Average User Score: 7.4Nov 23, 2011I had high hopes for this with DICE stating how they focused on the PC version and they live up to it. There's very little to complain about, basically the worst thing is pretty long load times which is minor with everything else doing well for a PC game, graphic, sound, gameplay are all solid.
As for the actual game there's only one complaint, the campaign is rather short. Though it's refreshing and has it's own feel, putting you in a dirty warzone usually on foot and sometimes in a tank or jet with the only distraction being how good it can look.
It's all very good but for me who doesn't play multiplayer the price is far to steep for such a short campaign.
Average User Score: 2.4Nov 23, 2011It's an average shooter, nothing really stands out. Infact it's lacking even compared to older FPS games and that's before considering how badly it's ported to the PC.
The campaign is short and the story could have come from a once off comic book for gun ho teens, presuming it could even keep them interested.
Only good part worth mentioning is one point in the game where the player is heavily armoured which is fun and changes things up, other than that there's nothing good to mention about Modern Warfare 3. It's beating a dead horse, that died in a previous game.
Average User Score: 6.0Oct 15, 2011As a longtime fan of the Heroes of Might and Magic series... Heroes 6 gives very mixed feelings but is still fun, while it looks beautiful keeping faithful to the HoMM style graphically when it comes to the creatures and heroes unfortunately it also changes some things for the worse.
It could be compared to Heroes of Might and Magic 4 of the series, improving the game in some areas while detracting from it in others.
For example one of the welcome improvements is not having to hire heroes just to run relay courses to deliver hired troops so you don't spend a lot of the time just moving them around the map.
Seems there were attempts to simplify (dumb down) other parts of the game, seen in the towns and their building menus etc. You don't get to see the building added to the town so it feels hollow and arbitrary, like you're checking boxes rather than building a town so there's no longer the satisfaction of watching your town grow and improve, instead all you get are a few icons.
The campaigns have 20 missions which seems decent but only 4 per campaign which doesn't seem nearly enough to level up your hero and get attched to them. For example by the end of the first campaign after letting the hero grab every available experience point he'd only reached level 9, it felt as if the moment he was start to step out of the small fry zone it was over and you have to start all over with the next.
After 2 campaigns the story isn't great and the writing seems a little childish, they also seem to have a thing for trying to squeeze in a talking bird for some reason. The voice acting isn't stellar but with those lines I doubt any voice actor could shine.
There are a few smaller shortfalls, as simple as the font being to small in high resolutions and it seems like the view can't even be rotated which makes 3D rather pointless, may as well have stuck to 2D and given more attention to the detail and graphic art style.
Even so it's still fun and enjoyable.
Though there is is a dark cloud over it thanks to Ubisoft. If you aren't permanently connected to the internet and try play in offline mode the game constantly rubs it in your face, splattering red text in many places about "offline mode" and even goes as far as to deny you using items or skills because you aren't letting it raise the phone bill or just aren't permanently connected to their servers.
Average User Score: 4.3Mar 22, 2011Seems like one of the times they make a game add a "2" to the name and milk it for all it's worth. Changing the game to suit the largest audience relying on the original's success and in the process ruining what could have been a great sequel to an excellent original. Instead it's a "lowest common denominator" situation, overflowing with violence, sex and pubescent attitude rather than continuing and expanding Dragon Age.
Why they completely change games and call it a sequel instead of just making a separate game is beyond me. It disappoints the buyers/fans who helped make the first a success and you simply can't please all the people with a single game so how about just pleasing the people that enjoyed the original to begin with.
It's really sad when they do this to games just to try maximize profit, it's one of those times you wish a sequel hadn't been made. Though big game companies lately seem to love prostituting and milking something for all it's worth, changing it to suit a "broader" audience which ruins what made it good then give up on it when people stop buying it because of these changes that turn it into just another game.
It would have been better if they simply used everything from the original (gameplay, style etc) and simply added a continuation of the story.… Expand