For this gen it seems Presentation>>>>Gameplay

#11SpacePirateKhanPosted 11/20/2012 10:14:29 AM(edited)
Did UMvC3 get low scores? I never looked up reviews for it, but the menu was ass, and it was constantly doing something that forced you to wait much longer than necessary to do anything.

And the story mode was extremely barebones, and as we all know from professional reviewers, the most important part of a fighting game is the story mode. >_>
---
www.change.org/petitions/superbot-make-the-king-of-all-cosmos-a-dlc-character-2
King of all Cosmos (Katamari) for PSASBR!
#12TaizukuPosted 11/20/2012 10:16:11 AM
SpacePirateKhan posted...
Did UMvC3 get low scores? I never looked up reviews for it, but the menu was ass, and it was constantly doing something that forced you to wait much longer than necessary to do anything.

And the story mode was extremely barebones, and as we all know from professional reviewers, the most important part of a fighting game is the story mode. >_>


Nope UMvC3 got pretty good scores.
---
~~'~,~'<(@Official Jon Talbain of Za Warudo@)>'~,~'~~
PSN: MobileFlame
#13Chzrm3Posted 11/20/2012 10:19:52 AM
IcyFlamez96 posted...
Chzrm3 posted...
Probably true. I'd say the original Uncharted was an 8.5 because it showed off the strength of the PS3, Uncharted 2 was a 9 because it had the best story in the series and (imo) the most fun gameplay, and Uncharted 3 was an 8 because it felt like a step backward (didn't like the story as much, they took out the whole stealth mechanic in Uncharted 2 which I loved, etc).

But it had exploding ships so 10/10!!!!!!!!


Uncharted 3 had stealth. It just wasn't forced.

I don't know why but I can't even play through the first half of it anymore but the second half is godly.


Haha that's funny, I love the first half (always been a sucker for a well-done backstory) and actually thought the second half was where it dragged a bit. When they got to the lost city of the sands, it felt like we were retreading familiar territory from UC2. The final boss fight was also really underwhelming.

When UC2 ended I felt like I'd just finished playing something incredible. When UC3 ended I was like "...hey wait! We aren't done yet!"

I think it's cause UC2 emphasized characters and relationships, and UC3 emphasized bombastic set pieces and Nate tripping on acid.
---
If I haven't mentioned Trivio in my post, it's because she is so beautiful and precarious that I just wanted to show her how much she means to me.
#14kratosandzelosPosted 11/20/2012 10:24:21 AM
blaze, I hate to disagree with you, but I have to..well sorta. Yes gameplay is what is most important, but there are numerous things and features that should be mandatory in all fighters by now that this game is lacking. This is the year 2012, you better have a fully operating online system with everything there by now.

Granted, the game itself is hella fun, I just had a great set with a Jak player I really should of recorded (we split it evenly btw) and the game has a lot of depth to it (though the fact we cant set time limits for stock/kill made our matches take roughly 10+ minutes, minus one match where he blew me up lol).
---
http://allstararena.com
Competitve Hub for Playstation All-Stars Battle Royale
#15blaze19_0X(Topic Creator)Posted 11/20/2012 10:42:39 AM
kratosandzelos posted...
blaze, I hate to disagree with you, but I have to..well sorta. Yes gameplay is what is most important, but there are numerous things and features that should be mandatory in all fighters by now that this game is lacking. This is the year 2012, you better have a fully operating online system with everything there by now.

Granted, the game itself is hella fun, I just had a great set with a Jak player I really should of recorded (we split it evenly btw) and the game has a lot of depth to it (though the fact we cant set time limits for stock/kill made our matches take roughly 10+ minutes, minus one match where he blew me up lol).


I don't think you understood my point at all. I'm talking about people complaining about menus and not having MGS length cutscenes. Not valid concerns about the gamplay.

The only major thing I see missing is random 1 vs 1 matchmaking, like brawl it has to be done with online friends. That and 1 vs 1 ranked. Those are valid complaints.

The timer not being in stock matches in another valid complaint and no friendly fire is as well but those are minor things. Oh and I guess the AI is really bad in this game.

So what are these numerous features you are talking about?
Did I cover all of them?
---
http://allstararena.com
Competitve Hub for Playstation All-Stars Battle Royale
#16kratosandzelosPosted 11/20/2012 10:52:45 AM
...people whined about the menus?

Faith in humanity lowered. Carry on then
---
http://allstararena.com
Competitve Hub for Playstation All-Stars Battle Royale
#17LuminescentRulePosted 11/20/2012 10:53:25 AM
A great game had presentation, gameplay and content. Have only one of those and you failed.
---
Sent from my iPhone via PowerFAQs 1.10
#18TaizukuPosted 11/20/2012 10:54:50 AM
LuminescentRule posted...
A great game had presentation, gameplay and content. Have only one of those and you failed.


Well I guess EVERY SINGLE CAPCOM FIGHTING GAME EVER failed.
---
~~'~,~'<(@Official Jon Talbain of Za Warudo@)>'~,~'~~
PSN: MobileFlame
#19xxx000110000111Posted 11/20/2012 10:55:14 AM
IcyFlamez96 posted...
Are they really rating it lower than you think it should because of menus? They seem to be taking off points because of the arcade mode and the content in general.


This. It's amazing how some of you are so blinded by your bias of the game that you just focus on the menus of the game being one of the only aspects of presentation; it's much more than that. Considering how most of the people on this board thought this game was going to get a score in the range on 8.5-8.9 according to a poll, it's no wonder why so many of you feel let down. If you watched the IGN stream of this game and saw what it has to offer, you shouldn't be surprised by this score. You can't get so carried away just because the reviewer seemed to love the game when talking about it with Omar.

Many of you keep trying to justify why this game deserves a higher score because of the gameplay alone, yet you keep attacking other games because of their lack of content, despite those games having far superior gameplay. From a fundamental level, this game can't touch proper fighting games, and it never was meant to do that. It's supposed to be a fun game with some depth for those who wish to explore it. Maybe it will become tournament worthy or maybe it won't, but dismissing the game for what it is and saying that the presentation shouldn't really matter in a game like this is a bit ridiculous.
#20xxx000110000111Posted 11/20/2012 10:56:03 AM
Taizuku posted...
LuminescentRule posted...
A great game had presentation, gameplay and content. Have only one of those and you failed.


Well I guess EVERY SINGLE CAPCOM FIGHTING GAME EVER failed.


You clearly have not played many Capcom fighting games.