to add my opinion about the Gamespot review to this thread. I am not mad about the 9.2. That is a good score, I was expecting a higher one though because Halo 2 got a 9.4 and its story line is pretty weak and it is 100% a rehash of the original game with a few new weapons and locations.

My main grip is with the actual text of the review and not the score. After reading it I was expecting it to get a low 8 score or even a high 7. It was filled with negative things about the game and only gave praise when the reviewer felt he had to and even then it was a backhanded complement. I seriously wondered after reading it what the deal was. Go and read it again and see for yourself. It reads like a review for an average 7.something game.

 

[swiss]

Ahh well..so it got a pretty crappy review, but it dont matter. I mean basicly all other PC mags/sites gave it at least 95%. (98% PC GAMER US, 96% UK) Some chump is bound to give it a worse review than every1 else, especially as (u lot are saying) Gamespot is definitely biased against the PC, and pro console. Calm down people, we will be playing the game 2morrow and im sure it will be great.

 

[jabberwock95]

The reason people are complaining is that Gamespots review is so backward compared with others.

Nearly every other review I have read praised HL2's storyline as being one of the best aspects of the game. Gamespot says its weak. Other than it just being the reviewer, I can't think why reviews would be that different.

Gamespot also says the game is too easy even on the higher difficulty settings. How much time did this guy have to complete the review? Enough time to complete HL2 multiple times? Wierd.

It's just a bit out of line with the other HL2 reviews. That is what everyone is annoyed about.

 

[t0v3]

I've been a loyal GameSpot reader for many years now, and even I am starting to lose trust in their reviews. For the past half a year i've noticed an increase in misleading scores, and how they contradict every other review, whether it be in a magazine or on another site. After reading both the GS and IGN review, one thing immediatly hit me, they disagree on the AI. GS tells us its notthing special, not even as good as the original HL, while IGN (and many magazines) tells us its simply amazing, except the ally AI who occasionaly get in the way. Why such a large difference in opinion between GS and the rest? Same goes for the storyline, i'm starting to believe GS want their storys to be on par with the worlds finest novels and everything has to be answered by the end, so there can't be a sequel. The reviewer didn't seem too impressed or enqusiastic about the game overall, and IMO gave it the bare minimum he thougt he could get away with. Bottom line is: GS are too harsh with their reviews, and i'm getting annoyed with them (an not just because of HL2, because of quite a few others too)
If you notice, lately there have been big differences in alot of GS reviews and user reviews.

But anyway, it hasn't dampened excitment about playing it, I still know it will be an incredible game, so nevermind hey?

 

[AudioStar]

Wait they said the AI was bad? What happened to the guys that would bust down a door and shoot through the window to get you? Eh yeah. GS sucks, not because of this review, just never liked them.

 

[madacian]

I'm glad to see an honest review. All the others I read didn't touch on any of the pitfalls or downsides to the game. It was non-stop "Oh my god this is so cool" quotes. Great, tell me more than that please. However, I will agree that in terms of story, it's really subjective. Apparently this reviewer didn't care for it, but others did. Still, the score wasn't based on story alone, there were other flaws mentioned as well. I personally didn't see all the fuss over the first Half-Life, but yet it won numerous Game of the Year awards.

The bottom line is that it got a Superb rating. Nothing to gawk at. I'm sure it rightfully deserved such a good score. A lot of you sound like the very people you despise, the Halo 2 fanboy crowd. How could HL2 possibly be flawed? Well guess what, nobody's perfect and your precious coming of Christ may not be all that it's hyped up to be. It's no one's fault but your own.

 

[eiric]

Dammit, my gf were playing Sims 2 by the time the reviews came out and now I have to read up on 64 post! Summorize it in one word... Ok, five words what you have talked about so far. =)

 

[Mountain Man]

I'm glad to see an honest review.

Begging the question. What makes you think Gamespot's review is any more honest than the others? Simply finding fault where others have apparently found none does not give one's opinion more integrity.

 

[AudioStar]

Dammit, my gf were playing Sims 2 by the time the reviews came out and now I have to read up on 64 post! Summorize it in one word... Ok, five words what you have talked about so far. =)

Read it yourself ok? Thanks.

 

[incognito]

I think the harshness is just gamespots style, really harsh review but with a reasonable final score. Like this chinese restaurant in london where they are really, really rude but you know the foods quite nice. Actually I think that analogy's a bit tenuous :|

 

[G-Uni7]

Biased riceboi </3

 

[AudioStar]

Begging the question. What makes you think Gamespot's review is any more honest than the others? Simply finding fault where others have apparently found none does not give one's opinion more integrity.

Almond. Er... Amen.

 

[madacian]

Begging the question. What makes you think Gamespot's review is any more honest than the others? Simply finding fault where others have apparently found none does not give one's opinion more integrity.

While reading it I felt like they were giving me the real scoop on the game. I've got a copy of the US PC Gamer and it's nothing but repeated banter about how he's so excited about the game he can't even type it up. He doesn't go into any of the flaws of the game or what was a possible disappointment. I never understood how a reviewer could review a game that wasn't finished anyways. HL2 wasn't even Gold when my US PC Gamer arrived. I personally felt the text contained in Gamespot's review was more down to Earth and addressed issues of concern.

 

[csmighty1]

I think that the Gamespot review was to, "Alright moving on to the AI and now the story and now the vehicles...etc" lol, sounded like he didn't want to be there. I understand that HL2 will have it's flaws but gamespots review of HL2 was like 5 minutes while Halo 2's was like 15...what's up with that? Oh well, I don't give a shi* what that guys says, I'm picking it up tomorrow and can't play it till Friday...sh*t! (The computer I will play it on is a really good one but my buddie has it at his college which is four hours away) Oh well, I'm guess I need a distraction until then . =(

 

[PvtRyan]

Why are you guys pissed off at Gamespot? They are one of the few sites that tells it like it is and doesn't take bribes from other companies, they ragged on Doom 3 for the lack of storyline, very few other reviews did that.

I like Gamespot for the fact that they don't blow sunshine up your ass and tell you what the game is good at and what it isn't good at. He never said it was a bad story, he said that it's disappointing if you are looking for answers, as he mentioned this is sort of a "middle" chapter. He gave 9's across the board and a 10 for graphics.

Those of you who are pissed off have no right to be pissed at them at all, every game they're reviewed, they've reviewed unbiased and fairly. You may think it's the greatest game ever, because most of the guys here are HL2 fanboys, the guys over at GS sit down and don't get caught up in the hype, analyze the game, and tell you all about it.

Gamespot is one of the few credible review sites left out there. IGN always gets caught up in the hype and overscores on games I find, and Gamespy....we don't need to mention Gamespy...

It's not like Gamespot doesn't ever give extremely good reviews out, they gave THUG 2 a perfect 10, because it mastered everything it tried to set out to do on the console, and executed flawlessly, I think most of you are pissed off that one of the top rated sites out there gave it something below a 9.5

Just because the game was hyped to shit doesn't mean it'll do everything you thought it would. Doom 3 is a perfect example of this. They never bash HL2 at all, they just say that the story isn't all they had hoped for, stop crying.

What complete nonsense.

The 9.2 score is fine, sounds good, even great. When the score leaked out this afternoon, I even predicted that 9,2 earlier, and I thought it would be a good review. I don't mind low scores, the 90% from PCGP was low, but well argumented (although there were some flaws) so that's a good review. But the GS review doesn't match the score at all. Very poor arguments.

They criticize the game for bad story, weird pacing and little innovation... and at the same time they give Halo 2 a 9.4, Far Cry a 9,2 and Freedom Fighters a 9.3. No consistency at all. They criticize games for a certain thing, and detract many points for it, and the next game gets away with those flaws.

The review sounds like 'look at me! I didn't fall for the hype! I'm so fantastic because I gave it a low rating'. Anyone can rate a game low, but only good reviewers can back up their claims.
Not to say that IGN has a better review, with it's 9,7. Which is also purely 'omg so great so great omg omg'.

And do you honestly believe that all reviewers were bribed? Yeah right.

 

[Kouch]

Gamespot: " ut2k4 is a better and more innovative game than hl2."

Me: "I want to cancel my gamespot membership, NOWWWW!!!"

Also alghough IGN had a good review for HL2, I have no faith in them either. I mean they gave halo2 a 9.8 and GTA:SA a freaking 9.9!!!!

 

[XBORGZORZ]

Shouldnt you stop acting like fanboys? Its just a review! Rating the game 9.2 isnt a bad score at all...
Gamespot reviews are way different than most. And stop comparing HL2 with H2 and GTA SA. I HATE gta, but cant argue that its one of the most influential and innovative games this industry has to offer. If I were a proffessional reviewer 9.6 would be the score Id give...
As a gamer though and based on my personal preferences it wouldnt get more than 8.
A review is subjective and many factors form the finall rating a game gets. The difference with gamespot and other sites is that they are more professional. Trust me, if I got to review HL2, being that hyped about it, itd get a perfect 10. The deference is Im not a reviewer, Im just a fanboy like you.

 

[amarc]

The best review will probably be your own

 

[InvaderScooge]

While reading it I felt like they were giving me the real scoop on the game. I've got a copy of the US PC Gamer and it's nothing but repeated banter about how he's so excited about the game he can't even type it up. He doesn't go into any of the flaws of the game or what was a possible disappointment. I never understood how a reviewer could review a game that wasn't finished anyways. HL2 wasn't even Gold when my US PC Gamer arrived. I personally felt the text contained in Gamespot's review was more down to Earth and addressed issues of concern.

He didn't mention any of the high points though. It was, this is weak, this could have been better and this was lame oh and by the way 9.2 editors choice super game. WTF? Tell us why you gave it a 9 in gameplay instead of a 3 if it sucked so much. Tell us why you say there is nothing new there but gave it a 9 tilt. I am sorry but a review that does not touch on both the highs and the lows of a game and does not tell the user if they will be entertained by the game or not is not a good review. Gamespot's review was weak. Not because of the score but because it provided no information the user could use to make an informed decision. If you looked at the score only you would say "Cool, I will buy it" if you read it only and never saw any review score you would say "Huh, I think I will stick with <favorite game> and save my money"

 

[madacian]

He didn't mention any of the high points though.

Every other review out there has told you all the good things about it, a thousand times each. How many more times do you need to hear it?

 

[Narcolepsy]

I am slightly disappointed, but I think we expected this from Gamespot. I would like to note that Deus Ex got an 8.2 on Gamespot! No, I'm not trying to insult the site, but I am saying that reviews really mean nothing in the end. Deus Ex is one of the greatest PC games ever made, and it got BASHED in Gamespot's review. Just a thought...