Good graphics doesn't mean the most polygons, or the best bump maps. You are so full of crap if you think that's all graphics encompass. It's the little things, the interesting animations, the leaves falling off trees, the helicopters flying across the sky, the rain effects, the fog effects... etc. Play the fucking game, then come whine about what you think it deserves. Of course, you are so biased yourself, that no matter how good the game, your stubborn self won't accept the fact that it's a great game.
Is this pointed towards me? If so its rather blunt and it doesn't sting to be honest.
The reason why is that i haven't said anything about the graphics at all, infact i repeatedly said that i didn't play the game and i even implied a couple of times that i don't think GTA to be crap, at all. Yes, i agree completely that "good graphics" do not depend on polygoncount, infact i'm absolutely not a graphixwhore ("graphix as in polygoncount, not quality of graphics). I'm also the last person to think a game doesn't deserve a high score because its graphics are for example outdated. (*looks at Dwarf Fortress thread*)
I assume this blunt piece of nonestinging failure is pointed towards me for the fact that Whiteghost already implied that he did infact play the game, if you missed that then i would advice you to not mix up statements of Whiteghost and me. Lastly, "biased"? A joke?
If you really stand behind this retardo review and can keep a straight face when facing these straight tens then answer me this, is it asymptotic or linear?
Asymptotic meaning infinite possibilities? If that is the case then its more linear than asymptotic. But by traditional gaming standards its not linear at all. And I'm sure the number of instances you can achieve in the game are in the trillions if not more. So in pure mathematical terms it isn't perfect. but by a reasonable rating scale its pretty much perfect. All games have glitches and hiccups, there is no avoiding that, so there should be room for a small margin of error in a perfect rating or else no game would ever get one.
I agree that there is should be a margin of error for games but i still don't agree with IGN's reviewing skills and probably never will. I'll agree that the game is fun for people unlike myself. I just don't see the point of it. The sound, yeah sure the music is good, don't really care for it in console games as im usually listening to my own music when playing them unless its rock band or guitar hero. The story, well i can't judge that because i didn't play through the entire game so that would be a problem. The graphics are good, i'll give you that. They're definately decent. However i don't see the fairness of IGN's reviews. If they are going to give this game's graphics a ten then give some games such as (once again) Assassin's Creed over a ten. I read the entire review of Assassin's Creed and the guy complained that as he was sitting on top of a building looking out over Acre or Jerusalem, there was some slight pixelation in spots. Well of course. The city/map is fucking huge. You're gonna have these things happen. Ill give it that GTAIV is a good, solid game. I wouldn't give it a 10 personally. Id give it around a 9.7 or 9.5 overall. But hey, i don't write the reviews.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"I'm like a dog chasing cars." - Joker, Dark Knight
That doesn't mean a game deserves "all tens". To me its pretty obvious, IGN is just mainstream junk, all of the mainstream praise GTA IV so they thought to themselves "i better join in and give this game all tens". Its a fucking mainstream junk rating. Might aswell read a gamespot user review, most of the time its either 10/10 BEST GAEM EVAH or 0/10 WORST GAEM EVAH. Mainstream junk ratings.
If i read a review then i want to know certain flaws, or special things that deserve praise, i don't need this crap 10101010101010101010 BS. Will the game even last? Did they at all think about that? or is it really just a "everyone says its good, so it must be good" and a "i believe everything PR said about this game" review?
I mean, come on, even user rating gives it a 9.1 (due to fanboyism likely to be a tad to high, but could still be a fair rating) and the average press rating is a 9.9? WTF???? Do i need to draw a picture or what?
Exactly, now every fucking big gamereview site is chanting "OMG GODLY", but is it? Is it really "OMFGBBQGODLY"? I mean although i like GTA it has BIG flaws, it has one of the worst third person shooting mechanisms i have ever seen and "shooting" is a pretty big thing in GTA, no? Seriously, for this game to deserve a TEN they better fucking not give me crap controls for example. San Andreas wasn't "OMG GODLY", and that was LAST GEN, seriously, what has improved so drastically for this game to deserve all tens? I can't really figure it out. "Story"? Really? "Story"? GTA games have a "great story"? Don't make me laugh.
On a not-so-side sidenote, i'm probably getting this game tomorow. (I always liked GTA games, but they never struck me as "GODLY" though, just very fun "BLOW STUFF UP" and "DRIVE AROUND MAKING JUMPS AND KILLING PEOPLE" entertainment, oh and the radiostations are pretty much solid each time, so i could see how it could deserve a 10 when it comes to music)
I've played the game a total of 15:26 hours - checked ingame - and I'd give it around a 9.1.
The replayability, story wise, is pretty bad. After playing an hour on the wrong gamertag that has no Live I couldnt be arsed to restart it because it got off so slow and it would be such a pain.
On xbox the pop-up is about 100X worse than what reviewers said "minor pop-up". Textures get sometimes get loaded 5 seconds after i've been staring at it 3 feet away. Trees randomly appear out of no where, and random scenery does too.
One major flaw has been passed down from generation to generation of GTA. After hours of non-stop play, sometimes i get in a car and it fails to play the sound of the engine or tire squeel. Even after switching cars it doesnt play the sounds.
Every now and then I get out of a car and something weird happens, whether it be it misplaces Niko or something else, it shouldn't be happning in a game of this magnitude. 10/10 for this? C'mon.
I'm not saying its a wonderful game - it is - but even the story is missing some depth.
ok i havent really read this thread. but i do have a 360 and was wondering about getting this game. i probably wont get it for about another month at least. but still i am wondering if i should even get it. so what do you guys think who have it. buy or not?