clank543

Lost Planet is a strange series to continue after the last one to me. I hope it turns out well, but i would have rather seen a new IP

I'm really enjoying Mass Effect 3 so far after about 7 hours. All of this controversy about the ending has really made me want to finish it faster, though. I'm excited to see what everyone's so mad about.

Downloading the Fourth Wall now. Platformers have always had a stranglehold on my life. If I can't jump to a ledge, I am damn well not interested!

Hell yeah, I'm down for some SSX! Psn- clank543

Well, for me, I need to know the history of the reviewer and what they like. For instance, a 5/5 for Patrick on this site for an action adventure game usually means I wouldn't like it as much as he did. A 5/5 for a racing game from Jeff, however, means I will usually love it. Same thing goes for other reviewers on this site. That's why I only stick with one site for reviews, and if they don't review a game I'm interested in, they usually at least do a quick look for so I can get their opinions from there. The problem is that each person has a different definition of what each score means and unless you know the likes/dislikes of that person there is no way to properly judge how a review fits for you personally.

Totally agree with Manveer. Uncharted 3 was my personal GOTY, and I think it got undeservedly bashed on several websites because of what it is. If I'm sitting over at Naughty Dog and read the Eurogamer review, I would just be thinking to myself, "Well, he says that he doesn't like what we set out to do. There's not really too much about the quality of what we did or how it is performed, but basically he's using our game as a platform for his problems with the game industry as a whole. Thanks!"

Personally, I don't care about the score because my score would be different and I'm fine with that. However, it's the way he used the game as a personal punching bag just because it does a lot of things that the industry has become acquainted to over the years, all be it very well.

I don't have time to play many video games anymore, and while I can see video game journalists getting bored of the same stuff over and over again, I don't because I usually only get to play 1 game a month or every 2 months. I'm never going to play Skyrim or Dark Souls because it doesn't fit into my lifestyle or schedule. And for me in 2011, if I'm looking for a 10 hour game with some fun, easily accessible multiplayer, and a tight, action packed campaign, Uncharted 3 was the best decision for me this year.

The problem with some reviews for this game is when they comment on the linearity. Naughty Dog purposefully makes the game very tight in pacing and linear because they are telling a story and providing an experience tailored for the player, just like a movie would. Over the last few years, linearity has all of the sudden become an awful word in the gaming industry and I don't really understand why people are taking points off of games for this trait. If a developer purposefully tries to execute something, but the execution has flaws, it's understandable to rate it lower. However, when a developer achieves what they were going for and the reviewer doesn't agree with it or enjoy it, should that really lower the score in what should strive to be an objective review?

Catwoman is the opening of the game. How do you make the opening of the game only accessible through an online pass? What kind of thinking is that? What they should have done is just make Robin the online pass character for the challenges.