Viewing Thread:
"How fantastic is XIII?"

I'm not supposed to be playing games right now to be honest. I'm pretty bust with my Uni-work, 1080 is great, True Crime is very enjoyable but really I can't play the game without feeling guilty. The comes along XIII,

You know that feeling Goldeneye had, that feeling you can't put your thumb on but made the game the legend it is. Yes Halo and Perfect Dark are technically better than it in EVERY WAY but Goldeneye had a special feeling that just made it surpass anything that has come to rival it. Well XIII has that same feeling.

The problem is the game's loading times are 30 seconds long and there are a lot of them. But with nice graphics, clever extras, a good feel to the weapons, a splash of comedy, a fantastic storyline, David Duchovny voicing the lead character and some nice flash backs.

You can't imagine how satisfying smash a chair over someone's head is or plating a pane of glass between the eyes.

FANTASTIC!

Over doing it perhaps from the point of view of people who were getting it regardless.

Vital to those that need persuading completly. If there were X-box reviews like this I'd have that system myself by now.

]-[ØM€® B€€® §ØL!D ™ wrote:
> Dringo wrote:
> Lets face it 10 pages isn't even enough to describe how wonderful
> Zelda is.
>
> But did NGC need to do a 15 page review on Mario Kart?? When by the
> time the game came out virtually everyone already had it....and where
> did the hardware review pages go to?

Let me say that again ^

Dringo wrote:
> Lets face it 10 pages isn't even enough to describe how wonderful
> Zelda is.

But did NGC need to do a 15 page review on Mario Kart?? When by the time the mage came out virtually everyone already had it....and where did the hardware review pages go to?

Yeah but you see reviews with a score and a why it is good and why it is bad is a poor structure because you may prefer different things about games. What I mean is NGC look at all aspects of the games, look at them in a lot of depth and we read it.

Lets take P.N:03 for example... people criticised it for being too short. The fact it was short is a plus point in my books as it means I am more likely to complete it, and I did, due to my lack of time. A short game losses scores in a review but not in my books, so therefore I prefer an in depth look so I can discover the ins and outs of games before I buy it.

Lets face it 10 pages isn't even enough to describe how wonderful Zelda is.

Dringo wrote:
> NGC's reviews go into the most depth.

Ah, but it's too much depth. They really need to master the art of concise yet infomative and interesting writing. It's not a bad magazine, and I do enjoy reading it, but I took one look at their 10-page Zelda review and thought "get out!".

You know what XIII reminds me of Die Hard: Vendetta...

But with a host of cool extras.

NGC's reviews go into the most depth.

Hedfix wrote:
> So Mav reads one magazine where others choose to read more than one
> review to get a better picture of what they're buying.

It looks that way, doesn't it?

But before I dismiss a game completely I will do some research on it and ask around. I simply don't have the money or time to indulge in more than one gaming magazine a month (I may pick up CUBE, NGC, NOM, XBM or OPSM2 once or twice a year, though).

Really though, the good thing about GamesTM's reviews is that after reading them, I don't need much more to give me a clear picture of the game. I prefer one very good review to lots of rubbishy ones.

Yeah, but you have like *2* triggers!

Equating into 4 buttons.

Cyclone wrote:
> cookie monster wrote:
> That controller was the best there has ever been.
>
> They should have stuck with it.
>
>
> Pish.
>
> The GCs controller is faaar better.

Agreed... I still miss the Z trigger.