Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'PS3 - Games & Content' started by Valwin, Nov 5, 2011.
read the rest at the sourcesource
I can't say I completely disagree.
I find the game part of the game gets monotonous pretty quickly but it's not bad. And the cinematic part is great.
If I was to review it like a complete asshole, the lowest I'd rate it is 8/10
I remember watching Sony E3 and they were complaining that people only wanted great graphics now, and that's what they're spending all their money on - mostly on real-like graphics than a story or something.
Also that site is shitty at best, it gave a shitty game like Chrono Trigger a 10/10.
I've only played one chapter of the game, so I can't really make a determination as to its quality. however, I have heard several people comment that the game is a major step backwards from part 2. the game may be a victim of over-hype that nothing could ever live up to.
lol! seeing others hyped about this game ... i thought it'll be a 10/10
I remember seeing this a while ago. That reviewer is just a complete idiot, how he figured out how to post that on the website is beyond me.
The game is perfectly alright. My only issue with it is that some key scenes I was expecting didn't exactly turn out as I had hoped, but it's still a good game.
I mean, The gameplay in 1/2 was pretty bland, the shooting at a core is weak, and the climbing parts are on rails.
Uncharted at best is a glorified movie.
oh look at me by giving this game a bad review I will surely generate controversy and get more views and attention!
Same site only gave Valkyria Chronicles a 7/10. So anything it says is now invalid to me.
and a few other random titles I searched got low ratings. Then shitfest titles like RDR and a few others got high ratings.
Yeah, this site doesn't produce valid reviews...at all. Reading some of them, you kinda wonder how monkeys can run a site for so long.
and i'm not sayin' this because i'm mad they gave Uncharted 3 a bad score. I've actually never even touched the Uncharted series, and probably wont since it never looked to be up my alley in terms of fun.
troll review alert
4/10 ehh, I cant just give a score like that with this game, well you know, I love it.
anyway for me, this is a 8/10 for me, despite of the lack of gameplay, story line and graphics are awesome.
Anyway, this is the worst score that I ever seen on a reviewer, he fail as a human being right now.
I rather give Final Fantasy XIII a 4/10 than this one.
Climbing parts are on rails? How do not have it on "rails"? What do you mean by that? Didn't they have secret places that people can go to?
While he may have valid points (idk if he truly does since I only watch the first two walk thoughts and part of the 3 one) he seem to want a shooter game with basically
no story(which he doesn't seem to care about). Like I thought this was a shooter game with a story, until I read some comments.
The game try to copy (which I believe it miss) Batman fighting style which you couldn't even do much of. I thought the combat part was lacking and
seem easy. The shooting wasn't like right or consistent. I understand it is a video game and multiple shoots are fine,but a shot in a leg kills them faster in a shot in chest in some cases. I think people like the fact it feels like a movie (which I believe where most the hype is coming from),but I do feel something is lacking, mainly
in gameplay. Oh and the trophies for this game, from what I seen, are something you would have done anyway, so it doesn't really add anything...
I think the game could have benefit with at least one more year of development 'cause some say they are pumping out the series too fast.
I would at least give the game 7-8 for a score base on past games. That score just seem unfair/unlikely...
I can't believe a site would give it such a bad score since it got so much hype. Also, isn't this a ps3 exclusive so this score is crap.
Lol IGn gave it a 10/10 and Gamespot gave it a 9/10. Pretty sure that gametrailers gave it a score higher than 9. The game is awesome and stands against Skyrim, Arkham City, and Skyward Sword for Game Of The Year.
Man, I absolutely loved Uncharted 2 and it`s imo the best sequel in gaming, since I thought Uncharted 1 was heavily overrated. IMO U2 had an overall way better pacing then U1, since it managed to deliver just the right amount of gunfights, climbing and puzzles so that the pacing felt absolute perfect.
U3 on the other hand has honestly a very flaut pacing. The first part is very puzzle-heavy (not that they were bad thought) and the second part was very gunfight-heavy... Seeing something in the distance that you want to get to was just thrown away in favour of very quickly putting you in admittingly amazing situations (in the case of Uncharted not a good design-choice). Over all it doesn`t give you time to breath like U2 gave you and that`s why some of the amazing scenes didn`t have a big impact on you even though they might have been better then the ones from U2.
Over all I would rate all 3 games the following:
U1: 75% (at best... very overrated game)
U2: 92% (damn it`s an amazing experience)
U3: 84% (imo it tried too hard)
But 4/10 is ridiculous!
Perfect thread to link this video clip. Topical, no?
How dare that reviewer not give U3 a 10, I'll tweet about this! lol
metacritic doesnt even count this site as a real review site so you can see the validity of it
I just got a PS3 recently and Uncharted 2 was a very fun game. I liked the gameplay a lot, it was simple and the enemy AI's could of been harder.
I haven't played UC:1 or UC:3 at all so I can't comment on UC:3 clearly. but if UC:3 is more of the same. I can safely say to me it's a good game and that's all that matters to me in the end is that I think it's good.