Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 27

Thread: Gamespot is dumb

  1. #11
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    37
    I don't know, fellas. I do agree with some of the points in the review, it is a bit repetitive at times. Scary as hell, yes, but I am pretty tired of going back and forth between that damned flashlight; while the graphics are beyond phenomenal, the constant dark can become a bit monotonous. The reviewer DOES say that it is worth it "once you take the fight to hell", and you get out of the UAC, however.

    I also agree with the oversimplification degree. Think of it this way, gentlemen; imagine going through Doom3 being able to swich to infrared; leaning around corners, or falling into prone from time to time (though that probably wouldn't work, as there is no room in the corridors). At least mount that flashlight on your shoulder.

    Another good point is the constant claustophobic feeling you get in this game. Hell, even doom had some open rooms, occasionally! It sometimes goes from creepy, to uncomfortable from time to time.

    I actually thought it was an insightful review. Please don't get me wrong, though. I have really enjoyed the game thusfar. I can't remember the last time I've been so scared!

    Cheers,

    Rakewell
    Educated beyond my intelligence.

  2. #12
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    11
    Ok, one more thing, how come nobody, and I mean NOBODY has come out and bashed this game for being so resource intense.

    Yeah, I know, eye candy, and I am sure it looks fabulous, but the thing is a beast, seems wasteful given what other games are using, and nobody cares. Everyone just happily whistles along while this thing goes at 20 fps. Shouldn't game makers have some responsibility to make the game accessible? They even get good press for making the game so unweildy, it's like "oh boy, this thing is an elephant, wow, good for them".

    The fact that mulitplayer is only 4 players, soley because the thing is so damn huge, yet no one makes a peep, because it looks nice.

  3. #13
    Sucky sucky..five dollah! CrabbyPatty's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    San Francisco area, California
    Posts
    351
    Quote Originally Posted by mr_bojangles
    folks, what's the point of having reviewers if you only look for confiirmation of your opinion...

    I mean, doesn't anyone get mad that all reviews seem to do is pump games anyway. read some reviews for games that you know stink, but they still hype them. Oh, they distinguish between top flight games and the rest, but these magazines have an active financial incentive to promote the industry.

    IMHO these guys don't take games to town enough, if I wanted to read only positives, I would just read the press release.
    Who's talking about confirmation of opinion? That's not the point. The point is it's VERY biased. Whether it scares the reviewer or not because he thinks he's Mr. Macho shouldn't be downplaying the whole review. Not only that, the worse part about the review is at the end where he asks himself all these absurd questions, like why the lights go off? etc.. Maybe if he had a working brain, he would realize that it's THE WHOLE POINT OF THE DAMN GAME to be in the dark. He also biatches about not having night vision goggles in the game. The funny part is, if there WAS night vision goggles in this game, he would then be bitching about how the game is too similar with other FPS genres with night vision goggles.
    Almost every hightech FPS has NVG. I'd rather turn on the flashlight, glimpse where the creature is and take my gun and shoot in that direction in the dark, this was made on purpose!

    I don't care about the 8.5, thats a fine score if they want it, but the actual review about it is :nono:
    Athlon 64 3000+ / Asus A8n-SLi nForce4 / Dual 6600GT SLi / 19' Samsung Flat Panel (8ms!)
    Audigy Gamer sound / Razer Diamondback 0wnage mouse / Klipsch 5.1 THX Surround
    3dmark03: 14298
    3dmark05: 6380

    There's no place like 192.168.0.1

  4. #14
    Registered User Evil Juggalo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Arlington - Texas
    Posts
    44
    Pros:
    1)Superb Graphics
    2)Decent/Good plot
    3)Multiplayer (4ppl can be changed to up to 32 easily)
    4)Ultra Sweet Surround Sound
    5)Did i mention the superb graphics
    6)A brand new engine for All to enjoy
    7)Programmed even for computers that are not top dollar

    Cons:
    1)Dark Atmosphere adds effect, but not beign able to hold a flashlight and a gun at the same time is ANNOYING
    2)Repetitive Creatures
    3) auto run is not an option



    Neutrals:
    1)Should have been on 1 DVD like UT2004... multiple cd's can be irratating



    The give definantly deserves a 9.5 out of 10.... given its slight flaws, it still makes this the best game ive seen in YEARS... halo does not deserve a 10, it should be licking Doom 3's nuts...

    -Evil Juggalo
    They are like powdered sugar-coated fried dough heroin cereal. I wanna load an uzi with sugar bullets and shoot myself in the tounge.

  5. #15
    Notebook Neophyte
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Princeton, NJ
    Posts
    15
    I do have doom 3.

    10 hours of dark passage->flashlight->switch to weapon->spot enemy->kill->next room and the whole "walk into a room and turn around to blast the imp behind you" gets a bit more tedious the more one plays. I'm still waiting until i can reach hell, which is supposed to be a bit better. Worst of all, the AI is hardly impressive. The monsters have basic AI that tells them to attack you, but I've never been surprised by any monster's behavioral patterns. Fanboys might call this an homage to classic doom's AI, but it would be a lot scarier to have highly sophisticated imps, etc that knew how to cover and gang up, etc
    Discountlaptops Chembook 2056 (CL56)
    1.7 Dothan/512 RAM/60 GB 5400 RPM HDD/m11

  6. #16
    For the Horde! OGREtheBUFFOON's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Louisiana
    Posts
    188
    Quote Originally Posted by Evil Juggalo
    The give definantly deserves a 9.5 out of 10.... given its slight flaws, it still makes this the best game ive seen in YEARS... halo does not deserve a 10, it should be licking Doom 3's nuts...

    idk, halo is the most balanced fps I've ever seen. the gameplay in halo can't be beat. when halo 2 comes out, doom3 will be licking it's balls, maybe not for graphics, but for sheer gaming awesomeness.
    The only good is knowledge and the only evil is ignorance. - Socrates
    Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something. - Plato
    It is not once nor twice but times without number that the same ideas make their appearance in the world. - Aristotle


    Join the 4750 Club Today! -President Ogre

    Are you a Noob?


  7. #17
    Yes! mayaman2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Delaware
    Posts
    471
    I liked Half-life and Perfect Dark better than Halo. I dunno know about you but those machine gunning zombies seem to have pretty good AI. they move out of the way when you shoot at them, take cover, and crouch when firing. The game engine is supposed to be resource intensive, that's what it was hyped to be. You should only play it if your computer can can handle it. Otherwise upgrade your graphics card. Its worth it.
    Interested in World War 2? Check out this.

    http://www.notebookforums.com/showthread.php?t=158050 (cheap laptop ideas for the artsy fartsy type)


    Pants are fun
    Finished CG artwork! It may be revisited though

    http://www.notebookforums.com/showthread.php?t=156371

  8. #18
    Better Than You! Sterlin254's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    175
    The regular zombies aren't meant to have great AI. Only the past security guards should have AI, and their AI is very good. They dodge you, they have a good amount of health, they have great guns, and very fluid movement.

  9. #19
    Sucky sucky..five dollah! CrabbyPatty's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    San Francisco area, California
    Posts
    351
    I dont even know why I'm surprised, everytime a very popular game comes out there's that decent sized negative backlash of opinions. It's quite annoying My assumption is people having a overzealous expectation of the game to be perfect to their standard, yet when a couple of features don't hold up to their perfectionist ways, the game automatically "sucks".
    Athlon 64 3000+ / Asus A8n-SLi nForce4 / Dual 6600GT SLi / 19' Samsung Flat Panel (8ms!)
    Audigy Gamer sound / Razer Diamondback 0wnage mouse / Klipsch 5.1 THX Surround
    3dmark03: 14298
    3dmark05: 6380

    There's no place like 192.168.0.1

  10. #20
    Fragged drawmonster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Fort Bragg, NC
    Posts
    164
    I don't like the way Gamespot reviews games either. I don't like Doom 3. After playing it for a while, it got old. I'm not a big fan of shooters though. They should have had someone review it that would have given it a chance. I would give it at least a 9.2 or so, and I'm not even a fan. A lot of other sites scored it high, so it all evens out. Seems like Gamespot always tries to seem special by tearing a game apart that everyone else is giving rave reviews. I personally go to HappyPuppy for all my reviews.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Advertise:
Ads@StrafeRight.com

Terms of Service || Privacy & DMCA Policies || About Us
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.2
Copyright © 2020 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:24 PM.
Design by DanFortH