Average User Score: 8.8Sep 2, 20138/10. This game is an absolute classic, and due to the immense amount of variation in builds and styles, this game is still a load of fun to8/10. This game is an absolute classic, and due to the immense amount of variation in builds and styles, this game is still a load of fun to play.
The graphics suck for today's age, true, but it came out *eleven* years ago. It's still a great game, although I don't like the latter system on battle net in the slightest.
Diablo 3 failed to live up to this game, so I bounced back to it quite quickly.… Expand
Average User Score: 6.2Sep 2, 2013I simply have too many fond memories of this game to give it anything lower than an 8.4, even though the quality of the game is significantlyI simply have too many fond memories of this game to give it anything lower than an 8.4, even though the quality of the game is significantly lower than that.
The multiplayer was straight up standard FPS which was quite fun to play with friends, and I have fueled a ridiculous amount of hours into it. The single player also had a nice story, and the spec ops missions were a lot of fun to do with a friend. Overall, the multiplayer aspect of this game is what makes it good, but over the years, I have grown tired of its standard, strict FPS feel. As my friends got bored of it, I ran out of things to do and I eventually shelved it.… Expand
Average User Score: 6.2Sep 2, 2013Loved the campaign and the cold war theme of it, hated the multiplayer. The online shoot-em-up feel was just so underwhelming due to mediocreLoved the campaign and the cold war theme of it, hated the multiplayer. The online shoot-em-up feel was just so underwhelming due to mediocre graphics and awful weapons.
I also really enjoy the zombies levels, as they're a load of fun to do with friends, and they have nice backstories to them. So, in general, I like every aspect of the game except for the biggest one; the multiplayer.
It didn't deserve the hype, and a lot of people went back to Modern Warfare 2 after playing a few hours of this game.… Expand
Average User Score: 8.0Sep 2, 20138.4/10. Just like The Last of Us, it has a wonderful feel that you really can't put your finger on. The setting is remarkably different from8.4/10. Just like The Last of Us, it has a wonderful feel that you really can't put your finger on. The setting is remarkably different from TLOU, as the game satisfies a 50s-perception-of-the-future-plus-bombs, but how hopeless the world feels is simply beautiful as a setting, and this setting is dominant in both games. With that being said, this game does have a few obvious flaws.
For one, the story. It's a roleplaying game; the story should not be linear, and it should give your character a blank state instead of forcing you into a story you may not want (a.k.a the Vault 101 backstory). The other is the forced system. VATS should be a choice, not something you are forced into. Sure, you don't have to hit "V" every time you enter combat, but you'd might as well, considering that there are no iron sights.
Voice acting was heavily recycled; they should have hired more voice actors instead of having the same guy voicing almost half of the characters in the game. The world size is nice, but it's mostly the same designs recycled over and over again. Fallout 4 has a ton of potential, if it combines what is good about Fallout 3 and New Vegas alike.… Expand
Average User Score: 7.2Sep 2, 2013Hmm....Considering it says just "World of Warcraft", I'm wondering if I should review what the game was, or what it is now. I suppose I willHmm....Considering it says just "World of Warcraft", I'm wondering if I should review what the game was, or what it is now. I suppose I will touch into both a little.
Vanilla WoW was one of the best games ever developed. It has turned into one of the most boring and lifeless MMOs you can find. The 40 man raids, the challenge, and the interactivity with other players was a huge plus, but now, they've dumbed down the game and recycled their ways over and over with every single expansion.
The game is worth $15 a month, and, frankly, back in the day, it might have been worth it. However, at this point, you're paying for a game that is heavily struggling to stay afloat and has become a lifeless bore that is somehow very addicting.
Don't buy it. I've played the game for years, and I have hated what it has become. If you're looking for a Blizzard title, buy Diablo 2 instead. Way cheaper as well.… Expand
Average User Score: 7.8Sep 2, 20139/10. The negative reviews are correct; the game is a lot like a movie that you get to somewhat be a part of, and the action scenes are very9/10. The negative reviews are correct; the game is a lot like a movie that you get to somewhat be a part of, and the action scenes are very underwhelming.
However, considering I'm so interested in the post-war 1940s era, I would buy the game simply for the driving-around-in-1940s-LA aspect. It has solid character development, and the facial animation technology was fantastic. In my opinion, L.A. Noire is like a very good movie that you also get to be involved with, which is totally fine by me.
The story was nice, the way they portrayed Los Angeles was fantastic, and overall I enjoyed this game a great deal.… Expand
Average User Score: 5.7Sep 2, 2013I enjoy playing it, and it's certainly the best due to graphics and feel, but overall, I was disappointed by how similar it was to NCAA 13. ItI enjoy playing it, and it's certainly the best due to graphics and feel, but overall, I was disappointed by how similar it was to NCAA 13. It really seems to me like they're taking the games and recycling them over and over while making them a bit shinier every time.… Expand
Average User Score: 9.1Sep 2, 20139.7/10. A game being my favorite really just depends on my mood and what I want from a game at a given time, but right now, TLOU is my9.7/10. A game being my favorite really just depends on my mood and what I want from a game at a given time, but right now, TLOU is my favorite game, bar none. The combat mechanics are a bit shaky, true, but I didn't buy this game and start playing it for a shoot-em-up style. The character writing is fantastic. The game is very linear but it doesn't feel that way, because you're often left to consider what you need to do next. The relationship between Joel and Ellie, and the world that they're traveling through, is beautiful. The storywriting and setting are stunning. I don't know what it is, but seeing civilization break down and become overgrown and largely back-to-nature once more is beautiful.
And then there's Ellie. I wouldn't call it a character-crush, but rather almost a fatherly affection. She is living example that the state of affairs in the world doesn't ruin everyone; Ellie is basically untouched by what is happening around her, and you very much feel the need to protect her (and her innocence) and keep her safe. And it's quite sad, in a way, to watch her become more accustomed to the world. Not to mention, she (along with Joel of course) is quite well written.
The game was short, and does not have much replay-ability, but I'm on my second playthrough simply because I enjoy walking around and seeing the setting so much.
I understand that there are nitpicks about the gameplay that turn people off the game, and they're entitled to that, but I believe that the game was certainly worth its hype. You can't quite put a finger on how perfect it is.… Expand
Average User Score: 8.4Sep 2, 2013In terms of game enjoyability, I give it an 8.7. It has a great story and gives you a lot of freedom to write your own backstory, and heavilyIn terms of game enjoyability, I give it an 8.7. It has a great story and gives you a lot of freedom to write your own backstory, and heavily improves on Fallout 3's system by adding more perks and true ironsights.
As a standalone game, this shouldn't even get a 5. If you're expecting the transition between Fallout 3 and Fallout New Vegas to be similar to how it was between Oblivion and Skyrim, bury that thought. It frustrated me that New Vegas' weapons, engine, and game mechanics were essentially recycled from Fallout 3. I understand that there were time constraints, but making a shinier version of an already-released game (which is what most of the sports games and CoDs are doing at this point) is not an impressive feat.
Not to mention, the game is incomplete. There are so many bug fixes that are needed, and luckily, most of those come from mods. With that being said, I reach yet another gigantic problem that no mod will be able to fix. The save issue.
The reason why I enjoy the new Fallouts so much is because of the open world and the vast amount of things to do besides the story. Therefore, a playthrough can easily swallow dozens (even more than a hundred) hours. The problem with New Vegas is the fact that, in addition to the many bugs that flaw the game, the saves get bigger. It's not noticeable at first, but after a while, quicksaving will freeze up the game for a few moments. For a while, you won't pay it any mind, but after a few hundred saves, you'll know what I'm talking about. The game will become extremely sluggish. It will crash very often. It will take nearly five seconds to open your pip boy. And it keeps getting worse with every save until you give up on the playthrough. Mods tend to speed up this process, unfortunately, by adding more data to the game.
Overall, I give the game a 65/100. Obsidian should have had more time, so-to make a better product that could have lived up to its predecessor, Fallout 3, but due to time constraints, all they could do was simply build on Fallout 3's system, which is very disappointing for a gamer coming off Fallout 3 and enjoying it a ton.
Buy Fallout 3 instead. A lot of times, I tend to disagree with game critics, but in terms of these two games, critics are correct. Fallout New Vegas is *okay*, but Fallout 3 is a lot better.… Expand