dont think ill check out any reviews till i actually get to PLAY the game and not have anything spoiled or make me feel like robbing gamestop Monday afternoon :cryvaultboy:
You're probably right, but if they look deep enough in the game they will see the new gameplay additions such as:
Companion wheel Companion perks Weapon mods hardcoe mode More quests New factions Gambling Traits Binoculars Night/Thermal vision Nightkins Snow More Freindly Super-Mutants 2x guns More joinable factions Reputation New drugs Repair kits Doctors bags Unique speach options for low intellegence characters. Crafting Poison/Medicine making Ammo crafting Disguises 180 quests Ability to Play-Through as a pacifist Ability to kill every person in-game except for one. Iron Sights Non-Lethal ammo types Ammo Type Switching Faction Ranking
I'm imagining reviews of 8.0 to 9.5 across the board (on a 10 point scale).
Most critics will probably praise the improvements it has over Fallout 3 and how great the story is. A few of the hardcoe critics will give it a plus on how it pays more respect to the older Fallout games.
Most critics will probably gripe about some of the bugs currently in the game and how the AI might be kind of lacking at times. Not to mention the animations.
All in all, I see it getting high reviews, but not being praised nearly as much as Fallout 3 was. I wish I could explain why, but I don't understand game reviewers reasons sometimes...
Being like Fallout 3 isn't a reason for a marked down score, hell, if the reviews of FO3 are anything to go by, I imagine a lot of reviews will be marking it up. I think there are very few games in recent years that were so well received by critics, as Fallout 3. There's more than a few fans there. If it gets marked down, it'll be because it's taken something from 3 and not improved on it, but made it worse. Dunno what that could be? I could take a few guesses... :sadvaultboy:
No matter what the review is, i think i am going to like this game, but i do want it to get a good score so the IP will develop so we can get more great games, but hopefully they don't sell out. I think IGN are wise in the sense that they are not going to call it an expansion, but will probably say how similar it is. It svcks, they are so bias and so many people take their word as the truth, like medal of honor, it was not great, but better than a 6/10 and also modern warfare, they said so many flaws in it, and it still got a 9.5/10, and lookwhat it is now.....
This sequel is adding a hell of a lot more then most other game's sequels so I don't really care what the reviewers say even though we already know that they will say it's amazing but just an expansion.
No matter what the review is, i think i am going to like this game, but i do want it to get a good score so the IP will develop so we can get more great games, but hopefully they don't sell out. I think IGN are wise in the sense that they are not going to call it an expansion, but will probably say how similar it is. It svcks, they are so bias and so many people take their word as the truth, like medal of honor, it was not great, but better than a 6/10 and also modern warfare, they said so many flaws in it, and it still got a 9.5/10, and lookwhat it is now.....
MW2 is leagues ahead of the new MOH. Still, I suppose we're talking semantics here.