Adam Sessler's DMC review.

#161thesacknatorPosted 1/14/2013 3:23:27 PM
Seems I missed the part where you said Hard and onward
#162thesacknatorPosted 1/14/2013 3:23:56 PM
Seems I missed the part where you said Hard and onward
#163YoYoLeFtToRiTePosted 1/14/2013 3:25:29 PM
People still watch X-Play? Now, ain't that some s***.
---
C-C-C-C-COMBO BREAKER!!!
#164KafkafPosted 1/14/2013 4:12:39 PM
YoYoLeFtToRiTe posted...
People still watch X-Play? Now, ain't that some s***.


Nope, it's cancelled
---
Play F-Zero GX, it's a good game http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o-nGCm8CQaM
#165En Sabah NurPosted 1/14/2013 4:25:22 PM
LordMe posted...
Capitan_Kid posted...
cyanide_suicide posted...
m100t1s posted...
theofficefan99 posted...
3/5

The first unpaid score.


My DMC sense is tingling! I think the reviewer is being paid off bro.


3/5 is 6/10. Nobody is paying anyone for a 6/10.


Thats not how a 3/5 stars works. Different scales


2.5 + 2.5 = 5

Which makes 2.5 = 5/10

3 is about a 6 or 7


Mathematically that's exactly how it works. However, the 1 to 5 scale is stupid and not flexible enough.

For that reason, 1 to 5 scores are usually interpreted as such:

5 = 9.5/10
4 = 8 or 8.5/10
3 = 7 or 7.5/10
2 = 5 or 6/10
1 = below that

It doesn't make sense mathematically, but I'm not saying it has to. I'm saying that's generally how reviewers use that silly scale. I mean, 3/5 games are clearly not 6/10. 3/5 is considered an above average score (and we all know 6/10 is considered "bad" by the mass market of gamers and companies).
---
Playing - Far Cry 3, Black Ops 2, PSABR, Halo 4, Lego LOTR, Darksiders 2, Forza Horizon, Transformers FOC, DOA5, Game of Thrones, Skyrim, Resident Evil 6, MAA
#166_Uwye_Posted 1/14/2013 4:29:39 PM
En Sabah Nur posted...
However, the 1 to 5 scale is stupid


IMO it's much better because it reduces the stupid controversies regarding scores and forces people to actually read/watch the review.
#167BillysanPosted 1/14/2013 5:18:30 PM
GreatTroySensei posted...
Billysan posted...
Mister_Zurkon posted...
The plot is terrible, it's about a Matrix Cosplayer who wants to turn the earth into evil noodles.

The justification doesn't make the random insertion of a spear throwing tribe in the middle of a modern day warzone any less sleazy.


Wow so just dismiss the plot completely now.

The game is centered around the ruins that house the Progenitor virus. Africa had long since been established has the location of the virus.

For many many many years the tribe has protected the area. (Contact with the tribe is how the virus was originally discovered)

They evolved with the times and use modern tech but they always protected the area. Like I said they have celebrations involving their heritage and dress up in traditional clothing.

Not only did Wesker and Co get rid of the tribes attacks he had them join him using the parasite.

Has shown in RE4 people still act like humans but end up becoming more primitive in nature.


RE5 was effing disgracefully bad. Why defend it's plot so adamantly? It's like defending a Michael Bay film.



RE5 was pretty fun and addicting.

The story itself beyond ending Wesker and Spencer in a anticlimactic way was enjoyable. RE plots are always a bit silly but enjoyable.
---
http://billysan291.deviantart.com/
PSN: Billysan291 360 Live: Billy Saltzman
#168GreatTroySenseiPosted 1/14/2013 7:11:39 PM
Billysan posted...
RE5 was pretty fun and addicting.

The story itself beyond ending Wesker and Spencer in a anticlimactic way was enjoyable. RE plots are always a bit silly but enjoyable.


Agree to disagree. The plots have always been campy, yes but 5's was rail thin as an excuse to do big action set pieces, something the series doesn't need. RE4 was redesigned to appeal to more core gamers, but I didn't mind because the gameplay benefitted, and Leon, Ada and Wesker all made sense in their roles. Plus there were still puzzle bits - albeit dumbed down. 5 was just "co-op action, America **** yeah!" It was like the game had an offbrand Kirkland label reading "compare to Gears of War!"

I know there are tons of arguments about what Resident Evil should be or has become, but shooting down machine gunners on dirtbikes ISN'T Resident Evil. It's a bad Vin Diesel vehicle, and that's on a good day.
---
These are like, third dimension glasses, you know? They don't really work, though because I feel like I'm still seeing stuff in whatever dimension we live in.
#169Dicer7Posted 1/14/2013 7:33:14 PM
_Uwye_ posted...
En Sabah Nur posted...
However, the 1 to 5 scale is stupid


IMO it's much better because it reduces the stupid controversies regarding scores and forces people to actually read/watch the review.


Agreed. 1-10 rating scales are pointless if reviewers don't even use half of the scale for 99% of games and the decimal increments are just completely arbitrary. A simple 1-5 gives a more efficient way of telling someone whether a game is worth buying or renting or passing on and like you said, gives consumers a better incentive to actually READ/WATCH a review than just judging a game on a number.

Got a lot of respect for Adam. I don't agree with him all the time but he's rather intelligent and inquisitive when it comes to games but he also never comes off as pretentious or having some agenda like a lot of reviewers seem to be.
#170MashYouGoodPosted 1/14/2013 7:36:18 PM
theofficefan99 posted...
3/5

The first unpaid score.

Correct.