The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Ok seeing as this gets deleted on the official site i think ill post it on here.
A few readers have noticed 2 big mistakes in 2 games that were reviewed this month[issue34]which has bought up the question, do the staff even play the games they are reviewing??
The first was Headhunter which they gave 5.8. They complained about the graphics[funny seeing as they look like Prince of persia sands of time, which they said looked great]. But the big problem was this, 'The odd bike chase succeeds in breaking up the on-foot action' Now anyone who has played Headhunter will tell you that the Bike bits were taken out of the game.
The seconed one is Madden 2005 which they gave 8.5. Saying that there was LIVE play for up to 4 players, again this is not true as the Pal version does not support live play[this is the official mage and only reviews Pal games]. The question again did they even play the game??
Im sorry but how bad can it be if a mag is having to cut corners in their reviews?? How bad is it when Amuze[makers of headhunter] have to wright a letter on the OXM site about the false comments in the review?
I dont know any other mag that does this sort of thing?
Like i said if this sort of thing is posted on the official site they just delete it with instead of being grown ups and dealing with the matter properly.
A few readers have noticed 2 big mistakes in 2 games that were reviewed this month[issue34]which has bought up the question, do the staff even play the games they are reviewing??
The first was Headhunter which they gave 5.8. They complained about the graphics[funny seeing as they look like Prince of persia sands of time, which they said looked great]. But the big problem was this, 'The odd bike chase succeeds in breaking up the on-foot action' Now anyone who has played Headhunter will tell you that the Bike bits were taken out of the game.
The seconed one is Madden 2005 which they gave 8.5. Saying that there was LIVE play for up to 4 players, again this is not true as the Pal version does not support live play[this is the official mage and only reviews Pal games]. The question again did they even play the game??
Im sorry but how bad can it be if a mag is having to cut corners in their reviews?? How bad is it when Amuze[makers of headhunter] have to wright a letter on the OXM site about the false comments in the review?
I dont know any other mag that does this sort of thing?
Like i said if this sort of thing is posted on the official site they just delete it with instead of being grown ups and dealing with the matter properly.
Page:
But OXM say they on review finished games, clearly this is not the case.
No online play in Tiger Woods 2005, EA confirmed that the first four games to include this were NFSU2, Burnout 3, Timesplitters 3 and Fifa 2005.
No online play in Madden, does this mean we won't be getting online play in Tiger Woods 2005?
If so this sucks ass, EA can f**k off if this is true.
If so this sucks ass, EA can f**k off if this is true.
Magazines review pre-release sourcecode builds in order to beat their competition.
Just look at some mags 'reviews' of Driver 3 to get an idea of how trustworthy they are.
Look up the game you want at IGN, Gamespot and then look at some reviews here and you'll get a much better idea of what the game's like than reading a rag reliant on hype, bribes and advertising revenue.
Just look at some mags 'reviews' of Driver 3 to get an idea of how trustworthy they are.
Look up the game you want at IGN, Gamespot and then look at some reviews here and you'll get a much better idea of what the game's like than reading a rag reliant on hype, bribes and advertising revenue.
Ok seeing as this gets deleted on the official site i think ill post it on here.
A few readers have noticed 2 big mistakes in 2 games that were reviewed this month[issue34]which has bought up the question, do the staff even play the games they are reviewing??
The first was Headhunter which they gave 5.8. They complained about the graphics[funny seeing as they look like Prince of persia sands of time, which they said looked great]. But the big problem was this, 'The odd bike chase succeeds in breaking up the on-foot action' Now anyone who has played Headhunter will tell you that the Bike bits were taken out of the game.
The seconed one is Madden 2005 which they gave 8.5. Saying that there was LIVE play for up to 4 players, again this is not true as the Pal version does not support live play[this is the official mage and only reviews Pal games]. The question again did they even play the game??
Im sorry but how bad can it be if a mag is having to cut corners in their reviews?? How bad is it when Amuze[makers of headhunter] have to wright a letter on the OXM site about the false comments in the review?
I dont know any other mag that does this sort of thing?
Like i said if this sort of thing is posted on the official site they just delete it with instead of being grown ups and dealing with the matter properly.
A few readers have noticed 2 big mistakes in 2 games that were reviewed this month[issue34]which has bought up the question, do the staff even play the games they are reviewing??
The first was Headhunter which they gave 5.8. They complained about the graphics[funny seeing as they look like Prince of persia sands of time, which they said looked great]. But the big problem was this, 'The odd bike chase succeeds in breaking up the on-foot action' Now anyone who has played Headhunter will tell you that the Bike bits were taken out of the game.
The seconed one is Madden 2005 which they gave 8.5. Saying that there was LIVE play for up to 4 players, again this is not true as the Pal version does not support live play[this is the official mage and only reviews Pal games]. The question again did they even play the game??
Im sorry but how bad can it be if a mag is having to cut corners in their reviews?? How bad is it when Amuze[makers of headhunter] have to wright a letter on the OXM site about the false comments in the review?
I dont know any other mag that does this sort of thing?
Like i said if this sort of thing is posted on the official site they just delete it with instead of being grown ups and dealing with the matter properly.
Page: