Gamespy gives Midnight Club 2 for Xbox a 91

Who really cares? Why people get all bent out of shape because of a review is beyond me. Maybe MC 2 really does deserve a great score? We should play it before we get all pissed off because one website gives it a higher score than it gave halo.
 
I'd kinda have to agree with that Halo score..

Although.. I might knock it up a few points considering the polish of what the game did right. ;)
 
I wish there were more consistency in the reviews, but for the most part I think that Gamerankings.com is a decent way of averaging out the various site biases. Across the board, there's no way that MC2 is going to beat out Halo.
 
Agreed. Gamers.com is another one of those sites that typically give lower scores for xbox titles and gamecube occasionally. I've had many problems with review consistency on these websites (one of the things i hate is the "final review score is not a total or average", but there's really nothing that can be done about it.

I just wish gamerankings would critique each of the reviews it links too. That would be an interesting way to fix the problem...
 
Two things

#1, Halo scoring 85 is much better then all the other scores (frame rate, small enviroments).

#2 Australian multi-format Hyper magazine gave MC2 90/100 as well! Saying it has the intensity of Burnout 2! I'm getting in a few days based on all the good news.

And to think the original was crap and only sold 17 copys in the UK on Ps2's launch. :D
 
Jabjabs said:
And to think the original was crap and only sold 17 copys in the UK on Ps2's launch. :D


17 copies? u must be kidding...... the original was OK, not crap, not great, just a decent thing to spend some time on while waiting for the bigger PS2 titles...
where did u get that 17 figure? the game has gone platinum, so i'd say the figure is SLIGHTLY off...
 
Jabjabs said:
#1, Halo scoring 85 is much better then all the other scores (frame rate, small enviroments).
Framerate has been discussed over and over for craploads of games besides Halo. First there is this cold war between 30fps vs. 60fps followers, then there is the question of wether an inconsisten framerate should impact review score if it doesn't have a negative effect on gameplay (which in Halo's case it rarely ever does). Lets not revisit this.

As for small environments, WTF are you talking about? Except for maybe Tribes there pretty much were (and still are) preciously few shooters with larger environments than Halo and even if there were what does this have to do with the score? It's not the games fault if you were expecting flightsim like vast outdoor environments, might as well complain that MC2 doesn't feature enough indoor environments! :rolleyes:

Don't know much about MC2, but if it gets such favorable reviews then maybe that's because its simply a good game? Wether some reviewer/site thinks is better/worse than Halo is utterly irrelevant, they are so completely different games this comparison doesn't make sense anyway...
 
MC2 for ps2 got pretty good scores, in the high 80's... APPARENTLY it is good... i've seen it running and it didnt really appeal to me but hey...
 
Think about it for a sec, Midnite Club 2 got pretty decent scores on the PS2 and a lot of reviewers seemed to have really liked the game. The game was already good to begin with, but they throw it on the Xbox and make a few improvements to the game and an already good game gets even better. If the reviewer gave the game an 85 before there's only one way the review can go, and that's up. It's reviewing politics I tell ya, a massive conspiracy.
 
That's the thing, that normally doesn't happen. In most cases they will give the xbox version (that contained extra features) and improved on areas of the game, a lower score than the other versions. That's where reviewer inconsistency comes in.
 
Back
Top