To start off, Brink looks amazing and is definitely a Day 1 buy for me. However, I'm worried about how critics will review it, considering the Day 1 patch. According to people who got copies before street date, some parts of Brink are not up to standards. Now, we know we'll be able to download the patch to fix these issues on launch day, but will critics have access to/know this patch is coming? If not, Brink's review scores could go down by a few points at the least. Just worried about this, so what do you think?

No shooter's up to any reviewers standards, unless it's Camp of Duty or Glitch of War.

if critics are that stupid, then ignore them. simple.

Well, to be a bit more accurate, it seems some parts of Brink are not up to their standards. Seeing what the majority of FPS community on console crown as "high standards," I wouldn't be to worried.


I think the patch will be an automatic update, meaning you won't need to download it or even know about its existence, to apply it.

It oughta have been shipped with the patch/without these problems, but at least they're on it.

Chances are though, it was reviewed a good couple of weeks ago, but they've kept the lid on till release-time. Possibly, there'll be an "out-the-box" review, and a patch review, but probably not. What other games were released and then required a huge game-fixing patch? Were they reviews before/after, or?

the problem isn't the game, it is the xbox 360. that is why the patch is day 1 and not already taken care of.

Since when do u let other people decide for you if the game is good or not? If it gets bad scores so be it. I know im getting it . Critics are overrated

If the reviewers knew of the patch, then most will mention it in their review. If they are good reviewers, then they knew of the patch and can say that game has potential if the patch works.

You would however need internet-access to get it, what if the critics don't have LIVE and just ''whoopidoop instant svck'' when there is a patch that would fix their ''instant svck''?

if they are that stupid, ignore them. it really is that simple. people who beleive them don't belong here.

Then they shouldn't be reviewing games. :wink_smile:

I'm not too worried since a lot of reviewers completely trash games or are completely biased towards them. Half the time I think some of them don't know what they are talking about.

These players cant give a legit review because they are only playing against bots.

And people shouldn't run with scissors, yet some people do that :wink_smile:

Ah well, I don't care much for reviewers, some are just pathetic, like IGN.

I don't read nor listen to reviews either, or well.. The only reviews I read is the ones on gamefaqs when I'm looking up a new game that has been out for a while, lol

And I've heard IGN doesn't do that good reviews, but are counted as one of the big-ass goodie-good reviewers

Let the reviewers be. They're part of Splash Damage's master plan; the codfag-force field.

Basically, this force field is a non-physical barrier around Brink that is designed to keep the bad majority of the CoD community away, so everyone with an actually functional brain can enjoy Brink peacefully.

Splash Damage hires reviewers, and orders them to give horrible ratings for Brink. That way, anyone dumb enough to actually let reviews guide them to what they want to buy, will be mislead, and stay away from Brink.

This. A review is one person's thoughts. Even Metacritic is just one person's thoughts on many people's thoughts.

You play games because of your thoughts. Not Metacritic's thoughts. Not Yahtzee's thought's. Yours.

IGN reviews depend. i think they randomly assign games to reviewers, so if some one who knows the genre gets a game, then the review is trustable. if someone who doesnt know the genre gets a game, then the review is crappy.

i prefer game informer to be honest.

Personally, I think the reviewers review games very fairly, especially IGN. Black Ops got an 8.5, which I felt was deserved. Battlefield Vietnam got a deserved 9.5. And Medal of Honor, which I hated, got a 7. Crysis 2 got a well-deserved 9.0. Contrary to popular belief, IGN doesn't svck up to Activision and Microsoft.

Not to mention IGN's first impressions of Brink were positive. So I can count on them delivering a decent score when the review comes out.

I dont want to be rude but Crysis 2 is 1 fail game. Battlefield Vietnam 9.5 so ur saying its almost a perfect game pff.

Really? I freaking loved Crysis 2 and Vietnam. Sure they're not perfect, but that's why they didn't get 10 our of 10.

I should also mention them giving Portal 2, which is becoming one of my favorite games out there, a 9.5. Again, IGN to me seems fair. Complain all you want, but I trust IGN.

The only IGN review I didn't agree with was when they gave Halo ODST a 9.0. That game was mediocre at best.

Remember that it's not IGN as a whole that rates the game, but one person - one unit in the program

Anyways.. I've only played the Crysis 2 MP Demo and thought it was pure and plain [censored], don't know if the retail game is any different, but all I know is that Crysis aint my cup of tea

Yeah, just to clarify, this isn't about me. I don't care what reviewers give a game, never have, never will. If the game looks like something I know I like and would be playing several months from now, I buy it. This is more to do with convincing friends and other people to buy the game. A lot of people just care about the number at the bottom of a review and don't listen to anything else.

I'm almost certain Brink will get poor reviews from many popular reviewers simply for the fact that people have been trained to jump into a game and just kick ass headshotting everyone. Brink actually has a learning curve. It's been really easy to tell that a lot of the people that already have this game don't know much about it because most of the time they don't use abilities, they don't track missions, they don't buff people, they don't use a [censored] syringe when a medic throws one to them and there are no enemies around, etc. Of course, this is generalizing the whole group, but most of the streams and videos I've seen have had the player failing in these ways. I'm quite sure many reviewers won't bother to learn the game either and will end up making the same mistakes and then will put off how terrible they are at the game as the game being designed poorly.