5 critically acclaimed games that reviewers were wrong about
- Thread starter Tinman
- Start date
It's okay, I still love you >.<'
Tsar
The thing that should not be
Subversion
MyGaming staff
@ Azimuth
Sorry I lost you with the content, but at least I managed to reel you back in with the tone
@ Lycan
I guess we'll have to agree to disagree, although I don't really understand some of your arguments. Something like Black and White, sure, its a difference of opinion. The article is, after all, opinion. But for a large amount of people, GTA4 was unplayably bugged. Maybe it was fine for you and thats great, but a game with that many game-breaking bugs, for so many people, simply does not deserve a score in the 90s.
And how can you disagree about a game you didn't even play? =/
Still, was cool debating this with you
At least we have something in common - a passion for games we love (or hate!)
Sorry I lost you with the content, but at least I managed to reel you back in with the tone
@ Lycan
I guess we'll have to agree to disagree, although I don't really understand some of your arguments. Something like Black and White, sure, its a difference of opinion. The article is, after all, opinion. But for a large amount of people, GTA4 was unplayably bugged. Maybe it was fine for you and thats great, but a game with that many game-breaking bugs, for so many people, simply does not deserve a score in the 90s.
And how can you disagree about a game you didn't even play? =/
Still, was cool debating this with you
At least we have something in common - a passion for games we love (or hate!)
Lycanthrope
New member
Because: Planescape had bugs, Arcanum had bugs, Gothic had bugs, Fallout 1 & 2 had bugs, Temple of Elemental Evil had bugs, Vampire: The Masquerade - Bloodlines had bugs. Bugs don't make a good game bad unless they're game-breaking ones (for the majority) because I feel bugs can be patched, even unofficially. I feel that rating a game badly because your (general 'your') PC couldn't run it isn't rating the game anywhere near as much as it is rating your PC's ability to run the game.
Do you understand what I mean?
Perhaps an ideal would be differing ratings for gameplay and stability :3 Regardless, as I said before, 8.1 average of 8,500-odd users indicates that more people didn't have problems than those who did and therefore, despite (or, if you'd prefer, in spite of) the bugs/performance/whatever, it was still considered good.
I'm disagreeing based on the facts presented to me: that Fable 2 is largely much of the same. If it's what brought appeal to the first game I don't get why this is a bad thing
Still, was cool debating this with you
Happy to oblige
Alan
New member
And all this time I thought I was the only person who doesn't like Half Life
What a relief I'm not alone.
Gears Of War is the epitome of what this article is all about IMO
Lycanthrope
New member
Uh... Like whom exactly? Don't recall anyone saying anything that die-hard.
Regardless, some people like discussing politics, religion, cars or whatever interest they have, others like discussing games. An interest can be passionate. As I said, I don't recall anyone here willing to kill or maim :wtf:
