Sammo21's forum posts

#1 Posted by Sammo21 (3370 posts) -
@Ravenlight: I agree.  Clearly we all know that Battlefield games are supposed to be on PC only so I think the game should be reviewed lower because it should be PC only.
#2 Posted by Sammo21 (3370 posts) -
@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.
#3 Edited by Sammo21 (3370 posts) -
@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 the box and commercials still advertise 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 that in grade school.
#4 Posted by Sammo21 (3370 posts) -
@Video_Game_King: Yeah, his point is illogical.  Count into the fact that most reviews scores are still very positive...it just makes no sense.  
#5 Posted by Sammo21 (3370 posts) -
@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". 
#6 Posted by Sammo21 (3370 posts) -
@Video_Game_King: his entire argument is stupid, so picking out one dumb thing is way too easy lol
#7 Edited by Sammo21 (3370 posts) -
@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 bait.
#8 Edited by Sammo21 (3370 posts) -
@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.   Also the single player campaign was shown before any multiplayer, the single player campaign has been marketed more heavily than the single player, and if I am not mistaken the single player has been demoed to those in the enthusiast press more than the multiplayer.  
 
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. 
#9 Posted by Sammo21 (3370 posts) -

@Niche: Most people had favorable opinions of the GTAIV multiplayer; it was that people just didn't play it.

#10 Edited by Sammo21 (3370 posts) -

@Mageman: A flaw in the system? Who cares if DICE didn't want to make it (I haven't read any interviews saying they DIDNT want to make it...as I said the last 2 games with BATTLEFIELD in the title have had a single player campaign as did Mirror's Edge...a DICE game), the single player is part of the game and game reviewers review what? The game...again, your choice of words and tone indicate you are just pissed the game isn't getting a specific score for the hell of it. If a car manufacturer makes a decent car but the automatic seats are fucked, don't move properly, and are uncomfortable why would that not factor into a final review of the car? You bring it on yourself. "Anti-fanboys" aren't "anti-fanboys", we are just gamers who don't understand irrational "logic" and the defense force mentality.

I haven't seen a reviewer yet "bash" the single player, but critique and say "the single player is a poor experience but the multiplayer is awesome". If that ruffles your feathers then you have more than just a problem with Battlefield 3 reviews to work on. A game reviewer reviewing a game isn't bashing. Show proof, quotable proof, of a reviewer "bashing" the single player and we'll talk. 


rape  / ˈre ɪp/  verb rapes ;   raped ;   rap·ing
[ + obj: to force (someone) to have sex with you by using violence or the threat of violence 
▪ He is accused of  raping the girl.  ▪ She was  raped by a fellow student.
 
If anyone here actually has raped you I would suggest contacting your local authorities...or just choose better words to emphasize your feelings.