marconelly!
Veteran
Gubbi, PS2 version of Madden is the only one with online play. That's a clear advantage, and much more important than slight difference in graphics. Thus the score difference.
Blinx Review
- Thread starter zurich
- Start date
Mr. Angry Pants
Newcomer
marconelly! said:
@ Online MaddenIs it just me, or does support for a whopping 1-2 players completely defeat the online experience? If I were a game critique, I'd take points away for something so laughable.
Yet another contrived online effort by EA. I wouldn't have payed $50 for a joke like this even if it did come with Live support. 2k3 is 10x more fun to play, anyway.
marconelly!
Veteran
I don't play american football games, but having something that increases gameplay possibilities vs. not having it, is an advantage. If you don't like the game, that's fine, but it looks like many people enjoy it, and it's getting very good reviews.
How many players NFL2K2 supports over online connection? I know it supports 8 players - offline - on the PS2 version, but I don't know how about online.
How many players NFL2K2 supports over online connection? I know it supports 8 players - offline - on the PS2 version, but I don't know how about online.
Mr. Angry Pants
Newcomer
NFL 2k3 supports 16 players, I believe.
This is why Madden should have points taken away. If it were the only online football game in town, then it's pitiful number of online players could be forgiven. But Fever and 2k3 have set a standard for number of players online and Madden fell below this standard by a mile. That = points taken away.
This is why Madden should have points taken away. If it were the only online football game in town, then it's pitiful number of online players could be forgiven. But Fever and 2k3 have set a standard for number of players online and Madden fell below this standard by a mile. That = points taken away.
marconelly!
Veteran
I've just asked a guy who is on the Xbox live beta and PS2 online - NFL2K3 supports 2 connected machines and up to four players on each online (and 8 players on a single machine offline in PS2 version).
So it's not like you can connect 8 different nodes and play altogether. You would have to gather four friends in your house and find four guys on another machine. Madden is only 1 on 1.
However, the point here was comparing one version of Madden vs another, and comparing their reviews. Not comparing Madden with another game, which may have had even better scores with some reviewers for the reason of offering a superior online experience.
So it's not like you can connect 8 different nodes and play altogether. You would have to gather four friends in your house and find four guys on another machine. Madden is only 1 on 1.
However, the point here was comparing one version of Madden vs another, and comparing their reviews. Not comparing Madden with another game, which may have had even better scores with some reviewers for the reason of offering a superior online experience.
another site saying ho terrible Blinks is
http://www.gamespy.com/reviews/october02/blinxxbox/index.shtml
50/100
http://www.gamespy.com/reviews/october02/blinxxbox/index.shtml
50/100
Johnny Awesome
Veteran
Any reviewer that says: "Occasional use of these abilities is required to make it through many levels." is blowing smoke. They haven't played past the first few levels, as extensive use of the time powers is needed for the later levels, not to mention finding the secrets in the early levels, of which there are plenty.
I have two complaints though:
- The camera is as bad as Mario Sunshine.
- Blinx moves too slowly.
The game is innovative, fun, and encourages you to retry earlier levels (lots of replay value). The levels and enemies get more interesting as you go. After 8 levels of play I'd give the game an 8/10, as opposed to the 8.3/10 I would give SMS and the 8.9/10 I give SFA.
I have two complaints though:
- The camera is as bad as Mario Sunshine.
- Blinx moves too slowly.
The game is innovative, fun, and encourages you to retry earlier levels (lots of replay value). The levels and enemies get more interesting as you go. After 8 levels of play I'd give the game an 8/10, as opposed to the 8.3/10 I would give SMS and the 8.9/10 I give SFA.
CaptainHowdy
Regular
the collective list of review scores thus far
games domain - 90/100
IGN- 88/100
Gamespot- 63/100
gamespy- 50/100
gamepro- 70/100
gamers.com 70/100
thats a mixed bag for sure, getting a 90 anywhere means some people are going to love it, but its no AAA title for sure.
games domain - 90/100
IGN- 88/100
Gamespot- 63/100
gamespy- 50/100
gamepro- 70/100
gamers.com 70/100
thats a mixed bag for sure, getting a 90 anywhere means some people are going to love it, but its no AAA title for sure.
Gamespy and Gamespot are usually the sites I trust most. Even though I'm a rabid Square zealot, those two sites hit the nail on the head about my problems with Kingdom Hearts and scored it accordingly.
It's too bad that Blinx turned out so poorly. I'm a pretty empathetic person, and I'm really feeling for MS here
zurich
It's too bad that Blinx turned out so poorly. I'm a pretty empathetic person, and I'm really feeling for MS here
zurich
CaptainHowdy
Regular
I can't say I am, They don't know games, they dont care about games, they dont game period, and it shows.
People at Sony, know games, you can tell, its very rare that a Sony published game is crap, its very Rare that a Nintendo published game is crap, on that Note, its very Rare an MS published game is above average.
People at Sony, know games, you can tell, its very rare that a Sony published game is crap, its very Rare that a Nintendo published game is crap, on that Note, its very Rare an MS published game is above average.
Mr. Angry Pants
Newcomer
I'll buy this game from Babbages or whoever has that 7 day no questions asked return policy. If I don't like it, I'll exchange it for Panty Raider or Deer Hunter.
Personally judging by the complaints of this game, it's your typical, "I played for 10 mintues and didn't care much about it before I started..." review. This is exactly why I DON'T trust "so called" professional reviews websites. Anybody can write a review. I'd rather trust the optinons of hundreds of people that actually have an interest in playing the game, like user ratings at gamerankings.
Captain,
I can't say that I'm surpised to see you make a comment like that. it comes natural to people like yourself. It's a pretty uninformed comments. MS don't know games? ....and sony did before they made PSone? Do you have any idea which company was making video games longer?
Do they? interesting how they don't make all that many games themselves.
Um hardly, sony published lot's of crap titles on thier "first" consle. They even still publish lot's of crap titles. just look at the 989 sports lineup. even still the overwhelming majority of good games on teh PS2 are NOT published by Sony. Any person with an ounce of sense can see that.
I hardly think your the person to trust on that one. You know what get's on my nerves. Fans that slam a game without ever playing it.
Captain,
I can't say that I'm surpised to see you make a comment like that. it comes natural to people like yourself. It's a pretty uninformed comments. MS don't know games? ....and sony did before they made PSone? Do you have any idea which company was making video games longer?
Do they? interesting how they don't make all that many games themselves.
Um hardly, sony published lot's of crap titles on thier "first" consle. They even still publish lot's of crap titles. just look at the 989 sports lineup. even still the overwhelming majority of good games on teh PS2 are NOT published by Sony. Any person with an ounce of sense can see that.
I hardly think your the person to trust on that one. You know what get's on my nerves. Fans that slam a game without ever playing it.
Johnny Awesome
Veteran
Microsoft knows games as well as Sony, but not as well as Nintendo and Sega. Amped, Oddworld, Halo, Project Gotham, Rallisport, and Quantum Redshift are all great games. That's a good hit rate for only being in the console business for one year.
Sony has had plenty of fiasco's, like just about anything from 989 studios. They've improved a lot since the PSX, with games like Twisted Metal Black, ICO, and Mark of Kri, but that's what 7 years of experience gets you.
There is a certain hypocrisy to most of the bad Blinx reviews. How can you dock points from a platformer for having uninspired enemy designs, a poor story and a touchy camera? Why didn't Mario Sunshine get slammed for that?
It's a bad trend in the game industry right now - anything new has a tough go of it, because there is no nostalgia factor or franchise legacy to give the game a boost in the eyes of pro reviewers.
Don't get me wrong, I think that Mario and Starfox are better games than Blinx, which should have turned out better than it did, but the reviews are still pretty off the wall. It's a good game.
Sony has had plenty of fiasco's, like just about anything from 989 studios. They've improved a lot since the PSX, with games like Twisted Metal Black, ICO, and Mark of Kri, but that's what 7 years of experience gets you.
There is a certain hypocrisy to most of the bad Blinx reviews. How can you dock points from a platformer for having uninspired enemy designs, a poor story and a touchy camera? Why didn't Mario Sunshine get slammed for that?
It's a bad trend in the game industry right now - anything new has a tough go of it, because there is no nostalgia factor or franchise legacy to give the game a boost in the eyes of pro reviewers.
Don't get me wrong, I think that Mario and Starfox are better games than Blinx, which should have turned out better than it did, but the reviews are still pretty off the wall. It's a good game.
singling out 989 does not justify 'lot's' or johnny's 'plenty'.
who said they we're? There are hundereds and hundreds of games available for the system(many of whch are good)so publishing a lower % is hardly surprising. But the majority of Sony published games(espescially this gen) are quality material. Any person with an ounce of sense can see that.
The user ratings at GameRankings isn't very useful at all IMO, for quite obvious reasons. The average review scores are a far better guide to the true quality of a game. But then I wouldn't take too much notice of the average review scores either until they have at least 10+ reviews in the database.
But if you do trust the user ratings system at GameRankings then why not look at Blinx's user rating.. which is actually 6.3
Its not from hundreds of people, but it is from 150 people.Johnny:
Maybe because Mario Sunshine had some brilliantly designed enemies and the camera is nowhere near as bad as Blinx camera sounds from reviews I've read, I mean its not as if SMS's camera always falls in a bad possition, its barely any problem AFAICS. Secondly perhaps people don't dwell on SMS's few flaws due th the fact that its fantastic in so many other ways were as Blinx is not? If you have enough great parts to a game a few bad parts (like for instance SMS's cut scene's) won't be worth mentioning.
Some review sites have given it a good score. But from the reviews the game doesn't sound too good. One of the worst things I've heard about the game is that if you don't have exactly the correct crystals for a certain situation your screwed.. that's just annoying. There's quite a few problems mentioned in various reviews that just sound like huge flaws... and I don't hear too many redeaming qualities. Anyone who's actually played this game, I ask this as a serious question, what is actually really good about this game?
Blade said:GameSpy and IGN are my most trusted multi-platform review sites right now.. IGN says 88/100.. GS says 50/100..
I don't know what to think!*waits for th' new EGM*
well here's one of egm's reviewer's opinion:
http://www.gamers.com/game/1157407
Johnny Awesome
Veteran
The difference between me and most of the people that are posting in this thread: I've played SMS, SFA, and Blinx for several hours each. If you haven't, then you have no business posting other reviewers opinions as facts or your own for that matter.
Also: Anyone who thinks the majority of Sony first party games over the last 7 years have been good is clearly a fan boy.
Lastly: Blinx is a good game that falls short. It's an 8/10. Not as good as SMS or SFA, but still a good game. If my opinion changes later, I'll let you know. 8)
Also: Anyone who thinks the majority of Sony first party games over the last 7 years have been good is clearly a fan boy.
Lastly: Blinx is a good game that falls short. It's an 8/10. Not as good as SMS or SFA, but still a good game. If my opinion changes later, I'll let you know. 8)
Similar threads
