[PS3] Ratchet & Clank Future: A Crack in Time

Same as 1up...they didn't seem to give it any time. Rush job comes to mind.

 

Actually, it's fairly common for Gamespot reviews to be 1 page only. Length is not necessarily a measure for quality of a review.

 

True, but after reading the review from the sports reviewer...the quality is sorely lacking.

 

As far as the 1Up review it's hard for me take anyone seriously who says they don't see a large leap in graphics from the PS2 version and don't this this game is even pushing the PS3. If the latter is true then

 

They obviously didn't have time to implement any co-op or multiplayer. And it may not be realistic for them to do in a downloadable expansion either, although EA is going to be offering free downloads to add new multiplayer modes to NBA Live and FIFA in November.

Perhaps for the sequel they will have something. R&C has been able to put out a game almost every year on the PS2. With this engine built, perhaps they can look at features like co-on.

 

Gamespot's review score makes no sense... there is no way that the reviewer did not take into consideration the production qualities that are through the roof on this title when scoring it(let alone the super polished gameplay). The way it is scored is as if it were some run of the mill, average platformer... which it clearly is better than average in many aspects. I do not think that Gamespot as a whole has an agenda against Sony but have no doubt that some game critics that do reviews clearly have a bias. I saw such a case of bias against PS3 just last week on the 1up show. One of the female game critics could not give the PS3 version of UT2007 any credit and went as far as to say that it ran about equal to a low end PC!!! Now, I don't know about you, but I at least consider a game that (from every other website I read) seems to be performing even better on PS3 (in terms of graphics) than GeoW did on the 360... how the hell is that equal to a low end PC?

I was happy to see that before the GS review the PS3 finaly had a title with an equal Metacritic score to Geow and Halo 3. Now that GS has reviewed the game about 20 per cent lower than the average it will probably end up equal to Ninja Gaiden Sigma.

 

It's just one guys opinion.

And if he's only given the best game he's ever reviewed 8.4 (or whatever it was) than using his own scale, 7.5 ain't bad.

Should they have given the first second generation PS3 game that was a considerable hit on the PS2 to someone who generally reviews sports games and not someone who has already invested some time in the series?

I think that is where the problem is.

There is a nice easy going interview/Q&A with Brian Allgeier on the MTV website.

http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1572569/20071023/index.jhtml

 

The problem is review score moderation/consistency. The only way to mitigate that currently is via score aggregation sites (since none of the magazine can hit the average consistently enough).

That said, it is fair to criticize an article if you can find anything objectively wrong with it (not just complain about the final score and run away). Mistakes do happen in articles.

 

I think GS' is low, IGN's is high. While people are pointing out the GS reviewer has his own biases, Jeremy Dunham (IGN) is also a huge R&C fan. The truth lies somewhere inbetween.

 

Jeremy is in the ball park..however the GS score is out of left field!

I'm starting to doubt GS reviewers because I do remeber some of this Sh$t played out with Zelda review. However, look at the review scores for the X360 and their throwing high scores like its in style.

 

When do the TV ads start airing?

As of now, the interest seems less than promising.

 

The official release date remains the 30th.

 

I agree.

I don't doubt GameSpot's score simply on the reasoning that everybody's taste in games aren't carbon copies of each other.

If I worked for any mag or website and was responsible for reviewing either Halo1 or Halo2, neither would of received any score north of 8.0 out of a scale of ten. This is one of the few franchise where my feeling correlate pretty badly with the general gaming media and public.

Its perfect acceptable and should be rather normal that a game which scored highly amongst 99% of all media would have some rogue low score laying around somewhere.

 

Preach it.

The review bias discussion is a dead end from the word go.

There are greater injustices in the world than a good game getting a middling score.

 

Amusingly, the R&C disk comes with a more recent System Update than you can actually get over the network right now. Funny, no?

 

I think that's normal (and it's probably a minor or even title specific change). Save PSN bandwidth and $$$. Helps offline PS3 users keep up.

I don't know when the 1 million pound R&C campaign will start (Check their European R&C launch date).

Apparently, US will have a new PS3 campaign afterall (so in this regard, I faulted them wrongly): http://www.ps3fanboy.com/2007/10/24/scea-discusses-new-ad-campaign-for-holiday-season/

Despite these ads, I still see R&C as a device to attract PS2 buyers. Layman do not know who they are although some may pick it up. Portions of those 2 million R&C customers will switch over also.

 

The official release isn't suppose to be until next week. I guess Sony didn't expect this. I believe the only thing 1.94 does is add the option for rumble in controller menu.

 

Actually Sony knew about it. They gave the go ahead.

 

oops, I forgot Sony prints the disks for them.

 

By the way, in their weekly podcast about a month ago, they mentioned this:

Set to run at 60 fps, the title will support both 720p and 1080i. For all you Resistance fans, they promise that all of their upcoming PS3 titles will support 60 fps (and that means Resistance 2 as well). Back to Ratchet and Clank, the title will take up a whopping 22 GB of a 25 GB Blu-ray disc. Even without the localizations, the title couldn't fit on a DVD9.