"-Story is insipid -Writing is embarrassing -Later levels are lacking"
funny how you leave out the positives in a positive review.
I never knew that a 60% is positive.
Adam Sessler has said a billion times he hates Metacritic and other review averaging sites. He says when he reviews a game as a 3/5, it isn't the same thing as a 60/100. As with every review, actually read or view it and see what the review likes and dislikes about it. For all you know, a "negative" of a review's opinion may actually be a "positive" in your opinion.
Pointless numerical values do not make a game "good". No standard for how to rate exists across or even inside genres.
So an 84 for one game can not be used to compare to a 92 of another.
What is actually important is the written part of the reviews because that actually tells people about the game.
9.5 means nothing other then inciting moronic troll/fanboy ammunition.
So what people in this topic (those that hate the game) should be doing is reading (I know it hurts your head but give it a shot) the actual reviews to gain some insight.
Look for any glitches mentioned, how developed the gameplay is and other criticisms.
TC all you do by posting the scores is encourage a flame war, next time just post the links for the reviews and for those interested in finding the numbers they'd have to either click them to find out or do there own searches.
This is all common sense which honestly is sad I even have to state it.
If history is to change, let it change. If the world is to be destroyed, so be it. If my fate is to die, I must simply laugh.
You have great taste in music Crim, but you're kidding yourself if you think there wasn't at least one other shooter on the grassy knoll. Way to ignore 50+ witness accounts of hearing gunshots from that area.
I was just using it as an example. the JFK assassination does not interest me.
DmC looks like a good game. I also enjoyed the latest Final Fantasy and Resident Evil games. I like video games. http://imgon.net/di-CFMD.gif
I enjoyed Sessler's review as I normally do, but I gotta say that I think games reviewers are forgetting what it's like to just play and enjoy.
The story is insipid? The writing is embarrassing? What kind of critiques are these.
I normally agree with Sessler and actually subscribe to RevGames but I agree with you here. It's like when Ebert spent an entire review talking about how Kick-Ass was morally wrong when you need to just accept something for what it it is. Or what its goal is. DMC isn't trying to have a story written in the vein of Bioshock but something ridiculous. He's not getting the punchline basically
EGM is the same publication that gave Final Fantasy X a 6...
Everyone can tell that something fishy is going on. DmC a 9.5? No way in hell. These are obviously paid off. This isn't some massive off-the-walls conspiracy theory, either. It's just obvious.
It does seem fishy, but to think that Capcom would pay for reviews and Square Enix wouldn't is also baffling. FFX was huge for its time and it was pivotal for their team. I guess they both had different objectives as far as advertising goes. Nowadays, it's much less, "You [the writer] were paid to write a good review. Now write it." and much more of, "You [the company receiving the funds] were paid to write a good review. Why haven't you written a good one? Do you want us to stop funding you?"
It's really just bad all around. I played the demo and at most I believe it deserves an 8.5. The framerate is horrid and the shadows are terrifyingly bad.
"Fantastic baby." Currently playing: R&C HD Collection, Borderlands 2, Far Cry 3, and Assassin's Creed III