Mageman

I really like it, it could be a bit better imo but it's pretty damn decent and quite eerie at times. But I'm not so sure how long they can keep this going, a series with such a premise can not be forcefully stretched out or too long.

No one gov. should have all that power...

I am fairly satisfied with my HD555 headphones. It has a very good music listening : video gaming ratio for my needs. What ever you do DO NOT BUY a headset.

I watched the first episode and I didn't like it. But I guess I will give it another go in the future.

Both

@Sammo21 said:

@Mageman: Maybe you should read reviews instead of just looking at a number.

Of course I do read them and obviously the things are reviewed separately, but maybe the number should still be an important part, a conclusion ? You will never get the full amount of points in a mathematics exam on a problem if your answer is wrong. Obviously you could now start this with ''it's just a number, numbers can't accurately paint you the opinion of person x'' etc

@Sammo21 said:

@Mageman: No matter your feelings its pointless and proves another thing: people use review scores for the wrong thing. Look at this and tell me if looks like battlefield 3 suffers too much from having a shit single player game... apparently not.

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/battlefield-3/critic-reviews I would argue that the game scores maybe should be lower if the game's single player is really that bad.

At this point I don't really care about BF3 anymore.

@Sammo21 said:

@Mageman: No, that is not the same thing...fuck are you really serious, lol. You just got 2 presents, two different boxes, bought seperately, and having nothing to do with each other. If someone gives you a box of chocolates that has both SHIT and delicious chocoliate in it guess what...that box still has shit in it. Was it seperate from the chocolate, sure...can you throw it out without having the shit effect your chocolate...sure, but in the box and commercials still advertised that box of chocolate as having AWESOME CHOCOLATE AND NOT SHIT...and guess what you got: awesome chocolate and shit. You need to learn how to compare and contrast better. I learned than in grade school.

But if the chocolate is really good and someone asks you how good it tastes your answer would be ''it tastes great man, I really liked x and x about it but also including in the package there is shit, be sure to throw that away and not it eat though.''

Opinion about the chocolate =/= opinion about the package. The best thing for reviews would be to review the SP and MP separately, for all games, which means scoring it separately as well. And below there could also be a score of the complete package in which case I would not mind x game of getting a lower score because of having a shit y component, but as reviews stand now the shit actually attaches itself on the chocolate which I don't agree with.

@Sammo21 said:

@Mageman: it's been discussed for 6 pages and clearly you are trolling at this point. When you go to buy Battlefield 3 you get 1 box containing the product. That is what is being reviewed. If you don't like the fact that DICE made a shit single player game, I am very sorry for you. Your argument is illogical and cannot be explained further without making you sound like the equivalent of a "I believe when discussing facts you should ignore the facts you don't like".

Look I understand you, but I disagree with you, it seems however that you lack the insight of why I am disagreeing with you. Again, this might sound a trollish but really, it is not. Let's assume you get a present and inside of it it's a box of chocolates. Now let's assume the next day you get a different present, and inside of it is a box of chocolates the same as in that one, and one smaller box of chocolates which is not that good. You decide to throw that other box of chocolates away, but in the end you still have the same present, the shit can easily be ignored/discarded. And if someone asked me which present was better, I'd answer the second one because it had more, even if that addon box was not that good.

@Sammo21 said:

@Mageman: I'm really glad you don't review games for a living. Also, I'm not the one using the word rape in the context of people disagreeing with you. I am going to request to have this thread locked; either he is trolling (poorly) or it's meant to be some sort of flame bat.

And I'm disappointed that you do not want to discuss this further. Why would you flame me in the first place btw ? Why ''flame bate'', why not just say '' I disagree '' and proceed to discuss it.

@Sammo21 said:

@Mageman: No it's not the same...I really don't understand why this concept is so hard for you to grasp. No one has ever said "I am giving this game a lower or higher score because a game doesn't have a multiplayer or single player game". Honestly, here are the bullet points

1. You are possibly trolling and making a poor attempt
2. You can't understand the basics of video game reviewing, even when a review posts complete, concise, and clear thoughts on the game they are reviewing
3. You are upset that a game you love, or want to love, has any sort of negative thing associated with it all no matter how illogical your arguments become
4. You can't clearly, or logically, make an argument about your feelings as it becomes clear that your argument devolves into nonsense. An example being something you said a few posts ago.
- Your (illogical) Question: "Again, should Assassin's Creed II be considered a bad game because it has NO multi player ?"
- My (logical) and truthful answer: No, and it never was considered in a review. I'll explain further: Assassin's Creed 2 was reviewed positively across the board. The game was single player only and no reviews have mentioned multiplayer. When Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood was released it contained a single player game and a multiplayer game. Both modes were reviewed positively and that factors into the score. A+B=C, basically. Now, had you made an argument or complete thought that was something along the lines of "I wish game reviewers were more consistent when reviewing games that have single and multiplayer modes that are drastically different in quality to each other. An example? Metal Gear Solid 4 (as someone mentioned earlier) has both a single and multiplayer component, but I can't honestly see a score being effected negatively because of a decent multiplayer (even though the hoops to get to the multiplayer were incredibly dumb and frustrating). Your argument is also made illogical and invalid AGAIN because all review scores of the game Battlefield 3 have been largely positive and seemingly do not take the single player game into account too much. Again, you come off as completely illogical and whiny. If you can't understand why then I think you have bigger problems than not being able to process review scores.

First of all I only used BF3 as an example, I'm not quite so sure why you are so stuck on that part. I don't really care about it's scores.

Because the basics of video game reviewing are wrong. And this thread is a discussion about this, if you don't like it or think it's a troll you are free to go the fuck off.

I do not own BF3, I will likely own it in the future however since I enjoy playing Battlefield games with my friends.

The scores BF3 received are not in play here, at all.

Again using logic, let's assume a videogame is made out of 2 parts, single player and multi player. Each of these two parts can score from 1-10.

So if a game had a masterful single player and a shit multi player it's score would be 10 +0.1 = 10.1. And if a game had a masterful single player and no multi player it's score would be 10 + 0 = 10.

10.1>10

But in your view the 0 can just be ignored, why the fuck is that. Why can't the .1 be ignored as well in that case ? Also please stop being hostile.