Revenge of the Sith (Game) - WTF is up with these reviews?

A

AnthonyRoundtree

CAGiversary!
Revenge of the Sith (XBX) - WTF is up with these reviews?

So...

IGN gave the Xbox and PS2 versions a 4.5 out of 10.

---> http://www.gamerankings.com/itemrankings/launchreview.asp?reviewid=537139

Lemme tell you...

I just finished the Xbox version... and yeah... the dialog bits are wanky...
And its by no means a DEEP and intricate experience.

BUT.

It IS a pretty nice 3d hack and slash... with LIGHTSABERS!

all in all...
i mean...
its in the 70 percent range....
not the 45 percent range.

Star Wars fan or not...
ROTS fan or not....

its at least fun.... the controls are MUCH more solid than IGN lets on....
and while co-op is a bust (plays ala the survival waves in the Clone Wars)
the Duel mode is very much a hoot.

I dunno man...

i never take reviews to heart....
but i was simply shocked by this...
i guess we'll see on monday more of the ROTS reviews...
see if this is just IGN ridiculous again...
 
After reading the review the complaints sound valid, forced animation after doing a combo that leaves you vunerable to attack in a hack n slash game just sounds sloppy. Even so I still want to play it after I see the movie.
 
[quote name='help1']I dunno, I knew it would suck after it had no online paly... thats the only good part of SW games.[/QUOTE]

Then you sir have never played the Super Star Wars series. That, or you're a complete idiot.
 
[quote name='Mr Unoriginal']Then you sir have never played the Super Star Wars series. That, or you're a complete idiot.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, I started palying the SW since jedi knight, nothing before that, but everything after that besides this new one. Or Lego or Kotors.


4.5? I doubt its accurate.
 
The game is no where near AAA...but 4.5? Come on! It's really fun to play, yes it gets repetitive but it's still good to pick up every once and awhile when your bored.

Game length is roughly 5-6 hours the first time through.
 
I played the game and I liked it alot. I thought it was much better than most Hack n Slash games (and not just because I like Star Wars). Most of the complaints in the review were pretty off.
 
[quote name='Scahom1']The game is no where near AAA...but 4.5? Come on! It's really fun to play, yes it gets repetitive but it's still good to pick up every once and awhile when your bored.

Game length is roughly 5-6 hours the first time through.[/QUOTE]

cool.

i knew i wasnt the only one....

4.5 is harsh.
really harsh.


its so dissapointing....

fucking IGN runs a TWELVE page preeview about how great its gonna be... (payola?)

then slams it.

ridiculous.

its not that bad.
 
[quote name='joystickz']cool.

i knew i wasnt the only one....

4.5 is harsh.
really harsh.


its so dissapointing....

fucking IGN runs a TWELVE page preeview about how great its gonna be... (payola?)

then slams it.

ridiculous.

its not that bad.[/QUOTE]

Sadly, websites and game magazines do this ALL THE TIME. It's pathetic. Remember the hype Tomb Raider: Angel of Darknes and Enter The Matrix got? I know they look at these games when they are unfinished, but come on now. Stop looking for the exclusive preview/review, be honest to your readers, and stop taking money under the table.
 
I was greatly anticipating this game, if for anything so that my roommate and I could play co-op. I was sorely disappointed to find out you couldn't actually go through the campaign with two players. I'd put it in the 6 or so range. It's not 4.5 bad.
 
[quote name='m1lesteg']I was greatly anticipating this game, if for anything so that my roommate and I could play co-op. I was sorely disappointed to find out you couldn't actually go through the campaign with two players. I'd put it in the 6 or so range. It's not 4.5 bad.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, it's in the 6 range imo. I was highly anticipating this game but at the same time, I had no really hope for it gameplay wise. I recieved it today as a gift and as a gift I love it. Being a huge SW fan, I just love the game. But it could definately be better, lack of online play in the XB verison is unexcusable. The game also has some camera issues and the controls should be much more responsive. It's obviously a rushed job, but let's be honest, were we really expecting anything from it? For big fans this game is great, for a regular gamers, somewhere between high 5s to mid 6s.
 
[quote name='Scahom1']Sadly, websites and game magazines do this ALL THE TIME. It's pathetic. Remember the hype Tomb Raider: Angel of Darknes and Enter The Matrix got? I know they look at these games when they are unfinished, but come on now. Stop looking for the exclusive preview/review, be honest to your readers, and stop taking money under the table.[/QUOTE]

To be fair, not all magazines and sites do this. EGM routinely puts off reviewing a game, even if it means they will be a month late with it, unless they have a retail version. They did this with Tomb Raider: Angel of Darkness, since you mention it. I believe Gamespot also does this, as many times a review for a game won't be up until the week after it comes out.
 
[quote name='Jrunt20x']It's obviously a rushed job, but let's be honest, were we really expecting anything from it? [/QUOTE] I actually was expecting quite a bit because I love the developer (the Collective), they have the best melee combat in any game IMO (Indiana Jones & the Emperor's Tomb and Buffy the Vampire Slayer). I was excited to see how they would handle lightsaber combat, unfortunatly while I like the game alot it did not live up to their other works.
 
[quote name='BigSpoonyBard']To be fair, not all magazines and sites do this. EGM routinely puts off reviewing a game, even if it means they will be a month late with it, unless they have a retail version. They did this with Tomb Raider: Angel of Darkness, since you mention it. I believe Gamespot also does this, as many times a review for a game won't be up until the week after it comes out.[/QUOTE]

Well I didn't mean to criticize every magazine, and i'm glad you pointed out EGM doesn't do this, because they happen to be my favorite gaming magazine. And I know when it's time to review said game, they trash it, but when they tell us how good it is month after month in the preview section, then put out a review 2 months after it's released...you just know some people got burned (or tricked?) into buying it.
 
[quote name='Follandboy']I hate every last star wars game. They all stink.[/QUOTE]

That's not true, RSII is one of the best star wars games and just shooters in general. That game is amazing. There are many good SW games, Dark Forces series is awesome, and as Mr. Unoriginal said the Super SW games are great. Sure there are tons of crappy ones (masters of teras kasi I'm looking at you!) but there are also amazingly good SW games as well. SW: Epi III the game just didnt live up to potential but not all of them are bad.
 
This game deserves a 4.5. Well, maybe 5.5 Just becuase it's a hack and slash with lightsabers doesn't earn it a much better score. It's about time reviewers started really reviewing things. Lately, it seems like people have just been handing out top notch score for bargin bin shit.
 
[quote name='Mr Unoriginal']Then you sir have never played the Super Star Wars series. That, or you're a complete idiot.[/QUOTE]

That's it !!

I started playing this game and I kept thinking...
"This game feels just like another game I've played before... "

Super star wars, but with 3-d rendered graphics! It's not horrible, but it should be a $19.99 title right out of the box. There's nothing special here except movie spoilers. A general rip-off for $50.
 
I have the game. And I disagree with the review. I think that it is an above average game. It has good gameplay. I love the controls. They lightsaber animations are just great. Have you e seen the review at Gamespy.com they loved the game. Thos are my two cents.
 
[quote name='Scahom1']Game length is roughly 5-6 hours the first time through.[/QUOTE]

Can you imagine paying $49.99 for a licensed game that, regardless of its review scores or inherent quality level, is finished and complete in a mere 5-6 hours? That's a whole lot of cash for a game you won't be playing much after the initial run through.
 
Rented it...For me, I consider a 5 to be maybe just a bit less than average, so 4.5 fits this title well. It's an average 3D hack'n'slash layout with some major flaws IMO. First off it was way too easy, I beat it in about 5 hours which was only about 3 and a half days from a week rental. The controls and gameplay are simplistic which is good, but like the IGN mentioned, the melee combat gets cheap hits because of the combo animation. The levels are repetitive and so is the play, I had some slow down too but I dunno if that was everyone. The audio is below average...sound effects are nice, but the recycled music gets kinda old. Then there's the voice acting...I didn't it know it was possible to find worse acting than Hayden but they did. They couln't even get the real actors in the studio for such a short game? It's just plain awful IMO. Oh and the multiplaer duel thing sucks when it had so much potential. The game as a whole has graphics going for it and some interesting moves like the force stuff and so on, but as a whole it's just below average IMHO.
 
[quote name='markholladay']also, it is not the greatest. I am not such a fanboy to say that. Bu 4.5 is a little harsh I think[/QUOTE]
holy crap... is that a robot with double lightsabers?
 
[quote name='Mr Unoriginal']Then you sir have never played the Super Star Wars series. That, or you're a complete idiot.[/QUOTE]
great games, imo there are many good sw games though:

star wars chess
the racer series
shadows of the empire
the rouge squadron series (i believe battle for naboo fits in here as well)
the starfighter games
the kotor games
the dark forces series
the old tie and x-wing games
i hear good things about the new lego game

there are a whole bunch of good games, maybe nothing that exceptional for an average gamer, but for a star wars fan all of these are great...also mark hamil is in wing commander 3+4, 2 of my favorite space shooters ever, worht a look.
 
For the mainstream reviewers, if it has no GTA elements than the game must suck.

Look at the media criticism Call of Duty received on the consoles, "a rail shooter"? Since when did all FPS games have a requirement to model themselves on GTA? And games that receive lower scores for having no online component? Online gaming is not mandatory -- sures its desirable but not manadatory.
 
Okay...i do agree the IGN review is a little harsh. The review doesn't mention alot of aspects of the game. Its like the reviewer was expecting the 2nd coming with this game and was disappointed (kinda like seeing THE PHANTOM MENACE).

The game is not that bad.....not worth 50$......maybe 30$ (which I got it for with a Best Buys Reward Zone Coupon, and the 10$ Gift Card last week.

It is a Lightsaber game...so if you like lightsabers you will like it. It is very unforgiving in the combos....but I have been using alot of force powers more than lightsaber...its just fun.

The Multiplayer Versus is the selling point of this game.

At least it is not as bad as STAR WARS: MASTERS OF TERAS KASI....possibly the least responsive fighter.....EVER!!!
 
people treat this game far too harshly. I have fun playing it, and when you have fun, shouldn't that be all that counts?

i'll admit in my times i've played alot of games that seem to have great production values, but somehow feel shallow and lost and unintresting.
 
Did anyone even mention the Jedi Knight series? Those were great on PC. Nothing like putting in the decapitation code on Outcast and chopping storm troopers into 10 pieces.

On the review side...4.5 is maybe a little too generous.

Short Gameplay
Repetitive
Nothing new in terms of concept (This is Lord of the Rings: TT)
 
[quote name='joystickz']It IS a pretty nice 3d hack and slash... with LIGHTSABERS! its in the 70 percent range.... not the 45 percent range.[/quote]

If it didn't have "Star Wars" on it, would you still think it was a 70%?

troy
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top