Brink

1258

Forum Posts

77

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 4

#151 Edited By ectoplasma

12 years ago

Jams

3043

Forum Posts

131

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#152 Edited By Jams

@xxizzypop said:

" @jams: This game isn't old school, this game sucks. Shooting is inaccurate, the SMART system is largely unnecessary, this was marketed as something that seemed entirely different, little differentiates one gun from another, the A.I. is terrible and rubberbands like a motherfucker, the online games have a disgusting amount of lag, and attempting to get around that by playing the single-palyer 'campaign', which was slanted as something more interesting than 20 second cutscenes for story is madness, as they're just shitty multiplayer matches with the horrible bots. "

Shooting is inaccurate? Shoot straight next time. I use the SMART system constantly. It's what you make of the SMART system. I find myself sliding under friendly fire if I have to get across corridors while they fire. I can get up to higher overhangs by climbing instead of having to run all the way around to find some stairs. The A.I. is about as good as it gets (which isn't that good) in regards to spontaneousness. I've experienced lag but 1 in 10 games.

What I do agree with is the lack of story or a single player campaign. It's just a glorified (barely even glorified) version of Battlefield 2's single player. Which is just bot matches. What I do like about the campaign mode is that it is coop only. So you can do that if you want to play with people and not against them. Maybe I'm the only one who knew going in that the single player wasn't going to be some epic 120 hour journey.

It still doesn't justify the 2/5. I would be more content with 3/5. It's just a number and I don't care about reviews anyways, but like a lot of our worries is that all this unjustified hate towards Brink is going to dwarf the community and that's the most important part of this game.

12 years ago

Deranged

2022

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 5

#153 Edited By Deranged

I hate when people complain about reviews. It's just an opinion. It doesn't mean you have to go by it. Everyone is allowed their own opinion. Brink is a solid game from my experience, but it is far from perfect. if you enjoy the game, then good. There's no reason to go bitch someone out for their own opinion.

12 years ago

Daveyo520

7766

Forum Posts

624

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 12

#154 Edited By Daveyo520

@amir90: He is tired of zombies in general. He also likes the core game better and wants them to spend the time making zombie maps on that.

12 years ago

666

Forum Posts

1627

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 1

#155 Edited By xxizzypop

@Frostwolf: They never really did a good job at establishing this as a purely multiplayer game though. I was misled in to thinking that there was some sort of a competent single player component in this game by marketing.

12 years ago

imsh_pl

4208

Forum Posts

51

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

#156 Edited By imsh_pl

Jesus Christ, why is it so hard for some people to understand that Jeff didn't like the game?

He played the game, it didn't suit his taste. How can you even dismiss his review because he didn't have spend X hours playing the game?

If you don't agree with his review, fine. But don't tell him how he is supposed to review games.

12 years ago

benjaebe

2868

Forum Posts

7204

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 6

#157 Edited By benjaebe

@Jefflarz: There are a couple really big problems with Metacritic. One is that they convert numbers to a hundred point scale, which in and of itself is false. A 2/5 on Giant Bomb or given out by The Sess isn't a 40 out of 100. That's not how they review, and to convert it for the purposes of a final number is misleading. My second problem with Metacritic is that it fosters a certain attitude in the publishing and development industry that games must reach a certain "score" and that peoples jobs or pay are being affected by that. This is a horrible practice that should be stopped. No one wants to take risks because, if they miss that Metacritic score, they might lose their job or not get a bonus they were relying on. My third issue is the way Metacritic has no consistency - in writing a piece on it, I found that they weight their scores depending on where the review is coming from, lending more credence to certain reviewers than others. No one knows this formula except the man who owns the site. The number of reviews and where those reviews come from also drastically differ from game to game - sometimes odd, little known sites are included in the reviews and other times they aren't. While some might compare this to Rottentomatoes, I find the two to be very dissimilar because Rottentomatoes doesn't arbitrarily assign a score to a movie - they say if the review was overall positive or negative in tone, and formulate an average of how many reviewers liked it and how many didn't.

Metacritic is a useful idea, but they've turned into a blight on the industry, no doubt about it.

12 years ago

Commisar123

1957

Forum Posts

1368

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 14

#158 Edited By Commisar123

@freshakiff: Okay soooooo what? Jeff didn't like it, he gave it 2 stars. I didn't enjoy portal 2 everyone is entitled to their opinion even if you don't agree with it. Sure mabye you feel Brink deserves more but you can't say Jeff is "wrong" just that you don't have the same problems he does

12 years ago

666

Forum Posts

1627

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 1

#159 Edited By xxizzypop

@jams: I was pretty duped into thinking there was some decent, or at the very least, competent and enjoyable SP, but that's more my fault than anything I suppose. I wasn't expecting an epic journey, just something that was more than UT3's design. I can't really find any good use for the SMART system, though I dig that you have. The only real use I've found for it so far is automatically leaping over railings and such, but it doesn't really seem like it's as important of a selling point as they were once trying to establish. I'm glad that your connection has been awesome thus far and I'd probably be enjoying the shit out of the game much more if I could get in to decent matches, but I'm on the other end of the spectrum with 9/10 matches being unplayable due to latency.

12 years ago

LordAndrew

14609

Forum Posts

98305

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 36

#160 Edited By LordAndrew

Brink's great. It deserves a 3.

What?

12 years ago

Gizmo

5467

Forum Posts

329

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#161 Edited By Gizmo

@RoyCampbell said:

" @Gizmo said:
" Installed the game on my PC, saw it running at <5 fps on my good rig (AMD), rage-quit and uninstalled."
Maybe you should have bought it. "

I am so fucking glad I ********* this game before I bought, it's just a poorly optimised console port. I have a huge collection of legally purchased games on Steam, but if a game ships without a demo, what are you supposed to do? Blindly trust corporations with your money?

12 years ago

Jams

3043

Forum Posts

131

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#162 Edited By Jams

@xxizzypop said:

" @jams: I was pretty duped into thinking there was some decent, or at the very least, competent and enjoyable SP, but that's more my fault than anything I suppose. I wasn't expecting an epic journey, just something that was more than UT3's design. I can't really find any good use for the SMART system, though I dig that you have. The only real use I've found for it so far is automatically leaping over railings and such, but it doesn't really seem like it's as important of a selling point as they were once trying to establish. I'm glad that your connection has been awesome thus far and I'd probably be enjoying the shit out of the game much more if I could get in to decent matches, but I'm on the other end of the spectrum with 9/10 matches being unplayable due to latency. "

You know what I hate most about the game? The maps. They're too claustrophobic for me. I was hoping well done open maps like you'd get in TF2. As a matter of fact I was hoping for a different kind of TF2. Here's to hoping the developer support is as good as Valves with tons of map packs, new game types and.... hats.

12 years ago

Kyreo

4680

Forum Posts

5544

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 9

#163 Edited By Kyreo

Brink is shit. That's what's up with Jeff.

12 years ago

2403

Forum Posts

220

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#164 Edited By Vodun

@Jefflarz said:

" @Vodun said:
" @CaLe said:
" @Vodun: Metacritic just throws numbers together and gives an average. It's people that give it power. I see no reason to hate the site itself. "
In truth what I really hate is the idea of trying to quantify a game's quality by putting a score on it. It's not something you can measure, it has to be described. Metacritic is just the ultimate evolution of this horror, it's not unlike trying to determine if someone is a criminal by measuring their skull.... "
No, it isn't. Metacritic is a compilation of opinions that have been assigned numerical values to give a quick idea about the general consensus of a game. It's a number that can give someone who might not be dumping paycheck after paycheck into video games, or the other things on the site, a quick idea on whether or not a product is considered to be of high quality. For people who aren't that into video games, it's all they need. Yeah, forcing numerical values on to an opinion isn't always representative of a game's quality and people who actually play games on a regular basis shouldn't make decisions off a Metacritic score alone, but it's hardly some sort of scourge on the gaming community.The real problem is the idiots that act like Metacritic is the end all, it's not. Metacritic should be used to get a quick idea on what the general opinion of a game is, nothing more. "

Hey, if you're fine with only the standard games which fit into mold A43-6D getting any kind of attention then metacritic is the bee's knees. The problem is that games which might drive the development of games forward with some kind of innovation, but lack a little in development for one reason or another, get shafted.

The players themselves also get screwed; You might actually have enjoyed that 6.5 game, but you won't give it a second glance because you didn't take the time to look into it and see the real reason it got a slightly lower score. You would actually have been fine with what the reviewers complained about, but since you only go by the score you miss out.

And your argument that people with not that much money to spend, you shoot down yourself by arguing that metacritic is good for getting a "quick idea". So it's better to spend money on a quick idea rather than actually researching? I would say if you only can afford very few games per year it's even more important you form a real opinion of what is out there, rather than throwing your cash at the game with the biggest number next to its name.

Metacritic assumes every person has the same basic opinions, needs and wants. If that were true then it would work. The problem is that people disagree quite a bit (like you and me).

12 years ago

efman

221

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#165 Edited By efman

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. Write yourself a review, and spell just about anything out you responded to, certainly you're channeling your opinions into a different direction, thereby shaping the discourse of the informed opinion of this particular game. Your opinion, however opposed to Jeff's, is not any less informed than Jeff's, it just makes for a better conversation.

12 years ago

666

Forum Posts

1627

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 1

#166 Edited By xxizzypop

@jams said:

" @xxizzypop said:
" @jams: I was pretty duped into thinking there was some decent, or at the very least, competent and enjoyable SP, but that's more my fault than anything I suppose. I wasn't expecting an epic journey, just something that was more than UT3's design. I can't really find any good use for the SMART system, though I dig that you have. The only real use I've found for it so far is automatically leaping over railings and such, but it doesn't really seem like it's as important of a selling point as they were once trying to establish. I'm glad that your connection has been awesome thus far and I'd probably be enjoying the shit out of the game much more if I could get in to decent matches, but I'm on the other end of the spectrum with 9/10 matches being unplayable due to latency. "
You know what I hate most about the game? The maps. They're too claustrophobic for me. I was hoping well done open maps like you'd get in TF2. As a matter of fact I was hoping for a different kind of TF2. Here's to hoping the developer support is as good as Valves with tons of map packs, new game types and.... hats. "

I think that how close quarters every map is is what really bugs me about SMART. I was hoping to use it to establish some good vantage points or to free run and find better spots, but it feels like a lot of corridors and bottlenecks, rendering snipers virtually useless. All I could think of playing this was, exactly as you said, a different kind of TF2. And whereas we may differ thus far on our enjoyment of Brink, dammit man. I will raise my glass to more fanciful hats.

12 years ago

SethPhotopoulos

5777

Forum Posts

3465

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 8

#167 Edited By SethPhotopoulos

@hurrikenux said:

" @McGhee_the_Insomniac said:
" This game is getting lambasted all over the place. Griffin McElroy at Joystiq also gave it a 2 out of 5. Even IGN, with Brink ads all over their site, gave it a 6 out of 10. Jeff is not some lone voice unfairly criticizing the game. A lot of people have a lot of problems with it. "
In case you haven't noticed, Griffin McElroy is also getting lambasted all over the place by another reviewer. That appears to be one massive mess with reviewers attacking each other over quality of research. Anyhow, my opinion on this is that I believe that games that are made with PC as the primary platform need to stop being reviewed on consoles. Besides the fact that I think consoles are inferior (which is my opinion and irrelevant), games such as this one seem to have been made with PC in mind and therefore suffer on the consoles right after release. Granted at least consoles are now capable of receiving patches, however there are other features that PCs have that consoles don't that make the game better (for instance: dedicated servers and no bots options). Portal 2 was another game where I could not understand why the primary review would be done on an XBOX360, that one may have gotten good reviews but once again it was written for the PC to be the primary platform. There are other reasons I have this opinion, I believe PC players are more stringent about what games they buy and are more likely to look at a review than an XBOX360 player that probably won't look at a review at all unless he reads it in a magazine.

I guess that would be a suggestion I have for this site then (and others), games written with PC as the primary platform should have the reviews done on PC. Imagine if Grand Theft Auto IV had its review done on PC instead of XBOX360, it would have gotten a far worse score based on how horrible the performance was on PC.
"

Consoles have the bigger market therefore reviews are geared for them. But I don't think many reviewers get the PC version of the game to review.

12 years ago

SethPhotopoulos

5777

Forum Posts

3465

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 8

#168 Edited By SethPhotopoulos

@Frostwolf said:

" @spazmaster666 said:

Both Black Ops and MW2 had actual single player campaigns (that were actually pretty good in fact, even if they were short), as well as co-op, not like Brink which just has bot matches. Hell I paid $60 day one for MW2 and haven't touched the multiplayer. Can't say I'll be buying Brink for $60. "
you loved mw2 and havent touched the multiplayer. Why WOULD you buy brink for full price when its basically a pure multiplayer game. It seems like thats not your thing.
The campaign so far is more equatable to borderlands' style, but lacks the things tying it together to feel like its really well done.
"

Nothing like Borderlands. More like Team Fortress 2. Borderlands had shit to do with quests and an open world. What are you even saying.

@jams said:

" @NTM said:
"

I think that you're correct about the last sentence you wrote, making your rant pointless, and I also think you probably don't have a lot of experience with most shooters if you're going to say Brink is a great game compared to others. The reason Jeff has a job reviewing games is because he has the experience of playing a wide array of games to do so, so even if it is just his bias, he probably has a better reason to dislike it more so than you do liking it. I don't really care to stand up for the giantbomb crew, but I know what I say is true. Plus, every other critic hasn't been giving it good reviews either.

You feel like people need to like it, and fear (if only slightly) that the game won't be praised enough to your likings. Yeah, most people feel that way when they like something. My suggestion is, go on a site (or read a magazine?) that gives it a positive review, forget about this one, and be on your way if one persons opinion doesn't fit your needs. I'm just saying, your thoughts have been said a million times before from the start of gaming sites; there's always going to be someone that disagrees with someone else's review (opinion), and I don't think people need to see these types of rants anymore.
"
You're a fucking fool if you think Jeff is more qualified to review games properly just because he does it for a living. I've been playing shooters since the Wolfenstein. I know what makes a good shooter and what is another piece of shit. I may not be able to articulate my experiences in a review, but that doesn't mean I wouldn't know a good game from a bad one. This game isn't deserving of a 2/5. There's nothing really wrong with the game. Everything seems balanced from the time I've spent with it (all day yetserday). I actually started out not enjoying it. but after I got used to the controls I was having a blast.

Jeff should not have reviewed this game. Hell I think most of the crew aren't even into these types of shooters anymore. They don't have the time to commit to it, nor do they want to. It's easier writing a review for a 8 hour long game that everyones going to experience the same. How are you supposed to write an honest review about a game if you don't like the type of game itself? If I worked there and they threw a JRPG in front of me and told me to review it, I would have to decline because I hate JRPG's and there's a really good chance it won't be a good score.

To me Brink isn't a professional reviewers game. Most team based shooters aren't. It's too old school and it isn't instant satisfaction. It's hard to review a game that based mostly on the people you play with. Reviewers need to get in there beat the game and write about it. They don't have months to play with friends and enjoy the game. With something like MW2 you can just run around shooting people and that's the game. Brink, like L4D is going to be a really good time if you play with friends or even making friends through the game.
"

Did you read the review or just look at the score? He justifies the score nicely.

12 years ago

Nux

2898

Forum Posts

130

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 2

#169 Edited By Nux

Once you get a good game going and play with like minded people Brink is pretty fun. I do agree with Jeff that the guns feel off and the grenades don't feel like grenades at all. But I will enjoy my time with Brink and still respect Jeff's opinion which is just that his opinion.

12 years ago

DelroyLindo

387

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#170 Edited By DelroyLindo

I dont own the game or care about the scores, but i do think jeff is a fuck

12 years ago

Jams

3043

Forum Posts

131

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#171 Edited By Jams

@SethPhotopoulos said:

Did you read the review or just look at the score? He justifies the score nicely.

Yeah I have to admit, it was well thought out. Hell maybe he's right and it is a 2/5. I'm starting to think I'm defending the game because it's the underdog and I think it has potential to be a great game.

12 years ago

2403

Forum Posts

220

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#172 Edited By Vodun

@phrosnite said:

" @Vodun said:
" @phrosnite said:
" @Vodun said:
" @phrosnite said:
" The metacritic score is 69% now... The game is NOT good. Move on people. "
Uuurgh, why can't people like you just die? Fuck metacritic. "
And you are an idiot. Brink is not worth the disks it is printed on. "
How do you know? Have you played it? I haven't so I have no idea what it's like, and will refrain from making comments on its quality until I have...What I do know is that metacritic is a fucking scourge on the gaming community, and fucking amoebas like you help it survive. "
Developers need to learn that they just can't make a shitty FPS and sell tons of copies just because it's an FPS! Incompetent shooters should be given even lower scores than they deserve. Gamers should stop buying those shitty shooters. I'm glad that PSN is down and word of mouth will affect the sales of Brink. If developers want to sell copies and charge $60 for their game they better make it great! "

We seem to be having separate discussions here, I'm discussing people talking out of their asses about something they haven't even tried themselves...and you seem to stuck on hating a game which must have at some point murdered your mother?

I'll assume you must have suffered some form of terrible brain damage and won't continue this debate any further out of respect for your loved ones.

12 years ago

SethPhotopoulos

5777

Forum Posts

3465

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 8

#173 Edited By SethPhotopoulos

@Vodun said:

" @phrosnite said:
" @Vodun said:
" @phrosnite said:
" @Vodun said:
" @phrosnite said:
" The metacritic score is 69% now... The game is NOT good. Move on people. "
Uuurgh, why can't people like you just die? Fuck metacritic. "
And you are an idiot. Brink is not worth the disks it is printed on. "
How do you know? Have you played it? I haven't so I have no idea what it's like, and will refrain from making comments on its quality until I have...What I do know is that metacritic is a fucking scourge on the gaming community, and fucking amoebas like you help it survive. "
Developers need to learn that they just can't make a shitty FPS and sell tons of copies just because it's an FPS! Incompetent shooters should be given even lower scores than they deserve. Gamers should stop buying those shitty shooters. I'm glad that PSN is down and word of mouth will affect the sales of Brink. If developers want to sell copies and charge $60 for their game they better make it great! "
We seem to be having separate discussions here, I'm discussing people talking out of their asses about something they haven't even tried themselves...and you seem to stuck on hating a game which must have at some point murdered your mother?

I'll assume you must have suffered some form of terrible brain damage and won't continue this debate any further out of respect for your loved ones.
"

You seem to have the same hatred towards metacritic.

12 years ago

phrosnite

3528

Forum Posts

1

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#174 Edited By phrosnite

@SethPhotopoulos said:

" @Vodun said:
" @phrosnite said:
" @Vodun said:
" @phrosnite said:
" @Vodun said:
" @phrosnite said:
" The metacritic score is 69% now... The game is NOT good. Move on people. "
Uuurgh, why can't people like you just die? Fuck metacritic. "
And you are an idiot. Brink is not worth the disks it is printed on. "
How do you know? Have you played it? I haven't so I have no idea what it's like, and will refrain from making comments on its quality until I have...What I do know is that metacritic is a fucking scourge on the gaming community, and fucking amoebas like you help it survive. "
Developers need to learn that they just can't make a shitty FPS and sell tons of copies just because it's an FPS! Incompetent shooters should be given even lower scores than they deserve. Gamers should stop buying those shitty shooters. I'm glad that PSN is down and word of mouth will affect the sales of Brink. If developers want to sell copies and charge $60 for their game they better make it great! "
We seem to be having separate discussions here, I'm discussing people talking out of their asses about something they haven't even tried themselves...and you seem to stuck on hating a game which must have at some point murdered your mother?

I'll assume you must have suffered some form of terrible brain damage and won't continue this debate any further out of respect for your loved ones.
"
You seem to have the same hatred towards metacritic. "

Hurray for pyramid quoting...

12 years ago

NorthSarge

276

Forum Posts

979

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 1

#175 Edited By NorthSarge

i am enjoying brink. its not the greatest game i have ever played, but its definitely different than a lot of games ive been playing recently. The gameplay can be lacking at times, but the aesthetic of the game is wonderful and worth seeing. Hopefully someone takes the aesthetics from this game and make something spectacular from it.

Also the customization is a cool feature, and i like when games get really in depth with the way a character of gun looks. Don't hate me, but that is why i played through army of two by myself.... i wanted some baller ass shiny golden gun for my large mask wearing dudes to carry around. And while the game was not the most exciting experience for me, i enjoyed the ride.

Brink had a lot of really interesting ideas that i wish were implemented into some of the more popular games, like a crazy traversal mechanic, or a ridiculous amount of customization, or something that isn't fighting in a non-descript middle eastern town.

The game is not perfect and i do have gripes with it: Expanding upon the story would have been a great start, more character development. coming up with unique scenarios for a single (or co-op) campaign would have been a much smarter decision. Also making it a bigger package in general for the amount of maps or scenarios online to play. basically. i like what they had. gimme more of it.

This game reminds of shadowrun. (not the old school ones, the one that came out in '07 on 360 and windows) It didn't get very many raving reviews, probably for the same reasons. It had literally zero story, and a weird online mode with technology and weapon infused trolls, elves, dwarves, and humans. But i played it, and loved it. It was so different from anything else that was going on. Granted i had a couple of friends that got it so i had people to play with, but it was a great game that i enjoyed until my xbox ripped up the disc so it was unplayable :( .

yeah, im done. TLDR: this game has a comfortable niche and i hope it gets expanded because i think that there are some awesome ideas at play here. oh and its like shadowrun.

12 years ago

Mikewrestler5

637

Forum Posts

42

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#176 Edited By Mikewrestler5

Even if the game was good, Jeff probably wouldn't like it. It's gotta have COD in its name in order for him to like it.

12 years ago

666

Forum Posts

1627

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 1

#177 Edited By xxizzypop

@jams: The biggest problem is all of the wasted potential that it has on launch. This game could be a lot of things, but it just doesn't really do itself much justice at this moment in time.

12 years ago

imsh_pl

4208

Forum Posts

51

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

#178 Edited By imsh_pl

@Mikewrestler5 said:

" Even if the game was good, Jeff probably wouldn't like it. It's gotta have COD in its name in order for him to like it. "

lol

12 years ago

2403

Forum Posts

220

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#179 Edited By Vodun

@SethPhotopoulos: Yes, and that hatred is based on personal experience over a long time...as opposed to claiming something is bad which I have never even tried myself.

12 years ago

RIDEBIRD

1302

Forum Posts

25

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 7

#180 Edited By RIDEBIRD

@Gizmo: I did the dirty deed as well. It ran at about 20 fps and looked kinda bad on high . I can run Crysis 2 on maximum (4xMSAA though) at about 50 fps. Yeaaaaaah great job Splash Damage.

12 years ago

Boiglenoight

deactivated-5a46aa62043d1

605

Forum Posts

154

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 3

#181 Edited By Boiglenoight

Haven't played Brink.

Probably don't because the Metacritic score is goddawful.

Jeff's a cool dude.

12 years ago

2739

Forum Posts

496

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#182 Edited By deactivated-5a46aa62043d1

@Mikewrestler5 said:

" Even if the game was good, Jeff probably wouldn't like it. It's gotta have COD in its name in order for him to like it. "

I think you should probably take a look at Jeff's reviews for Battlefield: Bad Company 1 and 2, Crysis 2, Killzone 2 and 3, Halo: Reach, and other shooters that aren't Call of Duty that he gave very positive reviews for.

12 years ago

umdesch4

787

Forum Posts

135

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

#183 Edited By umdesch4

Funniest thing was my second-hand experience of this game last night, which involved trying to listen to the podcast with headphones while my friend's 12-year-old was playing Brink online and literally screaming at the screen for over an hour about all the messed up things that were happening (mostly due to lag, it seemed), and throwing down the controller every few minutes. Seemed like he was so mad at this game he was practically shaking, which is unusual for him, even when having a bad Black-Ops evening.

The funny part was later, when he started telling me what a great game he thought it was, I was like "huh?"

12 years ago

OneManX

1728

Forum Posts

50

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 6

#184 Edited By OneManX

The game's kinda busted, it has potential to be better, but I'm not paying 60 bones for potential

12 years ago

Aether

97

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#185 Edited By Aether

@Vodun said:

" @Jazz said:
" what the hell is wrong with Section 8? It's $15 has a full Single Player and Multiplayer option and it's fun.
How the fuck can you compare a $60 to a $15? Have people lost any sense of proportionality?

Also Jeff is allowed to have his own opinion as much as you are allowed to have your own. I tend to find Jeff's reviews to not follow my own opinions but that's life
"
Some people don't care about money, some people care about fun. Away with you peasant! I must have my lunch gilded, lest it taste cheap! "

Out of this whole thread this shit made me spit coffee at my screen at work. Thanks.

12 years ago

NoXious

1268

Forum Posts

365

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#186 Edited By NoXious

Modern Warfare 2 - 5 stars.
Black Ops - 4 stars.
Brink - 2 stars.

If anything this just proves me that me and Jeff are opposites, so I always approach his reviews from that same angle.
Don't care so much about the opinion of 1 man, chances are it'll never be the same opinion as yours.

12 years ago

Jefflarz

30

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#187 Edited By Jefflarz

@Vodun said:

" @Jefflarz said:
" @Vodun said:
" @CaLe said:
" @Vodun: Metacritic just throws numbers together and gives an average. It's people that give it power. I see no reason to hate the site itself. "
In truth what I really hate is the idea of trying to quantify a game's quality by putting a score on it. It's not something you can measure, it has to be described. Metacritic is just the ultimate evolution of this horror, it's not unlike trying to determine if someone is a criminal by measuring their skull.... "
No, it isn't. Metacritic is a compilation of opinions that have been assigned numerical values to give a quick idea about the general consensus of a game. It's a number that can give someone who might not be dumping paycheck after paycheck into video games, or the other things on the site, a quick idea on whether or not a product is considered to be of high quality. For people who aren't that into video games, it's all they need. Yeah, forcing numerical values on to an opinion isn't always representative of a game's quality and people who actually play games on a regular basis shouldn't make decisions off a Metacritic score alone, but it's hardly some sort of scourge on the gaming community.The real problem is the idiots that act like Metacritic is the end all, it's not. Metacritic should be used to get a quick idea on what the general opinion of a game is, nothing more. "
Hey, if you're fine with only the standard games which fit into mold A43-6D getting any kind of attention then metacritic is the bee's knees. The problem is that games which might drive the development of games forward with some kind of innovation, but lack a little in development for one reason or another, get shafted.

The players themselves also get screwed; You might actually have enjoyed that 6.5 game, but you won't give it a second glance because you didn't take the time to look into it and see the real reason it got a slightly lower score. You would actually have been fine with what the reviewers complained about, but since you only go by the score you miss out.

And your argument that people with not that much money to spend, you shoot down yourself by arguing that metacritic is good for getting a "quick idea". So it's better to spend money on a quick idea rather than actually researching? I would say if you only can afford very few games per year it's even more important you form a real opinion of what is out there, rather than throwing your cash at the game with the biggest number next to its name.

Metacritic assumes every person has the same basic opinions, needs and wants. If that were true then it would work. The problem is that people disagree quite a bit (like you and me).
"

The thing about your standard games, your CoDs, Halos and so on, is they are the games that the mainstream audience who doesn't game that much wants. For them Metacritic is fine. As for your innovative game example, chances are the audience that should make use of Metacritic probably wouldn't care about that kind of game anyways, even if it had a great score. Okami comes to mind as a perfect example of that sort of situation.

And you're exactly right, gamers who buy games on a more regular basis, do get screwed by not doing any extra research on a game despite a poor score. However, this only applies if you're interested in the game in the first place. I'm personally not a fan of team based shooters, they just aren't my thing, So my interest in Brink was relatively low. Seeing the low scores is an indicator that it's probably not the game for me since as someone who doesn't care for the genre it'll be very difficult to look past the flaws. Am I missing out? Maybe. But taking a risk on a game that's gotten incredibly mixed reviews, with a style I don't really enjoy is something I just don't do.

My personal opinion of getting a quick idea is that it's something that gets you thinking and if you're interested in the game you should research it further. Apologies for not clarifying.

And while you're right that everyone has different opinions on games, there are a lot of things within reviews that are pretty objective. Glitches, controls, UI and the like are all things that reviews often point out as problematic causing lower scores. A lot of us are willing to look past these things and enjoy the games anyways, but that doesn't take away the validity of the criticism.

12 years ago

craigbo180

1763

Forum Posts

42988

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 2

#188 Edited By craigbo180

@freshakiff: Jeff said medics healing him was the best thing the A.I. bots did. If you reach the max level straight away where is the carrot on the stick to continue play? Do you actually own and have played section 8? Also like you said it is all subjective, this was Jeff's verdict of the game, and the score represents his recommendation level. He didn't like a game that you did, no big has happened to me plenty of times.

12 years ago

LimpingFish

93

Forum Posts

3645

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 3

#189 Edited By LimpingFish

I've never understood the need to defend somebody's product, especially while admitting it's underwhelming. I suppose nobody likes ending up with a lemon, though. Having said that, plenty of underwhelming games are bought and played and enjoyed every day. Why are people so concerned with this one? At least those who bought it on 360 or PS3 can trade it in.

It seems I'll be passing on Brink, unless Steam drops it to ten wing-wangs at some point.

12 years ago

BabyChooChoo

7106

Forum Posts

2094

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 2

#190 Edited By BabyChooChoo

@Daveyo520 said:

"

Also, what is up with people jumping on swords for this game out of nowhere?
"

Yeah, I'm not opposed to people liking the game or anything, but the whole atmosphere surrounding this whole thing is almost as if Brink is some sort of video game martyr or something.

12 years ago

2403

Forum Posts

220

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#191 Edited By Vodun

@Jefflarz said:

"The thing about your standard games, your CoDs, Halos and so on, is they are the games that the mainstream audience who doesn't game that much wants. For them Metacritic is fine. As for your innovative game example, chances are the audience that should make use of Metacritic probably wouldn't care about that kind of game anyways, even if it had a great score. Okami comes to mind as a perfect example of that sort of situation.And you're exactly right, gamers who buy games on a more regular basis, do get screwed by not doing any extra research on a game despite a poor score. However, this only applies if you're interested in the game in the first place. I'm personally not a fan of team based shooters, they just aren't my thing, So my interest in Brink was relatively low. Seeing the low scores is an indicator that it's probably not the game for me since as someone who doesn't care for the genre it'll be very difficult to look past the flaws. Am I missing out? Maybe. But taking a risk on a game that's gotten incredibly mixed reviews, with a style I don't really enjoy is something I just don't do.My personal opinion of getting a quick idea is that it's something that gets you thinking and if you're interested in the game you should research it further. Apologies for not clarifying.And while you're right that everyone has different opinions on games, there are a lot of things within reviews that are pretty objective. Glitches, controls, UI and the like are all things that reviews often point out as problematic causing lower scores. A lot of us are willing to look past these things and enjoy the games anyways, but that doesn't take away the validity of the criticism. "

True, one would hope that anyone would be interested in an innovative game despite your "hardcoreness" but looking at movies I guess it's not true. A lot of people just like the block busters. Psychonauts is another example; critics love child, retail copies sold to me and Tim Schafer.

Gaah, curse you for being reasonable!! I guess my main issue with metacritic then is how it is used. Taking Brink as an example, it is receiving above average scores (considering 5.0 average) but since it is below 8.0 it is considered bad. I can accept that if you're on the fence about that type of game you might not take the plunge on a non-amazing game...but claiming it is a bad (even terrible) game due to average scores grinds my bones.

12 years ago

Chokobo

1251

Forum Posts

1020

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#192 Edited By Chokobo

idk. I seem to find myself disagreeing with Jeff more and more on his "controversial" reviews, tbh. Dead Rising 2 being one of the games he hated, but I can't get enough of. idk. I'll likely check it out, like it, and know how to react to Jeff's reviews more accordingly to my taste and wish Ryan reviewed more games because I agree with him almost 100% of the time.

12 years ago

OneManX

1728

Forum Posts

50

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 6

#193 Edited By OneManX

@PrimeSynergy said:

" @Daveyo520 said:
"

Also, what is up with people jumping on swords for this game out of nowhere?
"
Yeah, I'm not opposed to people liking the game or anything, but the whole atmosphere surrounding this whole thing is almost as if Brink is some sort of video game martyr or something. "

Which seems weirder considering there are better versions of this type of game available. With Borderlands, Team Fortress 2, and Monday Night Combat all out and cheaper and at WAY better value (manily Borderlands), hell even Enemy Territory is a better pick, it seems crazy that peopel are defending this game so hardcore, when it's not even the 3rd or 4th best class-based, objective-based, first person shooter.

12 years ago

awe_stuck

820

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

#194 Edited By awe_stuck

i would give black ops 2 or 3 stars. i thought his review was fine. i havent even played the game and from what ive seen brink it doesnt look like a game that would blow my mind.

12 years ago

Jackel2072

2510

Forum Posts

370

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 11

#195 Edited By Jackel2072

all right this has turned into a witch hunt!

if you like the game great if not also great. nothing wrong with disagreeing with someone else opinion. but just like everything on the internet it tends to get drag out to a near crusade like level.

12 years ago

Cube

4410

Forum Posts

1677

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 9

User Lists: 5

#196 Edited By Cube

Man, that quick look made Brink look boring. Pass.

12 years ago

SlasherMan

1723

Forum Posts

53

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#197 Edited By SlasherMan

@Jackel2072 said:

" if you like the game great if not also great. nothing wrong with disagreeing with someone else opinion."

This. Seriously.
I have no problem with my gaming tastes not being in line with most of the GB crew, and I don't see why I should care for it to be. They have their preferences, you have yours, I have mine. Who cares?

12 years ago

louiedog

2391

Forum Posts

227

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

#198 Edited By louiedog

What's your deal?

12 years ago

FesteringNeon

2297

Forum Posts

1683

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 2

#199 Edited By FesteringNeon

I come here for the entertainment factor, not really for the reviews. While I respect Jeffs opinion on alot of things, I feel his own personal likes/dislikes are predetermined, and if he isn't doing well with the tools he already doesn't like.. he's set in stone on having that strong opinion. This is not Jeffs fault by any means, it's just the way he is and always has been. I love his input on the industry at large, and he's a funny / good person... this is why I continue to be a huge fan of his, but when it's review time I find myself always thinking in a "Jeff kinda review" and add or subtract a star or point accordingly.

12 years ago

drjota