The most offensive review I've ever read (IGN, ROTT reboot)
- Paramultart
- VBB's Partner in Crime
- Posts: 3004
- Joined: Mon Jul 26, 2010 8:36
The most offensive review I've ever read (IGN, ROTT reboot)
I can't take it... I can't take it anymore.
It's bad enough that modern games are so horrible, but when IGN goes out of their way to write a scathing review about any attempt to revive good games (regardless of the quality of the attempt), and I happen to stumble upon that review and accidentally read the entire thing, then that really blisters my butt.
Here are his ACTUAL COMPLAINTS about the new ROTT reboot:
1) Those graphics are soooooooo 2006
2) TOO MUCH BLOOD, not realistic enough
3) Needs more STORYLINE HURRRRR
4) PLAYER IS TOO FAST! NOT SLOW ENOUGH!
5) You're free to mouselook anywhere you want? HOW OUTDATED! Gameplay should be restrictive and boring.
(I took the liberty of paraphrasing)
But enough of that, just read the stupid thing for yourself:
http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/08/06/ ... iad-review
Everything this idiot says... The mentality behind it... This is why there are no good games anymore... Because stupid people like this... with their stupid CoD/Halo clones and dumb expectations and standards for games... With their love for slow movement, hollywood storylines and cutscenes, et cetera. I can't take it anymore. I'm so full of hate my teeth are biting my teeth off my face.
He even goes as far as to say "Unless you've got nostalgia glasses on, I hope for your sake that you hate this game"... What the ffff....
To be fair, I haven't actually played the ROTT reboot, but it looks pretty darn good, and after reading this review, I am all the more inclined to do so.
It's bad enough that modern games are so horrible, but when IGN goes out of their way to write a scathing review about any attempt to revive good games (regardless of the quality of the attempt), and I happen to stumble upon that review and accidentally read the entire thing, then that really blisters my butt.
Here are his ACTUAL COMPLAINTS about the new ROTT reboot:
1) Those graphics are soooooooo 2006
2) TOO MUCH BLOOD, not realistic enough
3) Needs more STORYLINE HURRRRR
4) PLAYER IS TOO FAST! NOT SLOW ENOUGH!
5) You're free to mouselook anywhere you want? HOW OUTDATED! Gameplay should be restrictive and boring.
(I took the liberty of paraphrasing)
But enough of that, just read the stupid thing for yourself:
http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/08/06/ ... iad-review
Everything this idiot says... The mentality behind it... This is why there are no good games anymore... Because stupid people like this... with their stupid CoD/Halo clones and dumb expectations and standards for games... With their love for slow movement, hollywood storylines and cutscenes, et cetera. I can't take it anymore. I'm so full of hate my teeth are biting my teeth off my face.
He even goes as far as to say "Unless you've got nostalgia glasses on, I hope for your sake that you hate this game"... What the ffff....
To be fair, I haven't actually played the ROTT reboot, but it looks pretty darn good, and after reading this review, I am all the more inclined to do so.
"Father Mabeuf was surveying his plants"
- Paramultart
- VBB's Partner in Crime
- Posts: 3004
- Joined: Mon Jul 26, 2010 8:36
- StupidBunny
- format c:
- Posts: 2155
- Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2007 19:19
- Location: The Centre of the Moon
- Contact:
reviewing is one of the most useless professions. anyone can do it. besides i dont think they have any bearing on what games get made. dont worry about it. in the end its what people buy. if people want halo clones etc.etc., well, then thats what'll get made.
besides if the shoe was on the other foot, and all games were rott/doom clones, that'll be equally horrible. imo.
but having said that, i have heard the ROTT reboot isn't very good.
besides if the shoe was on the other foot, and all games were rott/doom clones, that'll be equally horrible. imo.
but having said that, i have heard the ROTT reboot isn't very good.
Ability:
I don't agree. Not everyone CAN review. Everyone *thinks* that they can though. That's one crucial problem. Finanically speaking reviewing can be done by anyone popular enough, because you have practical no cost at all to create a review. (with the tendency towards free to play there is even less test cost).
Impact:
And how do you think company leaders decide if a game gets made, or gets a reasonable budget assigned? Do you think they all play themselves and decide then?
Nope, someone reviews for them and they decide based upon that review.
I don't agree. Not everyone CAN review. Everyone *thinks* that they can though. That's one crucial problem. Finanically speaking reviewing can be done by anyone popular enough, because you have practical no cost at all to create a review. (with the tendency towards free to play there is even less test cost).
Impact:
And how do you think company leaders decide if a game gets made, or gets a reasonable budget assigned? Do you think they all play themselves and decide then?
Nope, someone reviews for them and they decide based upon that review.
You crack me up little buddy!
I happen to have this game and I agree this review is crap. Some statements are really lame and the author is a crybaby whiner! But... At the same time I also wished this game was really good. But unfortunately, the game isn't that good. I agree with their 3 final verdicts for the most bad points:
– Brain-dead AI
– Dated graphics
– Buggy
The AI is not spectacular at all and that's a true statement. However this kind of game doesn't demand Einstein AI in order to be fun, so in the end that's not making the game bad.
The graphics are mediocre and that's true as well. I don't really have problems with that either.
Finally - buggy. It really is! And that's a really big issue. As a matter of fact that is what it killed the game for me! It's not only possible to get stuck in a lot of places, especially if you're looking to find secrets, but it's possible to crash the game itself! And that's the point where I said "That's it!". The game was addictive, but those bugs pushed me away from the game. Maybe at least the multiplayer is better.
– Brain-dead AI
– Dated graphics
– Buggy
The AI is not spectacular at all and that's a true statement. However this kind of game doesn't demand Einstein AI in order to be fun, so in the end that's not making the game bad.
The graphics are mediocre and that's true as well. I don't really have problems with that either.
Finally - buggy. It really is! And that's a really big issue. As a matter of fact that is what it killed the game for me! It's not only possible to get stuck in a lot of places, especially if you're looking to find secrets, but it's possible to crash the game itself! And that's the point where I said "That's it!". The game was addictive, but those bugs pushed me away from the game. Maybe at least the multiplayer is better.
- Paramultart
- VBB's Partner in Crime
- Posts: 3004
- Joined: Mon Jul 26, 2010 8:36
This comment confirms my suspicions. DNF was a letdown for all of us, and I was happy to see that this ROTT remake was at least trying to be faithful to classic shooters. I think I may actually purchase this game if it goes on sale or something.mortimer wrote:The ROTT remake is weird, but I wouldn't say it's bad. It's clearly made out of love for the original, and I really respect that. It has shortcomings, sure, but it doesn't pamper to brainless expectations. That's what this game does right, that DNF did wrong.
Do you think they've patched it since then?wiivn wrote:Finally - buggy. It really is! And that's a really big issue. As a matter of fact that is what it killed the game for me! It's not only possible to get stuck in a lot of places, especially if you're looking to find secrets, but it's possible to crash the game itself! And that's the point where I said "That's it!". The game was addictive, but those bugs pushed me away from the game. Maybe at least the multiplayer is better.
"Father Mabeuf was surveying his plants"