I trust Sterling; some may hate him but his reviews line up with my thoughts very often.
Comment has been collapsed.
Early reviews = Good reviews (This isn't a good thing.)
That's pretty much how it always works.
-Gives the site more hits
-Gets people out there to go preorder it
Win win for them both.
Also should never trust reviews.
Comment has been collapsed.
Jim Sterling rips on EVERYTHING. If he gives a game a good review, then it's usually actually good.
edit: some people truly believe Sterling is a professional troll critic. If you don't know of the guy..... well.... look him up.
Comment has been collapsed.
Please stop pigeonholing me into some imaginary fucking placement that you feel is necessary. I have read his reviews, quite a few of them. They are entertaining, and occasionally trollish. He CAN however write good reviews, and of late I've found his reviews to be more accurate than the vast majority of the other ones out there.
Comment has been collapsed.
I need to pick up the HD collection.
KZ 2/3 multiplayer active still?
Comment has been collapsed.
I think I recall him giving some bad games good scores, and some good games bad scores. Has their every been an early review (week or more before the game came out.) that scored lower than a 7?(Real question.)
I know him slightly. Seen a few of his videos. Tries too hard to be funny to me.
Comment has been collapsed.
I can't give you a difinitive answer on that, but I am PRETTY sure before a few years back I saw a number of games get early reviews that weren't very good. I remember the blowup over IGN's Kane and Lynch review that got Gerstmann fired over there, and right around that time the review embargos seemingly picked up quite a bit.
Again, I can't speak definitively, but I seem to recall Duke Nukem Forever getting early reviews published. They certainly weren't above a 7.
Comment has been collapsed.
I think Duke had a midnight review. Not sure.
Early reviews (to me) just seem like the highest point of paid off reviews.
They wouldn't be allowed to post it if it that early if it wasn't a good review.
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't think it works that way, at least not in this case. A lot of publications have already released reviews for this game, that it's not really an early review anymore. Maybe they just finished it way before schedule that it gave them time to send it out to reviewers early and give an earlier embargo date.
Comment has been collapsed.
"Maybe they just finished it way before schedule"
If you mean the game, the game went gold long ago. So it isn't related at all.
If you mean the review.
No it doesn't work like this at all.
They have a contract most the time and it's why must reviews must be released oafter release day/midnight on release day.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yup, I agree with this. Very trustable source in my eyes, regardless of what others may think of him.
Comment has been collapsed.
This is one way to look at it. The other is that when a publisher/dev knows the game is good they allow for early reviews for hype.
Look at how Aliens: CM forced reviews to wait until the last second before review - early reviews would have killed that game's launch.
Comment has been collapsed.
IGN gave uncharted 3 a 10/10
Reviewers sure love eating up EXCITING NEXT GENERATION CINEMATIC ACTION™
Why dont you assume something is good based on what you think about the product and how it suits your interests as opposed to what someone else views it to be?
Comment has been collapsed.
I love Alpha Protocol. Few others do. I make my own opinions, thank you very much. Having said that, I've never enjoyed the TR games, though I was mildly interested in this one. Now that reviews are coming along positively, I can safely mark this down as a "when it's on a big sale" pickup.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'd likely have asked for my friends opinions on the game, ones that I share similar interests in gaming with. Reviews are simply a tool to be used, not the end-all be-all. I thought this was relatively noteworthy however, since nearly everyone I know that WAS stoked about this game also was also nervous. In the case of AP, I wanted to play the game as it sounded right up my alley, and despite a number of issues with the game, loved it to pieces.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yet despite all of this, you make a thread where you view the game as good right off the bat, as opposed to having a discussion on the reception it's receiving, you take your own premeditated thoughts of the game and use the reviews to warp the discussion into something else. You just contradicted every fucking thing you just said the moment you made this thread.
gg
Comment has been collapsed.
Let's be honest here: a ton of people here would be interested in good review scores. And for the most part, it's an initial gauging factor on whether or not a game is good or not. To me, I'm pleased to see that apparently Eidos did at least a reasonable job with it from what the reviews are saying. Others will take the information and process it in a way that reinforces that a game is worth buying.
I'm not going to pretend that I agree with all the reviews out there by any stretch of the imagination, but I generally have faith that a game is at least reasonably representative of what the reviewers are saying. That doesn't mean I am going to GET the game, or anything. But it does help for future purchase options. And on the flip-side, there are games I'm going to get and pre-order and I don't give a damn WHAT the reviews say. God of War: Ascension and Dead Island Riptide being the 2 coming up relatively soon.
Comment has been collapsed.
Infinite respect for Alpha Protocol, my good mate.
Comment has been collapsed.
Thanks! =D
I even picked up a used copy of AP on PS3 despite the fact it never got patched, unlike the Steam version. I'll get through it someday on PS3 when my backlog allows/not playing on PC!
Comment has been collapsed.
I liked it, the game just had so many flaws, some of which could be fixed yourself, others which I believe will eventually get fan made patches... a lot of people liked the game more than they are willing to admit.
www.joystiq.com/2013/02/08/alpha-protocol-is-the-new-deus-ex/
Comment has been collapsed.
Wow. I'm floored. Being compared to Deus Ex, and yet the article makes sense. AP always had something about it, the conversation system, the branching, the FLOW of how it all worked that was LIGHT YEARS better than any other conversation system I've experienced. I enjoyed the story, I always wanted to see how things played out.
And of course there was Heck, who when first I met him I suggested a funnel might be useful.
Comment has been collapsed.
As soon as I finished it I started into my 2nd playthrough :D
Comment has been collapsed.
LOL...reviews (from payed guys). Such naiv you are!
Comment has been collapsed.
Yes I'm sure it's terrible and such "paid-off" reviews giving it 8.5 or so must be 100% wrong/fake.
You're most likely right though. Tell me, how is the game?
Comment has been collapsed.
I just don't get it with these reboots - what's the f**** point (this goes for devil may cry too)? They make a new game with a different style, a different setting, with a new character... and yet they insist on using the name of an older game! This just pisses me off.
The new TR might be a good game on it's own, but as a fan of Tomb Raider I refuse to acknowledge it as a part of the series. It should be made as a new 'franchise'.
Comment has been collapsed.
Not much knowledge on Tomb Raider. But wasn't Lara kinda a character that had no personality/character?
Some characters are best like that.
Imagine if they tried to add character to Duke Nukem or Mario. :p
Comment has been collapsed.
I wonder if you'd be annoyed if [your favourite game] would receive a sequel that would be MOBA (unless your favourite game is some MOBA, that's when you have to imagine it to be CoD).
Old Tomb Raiders would be fun even if you'd take away Lara's pistols and enemies. This one wouldn't stand a chance without 1000 guys to kill.
Comment has been collapsed.
What you're suggesting is a radical change in gameplay between two games. This latest Tomb Raider game still retains a lot of the original game mechanics (from what I've seen so far). Of course it's going to be different, gamers expect more and more from games these days. If developers took the simplicity of the first Tomb Raider and adopted it for a modern release, it would flop, and I wouldn't buy it. "Change" has to occur, as the standard of games gets higher and higher.
Comment has been collapsed.
Lets look at the failed sequels to the original Tomb Raider, which I might add, were very similar in terms of gameplay. Over 10 years later, do you expect that sort of game to survive? People would bitch about how boring it was and if they modernize it, they would bitch about how different it was. The genre has to develop and try different directions, you can't blame the developers for that.
I can assure you, there have been some great games released in recent years. You're jumping on the "all modern games suck" wagon because they're unable to pioneer new genres in the same way that older games have. So many people look at modern games and don't see the positive things about them, only the negative things. It makes me sick.
Comment has been collapsed.
Agreed and I have been playing PC games since the original Doom/Wolfenstein. Yes many things have been dumbed down and streamlined but not all have been thats for sure, but lets not forget about all of those horrible games that came out back in the day, we tend to only remember the golden titles. Many great games still come out, quick time events can be shitty or good depending on the usage I think. They can add immersion. They can just as easily take away hard gameplay/skill, its a tightrope dance and sometimes it balances and sometimes it falls flat on its face.
I am weary of the new Tomb Raider but willing to give it a chance. If you want to play old Tomb Raider go right ahead I say, they made plenty for you to go back and enjoy. everything must change, I rather it change instead of playing the same game with a shinny coat of paint even if that outcome isn't as fun as when I first played Tomb Raider, at least I am getting a new experience.
Comment has been collapsed.
Sorry, I have posted a response to the wrong post, wanted to respond to your previous post. Anyway, you have said that if they'd release a game that would essentially be the same as the original Tomb Raider, it would flop. This is simply not true, as evidenced with Anniversary, very well received remake of the original. Actually, none of the modern Tomb Raider games flopped, they were successful both commercially and critically.
I have nothing against change, and this reboot might (and probably will) be a good game, I just really don't see the need for it to exist. Legend and Underworld sold millions, there still is a market for games like that. I understand that Squeenix wants a broader audience, the question is, if there actually is one. But that remains to be seen, just like quality of the new TR. What I've seen didn't left a good impression on me, but I'll definitely give it a shot, it'd be moronic to judge a game's quality just from marketing bullshots.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm not saying "modern games suck". I'm saying "if you name something like old game, make it like old game".
I love Deus Ex: Human Revolution. I love New Vegas. I love Xcom. All this games are new versions of old games, but their makers kept "the spirit" of old games, they still play like old ones.
But right now, new Tomb Raider have one element that is the same as in old games - female player character called Lara Croft. There's no exploration, no tomb raiding, there's running forward and shooting and beating QTEs. It's not a bad game - hell, I'll probably will have tons of fun with it - but it's bad Tomb Raider.
Comment has been collapsed.
+1. And i especially annoyed by prequels. Developers (except some indie) lost their fantasies and only repeating the same things only with hyped technique. Some guy call it evolution, i call it boredom.
Comment has been collapsed.
Oh thank god I'm not the only fan who thinks this way. From what I'm seeing it's taking so many steps from the original, it really shouldn't be considered anything but a spin-off at best. I let Guardian of Light off with its completely out there (for the series) style because it was labeled as a spin-off, but this one's trying to be a part of the main series.
Stealth kills with a bow... really? I'm supposed to go in, pistols blazing. And putting the tomb raiding/exploration/collectible and secret finding on a back burner... are we forgetting the title of the game here? It's one thing to modernize a game. It's another to change its entire style.
Maybe that's all well and good for other people, but those were my favorite parts of the older games... exploring tombs and jumping into fights like it's nothing. Taking away my favorite parts is like killing the series for me. This is actually sounding worse than when they removed bosses and added health regen to Underworld. The only thing that redeemed that game for me is the gunplay was still there (except once stuck with a certain awful weapon near the end of the game) and I still had fun climbing around tombs and seeking out collectibles in hard to reach/find, claustrophobic areas.
Comment has been collapsed.
Really nice to see that revies. Preordered it few months ago. I'm a big fan of old Tomb Raiders (from TR1 to Chronicles), so I'm really glad that apparently this time Crystal Dynamics have done everything right; while Anniversary was excellent, Underworld was rather weak.
Comment has been collapsed.
Do you really think they did not pay for such reviews and scores? :)
Comment has been collapsed.
Watched "Clueless Gamer" with Conan O'Brian. They showed 2 lvls that were in different parts of game and i really though that they were exactly the same. Plus, there were horribly dieing Lara, so i don't think this is gonna be that good. Check it buy yourself
Comment has been collapsed.
Maybe now Crystal Dynamics will finally roll out a new Legacy of Kain game?.. Please?.. I even bought your Tomb Raider.
Comment has been collapsed.
Cross out "handsome" and I'll buy that. Anything regarding the return to where it all begun (Blood Omen:Legacy of Kain) is nice.
Comment has been collapsed.
Haha yep.
Review it early and it's good: PAID-OFF!
Review it late: WHY DIDN'T YOU WARN US!
People seem to forget that review embargoes are set by the publisher, they allow early reviews for good games to stir up hype. They force reviews to be held back for damage control on bad games.
Comment has been collapsed.
Being a Square-Enix game, it should take only a couple of weeks until a -75% sale. If you don't want to wait that long, nuuvem's pre-order is ~$30.
Comment has been collapsed.
I've seen some gameplay videos and to be honest, it looks like some mediocre TPS. I'll just ignore first week reviews cause those are usually biased as hell
Comment has been collapsed.
Well seeing as reviewers rate for graphical fidelity and "fun factor" and not on the story or the messages of the game...
Comment has been collapsed.
IGN gave Tomb Raider 9.1, but in their review they clearly specified this is not like the old tomb raiders, this a reboot for all the saga, so don't expect complicated puzzles or hidden and hard stuff to find, this new game has some difficult but not too much =)
Comment has been collapsed.
seeing as though there hasnt been a review embargo that alone is a good sign, it means the dev actually has confidence that the game is good. unlike some of the even MORE hyped games in recent months that had review embargo
Comment has been collapsed.
36 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by Ezel
1,105 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by FreeFall
6 Comments - Last post 2 hours ago by hadouk3n
15,517 Comments - Last post 3 hours ago by schmetti
101 Comments - Last post 5 hours ago by FrozenShiver
523 Comments - Last post 6 hours ago by ComNguoi
1,479 Comments - Last post 7 hours ago by cpassuel
221 Comments - Last post 46 seconds ago by Fluffster
20 Comments - Last post 16 minutes ago by ceeexo
107 Comments - Last post 25 minutes ago by Aldcoran
29 Comments - Last post 34 minutes ago by ceeexo
87 Comments - Last post 39 minutes ago by evertonj
7 Comments - Last post 39 minutes ago by Fluffster
26 Comments - Last post 45 minutes ago by Aydaylin
Apparently Square-Enix felt confident enough with Eidos's work to lift the review embargo a week early. As of this post, TR is at 88 for PS3 and 86 for 360. Jim Sterling gave it an 8.5 for fuck sake. Now the question will be how good the PC version will be. Given the good job Eidos did with Deus Ex: Human Revolution, there's reason for optimism.
Comment has been collapsed.