You're browsing the GameFAQs Message Boards as a guest. Sign Up for free (or Log In if you already have an account) to be able to post messages, change how messages are displayed, and view media in posts.
Big Devil May Cry Fan and played both DmC and MGR, my vote goes to MGR. Once I beat DmC I couldn't gain any interest replaying it; however, MGR I have been replaying multiple times trying to collect everything. Those reviewers just suck at games and shouldn't even be reviewing games. MGR has a very small learning curve and once you got it, the game actually becomes fun.
didnt MGR just come out? and you already beat it AND replayed it multiple times?
on topic, they are both good games, just really started playing MGR and its not bad so far, beat DMC yesterday, and thought it was a good game. I liked DMC4 too, and didnt feel let down with this one.
1.) Expecting a reviewer to be as hardcore into a game as you are is a mistake 2.) Reviewers aren't only reviewing games for the fanbase. They review games with the general public in mind 3.) Reviews are there as guides to help YOU THE GAMER make a decision. Not to tell you what to do. What? You disagree with a score? Guess what? You can still buy the game and still enjoy it. 4.) Review scores have been skewed for 2 reasons: Fans and Game companies. It's a mutual fault, because fans have made it so that anything below a 9 is bad and game companies followed suit with that mentality. If fans didn't cry and moan every time their favorite game got an unfavorable review (Cause an 8/10 is unfavorable now apparently), we'd have a much better and varied rating system. 5.) The score of a game review isn't what matters. It's the content of the review that does. The moment you stop giving power to the number and try to spread that mentality, the sooner we can remedy this issue.
I mean, seriously, I use to work in the gaming industry (Can't say what company. Or, I'd rather just not say. Make my life easier.) and I'm soon to be back in it. I'm not saying what I'm saying is completely correct. There's some other factors, but these are definitely the main ones.
DMC has better environments. The envrionments in this game look like a Playstation 2 game, one large room with some boxes thrown in.In terms of gameplay well both games are more or less the same,. IE not very good, but to be hoenst DMC is probably a bit better in the gamrplay department as well.
There's no excuse for those two troll reviews though. It's like IGN's God Hand review all those years ago.
There is NO WAY ON EARTH MGR is a 3. Neither was God Hand. They both have issues, but that's Ninja Bread Man scores there.
I agree. The way i see it, for a game to get 3 or less in a review it must: 1) be unplayable, it cannot be called a "game". 2) be incomplete. The game can be played, but lacks a LOT of BASIC characteristics. 3) be the worst of its genre. The game is really bad, there are only a few other games in history that are as bad as that one.
There is no way that MGR or God Hand fall in any of those 3 categories.