Can anyone help me reason this? Thread

I recently got a hold of the latest Game Informer, and something caught my eye... this particular issue had reviews of three very major games, all at once for some reason. Since GI is a console and PC mag (though it's focus seems to be COnsoles) it had reviews for GTA: San Andreas, Halo 2, and Half-Life 2. GI gives out it's ratings in a .5 scale, so something is either 9.5 or 10... now, assuming I read it correctly, GI gave Halo 2 a 10, and HL2 a 9.5. THis is not unexpected... Halo 2 has a much larger fan base than Half Life 2, the hype was immensely greater, and most multi-platform game mags show bias towards console games. I could have lived with this, since they were both very good scores. However, GI gave GTA:SA a 10. A 10. Thats better than HL2. While I realize that these reviews are subjective based on th particular interests of the reviewer, I think that this is absurd. Clearly these reviewers are choked with hype, and they seemed to brush off HL2 as though it were merely a rather attractive footnote...

SO, now I can explain te purpose of this thread: The console gaming community, versus the PC gaming community. There is no question that there are more console gamers in existence, but the fact that the market bends over backwards for them while brushing us PC gamers off as nerdy individuals who never step away from our keyboards (I believe the HL2 review began with something along the lines of "Any PC gamer worth his cpu has been following this release for months), while the COnsolers are perfectly savvy and have managed to somehow seperate themselves from the world of virtual reality. Then, we've got Halo 2. While clearly this game's sole focus is on producing mass quantities of hype to move product and produce perfect (however undeserved) reviews, as opposed to a really good game (I'll give you, its good, but not 10/10 good).

THis outburst was triggered by the fact that GTA:SA, a game whose sole appeal lies in its gratuitous violence and immense focus on pop culture, which seems to completely blind reviewers to the fact that the game is something of a hack-job, a step backwards from the fact that we are trying to turn this industry into an art at least equal to, say, cinema, received higher marks than HL2. Then, we've got Halo 2. While clearly this game's sole focus is on producing mass quantities of hype to move product and produce perfect (however undeserved) reviews, as opposed to a really good game (I'll give you, its good, but not 10/10 good). HL2, I think virtually anyone would say, is as close to a work of art as our industry has ever gotten.

End Rant.

Discuss.

Edited by: EvilFish

some mag gave half-life 2 11 out of 10

pc gamers ARE more nerdy, so what?

Well thats just how it goes when newb console queers write in newb gaming magazines :/ I think we are going to have to live with the fact that Halo 2 is supposedly "the king of all games" yeah... okay I actually read somewhere that it birthed fps.... and I was liek no... wtf.... lol oh yeah... you werent mad about halo 2, you were mad abotu GTA.... well yeah HL2 pwns it to but w/e I have more of a problem with Halo 2

calm down dear its just a review

ror wrote: pc gamers ARE more nerdy, so what?

That wasn't entirely the point. I acknowledge that SOME of us may be SLIGHTLY more nerdy, but on the whole PC games are just as deserving of fair and balanced reviews as console games are.

Um, wow, a .5 off from a 10 out of 10. Half-Life 2 must be the worse game ever created

i dont think any game deserves 10 no game is perfect

Same. That's why percentile is better, and an easier and more broad way of scoring a game. No game should get 100%, because nothing in life is perfect

That's why you go to a site like www.gamerankings.com to get a much better idea

Not to mention, this is only one person's opinion. He/She may think that game is perfect, but others obviously won't. That's why you sometimes ignore the 10/10 or 5/5 or 100/100, because you can't always tell how it got that score.

I agree about San Andreas. I was really put off about how they scored it with a 10, and every other gaming magazine/site giving it the relatively same score. Basically it angers me. I bought Halo 2, San Andreas, and Half-Life 2. San Andreas was by far the worst. It was an intense game when some of those really awesome missions got started, but aside from that and a few added features, it's literally the same game as Vice City. No evolution, and thus, I put it down after a week or two.

Half-Life 2 engages someone in an intelligent way, unlike the mindless shit that goes on in San Andreas (albeit mindless shit with a not bad storyline), and at times Halo 2 (thought that does require skill.)

itachi_ wrote: but aside from that and a few added features, it's literally the same game as Vice City. No evolution, and thus, I put it down after a week or two.

a few? the game was bigger than an MMORPG is map wise. the "few" additions added up to somewhere in the hundreds of additions.ive played the first 10 missions something like 30 times just playing the game round different places and i couldnt care less just because i could not do a mission and spend about 8 hours doing the most random shit. I guess its a bit easier for me tho seeing as i do all gaming stoned

TBH i havent played halo 2 yet. HL2:DM is fun for lan because of grav gun buts thats about it. I only played the first 3 chapters of the SP so I had no idea what was going on at all and still dont >.<

Once San Andreas is released for the PC and Multi Theft Auto is adapted to it(which should be easier seeing as Rockstar already showed they could put a 2nd player in for the rampages) alot of people who had bad opinions on SA will change once that comes out i think.

I'm with Embers. I've played HL2 and the only thing that keeps it from being HL all over again is the physics and the pretty graphics. The Story is cool, but I'd take Halo 2 with the cliffhanger ending any day. San Andreas is by far and away the biggest game in terms of scope ever. The sheer amount of games inside the game and the freedom you have is completley revolutionary. It's a next gen game built on todays hardware. I have little respect for the PS2, but San Andreas is the only game you'd ever need to own with one, and you'd still be happy. You say there's no evolution? You're both wrong and you're right, because SA is more than evolution, it's a goddamned revolution in todays gaming industry.

Don't get me started on Halo 2 w/ Xbox Live though...

Half-Life 2 has a cliffhanger ending, too

HL2 was a great game, better than Halo 2 and GTA: San Andreas...

Ah, screw it, they'll all equally awesome and I'd play all three at once if I had two more pairs of arms, hands, and fingers

The map may have been bigger, etc., but I personally get tired of the same gameplay repeated over and over again, maybe that's just me.

I also may have found the ghettoness a little too overwhelming. I spent most of my time laughing at the dialogue, rather than caring about my brothas in the hood, .

Edited by: itachi_

Karuto wrote: Half-Life 2 has a cliffhanger ending, too

HL2 was a great game, better than Halo 2 and GTA: San Andreas...

Ah, screw it, they'll all equally awesome and I'd play all three at once if I had two more pairs of arms, hands, and fingers

I mentioned the cliffhanger ending cause some people were pissed off at it. I figure it's just like empire strikes back.

exactly itachi all the dialog is hilarious its a game ur supposed to enjoy. i loved the ghettoness of it just because thuggin' is funny(yo those some crap shoes cj! yo shut the fuck up nig before i gat yo ass!) the fact of being able to reply positively or negatively to anything anyone said was hella cool.

Counter-strike = the ultimate repetitiveness no?

I love playing Counter-Strike. It's so addictive, especially when you're trying to rack up the best score in the room

But hey, I guess that's just my opinion. A lot of CS haters on these forums...

Karuto wrote: I love playing Counter-Strike. It's so addictive, especially when you're trying to rack up the best score in the room

But hey, I guess that's just my opinion. A lot of CS haters on these forums...

thats my point, you do the same thing every round but not many people seem to care

eh, you have many options, and plus the gameplay mechanics are so addictive like karuto said, that any repetitiveness is outweighed. also, the only reason i play cs is for the competition, that's the key when it comes to that game. if i didn't feel like i was trying to get better than somebody, than i wouldnt play it.