Actually, I don't think the reviewer is a fan of MGS4. The article does not read like someone enthused with playing the game. It outlined the structure of the game, and established the author's neutrality (by describing why people may hate/love the game from several aspects). Problem is...
Exactly. If you love a game, you'd be inclined to talk about the details, or find ways to convey the feelings without violating the NDA, or spoil the game.
One way to interpret this is, if you're not so hot about MGS series, it's an 8. If you're a MGS fan, it's very close to 10.
Oh... I think people left out MGO because Kojima Studio is still working on the enhancements/fixes after the beta. The reviewers probably didn't get to play it yet.
EDIT: Whoops, started this before Shifty's post.
I have no problems with Eurogamer giving the game an 8 but they need to talk about the gameplay more.
Exactly. If you love a game, you'd be inclined to talk about the details, or find ways to convey the feelings without violating the NDA, or spoil the game.
Scott Arms said:Different reviewers. If you take a away a reviewers right to come up with their own score, then what's the point? If the reviewer says, I think MGS4 is an 8/10, what's the editor supposed to do? Can they say, "Well, Bill gave Grid a 9/10, and I think MGS4 is probably a better game, so you'll have to raise your score"? Is that what you really want?
One way to interpret this is, if you're not so hot about MGS series, it's an 8. If you're a MGS fan, it's very close to 10.
Oh... I think people left out MGO because Kojima Studio is still working on the enhancements/fixes after the beta. The reviewers probably didn't get to play it yet.
EDIT: Whoops, started this before Shifty's post.
Last edited by a moderator: