Yep.

That's a shame.

7.9's a decent score. I was hoping for higher, but its still shows they think its a great game.

7.9 is not a "Great" game, by any standards. 

That's like a C+, man.

I was only going to buy this game if it was phenomenal due to my insufficient fundings for my dire gaming needs.

So I guess it's a no-go on Mercs 2, I did enjoy the first one though.

"7.9 is not a "Great" game, by any standards. 

That's like a C+, man."

Decent review. Retards can ignore it like they ignore many other great games by using metacritic to determine purchases. Those people are pathetic and I feel sorry for them.

"Sir_Ragnarok said:

"7.9 is not a "Great" game, by any standards. 

That's like a C+, man."

I would say anywhere around the 8 mark is a great game. the 9 mark and its a fantastic game, and 10 its mind blowingly good."

After reading the review, it sounds like they really really enjoyed the game, but there were allot of bugs and problems that brought the score down. Still the line "I can't stress enough just how much fun it is playing in this destructive sandbox." definitely keeps this on my must buy list.

Not trying to defend this game at all.  I only plan on renting it. 

That said, this topic is a perfect example of why numbers shouldn't be attached to reviews.  They admit how much fun they had with the game, and describe the problems they had with it.  If you didn't want to have anything to do with it, I doubt this will convince you.  If you were blown away by pictures and videos of it, it may have settled your hysteria into a reasonable curiosity.

God forbid IGN gives it a 7.9!  What were they thinking?!

"I am sick of the "xx is a good score" deal. If a game is rated under like 8.5 it's usually not worth buying."

"MattyFTM said:

"Sir_Ragnarok said:

"7.9 is not a "Great" game, by any standards. 

That's like a C+, man."

I would say anywhere around the 8 mark is a great game. the 9 mark and its a fantastic game, and 10 its mind blowingly good."

Well, that's different, but your original quote is "they think its a great game," which, clearly isn't true.  It's good, but not great."

Just to get things clear, because I know conclusions can be jumped to rather easily, and distinctions take a little more effort, I'm not defending the review, and I'm not disputing some of you will enjoy this game.

I'm simply pointing out that the statement "they think its a great game" is wrong. 

By the way, I loved the film Speed Racer, so if that doesn't make me anti-critic, I don't know what does.

just to further the "fallacy of the ten point scale" argument.

do you think if this game was given an 8 rather than a 7.9 (thats 1 tenth of a point just to be clear) you guys wouldnt be dismissing it as a bad game? Not to say that you all are. You know what i mean.

7 is like the motherfucking kiss of death. An 8 out of ten is a pretty decent score for a game. This is 7.9 and everyone has immediately assumed its a disspointment (including hilary goldstein the reviewer.) It might as well just be a straight 7 for the way it is interpreted.

I only need one reviewer to determine whether I should outright buy a game: Me.

I actually read the reviews and could care less about the numbers. If the reviewer wants to point out problems, I'm all for it. Whether or not they can make that properly justify their low or high scores is another story. This is why the GiantBomb reviews are so appealing to me, personally: 1-5 stars is a simple system that's easy to understand that doesn't fuel fanboy debates. 1 is bad, 2 is pretty bad, 3 is good, 4 is great, and 5 is amazing. When you get into 7.9 and stuff like that, you're basically saying, "I really can't decide what I think about this game." Give it a 7.5 or an 8.0 if you have to, but don't try to justify a 7.9.

That's just my opinion on it, though. I haven't played this game yet, clearly, but I never expected too much from it. The original was a good game, but I wouldn't have bought it. I rented it and got everything I needed out of it, so that's what I expect to do with the sequel.

I just read the whole review and it looked like fun but has a lot of bugs.  Probably still gonna get it still.

"Decent review. Retards can ignore it like they ignore many other great games by using metacritic to determine purchases. Those people are pathetic and I feel sorry for them."

its just the reviewers oppinion, you might find it mind blowing - just see the review as a........heads up if you will about what you may or maynot think of the game.

take Halo for instance - Number 1 brill, number 2......was okay......number 3, Total shite - Yet your now gonna flame me and say you really like number3!
It's our oppinions! :P

if you guys want to know what the game is like before you rent / buy check out my BlogTV channel - 5th sept (Hopefully the 4th) - i'll be showing Mercs 2 - me and my mate are going to be doing the Co-Op mode :D
Subscribe and blogtv will keep you updated :)

"7.9 is not a "Great" game, by any standards. 

That's like a C+, man."

"7.9 is not a "Great" game, by any standards. 

That's like a C+, man."

I'm renting it (have no choice now since Gamefly already shipped it).  It seemed good in the IGN video review.  You can't really judge it off the final review score, you should really read the whole review.  If you look at the review the thing that brought the score down was sound which they gave a 5.0 but they gave presentation a 8.0, graphics a 8.0, gameplay a 7.5, and lasting appeal a 8.0. 

From the review.  It sounds like it isn't a 9/10 kind of game but still worth playing.

Decent score I guess, oh well I'm still going to rent this to at least check it out.

"Sir_Ragnarok said:

"7.9 is not a "Great" game, by any standards. 

That's like a C+, man."

Really. A score of practically an 8 = C+ ? I think you may want to recheck your math on that one."

Well I'm waiting to see more reviews, as well as Giant Bomb's review.  Deciding whether to buy or not from one single review isn't a great idea.  Just wait for more to come out.

I'm perfectly happy with a 7.9. Plus 1up gave it a B+.

That's actually a good score.

There's just something about this game though...the running...

I was expecting as much. The first one had horrific bugs as well, I'd be shocked if this one didn't.

"Sir_Ragnarok said:

"7.9 is not a "Great" game, by any standards. 

That's like a C+, man."

it's not.. what the hell is wrong with you people.. think there is a reason why giantbomb uses a 5 skala.. since nobody cares if it's not between 7-9 >_>..  get over it, this game would get 3 or 4 here.. which is either 6 or 8 on this site, directly translated.. however 3/5 is a great score.. so 80/100 is a damn fine score."

"Kush said:

"Sir_Ragnarok said:

"7.9 is not a "Great" game, by any standards. 

That's like a C+, man."

Really. A score of practically an 8 = C+ ? I think you may want to recheck your math on that one."

lolwut. 7.9 is 79% and that's a C+"

"Sir_Ragnarok said:

"7.9 is not a "Great" game, by any standards. 

That's like a C+, man."

Really. A score of practically an 8 = C+ ? I think you may want to recheck your math on that one."

"Kush said:

"Sir_Ragnarok said:

"7.9 is not a "Great" game, by any standards. 

That's like a C+, man."

Really. A score of practically an 8 = C+ ? I think you may want to recheck your math on that one."

I can check your math, if you'd like. 

7.9 literally translates to 79%. 

C+, hombre.  It isn't an 8, and therefore misses B-."

i dont really care about reviews mercs looks like fun and i enjoy blowing stuff up besides i never listen to people when they say somethings not good i like to be the judge of that myself 

"DarthMaul said:

"Kush said:

"Sir_Ragnarok said:

"7.9 is not a "Great" game, by any standards. 

That's like a C+, man."

Really. A score of practically an 8 = C+ ? I think you may want to recheck your math on that one."

lolwut. 7.9 is 79% and that's a C+"

maybe schools are harder now than they used to be, but 79 used to be a B- for me."

Its almost an 8...its a fine game. Its nothing amazing, by its a good game. If it was a 7.5 or lower, it would be way worse than even a 7.9 in terms of what they mean the quality of the game is.

That is a bummer. I thought this game was going to be amazing...

  "Oh no, you DIDIN'!"

-Evan

It's a solid game, it lacks a bit graphically, but all in all it's fun.

I would agree with this review, but the game is still awesome.  Just because it's not rated a 10 it won't stop me from enjoying it as much as I am.

And if they scored it an 8.0, what would people say?

A 0.1 point difference means little... it's a good game and worth checking out if you're into those kinds of games.

"Not trying to defend this game at all.  I only plan on renting it. 

That said, this topic is a perfect example of why numbers shouldn't be attached to reviews.  They admit how much fun they had with the game, and describe the problems they had with it.  If you didn't want to have anything to do with it, I doubt this will convince you.  If you were blown away by pictures and videos of it, it may have settled your hysteria into a reasonable curiosity.

God forbid IGN gives it a 7.9!  What were they thinking?!"

"And if they scored it an 8.0, what would people say?

A 0.1 point difference means little... it's a good game and worth checking out if you're into those kinds of games."

I am kind of dissappointed to see the game score so low.

I'm playing through it right now and i can sum it up in 3 words. fun but unpolished.