Average User Score: 4.8Sep 3, 2012GRFS deserves a 0 if you are a fan of the Ghost Recon series. **** butchers yet another game. Health regeneration, snap cover, and otherGRFS deserves a 0 if you are a fan of the Ghost Recon series. **** butchers yet another game. Health regeneration, snap cover, and other casual features to appeal to the Call of Duty audience abound in this game. GRFS plays more like Gears of War than Ghost Recon. It even has a **** horde mode. The multiplayer doesn't even work yet and **** proves yet again that they don't care about a stable release. Paid reviews won't save you this time, you French ****
They should have just called the game Future Soldier. This game has nothing in common with the Ghost Recon series. Where are the tactical maps and squad orders? Where is the magazine reload system? Why are you given unrealistic amounts of ammunition? Why do you sprint so damn fast with all that equipment on your character? Where did inventory management and weight disappear to? Why are there so many scripted events? Why is there hit confirmation? Don't even try to justify the built-in wallhacks with the "futuristic" technology. This is the perfect example of a "tactical" game. The HUD has random **** everywhere, the trailer makes the player look ultra hardcore and realistic, and all the 14 year old COD players run to their mothers and ask for $60 to buy another ****ty ecksbawcks game.
I give Gears of Duty Future Soldier a 10/10. Ghost Recon Future Soldier does not exist yet. This must be some sick joke from ****.… Expand
Average User Score: 8.3Aug 15, 2012Having not run into any of the bugs or issues with controls that most users are citing, I'm giving Sleeping Dogs a 10 simply because itHaving not run into any of the bugs or issues with controls that most users are citing, I'm giving Sleeping Dogs a 10 simply because it doesn't suffer from sequelitis. United Front Games did an amazing job of creating a true spiritual successor to the True Crime series that Luxoflux created so masterfully. For once, developers are not selling out to appeal to the Call of Duty audience. The on-rails drive by missions felt so familiar to their TC:NYC counterparts. While the police gameplay is noticeably different due to the nature of you being undercover, the gunplay feels incredibly similar with bullet time, dual wielding, and the purposeful lack of emphasis on shooting. You don't have some absurd amount of ammunition, and United Front did an excellent job of keeping True Crime true to its roots. The driving feels incredibly similar, especially with ramming replacing manual PIT maneuvers. The hand to hand combat feels just as in-depth as in previous games, with training locations and new moves to learn. I am just so amazed with how they kept all the things that made True Crime unique. You can still store weapons in car trunks, purchase and store vehicles in the garage, customize your player character, and so on. I am beyond ecstatic that United Front made sure Sleeping Dogs would always be remember as the third True Crime game. This consistency is a massive step forward for the industry: Call of Duty cannot ruin every game with a gun in it anymore. We can finally expect more unique, good games again.… Expand
Average User Score: 8.1Jul 31, 2012Enough with the GTA comparisons. Having played every single GTA and Saints Row game, I can assure you that they aren't even close toEnough with the GTA comparisons. Having played every single GTA and Saints Row game, I can assure you that they aren't even close to competitors.
The Saints Row series has really declined over the year, yet everyone hails this game as being a savior simply because GTA IV was too boring. Most of the people who are reviewing this game never played SR1, so they think Saints Row was always this ultra silly, casual alternative to the slightly more serious GTA. In the first game, the whole focus was the 3rd Street Saints. You weren't a Gary Stu, you were just a wild card in the gang. Most of the gameplay revolved around following your Lieutenant's orders. You actually had to use gang members, play the activities, and gain territory. It wasn't simple, nor was it easy. Level 8 Snatch activities, I rest my case. Those were infuriatingly impossible.
In the first game, we had more clothing customization. We had more layers of clothes to choose from. We could zip and unzip outfits, turn hats, put up our hoods, lower our pants, and frankly do whatever the hell we wanted. There was more intricate jewelry, a wider variety of clothing stores, and most importantly of all, colors mattered. Nowadays, respect is nothing more than some **** equivalent of levels in your average RPG.
In SR1, you could rob stores at different times of the day. If you burglarized stores at night, you broke in to the back, cracked the safe, and carried out boxes of goods. You then had to load them into trucks and drive them to a fence.
In SR1, you could buy liquor and joints. Not that getting high or drunk was all that important, but it made you feel more like a gangster and it also allowed you to punch people ridiculous distances.
In SR1, activities had 8 levels instead of 6. The final 2 levels of practically every activity were absurdly challenging, even on Normal.
In SR1, respect and money didn't grow on trees. You couldn't just buy meaningless properties that sit there in a static environment and do nothing. You actually had to play the activities and contribute to the well being of your gang to continue to do missions. In SR3 respect is thrown at me for taking a piss on the sidewalk.
In SR1, there was an actual story worth following. Los Carnales, the Rollers, and the Vice Kings put the SR2 and SR3 gangs to shame. Benjamin King alone is a better character than the combined cast of SR3. The narrative isn't limited to LOL SO RANDUMB kind of humor made for 12 year olds who are convinced that GTA is some ultra silly casual party game.
In SR1, there were stronghold missions. Even these were kept in SR2. In SR3, a stronghold is some useless building with nothing to do in it that sits around and makes you more money to spend on absolutely nothing.
In SR1, your phone was actually useful. There were phone numbers all throughout the game that made Stilwater feel much more alive and real. It wasn't limited to 911, taxis, and other dumb ****
I could continue to go on about all the features that SR1 had that were stripped away in SR2 and further removed in SR3, but I'll end with this. I 100% completed Saints Row The Third in 17 hours and 40 minutes. If you actually think this game deserves anything more than a 6, you must have the lowest standards on the planet. There is no new content to this game. The more serious tone has been completely abandoned for stupid kiddie humor and bland characters with absolutely no development. The whole community is filled with idiots who want furries and ponies and random **** they find online. The quality of game was sacrificed for slightly improved graphics in a boring, static city with no exploration allowed. The worst part is that there is genuinely no content. Once you beat the missions, clear the activities, and get the collectibles, you're done. The activities are so short, I have 100% control of the city before the story even ends.
Saints Row 3 is a bastardization of the previous two Saints Row games. The worst part is, this game is a pile of rubbish BEFORE the season pass bull**** I can only hope this was a product of mismanagement at THQ, and that Volition will do better in the future like we know they can.… Expand
Average User Score: 8.1Jul 28, 2012I find it rather odd how people are complaining about the RPG elements in the singleplayer mode. Warhammer 40k having RPG elements is bad? DidI find it rather odd how people are complaining about the RPG elements in the singleplayer mode. Warhammer 40k having RPG elements is bad? Did people have a lapse of memory as to what 40k is? The RPG elements do a better job of resembling collecting figures, building your army, and rolling dice than having completely uncustomizeable units. I mean seriously...
GFWL is a complaint? It's free. I honestly do not understand why people think it is such a hassle. Aside from the automatic sign in as the game launches, you wouldn't even notice that GFWL exists until you play multiplayer. Making an account takes a minute unless you're handicapped in some regard. I've had GFWL for 7 years now and never in my entire usage did I encounter the kinds of problems people commonly complain about. I get it, it sucks having to use it. I completely agree, but that alone doesn't make it bad.
Retreat is definitely an issue, but this is more of a Relic issue, not a DOWII issue. Relic did the same **** in COH and they realized people were upset by it so they're changing it. I agree, the current retreat feature is completely oversimplified.
Aside from "it wasn't like the old game", the removal of base building can be seen as a good thing. Your focus is shifted completely off of bases and onto combat. This allows for combat to be significantly more intricate than before, but as several others have pointed out, the Orks and Tyranids don't play very uniquely.
If you believe the singleplayer is overly easy and you can spam retreat to save yourself, you must have been playing on Normal. Try that on Primarch. I dare you. Yes, you can complete the campaigns on Normal with almost no thought involved. As soon as you start trying to maximize tokens (>80% of units killed, no squads incapacitated, very short clear time), as well as playing on Primarch, the single player becomes very challenging and thoughtful.
As for other simplifications from the original DOW, these criticisms are completely valid. The game easily could have had more content and customization. The lack of scope in the game is a completely valid change, as it places more importance on individual units and how you use them in combat instead of "amass X number of unit Y, use this build order, rush". Those kinds of "strategies" can be just as repetitive and if you won't admit it you're lying through your teeth.
I could have sworn PLAYING THE FULL GAME was a prerequisite to writing a review.… Expand
Average User Score: 8.7Jul 24, 2012I noticed not many people are capable of writing a proper review, so I had to chime in. Ys Origin is NOT a console experience. Ys Origin is aI noticed not many people are capable of writing a proper review, so I had to chime in. Ys Origin is NOT a console experience. Ys Origin is a PC exclusive. Although Falcom has recently turned to the psp and vita after they lost their PC distributor, they developed almost exclusively PC since the early 80s. The Zelda feeling people are getting should be flipped: the Ys series, which branched off from Dragonslayer, began in 1987. The first LoZ was released in 1986. Dragonslayer began in 1984. The modern day Zelda experience is absolutely nothing like Ys, and serves as a horrible comparison. Ys is traditionally known for its music and difficult boss fights. The composers are from the jdk sound team, which is the remnants of the jdk band from the early 90s. Their primary genre was metal. The boss fights and general gameplay is often cited as using button mashing. Unless you want to die every time, you won't use button mashing. Most boss fights have patterns and tiers, so you can't just inflict massive amounts of damage all at once. Many people also tend to think the gameplay requires grinding. Since levels only affect your base stats, this statement is false. The stages within boss fights do not allow you to do any more than a set amount of damage, so all grinding helps you with is staying alive longer if you get hit a lot. In short, grinding is only necessary if you're bad.
A single playthrough on Nightmare takes about 30 hours the first time through. There are 3 playable characters with different stories and boss fights, so a full, 100% completion of the story could take you 70 or 80 hours to complete. There is also a time attack mode for boss fights, which helps to add a bit more replay ability to the game. For $20, this is a great game that everyone should consider trying.… Expand
Average User Score: 7.5Feb 13, 2012To me, as a Battlefield veteran, this isn't even a video game. If you look at any past game and compare it to BF3, you keep discovering theTo me, as a Battlefield veteran, this isn't even a video game. If you look at any past game and compare it to BF3, you keep discovering the same statement over and over; there's nothing new. All BF3 does is remove features from older titles. BF3 doesn't have commanders, commander assets, large maps with more than 7 cap points, a more intricate squad command structure, more diversified classes, decent server tools, objective based gameplay, fucntional commorose, and options for veterans to play as we have been since 2002. As this is an objective review, opinions on decisions such as health regeneration, sound spotting, 4 player squads, etc are all irrelevant. What has BF3 contributed to Battlefield as a whole? There is nothing new about this game, just stripped down gameplay to appeal to console players and casuals alike.… Expand
Average User Score: 8.1Sep 17, 2011Good game, typical EA **** Game has massive drm and requires internet connection to play, so once again publishers **** over a unique and wellGood game, typical EA **** Game has massive drm and requires internet connection to play, so once again publishers **** over a unique and well executed game.… Expand
Average User Score: 9.1Sep 17, 2011I love the descriptions in other reviews calling Ys antiquated. Who would have thought a game made in 1987 would feel antiquated by today'sI love the descriptions in other reviews calling Ys antiquated. Who would have thought a game made in 1987 would feel antiquated by today's standards.
That aside, it's great to hear how troubled today's players are by its gameplay and storytelling. I'm sorry children, Adol doesn't talk much, and you're not going to be spoonfed what's going on during his adventures. You simply have to pay attention and use your imagination (and read the **** in-game books)
I don't have a button to attack? Deal with it. It's hilarious how the only justification for this system being bad is "it's old".
The level cap is too low? Oh dear me, I didn't know it was wrong to challenge people by putting the stats against you.
If the only thing left to answer is, "Why re-release it?", it's called opening it up to a new platform. To anyone who actually bothered to play it on DS before comparing it, the visual differences are clearly noticable, and the PSP version has the remastered soundtracks/visuals as well as the old ones from the PC-88 and complete versions.… Expand
Average User Score: 4.9Sep 17, 2011Great idea for a game, but my god, the PC porting and DRM was absurd. Ruined the entire experience and reinforced the trend that Ubisoft isGreat idea for a game, but my god, the PC porting and DRM was absurd. Ruined the entire experience and reinforced the trend that Ubisoft is not to be trusted.… Expand
Average User Score: 8.4Sep 17, 2011Deus Ex doesn't live up to its predecessor, but it's still a decent game. PC controls aren't too bad and they're more customizable than theDeus Ex doesn't live up to its predecessor, but it's still a decent game. PC controls aren't too bad and they're more customizable than the average PC port. Works fine in DX11, and post patches hasn't crashed for me at all. Despite all the blatantly obvious choices made to consoleize this game, it still remains above average for a PC game. Day 1 DLC was a stupid choice, and only 2 unique hubs made this game feel rather small. The story isn't terribly long for an RPG (25 hours on hardest difficulty first time), there aren't a ton of side quests, and the game was way too easy. All this aside, I enjoyed the experience and hope that if the series continues the developers return to their older roots.… Expand