theebenthusiast
Neo Member
NWR review updated. I gave it a 7.5: http://www.nintendoworldreport.com/review/39827/code-name-steam-3ds-review
NWR review updated. I gave it a 7.5: http://www.nintendoworldreport.com/review/39827/code-name-steam-3ds-review
If you glance at the eShop, you'll get your answer. It says available at midnight. All retail stuff is available at midnight.
Any word on the multiplayer? How long until this is out on the eShop?
Any word on the multiplayer? How long until this is out on the eShop?
1 hour now
Should be midnight EST. So in about an hour unless I'm mistaken.
I think I'm gonna post the OT now, though. I need to go to bed.
What do you want to know about multiplayer?
Thank you.
Thanks. I heard about tournaments, but I want to know if the MP is co-op or versus, the rest I'll try to find online.
Code Name S.T.E.A.M. |OT| is live: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1009627
Online is versus. Like the demo says. It's 1v1 death match (last man standing) / medal battle (timed) and ABE Battle (mech vs mech brawl)
This game has rare cult classic written all over it.
Kinda like Valkyria when it first came out, Now its on PC and everyone loves it. Hope this gets the same treatment. (got my copy wednesday and It is very fun and great. Difficulty fluxuates quite a bit, and the enemy movement gets slow at times. Other than that, a very solid game)
IGN 7.9/10
Code Name: STEAM is a good turn-based action game that poses tough choices, where one wrong move can mean doom.
■■■
Game Informer 8/10
Code Name: S.T.E.A.M has plenty to love, but it also falls short in keeping all moments thrilling and tense.
Gamespot 4/10
For the record, I'm not saying that reviews are pointless and I understand these are three different people. Still doesn't make the vast gaps in their scores and opinions and less silly though.
What is even remotely silly about different people having different opinions about something?
Updated the OP. I think we can officially declare that the reviews for this game are all over the place.
Still don't understand how you can review a game you didn't finish
The text of the review explains it pretty well.
Shouldn't be considered a review... Imo
Not finishing one mission doesn't make much of a difference. They played enough to judge the game and articulate their opinion. It's not like they played a few hours and gave up.
I was miraculously saved by review editor Arthur Gies who said I didn't have to finish it providing I'd just stop whining about it. I'm considering naming my next child after him.
I honestly think the game is average from what I've seen in the demo, so I'm not that far removed from their review (they were way too harsh on it though). However a reviewer should try and see everything what they're reviewing has to offer: imagine doing a review for a movie having only seen half of it, or reviewing an album before listening to all the songs. Nobody in the entertainment world does this, only game critics get away with this, in any case he should be sorry to its readers because he didn't complete it, he should certainly not gloat about it or be a dick about it.
So professional.BTW why does every single stupid thing from Polygon end up being Gies or Kuchera's fault? Incredible.
It's somewhat common to read DVD / Blu-ray reviews where writers don't actually listen to audio commentaries in their entirety or (especially) watch multiple cuts of movies. Listening to an album or watching a movie rarely takes north of 25 hours, for what it's worth.Nobody in the entertainment world does this, only game critics get away with this, in any case he should be sorry to its readers because he didn't complete it, he should certainly not gloat about it or be a dick about it.
I doubt there was anything in the last bit of the game that would have changed the reviewer's opinion of the game. Disliking that opinion is fine, but I don't think not completing the last mission is particularly relevant. The comparison to films is hollow as films are short and not interactive.
I vehemently disagree. If you're reviewing a product it's your duty to see everything that it has to offer. Maybe not 100% the game, but at least reach some developer-intended conclusion. Without that you are not entitled to a proper opinion about the game.
Polygon didn't finish the game? I never took them seriously but now I will never trust a review. Not saying the game isn't shit but finish the fucking game you are paid to review
I vehemently disagree. If you're reviewing a product it's your duty to see everything that it has to offer. Maybe not 100% the game, but at least reach some developer-intended conclusion. Without that you are not entitled to a proper opinion about the game.
So how did you come to a conclusion that reaching 100% is not required to properly review a game? It's still content I'd imagine most reviewers never see and thus really can't have an opinion on it.
Still don't understand how you can review a game you didn't finish
Most games have a minimal intended end state that is rather obvious.
I vehemently disagree. If you're reviewing a product it's your duty to see everything that it has to offer. Maybe not 100% the game, but at least reach some developer-intended conclusion. Without that you are not entitled to a proper opinion about the game.
You can still write a review, but I won't read your review to the end.
Polygon didn't finish the game? I never took them seriously but now I will never trust a review. Not saying the game isn't shit but finish the fucking game you are paid to review
Still don't understand how you can review a game you didn't finish
Polygon didn't finish the game? I never took them seriously but now I will never trust a review. Not saying the game isn't shit but finish the fucking game you are paid to review
I love this post.
You don't even read their reviews but second hand information about this one has made you so angry you'll no longer trust a site you've never read in the first place.
Yes, actually all review threads should lead with the bad scores >_>this was a great social experiment. Hope the zelda review thread will lead with the lowest score.
It might have been reviewed better, atleast reviewers would have avoided sitting through that last shite cutscene.I agree with this. I'd at least like a completely informed opinion on the entire game's main campaign/story mode. It's good that they disclosed this info at least.
Imagine if reviewers stopped playing MGS4 before the end missions/cutscenes of the main campaign lol