MastaKilla
Member
How can I take IGN seriously when they do things like this... as if it's not worth their time to be thorough and play the game with the patch. They've lost credibility in my eyes.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
LittleBigPlanet 3 reviews
- Thread starter Loudninja
- Start date
Haha, was just about to post this.
They lost any (review) credibility a long time ago...
King Beyond the wall
Member
Evidentially not as IGN gave the MCC a 9/10 and its bugs, glitches and virtually broken multiplayer are well documented.
hqqttjiang
Member
The game was reviewed by LUCY O'BRIEN.
I think she was fired by IGN after the beyond two souls???
I think she was fired by IGN after the beyond two souls???
Principate
Saint Titanfall
That's probably because they didn't play the multi properly/it was before the release and so issues were less noticeable. Whereas the issues here a more noticeable the earlier you play it.
DryvBy
Member
They learned in a week?
Catalix
And on the sixth day the LORD David Bowie created man and woman in His image. And he saw that it was good. On the seventh day the LORD created videogames so that He might take the bloody day off for once.
LBP community levels can be amazing in their own right, but it's really dumb to disparage the value of a well paced full fledged story campaign. It helps set the tone for the entire package. It's especially important when the only content available is old LBP1/2 levels, and a handful of beta levels that didn't have time to fully take advantage of the brand new toolset.
cbrotherson
Member
Glad I'm not the only one who noticed - not sure if people just expect it from IGN and blocked it out or...
That said, the first couple pages of this thread = grammar graveyard.
Kenshin001
Member
I did, especially the first game since the community levels were an unknown quantity. The game shouldn't have to rely on community levels to carry it. They should be the icing on the cake. Sumo hired 10 content creators so I would have thought there'd be a more than solid campaign with some amazing levels in it.
Actually quite surprised at some of the lower scores because all the previews I've seen it looks awesome.
Principate
Saint Titanfall
More like they probably didn't see because the rushed out the reviews, notice how the later the review is posted for MCC the worse it is. I mean as great as halo is it probably wouldn't have gotten the scores it got if everyone experienced the broken online.
get2sammyb
Member
I haven't experienced any game breaking bugs this end. On one occasion I died at the start of a level and couldn't respawn, so I hit the replay button and started the level again. Not a big deal like Unity's problems, and certainly something that seems easy to fix.
Anyway, the game's absolutely brilliant - when the campaign is at its peak, it's 10/10 calibre in my opinion. It's just a teensy bit short in my book, but that's fine, because Create opens up limitless possibilities.
Our review is through here:
http://www.pushsquare.com/reviews/ps4/littlebigplanet_3
Anyway, the game's absolutely brilliant - when the campaign is at its peak, it's 10/10 calibre in my opinion. It's just a teensy bit short in my book, but that's fine, because Create opens up limitless possibilities.
Our review is through here:
http://www.pushsquare.com/reviews/ps4/littlebigplanet_3
travisbickle
Member
The story campaign is fine. What the Polygon reviewer is specifically talking about when he says "that content" is 4-player levels. He is wondering why there aren't any 4-player levels in the single player campaign. As there's only small sections within the single player campaign that need multiple players to complete.
I play the games for the already made/story levels.
Americanmushroom
Banned
I hope the popit bug is fixed when it comes out in Europe.
travisbickle
Member
The story's fine, read the review he specifically calls out a lack of 4-player coop levels that use all the characters abilities.
Ye we should have frozen the very first person that ever reviewed for IGN and unfreeze him /her for every review and freeze him back so they have no clue about the industry changing landscape, ambivalent of anything around him, etc except for that very first review so we have a true baseline for reviews.
I just checked - its odd.
Dragon Age Inquisition or Far Cry 4 on amazon are about £40. On PSN they are £54.99
LBP3 on Amazon is £48. On PSN its £49.99.
Wonder why no real discounting on the physical release like the other big titles? It actually pushed me into a digital purchase because the gap was small - if it had been £40 on amazon I might have gone physical. (and now I'm tempted to buy Dragon Age at that price, damn..)
TheDarkKnight774
Member
If there are game crashing bugs during the review then it should be mentioned and affect the score. The fact they didn't for AC and MCC is the real issue, not doing it here. And hopefully this means reviewers will do it more going forward.
With that said, if/when patches are released it's the responsibility of reviewers to revisit the games and rescore them
With that said, if/when patches are released it's the responsibility of reviewers to revisit the games and rescore them
Wow, seriously? Further irons my resolve to never visit that site.
What are these bugs?
Coulomb_Barrier
Member
I can't take most reviews seriously.
But yeah, it's the usual suspects here with questionable opinions - IGN, Polygon, Gamespot. Just waiting for Eurogamer.
tim_pkmn89
Member
I play LBP for the story mode. The community levels were always too much of a crap shoot.
travisbickle
Member
Where did you read that? It says 7-8 hrs in the IGN review (it says single player campaign so I don't know if that includes side quests?)... not amazing but good enough with added user content.
Acquiescence
Member
It's fortunate then that there will be enough fan-made content to last you a lifetime.
Castef
Banned
Also, if you play for 4-5-6 hours and do not like the platforming engine of the game, that won't get better with more playing.
get2sammyb
Member
Well, that's if you just critical path it. I agree that it's on the short side, but that number will increase to at least 10 hours if you want to complete all the quests and get all of the prize puzzles. And then you need to ace all of the levels as well...
Justice_Bolt
Member
Call me crazy but I was. Now,I'm done with this website. Gaf it is.
Toothbrush
Member
Fair enough, I just think that those recent reviews have illustrated each of those individual's expectations out of game rather than purposely trying to cater to a targeted audience. That being said, I do think the idea of more consistency would be nice. Especially with the rising problem of unfinished games being shipped!
papercan55
Member
i've checked a few of the reviews, the campaign sounds good but very, very short.
user content is great but i really think that they should beef up the developer made levels next time, it's no excuse to constantly rely on user made content.
I'm hoping the reviews are wrong and the story mode is long but it looks to be the same case as little big planet 2 where they made new levels which show off new tools and then just stopped, relying on the players to make new content themselves.
The least they could have done is include the best story levels from the first two games remastered as a bonus after you finish.
Toothbrush
Member
As I mentioned previously, I do think you guys have a solid point with the lack of consistency although I don't think they're trying to manipulate the reviews in order to please their target audience. I think you're being a tad bit harsh on the site as many others are, but nonetheless you do bring up some valid points!
Polygon's reviews are run by the most disreputable person in the enthusiast press and IGN's reviews are run by a guy who only started playing console games a couple of years ago when he left PC Gamer. Neither of them are up to the job.
Plinko
Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
Another review I read--either Joystiq or Game Informer.
I'll definitely be trying to 100% tis, so hopefully that extends it a decent amount.
Coulomb_Barrier
Member
Yeah, it's preposterous how anyone can even consider there reviews. I haven't been to their site in a few years.
Dark_Rainbow
Neo Member
6.8 by IGN
I don't know what is wrong with current generation games. they all either ported as an HD version or they were poorly made. It seems that the real year of gaming is 2015 where allot of promising titles will hit the market and hopefully they present to us a great experience.
I don't know what is wrong with current generation games. they all either ported as an HD version or they were poorly made. It seems that the real year of gaming is 2015 where allot of promising titles will hit the market and hopefully they present to us a great experience.
I see a bunch of people complaining about reviewers not marking down AC for the bugs. Outside of maybe biogamer girl they ALL mentioned the bugs and the mediocre scores reflect that (as it should).
I see the lack of content also reflecting in most scores so before you pick up your torches and pitchforks to defend your franchise/brand etc try to be a little more objective.
Some of you need to remove your tinfoil hats.
I see the lack of content also reflecting in most scores so before you pick up your torches and pitchforks to defend your franchise/brand etc try to be a little more objective.
Some of you need to remove your tinfoil hats.
Dark_Rainbow
Neo Member
It is silly in some sense. However, we should care about reviews since they come from sources every gamer log into to get the information from. Whether we like or not, gaming sites are reference for gamers and once you get down into discussion you have to have reference. I guess
John Bender
Banned
Which is still nonsense!
If a game is good, it's good.
Doesn't matter if it's Dudebro 552585.
If you have to review a car, it doesn't matter if you are sick and tired of Toyota's.
If the care is good, it's getting good reviews.
This "I personally don't like it = bad" or "bu... but it's my opinion" is completely retarded and the perfect excuse for every reviewer. "Biased? Fanboy? Me? Nonono! Just my opinion."
Using that logic, I have to give Zelda: Skyward Sword a 5/10, because I hate it.
Would I do it? No, because I have to be unbiased and... you know... there is something called "objectivity". It is a good game, but it annoys me to no end, because it does some things I personally don't like.
Lower the score because of that? Bullshit!
Tempesta di Fuoco
Banned
Eh, I was hoping they'd fixed the numerous problems with the series, but from the sounds of it, it's worse than the last couple. Pass.
Tempesta di Fuoco
Banned
There is no objectivity in video game reviews. If you don't like a game, give it a bad review. If you like a game, give it a good review. That's how it works.
Someone had a terrible experience with the game and gave it a bad review, somehow this translates to everyone here being angry at them? What would you do, assuming you had the exact same experience they did?
Reviews are a reflection of a personal experience and nothing more, if I reviewed COD: Ghosts I wouldn't give it 10/10 because I know ~30 million people are going to love it, I'd give it a score based on my experience of it being a fairly poor game.
Reviews are a reflection of a personal experience and nothing more, if I reviewed COD: Ghosts I wouldn't give it 10/10 because I know ~30 million people are going to love it, I'd give it a score based on my experience of it being a fairly poor game.