GRcade

I thought Doom was a 7?

Have Edge reviewed World of Goo yet?

Mogster, you speak a lot of sense and I totally agree with you. The only reason I have fallen out of love with EDGE is that I think they have dropped far too many high profile clangers for my liking now.

The only way to find out if you are going to like a game pre-release is to read reviews from a wide range of sources and make up you own mind I guess. Anyone would be a bit niave to trust just one source I suppose.

The Halo Wars review is very positive, really looking forward to it now.

Although it did contain a MASSIVE plot spoiler. MASSIVE

I'm actually very pissed off about it.



Also I don't really see FEAR2 outscoring KZ2 as being much of a shock, the original FEAR was far better than the original KZ.

I know I'm going to really enjoy Killzone 2 and having enjoyed nearly all of Edge's recent high profile 7's I'm not worried.

Just reiterating what others have said but a 7 on the edge scale really isn't bad, only having the snippets of information from here to go on it sounds like the story is a bit of mess. This is a valid reason to give the game a lower score in my eyes, I'm buying this game for the flashy graphics and great sound so I know I'm not going to be disappointed.

A little surprising to see Hugo defending Edges scoring, I thought you had condemned ME to be 'wrong'?

An 8 for Race Pro, nice.

And the timing for the Hellgate "Making Of" couldn't be better, what with the server being shut down this week.

I'm more interested to see what those designers were able to create in LBP.

No one has mentioned how awesome the cover is! About time Edge put this right, the last few have been atroscious

As for the scores....

The opening statement from the Killzone 2 review says it all, they talk about "Sony Fanboys", "Four years of marketing" and later "so many millions of dollars". Now personally I dont think these things hould have an impact on a review, Edge seem annoyed that the story isn't better after all the money spent, but they should just review what is in front of them on the disc, most people don't know about the hype, the cost or the Neogaf fanbase.

The review is quite positive as shown by the quotes in the Killzone thread, if you hadn't looked at the score first you would be surprised if when you got to the end of the text.

However I'm afraid we are now in a world where you pull a gimmick like tapping a cardboard box with one finger and you get a better score.

I've heard Let's Tap has a phenomenal story, Rik

Rik before making his post:

Red Yoshi wrote:I've heard Let's Tap has a phenomenal story, Rik

It must have, Oscar stuff to get an 8.

Rik wrote:

Red Yoshi wrote:I've heard Let's Tap has a phenomenal story, Rik

It must have, Oscar stuff to get an 8.

Looking at 10's this gen, I'm not sure that's true

Rik, why does every negative review of the game have to have some ulterior motive behind it? It just seems like its a very good but slightly flawed game. I'm sure Edge didn't mark it down based on hype, they marked it down for an average campaign and gave it props for its great multiplayer mode. It's probably due to the multiplayer that it got 7 which is an above average score lets not forget.

Killzone 2 is currently at 92.3% average on Gamerankings and Fear 2 79.2%. Admittedly Fear has only had 3 reviews so far but from opinions I've gathered and the demos I'd be surprised if the gap changes much at all. The Edge KZ2 score is going to sit at the bottom of gamerankings/metacritic listings, which is becoming quite common for them recently.

DaveDS wrote:Killzone 2 is currently at 92.3% average on Gamerankings and Fear 2 79.2%. Admittedly Fear has only had 3 reviews so far but from opinions I've gathered and the demos I'd be surprised if the gap changes much at all.

Chalk me up for the "FEAR 2 might be better" camp so far. More on this later.

Shodan wrote:Rik, why does every negative review of the game have to have some ulterior motive behind it? It just seems like its a very good but slightly flawed game. I'm sure Edge didn't mark it down based on hype, they marked it down for an average campaign and gave it props for its great multiplayer mode. It's probably due to the multiplayer that it got 7 which is an above average score lets not forget.

It is relevant in a review to take into consideration expectations for the game promoted by the media shown from it, as well as the budget (otherwise why would low budget gems even get a look in in terms of high review scores). Especially if there's an insanely high budget and little to show for it, think Waterworld.

Rubbish! The review should be about whats on the disk.

Eighthours wrote:

DaveDS wrote:Killzone 2 is currently at 92.3% average on Gamerankings and Fear 2 79.2%. Admittedly Fear has only had 3 reviews so far but from opinions I've gathered and the demos I'd be surprised if the gap changes much at all.

Chalk me up for the "FEAR 2 might be better" camp so far. More on this later.

Did you ever play the first one?

HSH28 wrote:I expect at some point Edge will mention the fact it got this one wrong

I suggest you go read "Edge's most played" this month

Eighthours wrote:

DaveDS wrote:Killzone 2 is currently at 92.3% average on Gamerankings and Fear 2 79.2%. Admittedly Fear has only had 3 reviews so far but from opinions I've gathered and the demos I'd be surprised if the gap changes much at all.

Chalk me up for the "FEAR 2 might be better" camp so far. More on this later.

I think you should play more than the first 10 minutes of the killzone 2 single player before I chalk you up for that.

Shodan wrote:Rik, why does every negative review of the game have to have some ulterior motive behind it? It just seems like its a very good but slightly flawed game. I'm sure Edge didn't mark it down based on hype, they marked it down for an average campaign and gave it props for its great multiplayer mode. It's probably due to the multiplayer that it got 7 which is an above average score lets not forget.

It is relevant in a review to take into consideration expectations for the game promoted by the media shown from it, as well as the budget (otherwise why would low budget gems even get a look in in terms of high review scores). Especially if there's an insanely high budget and little to show for it, think Waterworld.

I don't think there is a "motive" but they have pre-conceptions before they put the disc in, I don't think that is right. the average punter will know nothing about the things I mentioned, the cost of the game is not relevant to the end user in any way at all.