Neal you seem to have a problem now!

KiwiVenge · 02-28-07, 02:25 PM

I think it depends on at what point the review is being done. When someone is on a cherry high trying out a game before release for a day or two and knowing it is not officially "quite done" I think it can be forgiven if someone rates over high on a genre they love.
If in fact the review is being done after a month or two of release things can be more clear.
I am of the opinion SH3 was barely completed enough to be released when it was. So many people had so many different problems getting SH3 running well on their machine. The whole Starforce factor sucked for some, either preventing legit SH3 games from running and then as bad going to the point of shutting down their DVD drive. Nvidia users (whats that, at least 1/3 of all PC owners??) had UZO partical problems, and the fix was automatically shutting off particals for Nvidia users when using the UZO. Saved games (and careers) that would vanish mysteriously.
The list goes on and on, well beyond what I would consider average problems for a new release game.
Don't get me wrong I loved SH3, but was it was far from perfect upon release.

Safe-Keeper · 02-28-07, 03:26 PM

Well, he didn't really give it a 10/10 (which it wouldn't have deserved as it had some pretty glaring flaws), but the end score was still 10/10 because he gave it "bonus points" for its positive features. So in effect, it really got less than a perfect 10/10, at least the way I see it.

DaMaGe007 · 02-28-07, 03:53 PM

Bugs aside, (which he could be forgiven for assuming they would be fixed) sh3 at first looked and played really well, if I was reviewing it I would have scorred it highly (and Im a harsh bastard). The Flaws of the game werent apparent untill some time was sunk into the game such as the campain, radio trafic, lack of ai subs, milkcows ect.
When writing a review they want to get the review up quickly and dont always get the time to see these things.

In the end with greywolves, its close to a 8-9 out of 10 on the DaMaGe scale. Im hopeing Sh4 gets a 10 out of the box.

Mikkow · 02-28-07, 04:39 PM

most importantly, the review is merely a reflection of one person's opinion.

FIREWALL · 02-28-07, 07:03 PM

As with women you can rate anything now...
an 11. :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

02-28-07, 02:25 PM	#1
KiwiVenge Medic Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: New Zealand Posts: 168 Downloads: 4 Uploads: 0	I think it depends on at what point the review is being done. When someone is on a cherry high trying out a game before release for a day or two and knowing it is not officially "quite done" I think it can be forgiven if someone rates over high on a genre they love. If in fact the review is being done after a month or two of release things can be more clear. I am of the opinion SH3 was barely completed enough to be released when it was. So many people had so many different problems getting SH3 running well on their machine. The whole Starforce factor sucked for some, either preventing legit SH3 games from running and then as bad going to the point of shutting down their DVD drive. Nvidia users (whats that, at least 1/3 of all PC owners??) had UZO partical problems, and the fix was automatically shutting off particals for Nvidia users when using the UZO. Saved games (and careers) that would vanish mysteriously. The list goes on and on, well beyond what I would consider average problems for a new release game. Don't get me wrong I loved SH3, but was it was far from perfect upon release. __________________ \"Emancipate yourself from mental slavery, none but ourselves can free our minds.\"

02-28-07, 03:26 PM	#2
Safe-Keeper Ocean Warrior Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Norway Posts: 3,234 Downloads: 11 Uploads: 0	Well, he didn't really give it a 10/10 (which it wouldn't have deserved as it had some pretty glaring flaws), but the end score was still 10/10 because he gave it "bonus points" for its positive features. So in effect, it really got less than a perfect 10/10, at least the way I see it. __________________ First Strike Mod tester. Hardcore sub skipper.

02-28-07, 04:39 PM	#4
Mikkow Gunner Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Sweden Posts: 93 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	most importantly, the review is merely a reflection of one person's opinion. __________________ Freelancing Illustrator http://mikkow.deviantart.com

02-28-07, 07:03 PM	#5
FIREWALL Eternal Patrol Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: CATALINA IS. SO . CAL USA Posts: 10,108 Downloads: 511 Uploads: 0	As with women you can rate anything now... an 11. :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: __________________ RIP FIREWALL I Play GWX. Silent Hunter Who ???

02-28-07, 03:53 PM	#3
DaMaGe007 Watch Officer Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 338 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	Bugs aside, (which he could be forgiven for assuming they would be fixed) sh3 at first looked and played really well, if I was reviewing it I would have scorred it highly (and Im a harsh bastard). The Flaws of the game werent apparent untill some time was sunk into the game such as the campain, radio trafic, lack of ai subs, milkcows ect. When writing a review they want to get the review up quickly and dont always get the time to see these things. In the end with greywolves, its close to a 8-9 out of 10 on the DaMaGe scale. Im hopeing Sh4 gets a 10 out of the box.