New Xbox 360 reviews tonight!(Kameo, Madden, PGR3, COD2)

[therealskywolf]

Kameo looks like an amazing game.

Every 8.7 by kasavin is an amazing game lol (Mgs3 for example) - Gamespot - . The score doesn't tell the whole story, i was kinda like "Hmm...i was hoping higher" but then i went on and read the review, and basically Kameo is an awesome game, wich only shortfall is really it's longevity - Value.

That's a lock for me on launch!

And PGr3 got a 10 on 1up....kinda weird, trowing nothing but 7's and then they give Pgr3 a 10. Did i miss something? PGr3 is nothing but Pgr2 with a new coat paint, kinda like Gt3-to->Gt4.

 

[Powderkeg]

And PGr3 got a 10 on 1up....kinda weird, trowing nothing but 7's and then they give Pgr3 a 10. Did i miss something? PGr3 is nothing but Pgr2 with a new coat paint, kinda like Gt3-to->Gt4.

Either you never played PGR2, or you don't know a damned thing about PGR3. About the only similarities between the two is you earn Kudos. The gameplay is very, very different.

 

[rosman]

And PGr3 got a 10 on 1up....kinda weird, trowing nothing but 7's and then they give Pgr3 a 10. Did i miss something? PGr3 is nothing but Pgr2 with a new coat paint, kinda like Gt3-to->Gt4.

you can even say gt2-->gt3

In fact the thing is :
what do you expect a next gen racing game to be...especially arcade racing.
If the gameplay is great, graphics awesome, all game modes you need you cant make a revolution in a classic arcade racing game.

The thing that can be added for so-called "car sims" like gt or forza is realistic car damage or physics, like gtr on pc( but thats means 1 mistake = race over ), with a lot of tweaking but making it too difficult may reduce the number of potential players.

 

[expletive]

I find it odd that they can give PGR3 a 10 without really delving into the online features, which are a huge selling point. What if all the online stuff is rubbish, is it still a '10' ? I dont think so... Seems a lot of these sites are rushing to get these first reviews out...

 

[Powderkeg]

I find it odd that they can give PGR3 a 10 without really delving into the online features, which are a huge selling point. What if all the online stuff is rubbish, is it still a '10' ? I dont think so... Seems a lot of these sites are rushing to get these first reviews out...

Considering that PGR2 was the benchmark for best Live implementation for almost the entire systems life, I would say the chance of PGR3's Live implementation being "rubbish" is remote at best.

 

[expletive]

Considering that PGR2 was the benchmark for best Live implementation for almost the entire systems life, I would say the chance of PGR3's Live implementation being "rubbish" is remote at best.

Agreed, but dont you think its odd theres no mention of it whatsoever? Thats probably half the appeal of this game to a lot of consumers.

 

[Master-Mold]

Agreed, but dont you think its odd theres no mention of it whatsoever? Thats probably half the appeal of this game to a lot of consumers.

Live probably wasnt functioning at the time of the review to give a proper evaluation of it.

 

[expletive]

Live probably wasnt functioning at the time of the review to give a proper evaluation of it.

Yes i know it isnt which is why i find it hard to believe they could give it a perfect 10 without any access to those features. Online isnt 'gravy' to PGR3 either, its part of the core experience IMO.

 

[dukmahsik]

pgr3 a 10 at 1up!

 

[Shogmaster]

The expansion pack offered better graphics and smoother gameplay all the same.

I've been trying to play PD on my friend's N64 with expension pack in the last month just to get familiar with the series, and I couldn't continue because I got queezy from the framerate......

 

[Powderkeg]

I've been trying to play PD on my friend's N64 with expension pack in the last month just to get familiar with the series.

That's funny since PDZ is a prequel that introduces you to the "series".

 

[Titanio]

PGR3 - 8.8 @ IGN

http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/667/667076p1.html

 

[kyleb]

That's funny since PDZ is a prequel that introduces you to the "series".

Heh, cool, then we might be able to play the orignal with respectable framerate on the Revolution.

 

[Hardknock]

PGR3 - 8.8 @ IGN

http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/667/667076p1.html

Wow, I don't know what to say about those reviewers at 1up.com now. Different strokes for different folks I guess. *shrug*

 

[Powderkeg]

Wow, I don't know what to say about those reviewers at 1up.com now. Different strokes for different folks I guess. *shrug*

IGN seems to have made their biggest deductions for the lack of advancement. Similar AI and similar handling to previous PGR games. But having read their review, it seems pretty fair and thorough. Better than 1Ups, and probably closer to a correct score.

 

[expletive]

IGN seems to have made their biggest deductions for the lack of advancement. Similar AI and similar handling to previous PGR games. But having read their review, it seems pretty fair and thorough. Better than 1Ups, and probably closer to a correct score.

I'll make the same point here, without playing the game online and getting the full online experience, including gotham TV, etc I dont see how they can fully review this game as not being an 'advancement'.

 

[Hardknock]

One thing of note(and I'm just the messenger so don't shoot me ) the 1up.com reviewer of Kameo has been posting on GAF for years under the name "Pfister", from several accounts from people on Gaf he is a rabid Nintendo F@nboy. Now don't get me wrong, that in and of itself is not reason to discredit his opinions, but when you combine that with his obvious biase towards Rare that is displayed in the review you might be able to make a compelling case. Also it seems he got several things incorrect in the review, facts, dates and names were all wrong, which there is no excuse for and throws further doubt into him knowing what he's talking about:

Sean
Member
(Today, 07:56 PM)
Reply | Quote #368
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The 1up review was awful imo (not the score, the actual review). I'm near the end of the game now and I couldn't disagree more. The short length of the review along with all the factual errors make it seem more like a reader review then a professional one to me. Take the first paragraph for example:

It's been a while since the Rare's last game.

Conker just came out a few months ago, and Rare released 3 games total this year alone.

If we were to equate their Grabbed by the Ghoulies to Nintendo's Luigi's Mansion -- a somewhat respectable, but obviously not a flagship title -- then it's been since 2001's Star Fox Adventures that we've seen England's famous coders in their full force.

SFA came out in September 2002, not 2001.

But because there's so many elemental forms, the ones that have decent combat skills end up being used far more often than the other forms that are highly situational. For example, the armadillo Major Pain can curl up into a ball and jump up ramps, roll through tight corridors, and charge up a spin attack. The terribly-named 40 Below, however, is only really good for one thing: rolling down a pair of ice slides that only appear when you play as 40 Below.

The armadillo is called Major Ruin, not Major Pain. As for 40 Below being useless, that's not true at all. He is extremely useful in the Queen Thyra boss fight for example (the ice boss with the many green eyes), and also useful in regular combat.

It seems like the reviewer played the game using mainly 3 of the 10 characters, which is not how you should play the game imo. It's like playing through Ninja Gaiden using just the flying swallow move - sure you could beat it that way, but why would you want to play like that when there are a ton of other moves and cool combos you can do. The fun part of the game for me is experimenting with all the warriors and combining their attacks for some fun combat.

 

[Powderkeg]

I'll make the same point here, without playing the game online and getting the full online experience, including gotham TV, etc I dont see how they can fully review this game as not being an 'advancement'.

I'll make a counterpoint.

Since 90% of current Xbox owners are not on Live the review should focus on the single player, and Live, if factored in at all, should just be worth a single point on the final review score.

 

[scooby_dooby]

Overall I think the review is pretty good, 8.8 is a good score and they do have to leave some room at the top.

I don't know if I agree with teh lack of innovation thing though, I mean for an arcade racer it has quit a bit of innovation:

#1) Cockpit Views. This alone sets it apart from every other game in recent history, being able to actually sit INSIDE these super-cars is a huge innovation for the arcade genre, it doesn't get much bigger than this IMO.

#2) Gotham TV. Thousands of people combined to watch a single race? Online Tournaments with spectators? The ability to shadow, and watch the bext player(s) in the world? Pretty innovative.

#3) Meticulously modeled 4 real life cities to a ridiculous level of detail. Who's ever done that to such a degree before?

#4) Custom route creator

You have to remember this si an arcade racer, how much room for innovation and progress is there really?

 

[rosman]

Nice review on pgr3 at ign.
The only thing i want to know is what's the "next generation gameplay of a racing car". If your are playing with a controller, i really don't see what type of gameplay you can expect ... Playing realistic in-car view with a wheel is really sthg that has never been done on any console before.

i dont see whats the deal with calling pgr3, pgr2.5
Every racing game sequel from a generation to another should be called like this if we follow the way they think. GTA3=GTA2.5 in this case.
You can't make a RR game to be played like GTR on PC ...