Hypnotic reviews: Duke Nukem Forever

This is my first review, so please bear with me if I suck. I appreciate any constructive criticism you give me. Also, let me know if you'd like me to review inFamous 2 as well.

Disclaimer: This is the first Duke Nukem game I've ever played, but I am aware of the old games and their legacy.
Yes there's a weapon limit. Yes the health regenerates. Yes the mighty foot is gone (sort of). Yes the loading times are the longest I've ever experienced. Yes the game is still good.
If you're willing to completely abandon your expectations this game is actually very good. It's not a real Duke Nukem game and it's not worth 15 years' development time, but it's fun.

I played the Balls of Steel edition for Xbox 360. The bust from the special edition feels heavy and solid, but is a bit small, big enough to fit in my hand. The book about the legacy of Duke Nukem Forever is basically a collection of quotes from people involved in the project and some concept art. The rest is pretty much throw-away. I'd only recommend it if you feel the bust is worth the money or are really into the legacy of Duke.

Story: It's a Duke Nukem game all right, at least in terms of story. 12 years after the alien invasion in Duke Nukem 3D the Duke has garnered some rewards from his exploits. He has infinite money and fame and women everywhere are dying to be with him. But as soon as he finish playing the masterpiece game Duke Nukem Forever the aliens return with a vengeance and starts taking all the women!

The story is cheesy as hell in true Duke Nukem fashion. The dialogue tries really hard to be offensively funny, but only rarely succeeds. Not much emphasis is laid on the story however, as the gameplay is the focus. The entirety of the story is presented with a few lines of dialogue automatically played if you walk past someone close enough and around 3 short cut scenes. If you liked the old Duke Nukem games, you won't be disappointed. If you don't like immature humour you won't like the story, and if you do like immature humour you still won't get your fill. The good thing is that you don't have to care about the story.

I haven't really kept watch of the length, but I'd estimate it runs around 10-15 hours on hard if you explore, 5 hours speedrun.

Level design: Surprisingly good. Really great actually. Extremely varied environments with expert pacing. The levels are aggravatingly linear, but there are a few places to explore. The beginning is very slow and boring, but after a while the pacing kept me from getting bored once. There are a few puzzles and platforming sections that can seem very out of place at first and also a driving section or two, but it all adds to the pacing and makes for a more varied and fulfilling experience. There are also underwater levels and the ability to shrink. The atmosphere differs greatly between levels, but is always well done.

The driving sections entirely lack the feel of speed, which makes them rather boring. However, the one real driving level is one of the best levels in the game. The atmosphere and pacing of the level is the best I've ever seen, and the roads are wide and open for exploration. Unfortunately there's no reward for exploration the one time it's actually fun, and there's also no challenge while driving, as enemies are nothing more than imminent road-kill to you.

The underwater sections manage to balance trying to get air and fighting enemies at the same time in a way that made it challenging but not frustrating. Ammo conservation can become a big problem though, as the enemies that usually frequent the underwater don't drop any weapons. The only real problem I had with the underwater level was that it was too short, you rarely see an underwater level any more, especially not one as good as this. It's also very linear, and while it was annoying that the rest of the game was linear, the missed opportunity here is actually aggravating. The level is massive and there is a huge world to explore, but you die if you don't follow a specific line.

The horror section of the game is more disgusting than scary, and it doesn't even do that right. Once again the enemies don't drop any weapons, but here it feels more in place to have to conserve ammo, and there are also a lot of hidden weapons around, unlike underwater. It drags on way too long, and it's the low point of the game in more than one way.

The shrinking sections are a great change of pace. They have great platforming and it's always fun to be tiny, and the challenge that arrives when regular sized enemies show up is great.

Gameplay: The gameplay has a focus on fun, as is expected. The AI is quite good, and there are a lot of fun enemies. There are charging dudes, teleporting flying dudes, and flying crate-throwing brain-dudes. There's no cover gameplay here, if you try to hide behind a crate someone will throw it at you or teleport behind it. You have to unlock the insane difficulty and the hard one is only kinda challenging, but it's not easy.

There are several boss fights. They can get a bit repetitive and the loading time if you die will drive you crazy, but they give a nice change of pace. Only one or two are really hard though, and those will require more patience than skill. Most of them revolve in shooting a few round into the boss and then run to get more ammo, repeated until it's dead. The challenge comes in surviving going out of cover to get more ammo. If it sounds boring, it is.

There are a few fun and interesting weapons, which can be easy to leave behind as you are only allowed to carry two guns at a time. There's a freeze ray with auto-rechargeable ammo which insta-kills an enemy of you manage to get close enough. There's a shrink ray that makes even the deadliest enemy as dangerous as a mouse. There are also all the standard stuff, like pistol, shotgun, RPG, machine gun and sniper ray-gun. The ammo can run out very quickly if you don't use it carefully, since the enemies takes a lot of damage, but it's never that much of a bother since there are always new weapons everywhere. You also have a melee punch and the ability to throw a lot of objects. They're all fun to use, but if you want a lot of fun weird weapons you'll be disappointed. There're also 2 grenades, one remotely detonable and one trip mine and 3 power-ups. The power-ups are rare and you can only stack one at a time, which is very disappointing since it forces you to conserve them, but the rare times you use them they're a lot of fun.

In an effort to keep the game feeling fresh, some weapons are kept from you until you reach a certain point in the story. This is a stupid move, as all of the fun weapons only come around towards the end of the game. For this reason, the last third of the game is immensely more enjoyable than the first and second. The last part of the game also has the most interesting levels and the most varied experiences.
The game feels unfocused. There are some great ideas and fun gameplay opportunities that show up once and are instantly forgotten. Pretty much all of them appear in the later part of the game, and if I had made this game I'd have completely scrapped the first half of the game and doubled the length of the second half.
The game will turn a lot of people away before they reach the good parts, but if you can accept the admittedly horrible excuse of "it gets better later" the later part of the game was some of the most fun I've ever had in an FPS.

Your health has been replaced by an ego bar, since in Duke's reality he's invulnerable. You can increase your ego by exploring the levels. Every item in the game is interactive and the first time you throw a basketball into a hoop or manage to successfully cook pop-corn, you get a permanent ego boost, AKA increase your maximum health. It's a good incentive to explore, but the increase is so tiny and the ego rewards are so rare, that the exploring get's pretty pointless after a while.

The UI is simple and intuitive, but would have been nice with a more complex one to allow for more weapons at a time. It will be easy for any experienced FPS player to just pick up and play, and it proves that to you by starting the game with a boss-fight. The game can get annoying when you try to interact with certain things, as it's very picky as to the exact spot on the item you need to be looking at before you can interact with it. When things are close together or you're in the middle of a fight it's sure to get on your nerves.

As someone that was bored to death with modern shooters this was a breath of fresh air. Neither you nor the enemy dies from just a few shots, so the fire fights will demand more from you than simple reflexes. The variation from the different enemies and weapons keeps it from getting boring. When I walk into an obvious ambush, instead of feeling annoyed like I do in other modern FPSs, this time I feel happy that I have a bunch of new enemies to slaughter. To have 3 huge pigs chasing you that each will chop off half your ego bar if they get close enough is quite a thrill, and to try to shoot an enemy that keeps teleporting behind you is a unique challenge.

Visuals: It's very obvious that this is, or at least should be, an old game. The design of the enemies and levels show great vision, but the textures fall short. Especially the humans look like they did 5 years ago. The design makes up for a lot though, but for the people who like to count the pixels this will look awful.

Multiplayer: To be fair, I haven't played it much for obvious reasons. It's crap. It has the feel of old classics like Quake or Unreal tournament, only horrible. The game modes aren't fun, the maps are boring, there are connection issues and the game is uneven. You level extremely slowly, the weapons respawn waay too frequently and the maps are hard to navigate. It feels like they spent 10 minutes on it, which is very annoying since there are some good basics here, just abominable execution. There are some great challenges though, unlike the achievements which are pretty standard.

I feel the best way to illustrate this is through an example. In the one level I played the most on, there's a spawn point right next to the best weapon in the game, and right next to it there are a few power-ups. The one that starts at that spawn point will win. Actually, that only applies if they're the host. The host will always win, because if you're not the host you'll always have lag. In such a quick paced multiplayer as this, lag matters a lot.

You may be able to find some enjoyment in this through LAN, (given that LAN is supported, I'm not sure about that) since broken gameplay can only be fun with good friends and it eliminates the connection issues. Though I'm not sure even friends will help this horrid affair, do yourselves a favour and stay away from the multiplayer.

Summary: The game may not be what we all hoped it would be, and it has a few flaws, but it's still a lot of fun. It doesn't have much replay value so it may not be worth $60 for you, but I'd still recommend it.

Pros: Excellent pacing and fun enemies. Varied levels with great atmosphere. Very refreshing gameplay if you, like me, am bored with modern military shooters.

Cons: The multiplayer and the load times. They're completely horrible, dragged the score down at least 0.5 points. Also the first half of the game wasn't that great and it's too linear.

Story: 3
Level design: 8
Gameplay: 7
Visuals: 7
Multiplayer: 1
Overall: 6

Note: I've retconned my early review scores to better fit my later reviews.

Not a bad review at all my friend. I'm a little bit surprised at the categories you chose to score though, I personally like hearing about sound and presentaion (How's the UI, is the atmoshpere good, is it immersive) but the breakdowns you had in the guts of your review were good at explaining the key points and what was done well/needed improvement. Good on ya!

MoNKeyYy:
Not a bad review at all my friend. I'm a little bit surprised at the categories you chose to score though, I personally like hearing about sound and presentaion (How's the UI, is the atmoshpere good, is it immersive) but the breakdowns you had in the guts of your review were good at explaining the key points and what was done well/needed improvement. Good on ya!

Thanks for the input!
I added atmosphere to level design, pretty obvious miss on my part.
As for the sound, I didn't really pay it much attention, but they say that when sound mixing is at its best you don't notice it, so I guess that's a good thing? I'd still only say it's adequate.
The UI is simple and intuitive, but would have been nice with a more complex one to allow for more weapons.
The immersion is hard to judge. It's not a game I'd classify as immersive, but you do kind of feel like Duke when you play. Maybe it's the fact that I can't really identify with Duke as a character that prevents the immersion for me.

Thank you for confirming my suspicions that this game will have a mixed response. Though I haven't played it yet on account of living in Canada, I expect to have some fun with it regardless of it's issues.

I would also like to add that although some may think I'm crazy for getting the "Balls of Steel" edition, I'll have some awesome Duke collectibles despite a so so game.

WaaghPowa:
Thank you for confirming my suspicions that this game will have a mixed response. Though I haven't played it yet on account of living in Canada, I expect to have some fun with it regardless of it's issues.

I would also like to add that although some may think I'm crazy for getting the "Balls of Steel" edition, I'll have some awesome Duke collectibles despite a so so game.

I also got the balls of steel edition, I had to order it cuz it's really hard to get it here in Sweden (Apparently it actually isn't now that the game is out, but it was hard to pre-order it). I'd say it's worth it, but the only good things are the bust and the book.
I really don't think there's gonna be a mixed response, I think it'll be unanimously awful. I'll be one of the few that says it's fun. Maybe I'm wrong, but it's how I felt. It was really hard to get into, but around the midpoint it became one of the best FPSs I've played. I have so much more fun with it than I had with CoD, Halo or BF:BC. Maybe I just have bad taste.

GeorgW:
I have so much more fun with it than I had with CoD, Halo or BF:BC. Maybe I just have bad taste.

Funny, because I don't like COD either, we must have bad taste. Now if you'll excuse me, I will go play Duke Nukem 3D Hi res. http://hrp.duke4.net/media.php

GeorgW:
I think it'll be unanimously awful. I'll be one of the few that says it's fun. Maybe I'm wrong, but it's how I felt.

Make that 2. I have fun with it as well. Specially the monster truck levels. Nothing more satisfying then blowing up aliens with heavy weapons(and i mostly dislike FPS).

But then i never cared for what other people's opinion about a game is. I mean if i enjoy playing it that is all that is important. The reviews are most of the time right about what is wrong with a game or what could be better.

The loading times are terrible though specially at parts you keep dying over and over again. The one think i found really terrible is the drop in framerate that the game gets hit by in single player mode.

D Moness:

GeorgW:
I think it'll be unanimously awful. I'll be one of the few that says it's fun. Maybe I'm wrong, but it's how I felt.

Make that 2. I have fun with it as well. Specially the monster truck levels. Nothing more satisfying then blowing up aliens with heavy weapons(and i mostly dislike FPS).

But then i never cared for what other people's opinion about a game is. I mean if i enjoy playing it that is all that is important. The reviews are most of the time right about what is wrong with a game or what could be better.

The loading times are terrible though specially at parts you keep dying over and over again. The one think i found really terrible is the drop in framerate that the game gets hit by in single player mode.

Apart from the multiplayer, the loading time is probably the game's biggest fault. (I should add a pros and cons) It's ridiculous, I actually went and read comics every time I died. And the few instances I died a lot it drove me crazy, as mentioned in the review.
I never really had framerate issues. I noticed it a few times but it was never game breaking.

I have removed my words from this site.

DeadpanLunatic:
That's certainly a much better debut than I pulled of. The review is mostly functional, I got what I came here for and learned about the game with no real grammatical or syntactical hiccups getting in the way of the information. That's good. But yeah, there's also some room for improvement. I mention this now because I don't intend to discourage you with any the potentially mean things I'm about to say.

The first thing I'd suggest is getting rid of the subheaders, since that's a bit like reviewing with your training wheels still on. It's easier for you to organize your train of thoughts this way, but it is a lot less interesting to read. Ideally you should be able to jump from idea to idea without these tags, simply by utilizing the mind-bending powers of segues and similar connectors. This takes practice, but the easiest way to pick it up is to simply try.

Secondly, more professionalism. You've already taken a lot of steps in the right direction when it comes to that (No overuse of immature jokes, proper grammar, formatting, spelling and punctuation), but a few more ounces would not go amiss. The thing about writing reviews is that it's less about being a gamer and more about being a writer, so the more you know about the rules of the craft, the better.

For the most part your review feels like the kind of feedback you'd get if you asked somebody who played the game to sum up his thoughts, on the spot. There's little to no overarching structure or polish. You spend a lot of time listing what the game does (Note how often you use the phrase "There are"), but don't really put these pieces into perspective or weigh them against each other. Okay, I think a few examples would be nice here.

Your health is your ego, since the Duke is invulnerable.

I can only make sense of this sentence because of things I learned in other reviews, this is generally not a good sign.

The game plays very fun.

As presented here this sentence is either incorrect, or awkwardly phrased, probably both. It could be read as "The gameplay's very fun", but in that case "good" would have been a better choice than "fun" (All games try to entertain, so if you're having fun the mechanics behind it are doing a "good" job). Alternatively it could be read as "The game plays fun", and I realize that this kind of mediopassive isn't breaking grammatical rules so much as bending them (as in "the book reads well"), but it doesn't do a very good job in this case, for reasons of ambiguity. It's bad enough that there's a fused version of the words "game" and "play" (while there's no "bookread"), but fun is an awkward choice since it's not inflectionally marked as an adverb.

There's a point I'm trying to get to here, and pay close attention because the same thing can be said for large parts of your review:

I perfectly understand what you're trying to say, but it could have been phrased a lot better.

This is very bad. Phrasing things the right way is the biggest and most important tool for any writer, phrasing makes all the difference in the world. When you come down to it, every writer and every text out there are borrowing from the same small pool of words, and yet, some have hardly any effect on us, others glue our eyes to the screen, grab us by the ankles and shake us up, make us laugh and cry, argue with us, reason with us, anger us, entertain us and convice us. It's about how you put things.

Okay, I'm beginning to ramble. I could go on (though not today), but I assume I have done enough to confuse you for now. Fret not, you'll learn a lot more by writing another review than this idiotic sermon could ever show you. Just let me know if you want me to elaborate on anything, or to clarify anything, or to read anything, or if you need an incredibly unreliable editor.

Cheers,

Joe

Thanks for the feedback, I really appreciate it and I realise that I need to learn.

The reason I used subheaders is because I felt if would make thing easier on the reader, not on me. Big difference there, I felt the need for the reader to be able to skim through to only the parts that interested them. Some people care more about gameplay than visuals, and I wanted them to get a quick overview of the parts of the game they feel are important before reading the whole review. I could get rid of them if you think it's needed, I agree that it would help the flow of the review a lot, but as I realised going into this review that my opinion would greatly differ from other's, and felt the need to make it easy to read. I don't know what I should do for my next review, any ideas?

I also completely stand by my use of the word fun. While all games try to entertain, there's a trend recently that seems to negate the fun aspect of entertainment and replace it with the entertaining factors of realism and non-stop action. I felt the need to enhance my opinion that while I've played games that were more entertaining, there are few I've played recently that were more fun.

I intended to use "The game plays fun" in the same way as one would say that a book reads well, but I now see how that could easily be misunderstood. I just wanted more variety in my language, got bored of saying gameplay.

I agree with your point that I could have expressed myself better. To be honest I really rushed this review, going through a check-list of what I felt I needed to mention. It took me less than 10 minutes, I just wanted to beat as many professional American reviews as possible and I apologize for that. I'll try to work on that for my second review, I'll definitely put more time into it. I probably should go though it and edit some of the rough stuff, if I put some effort into the writing I could probably double the length of the review just by clarifying.

DeadpanLunatic:
-snip-

I reworked a lot of it based on your suggestions, mostly just added a lot of stuff that should have been in there from the beginning.

GeorgW:

DeadpanLunatic:
-snip-

I reworked a lot of it based on your suggestions.

Looking back, you might want to mention which version of the game you played. In my experience, certain games play differently based on platform, which could affect how one views the game.

WaaghPowa:

GeorgW:

DeadpanLunatic:
-snip-

I reworked a lot of it based on your suggestions.

Looking back, you might want to mention which version of the game you played. In my experience, certain games play differently based on platform, which could affect how one views the game.

I added that, but the reason I left it out was because I really doubt there's much of a difference. It's not like it looks good or has a complicated UI.

GeorgW:

WaaghPowa:

GeorgW:

I reworked a lot of it based on your suggestions.

Looking back, you might want to mention which version of the game you played. In my experience, certain games play differently based on platform, which could affect how one views the game.

I added that, but the reason I left it out was because I really doubt there's much of a difference. It's not like it looks good or has a complicated UI.

Aside from the reason I gave last post, it seemed that a lot of people complaining about performance issues were playing the Xbox version.

WaaghPowa:

GeorgW:

WaaghPowa:

Looking back, you might want to mention which version of the game you played. In my experience, certain games play differently based on platform, which could affect how one views the game.

I added that, but the reason I left it out was because I really doubt there's much of a difference. It's not like it looks good or has a complicated UI.

Aside from the reason I gave last post, it seemed that a lot of people complaining about performance issues were playing the Xbox version.

A lot of people are playing on the 360 ;)
I didn't really have any performance issues though, soo...
Still, appreciate you telling me, I should have mentioned it.

I have removed my words from this site.

DeadpanLunatic:

GeorgW:

DeadpanLunatic:
-snip-

I reworked a lot of it based on your suggestions, mostly just added a lot of stuff that should have been in there from the beginning.

I'm sorry if I came off as two harsh. My suggestions aren't the word god, there's a lot of different philosophies about all this and I can't claim that mine's right. I'm happy long as it got you to think about these things, no matter how you decide.

Also, welcome to the review section.

Thanks for the input, the best thing you can do is to make me think about it, and thanks for welcoming me!
The only thing that really kept me out of this place is that I know that no matter how much effort I put into a review, only a handful of people will ever read it.

I have removed my words from this site.

DeadpanLunatic:

GeorgW:

The only thing that really kept me out of this place is that I know that no matter how much effort I put into a review, only a handful of people will ever read it.

Ah, the eternal plight. At least this place still provides a better floor than any other open stage I know. Well count me in as one of those few crazy people.

Yeah, what is good here is the constructive criticism. Now if only more people would comment...

GeorgW:

DeadpanLunatic:

GeorgW:

The only thing that really kept me out of this place is that I know that no matter how much effort I put into a review, only a handful of people will ever read it.

Ah, the eternal plight. At least this place still provides a better floor than any other open stage I know. Well count me in as one of those few crazy people.

Yeah, what is good here is the constructive criticism. Now if only more people would comment...

Getting used to people never commenting is one of those things you'll have to get used to I'm afraid. You could do what I do and post a neat section of all your previous reviews in case something catches someone's eye[1]. One time for me, this got a full blown thread out of a review that was dead the day before, so don't worry about that.

As for the review itself, I'd mostly agree with DeadpanLunatic. It's quite good for a first review, but there's a lot to work on. As he said, you should drop the sections, and focus on a cohesive overall piece. You may think it's easier on your readers, but if they think it's better, they're wrong. ;)

Another point (though more subjective territory here), is I feel slightly longer paragraphs would work better. You seem to be averaging around 3 sentences per paragraph, and whilst it's not a clear set rule, you should be aiming for a few more. Making your paragraphs longer can help you section off your points better. No particular aspect (gameplay, level design etc) should get more than 2 paragraphs I find. A few pictures here and there can help break things up nicely too. Now these are probably more my way of doing things, so feel free to disregard it completely, but I find it reads a little better when sections are identifiable at a glance, without the need for headers.

But anyway, keep it up, and as long as you keep improving I'd say you'll work out fine. Or feel free to say I'm full of crap, either's good!

[1] You can also shamelessly link your reviews whenever a vaguely relevant topic comes up. Not that I'd ever condone such desperate attempt, no sir! Oh wait.

GeorgW:

I feel the best way to illustrate this is through an example. In the one level I played the most on, due to the level never changing unless you change lobby,

Theres a button in the create game options that allow your game to play the same level or change. It seems youve just been unlucky, I seem to get constitently changing level lobbies all the time.

LightningBanks:

GeorgW:

I feel the best way to illustrate this is through an example. In the one level I played the most on, due to the level never changing unless you change lobby,

Theres a button in the create game options that allow your game to play the same level or change. It seems youve just been unlucky, I seem to get constitently changing level lobbies all the time.

Thanks, fixed.
As I said, I didn't spend much time on it, and I guess I was just unlucky.

GeorgW:

WaaghPowa:

GeorgW:

I added that, but the reason I left it out was because I really doubt there's much of a difference. It's not like it looks good or has a complicated UI.

Aside from the reason I gave last post, it seemed that a lot of people complaining about performance issues were playing the Xbox version.

A lot of people are playing on the 360 ;)
I didn't really have any performance issues though, soo...
Still, appreciate you telling me, I should have mentioned it.

well on PC the loading times were fine, sometimes so fast you couldnt read the tooltip help thing at the bottom before it loaded

Kragg:

GeorgW:

WaaghPowa:

Aside from the reason I gave last post, it seemed that a lot of people complaining about performance issues were playing the Xbox version.

A lot of people are playing on the 360 ;)
I didn't really have any performance issues though, soo...
Still, appreciate you telling me, I should have mentioned it.

well on PC the loading times were fine, sometimes so fast you couldnt read the tooltip help thing at the bottom before it loaded

I see, well then I stand corrected. Good thing I added the 360 part then.

Well, i must say, well done. All reviews i've seen so far have been, "i've played every duke nukem game, this is shit compared to them, blah blah blah." But you've obviously taken the game as a standing game, not a continuation of the series as it is. I myself have never playe a duke nukem game (was too young originally, and now, being 18, i have no interest) so its good to see a review from a point of view similar to mine. Well done.

And i've just finished infamous 2, i'd love to hear your opinion on it. I personally found it a REALLY good game, if a bit short. But the short may have been because i couldn't put it down. But finishing a game in 2 days, with a job interview in them days... that stands to be a bit short in my opinion...

Andrew_Mac:
Well, i must say, well done. All reviews i've seen so far have been, "i've played every duke nukem game, this is shit compared to them, blah blah blah." But you've obviously taken the game as a standing game, not a continuation of the series as it is. I myself have never playe a duke nukem game (was too young originally, and now, being 18, i have no interest) so its good to see a review from a point of view similar to mine. Well done.

And i've just finished infamous 2, i'd love to hear your opinion on it. I personally found it a REALLY good game, if a bit short. But the short may have been because i couldn't put it down. But finishing a game in 2 days, with a job interview in them days... that stands to be a bit short in my opinion...

Thanks for your input!
I've just started playing inFamous 2, and first impressions are that it didn't improve enough from the first game. I'll see if I'll actually review it, this review felt very needed, unlike an inFamous 2 review.

I didn't really have any trouble with the loading times on my* PC.

* - noted because not all PCs perform the same or do everything like every other PC

Kroxile:
I didn't really have any trouble with the loading times on my* PC.

* - noted because not all PCs perform the same or do everything like every other PC

It seems to be mostly a 360 problem. Thanks for reading!

OMFG it's a decent review that's 2 i found

This is exactly the problem with reviews when a game that's mediocre at best get's 7,5 out of 10.

trebthegamer:
OMFG it's a decent review that's 2 i found

Thanks! What was the other one?

Spherex:
This is exactly the problem with reviews when a game that's mediocre at best get's 7,5 out of 10.

I actually found it slightly above average. But I do follow the mainstream grading scale, even though I find it silly.

GeorgW:

trebthegamer:
OMFG it's a decent review that's 2 i found

Thanks! What was the other one?

the other one was from
machinima i think. it was not that positive but he admit he had fun. his score was 6.5

Andrew_Mac:
-snip-

Outright Villainy:
-snip-

DeadpanLunatic:
-snip-

I've posted my inFAMOUS 2 review and would love to hear your input.

 

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked