Results 1 to 15 of 15

  1. Post

    Posts in this thread appear as comments on the following Gameplanet article:

    Read article...

  2. Post
    #2
    How many times can they release the same game?

  3. Post
    #3
    Bobs wrote:
    How many times can they release the same game?
    Maybe ask Ubisoft.

  4. Post
    #4
    Seems like they should have just released the new gadget mechanics as DLC to muck around with.

    I'll pick it up when it is in the bargain bin for the sandbox gameplay.

  5. Post
    #5
    Feels like the reviewer is punishing the game based on what came before, rather than reviewing it as a standalone title. For all the fun and many hours of gameplay on offer, this is a 7.5 game at least.

  6. Post
    #6
    Tormenta wrote:
    Feels like the reviewer is punishing the game based on what came before, rather than reviewing it as a standalone title. For all the fun and many hours of gameplay on offer, this is a 7.5 game at least.
    Yeah for sure. I definitely did base the review off the previous games as I do feel that a sequel should be measured against it's predecessors in terms of advancements in gameplay mechanics, graphics, physics etc.

    I'm a big fan of the series but this one just didn't hit the mark for me unfortunately and felt like a sideways step rather than one forward

  7. Post
    #7
    Tormenta wrote:
    Feels like the reviewer is punishing the game based on what came before, rather than reviewing it as a standalone title. For all the fun and many hours of gameplay on offer, this is a 7.5 game at least.
    That is how reviews work. A sequel needs to be assessed in relation to its predecessors. Just as any game should be assessed within the confines of its contemporaries and/or genre. Context is vital. Using your logic every complaint about most of the Assassins Creed games being the same or COD being the same would not have any merit, when in reality they're (or were) a key issue with the franchise.

    A game review needs to be contextualised. If it isn't it has little real world value.

    Also please don't assert your opinion is correct and a reviewer or even another posters is objectively incorrect. You think it's a 7.5 that's great and true for you, but you did not write the review and it is not your opinion being shared.

    Personally I think the game is trash. It's still poorly optimised and objectively worse in many ways than 3, and essentially the same game we've played before. I'd give it a 5 at best, but that's just my opinion.

  8. Post
    #8
    AstoriaParanoia wrote:
    Maybe ask Ubisoft.
    Or EA.

  9. Post
    #9
    ChrisB wrote:
    That is how reviews work. A sequel needs to be assessed in relation to its predecessors. Just as any game should be assessed within the confines of its contemporaries and/or genre. Context is vital. Using your logic every complaint about most of the Assassins Creed games being the same or COD being the same would not have any merit, when in reality they're (or were) a key issue with the franchise.

    A game review needs to be contextualised. If it isn't it has little real world value.

    Also please don't assert your opinion is correct and a reviewer or even another posters is objectively incorrect. You think it's a 7.5 that's great and true for you, but you did not write the review and it is not your opinion being shared.

    Personally I think the game is trash. It's still poorly optimised and objectively worse in many ways than 3, and essentially the same game we've played before. I'd give it a 5 at best, but that's just my opinion.
    Exactly, it's just one persons opinion.

  10. Post
    #10
    Black Plague*** wrote:
    Exactly, it's just one persons opinion.
    Except Tormenta is saying the review is wrong. There is a difference.

  11. Post
    #11
    Even with more of the same I was looking forward to playing this, but the performance issues are putting me off.

  12. Post
    #12
    Caffeine wrote:
    Even with more of the same I was looking forward to playing this, but the performance issues are putting me off.
    I was able to get a refund even though I had put in almost 5 hours. I kept hoping it would do something new or interesting but it never did, that and the constant fps drops and micro-stuttering made it unplayable. I've not had micro-stuttering in a game in I don't know how long. This is a bit of a mess on PC. Or it was, it might be patched now.

  13. Post
    #13
    I always wait for these games to be about for like a year, so I can get fully patched experience with all the DLC.

  14. Post
    #14
    Tormenta wrote:
    Feels like the reviewer is punishing the game based on what came before, rather than reviewing it as a standalone title. For all the fun and many hours of gameplay on offer, this is a 7.5 game at least.
    The number at the end of the title refers to something you might find shocking.

  15. Post
    #15
    ChrisB wrote:
    Except Tormenta is saying the review is wrong. There is a difference.
    The review is solid, the score is wrong.