Read here if you are upset with gamespots review

I couldn't give any more than 2 shits about any review. Well, they give you a good idea in general about the game, but the bottom line is if in my mind a game gets 10/10, I couldn't care if www.OGMGPCGAMEZSUCK.org gave HL2 a 1/10.
 
Bait said:
I couldn't give any more than 2 shits about any review. Well, they give you a good idea in general about the game, but the bottom line is if in my mind a game gets 10/10, I couldn't care if www.OGMGPCGAMEZSUCK.org gave HL2 a 1/10.
Click to expand...

Why did I click that link? :(
 
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?
Click to expand...

Eh, that really isn't going to make people think "Man, Gamespot are really good at this- no one else would have the guts to let other reviewers do the work for them!". By the same argument people should leave any criticism ever alone, since any media's good points will have been hammered home a thousand times in advertisements (the creators, of course, focusing on the best possible features).

Reviewers are their own people- and if they genuinely started relying on popular opinion to fill in their own journalistic gaps, critics of all sorts would be a doomed species.

Actually, that sounds pretty good to me...
 
What those of you that say "You haven't played the game yet, so you can't judge the game." don't understand, is if you read the bloody review, it smells so fishy you'd think you were in a whore house. First off, the entire review contradicts every review every one of us have read/seen so far. Not only that, but throughout the entire review, all you read is negatives, and maybe a few positives, but yet, he gives it a 9.2? Come on, put 1 and 1 together and you get a biased, fvcked up review that nobody should take seriously.
 
I've not read Gamespot's review because it seems to contain spoilers. But PC Gamer (UK) did a great review on HL2.
 
This along with other things (one of which is halo 2 got 9.4: HIGHER THAN HL2) led me to one action. REMOVE FROM BOOKMARKS!!!!!!!!!
 
I'm sure the reviewer had no choice but to pick apart the game rather than repeat everything that was being said by previous reviews.

"It's the Greatest" (etc).

That said 9.2 is beyond 9. That's all I need to be happy.

Anything 9.0 or above (rated by Gamespot) is a clear winner in my books. It's always been the case.

Whether it is a 9.1 or a 9.8 doesn't matter. >9.0 = must own
 
PvtRyan said:
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.
Click to expand...

Well since some of you are thick headed dipshits let me spell it out in extra large font for you.

HALO 2 GOT A 9.4 YES, BUT HALO 2 GOT A 9.4 FOR BEING A CONSOLE GAME, NOT A PC GAME. THE REVIEW OF HALO 2 IS BASING IT ON HOW WELL IT DOES ON CONSOLE AND IS IN NO WAY A DIRECT RELATION TO HALF LIFE 2 NOR IS THAT SCORE SOMETHING TO BE USED AS THE SAME SCORE YOU WOULD GIVE A PC FIRST PERSON SHOOTER. HALF LIFE 2 IS BASED ON PC FIRST PERSON SHOOTERS, NOT IN ANY WAY DIRECTED OR TO BE COMPARED TO HALO 2'S SCORE. STOP COMPARING TWO GAMES ON TWO PLATFORM'S, THE SCORES ARE ENTIRELY DIFFERENT FOR ENTIRELY DIFFERENT REASONS.
 
The game will speak for itself.
It did sound like the reviewer's heart wasn't really in it though.. maybe he wanted to give it a lower score but pressure from higher up made him succumb.. that would explain his poor comments and still a 9.2
 
wTFXzOrZ?Z?!!

The reason that I am so pissed off at Gamespot right now is that they reviewed the game unfairly. It is as simple as that. Gamespot gave THUG 3 a perfect 10 because it accomplished everything that it set out to do. Am I missing something, but didn't the reviewer say exactly the same thing for HL2? Hasn't HL2 done everything that it has set out to do? Doesn't that automatically make HL2 a 10? No it doesn't and neither should THUG 3 or any other game.

The speaker, Jason Ocampo is a biased idiot, I’m sorry but he really is. Nowhere near as groundbreaking? Are you kidding me? Are you JOKING ME? What other game has such an impressive use of physics as HL2? Every other game from UT2004 to Doom 3 has not even implemented it half as good as HL2. The manipulator is a stroke of genius, period. It gives unlimited freedom in what you can do from using saw blades to slice off heads to tossing grenades back to flattening combine under your buggy. Like many other reviewers said, it changed the physics from something that was only there visually to something that can actually be used. That alone is revolutionary. There is no real solution to a problem… ever seen the movie with the tipped over buggy and the rollermines? You’ll know what I mean. This is not even mentioning the other major advancements and improvements such as realistic facial animations, photorealistic graphics, convincing characters, AI, bugbait, high quality voice acting, vehicles, 60 foot aliens, etc.

The other arguments the reviewer uses are stupid too. Not a good storyline because it didn't answer questions? So what, are they going to clarify everything and shoot themselves in the foot when it comes time for a sequel? He puts too much personal opinion in the matter. Just because he wants to know "all the answers" and hates cliffhangers doesn't mean everyone else hates them too. Imo, a storyline is made better when it is never fully answered; it leaves you guessing and encourages debate and discussion, getting you more hyped up about a HL3. This definitely happened with Half-Life 1; is the G-man really an alien? Who exactly is he working for? Was Nihilanth really the enemy? Is this "telling like it is" by giving your own opinion on an “unbiased” review? I don't think so.

A bit too effortless? Maybe, just maybe it was because you were playing on easy? You start a new game on normal or easy... it’s normal or easy... Wow, what a mixed up world I live in. Oh, just to let you know, there is a mode called hard, but why its there, I have no idea.

His comments on multiplayer were a tad unfair too. He is completely forgetting the fact that Half-Life has a huge fan base. The small mistakes that Valve made with not including DM and other multiplayer content will be quickly patched up others. It doesn’t take a genius to realize all the mods currently in production by teams like Sven Coop. If anything else, he is also overlooking Day of Defeat and HL: Source, both conveniently bundled together with HL2 for $10 more.

I’m sorry to say this but the vast majority of these so called flaws that they mentioned are completely idiotic. It’s simply the fact that they mention over and over again that the game is not groundbreaking that really ticks me off. In reality, the score that they gave HL2 is not bad at all. A 92 is very good, but compared to other games that deserve much less but didn’t get it because they apparently were revolutionary... Yes, I didn’t play the game yet but does that mean that I know nothing about it either? No. I know enough that it should be an amazing experience, that it IS revolutionary and that their stupid cheap shots and opinions at the game are not justified. Well, in reality I guess we will all find out the truth for ourselves tomorrow or at 12:00 for you bastards lucky enough to stay up.
 
Psygnosis said:
I've not read Gamespot's review because it seems to contain spoilers. But PC Gamer (UK) did a great review on HL2.
Click to expand...

Thats what pissed me off most, they gave out spoilers, like this:

Case in point is the end of the game, which feels anticlimactic--you're given a horrendously overpowered weapon to use against relatively weak opposition.

I didnt want to know that before I played the game. That, and the way it was written show a bad review, I'm glad it got a 9.2, but this is just being a bad reviewer. This is the first time i went there, and I'm not going back
 
madacian said:
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?
Click to expand...

I think I just won this argument. My whole point was the review was missing important information and you just confirmed that it is missing information and is therefore not a good review. Thank you and come again.
 
Look guys, I hate Halo 2, i'm not at all a halo person.
I'm all for Half-Life 2, i pre-ordered gold the first day .

I'm sure we can all admit here a few things :

1) None of us have played it.
2) Everyone has convinced themselves it's the best game ever.

Now, I have read every review out for Half-Life 2, everyone of them picks up on the same points linking to the AI.
For some of us gamers (ME ESPECIALLY) I HATE COUNTERSTRIKE, and to think of counterstrikesource being the only official multiplayer game mode for Half-life 2, makes me feel that slight bit negative towards it. I yearn for Hldm2.
That seriously does knock those last few points off half-life 2 for me.
There are many many fanboy people on here, who stick by there guns and are nearby ready to kill anyone that doesnt rate half-life 2 as close to 100% as possible.
Please for the sake of humanity get a grip :).
 
Gamespot does weird reviews.
People, 9.2 is only 6% lower than PC Gamer's score. I think a leeway of 6% is acceptable :D
 
One also has to question "how much time they were allotted to play? Were they allowed to play "awesome" levels, etc.?"
 
Gamespot and Gamespy reviews are just serving as an indicator. I dont trust them. If you want intelligent and balanced reviews read eurogamer.net or edge mag.
 
I personally cannot shake my apprehension about the AI. I mean, take the one of the Coastline binks for instance, the Combine soldiers just stand out in the open taking damage, despite the player dodging round the side of the building and taking successful potshots. How do we explain that? Let's judge on what we know and not what we do not.
 
See Serial, you make it seem like I wrote up my huge ass essay debunking Gamespot's review just because I'm trying to convince myself that HL2 is the best game ever. I'm not. The point I'm trying to make is that it was an unfair review. Thats it. I know that Half-Life 2 will not be the perfect game. Hell, what is the perfect game? However, what I am pissed off of is simply the fact that they kept mentioning things that were not true. How do I know this? Because of all the other articles/magazines/movies/other reviews that I have seen. I simply cannot fathom why they reviewed HL2 in such a negative tone when they gave other games much higher scores and praise when they didn't innovate either (not saying that HL2 isn't innovative, taking the worst case scenario and that their review is true).
 
Well i'll take comfort in knowing games that got equal or better score (UT2004/Far Cry ) will be dead and buried within a year whilst HAlf-Life 2 and mods will be absolutely alive and kicking.

I wonder if that should be a criteria for judgement?

"Will you still be involved with the game in a year?" 10/10
 
Infoceptor said:
His comments on multiplayer were a tad unfair too. He is completely forgetting the fact that Half-Life has a huge fan base. The small mistakes that Valve made with not including DM and other multiplayer content will be quickly patched up others.
Click to expand...

On launch, HL2 didn't contain a multiplayer component based on the game. It's completely fair to deduct points for this. What's really biased and unfair is not deducting points because some 3rd party will probably patch Valve's mistake in the future. Maybe. It's like forgiving bugs because they'll probably be fixed within the year.
 
madacian said:
While reading it I felt like they were giving me the real scoop on the game.
Click to expand...
Just so long as we're clear that it's your opinion as opposed to anything objective.

I, on the other hand, felt like they were going out of their way to be negative just so they could "stand out from the crowd" so to speak. And, yes, that's just my opinion.
 
Hotpot said:
I personally cannot shake my apprehension about the AI. I mean, take the one of the Coastline binks for instance, the Combine soldiers just stand out in the open taking damage, despite the player dodging round the side of the building and taking successful potshots. How do we explain that? Let's judge on what we know and not what we do not.
Click to expand...

The AI was tuned down in the videos so the player wouldn't die. And no, most reviews out there don't say the AI is the downside. They say the Combine are a very tough challenge and use flanking/squad manuevers. The ONLY complaint I have seen of the AI, is that the team members some times get in the way. Quit being tools
 
gamespot gave tony hawk game for ps2 a 10 lol it is so unproportional.
 
I can't believe he says this

Gamespot guy said:
In many ways, Half-Life 2 feels like the middle chapter in a much larger story, and it suffers as a result.
Click to expand...

ANOTHER VICTORY FOR CAPTAIN OBVIOUS
 
Alientank said:
Well since some of you are thick headed dipshits let me spell it out in extra large font for you.

HALO 2 GOT A 9.4 YES, BUT HALO 2 GOT A 9.4 FOR BEING A CONSOLE GAME, NOT A PC GAME. THE REVIEW OF HALO 2 IS BASING IT ON HOW WELL IT DOES ON CONSOLE AND IS IN NO WAY A DIRECT RELATION TO HALF LIFE 2 NOR IS THAT SCORE SOMETHING TO BE USED AS THE SAME SCORE YOU WOULD GIVE A PC FIRST PERSON SHOOTER. HALF LIFE 2 IS BASED ON PC FIRST PERSON SHOOTERS, NOT IN ANY WAY DIRECTED OR TO BE COMPARED TO HALO 2'S SCORE. STOP COMPARING TWO GAMES ON TWO PLATFORM'S, THE SCORES ARE ENTIRELY DIFFERENT FOR ENTIRELY DIFFERENT REASONS.
Click to expand...

I am so sorry, but I ABSOLUTLY HAD to quote that because I will probably never again have the chance to quote such a huge ass quoted font....lol....I'm so sorry.....I had to...I hope you guys can understand
 
I thought when you read the IGN and gamespot reviews....they basically said the same thing. The scores just didnt match up is all. But taking all the reviews that have been released this month, its a safe bet this is the best PC game of all time, at least for FPS.
 
You guys need to get out more.

Here's my logic - I didn't develope HalfLife2, so nothing a review says is directed at me personally. I don't read reviews to find out how good a game is, I read them to find out how bad it is so I don't end up wasting money on trash. 9.2 certainly isn't trash. The more critical a review is being, the more information I have to decide if the game's worth my 50 presidents.
You guys should try Il2 Sturmovik for a different kind of multiplayer.
Oh, and try catching some sun and sweat too.

PS: If you guys want another such thread to waste time on, I can post one at 12.01 saying how much Hl2 sucks.
 
madacian said:
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?
Click to expand...

What? That is completely ignoring the functional necessity of covering both strengths and weaknesses of a game in any review. Would an engineer say "Oh we don't need to make this elevator have the ability to go up and down, we'll just make it able to go down. Every other elevator already goes up." It's independant of each review and does not justify neglecting the positive aspects, especially when the final score doesn't reflect the review itself.

Without looking at the gamespot score and just reading the review text, I would have thought the game scored nowhere near a 9.
 
you dont get the point.
we believe half-life 2 is the best game ever made period.
as we read in the final hours article, someone from valve saying that if this isnt the best game ever made, we'll be disappointed. the same applies here. but because of the quality of the review and the fact that it contradicts about 10 other reviews makes hl2 fans angry.
 
ITS A 9.2. ITS STILL A GOOD SCORE!!!!

What do you care anyways, you're gonna buy it despite the review. Did you just want a high score for bragging rights or what? Grow up.

So, shut the **** up and enjoy the game when it comes out tomorrow.
 
I'm not upset, but he didn't list ANY real flaws with the game besides the AI for the allies follows you too closely and... Well that's it.
 
well i figure no one reads back this far so i can say whatever i want soooo.....H2 RULES HL2 H2 IS THE BEST EVER WHOOOO HOOOOOOO **** HL2 IM GONNA GO **** MY XBOX NOW WHOOOOO HOOOO XBOX HAS BEST GRAPHICS EVER PC BLOWS FOR FPS WHOOOOHOOO LOOK AT ME LOOK AT ME WHOOO IM DISSING HALFLIFE 2 ON THE FORUMS YAYAYAYYA I JUST ****ED AN ANT WHOO HOO MY DREAM IS TO BONE A GIRL IN THE EAR WHOOO HOOO YEAH
 
vinconair said:
What? That is completely ignoring the functional necessity of covering both strengths and weaknesses of a game in any review. Would an engineer say "Oh we don't need to make this elevator have the ability to go up and down, we'll just make it able to go down. Every other elevator already goes up." It's independant of each review and does not justify neglecting the positive aspects, especially when the final score doesn't reflect the review itself.

Without looking at the gamespot score and just reading the review text, I would have thought the game scored nowhere near a 9.
Click to expand...

That's got to be the worst comparison I've ever heard. That made absolutely no sense. Why can't people accept a 9.2? Why is it so hard to believe there are flaws in the game? Why does every review have to fulfill people's fanboy fantasies with witty banter about how mind-blowingly super l33t the game is? The world isn't coming to an end because of this review, and Valve certainly isn't going to lose any money over it.
 
I dont care what gamespot thinks. I trust pc gamers review and my thought on the game. It will rock everyones pants off! so no worries!!!
 
I actually think Gamespots reviews are better than IGNs reviews.
IGN are just a bunch of Halo fanboys. They always compare everything to Halo.
Gamespot however are sometimes hard on games. But guys, 9.2 still is a superb score.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Krynn72
You guys, what the **** is up.
Replies
11
Views
2K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
MFL
Fascinating look at the ongoing psychological evolution of flat hieirarchies.
Replies
2
Views
2K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
B
Community Interviews: Final Exchange development team
Replies
0
Views
5K
Barnz
B
B
The cut missions of Half-Life: Decay
Replies
2
Views
21K
Evo
Evo
B
Community Interviews: Tony Newton, co-creator of Redemption
Replies
0
Views
5K
Barnz
B
Back
Top