PDA

View Full Version : PLANET XBOX gives AC an 6.7



winner9000
11-13-2007, 10:10 AM
http://www.planetxbox360.com/index.php/articledetails/show/3035

Clonage2006
11-13-2007, 10:12 AM
It's an opinion. Nothing to worry about.

AirRon_2K7
11-13-2007, 10:14 AM
Originally posted by Clonage2006:
It's an opinion. Nothing to worry about.

Agreed.

Exassassin
11-13-2007, 10:14 AM
Am I the only one who doesn't even know this site? I'll wait for the more experienced reviewers out there: IGN/Gamespot/TeamXbox/Gamespy. Here come the trolls who only had negative feedback! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/shady.gif

AzureAssassin
11-13-2007, 10:17 AM
Kinda sucks that all these reviews seem to come to an agreement with the fact that it does eventually get a little repeptitive going through the same pattern of preparations for the assassination.

dd22cowboys
11-13-2007, 10:21 AM
man, aC isnt doing that well in reviews, with the AI and repetetive missions...http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

winner9000
11-13-2007, 10:22 AM
I'm a troll for posting a review?

GuStick93
11-13-2007, 10:24 AM
this review is obviously BS,they gave the graphics an 8,what the hell did they play it on,replay 4 ? controls 6 ? what the hell is planetxbox360.com...

Exassassin
11-13-2007, 10:26 AM
Assassin's Creed is not all problems but with only nine missions, no replayability (other than a few hidden items and boring side quests), and zero multiplayer it is hard to recommend it for a purchase. The game has some really amazing moments but at the end of the day it is just too repetitive and too many things go wrong for it to deserve a good score, save your time for Mass Effect or Call of Duty 4.

He totally lost his credibility with this.

No replayability? That's his own opinion but I don't really see why you should replay this game when you captured the 100 flags, killed the 60 templars, defeated the story, and climbed virtually everything. That alone would cost me 50 hours. I don't see myself replaying it after that.

Zero Multiplayer? Ok, this is the part where he lost his credibility. He's the kind of person who demands multiplayer in a free roaming game. It can be done but don't get me started about Saints Row's multiplayer. There are dozens of games who don't have multiplayer. Does he bash those games as well?

Call of Duty 4? Ok, don't get me wrong. That game is great but it's definitely not worth the 60 bucks because you can complete the singleplayer campaign in 6 hours. The multiplayer is great, but not worth the 60 bucks. Basically this game is multiplayer only (like Team Fortress 2) and that game was 30 bucks.

Raide
11-13-2007, 10:29 AM
Interesting review, but in the end it is only opinion. Assassin's Creed is not a normal stealth game. Linking it is Splinter Cell and Metal Gear is just wrong and already starts to form the wrong idea of the game.

Assassin's Creed is a new twist and instead of the sneaky/kill people genre that has been done for years, it tries to do something fun with player movement and social stealth aspects. Wait until you get your copy and make your own minds up about the game. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif



Raide
UK Forum Manager

Arlo1
11-13-2007, 10:31 AM
Cod4 Multiplayer is absolutely worth the 60 bucks bro.

winner9000
11-13-2007, 10:31 AM
Team Xbox: http://reviews.teamxbox.com/xbox-360/1428/Assassins-Creed/p4

AirRon_2K7
11-13-2007, 10:31 AM
Originally posted by winner9000:
I'm a troll for posting a review?

No you're not! I don't think he was talking about you, but if he was... ermm, ignore him.


6.7 is a terrible review score, and I mean terrible, not in a 'he's wrong' way, but it an actual fact that if a game get's 6.7... it's worse than poo: the video game.

I don't agree with this obviously, but bless him.. he's entitled to his own opinion.

winner9000
11-13-2007, 10:38 AM
there are some spoilers in the team xbox review

Exassassin
11-13-2007, 10:47 AM
Originally posted by winner9000:
there are some spoilers in the team xbox review

I had high hopes for the TeamXbox review but they failed me a lot lately. They gave Halo 3, which is nothing more but an upgraded Halo 2, a 9.7. These are also the people who gave Prince of Persia: Two Thrones a 9.1. Perfect Dark Zero also had a 8.8 from these guys. Assassin's Creed is the only game compared to that entire list which brings something entirely new and innovative and they complain about the fact that it is repetitive. The luxury of reviewers is that they get the game early. The downsight of reviewers is that they have to finish a game in a couple of days because they have to write a review. It doesn't really let them enjoy the entire game.

Dvlos56
11-13-2007, 10:54 AM
Originally posted by AirRon_2K7:
6.7 is a terrible review score, and I mean terrible, not in a 'he's wrong' way, but it an actual fact that if a game get's 6.7... it's worse than poo: the video game.

http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/5251069024/m/8721056706

This review agrees with what I stated, but it got locked because you placed yourself as the insultee.

In any case. 6.7 is not Poo: The Video Game.. 5 is average, sub-5 games are bad, people value their money so they only want to spend their hard earned cash on something that is potentially great or stellar and not just mediocre.

However 6.7 is "good" or better than average. I think that the score is a bit, personally I rated the game 7.5 out of 10, certainly not the near 10/10 I was expecting a few months back.

Interesting that Halo 3 and Perfect Dark are brought, I actually agree that Halo 3 deserves high marks but it has plenty of flaws. But as a shooter.. not judging it as a deep RPG or involved RTS.. but as a FPS against all other FPS games. Halo 3 brings tons of features to the table that warrants hours of re-playability. It's graphics are not next gen but it's such a solid entry in the genre you cannot help but give it a good score.

Perfect Dark Zero is a sham, I rated that game a 6/10 it had several sections that were unplayable, but I could not explain why so many sites rated it so high unless Microsoft wine'd and dine'd everyone to say so.

Good day.

Firecracker22
11-13-2007, 11:00 AM
I never heard of Planet Xbox, so they're not even on my radar.

And I agree, it's become so very strange how a great multiplayer is held in higher regard than the single player. It's as if, you have a bad a single player and a great multiplayer....and you'll still be given a great score. While, the vice versa isn't true.

The Game Trailers review pointed something out too, that FPS shooters are the craze...and Ubisoft decided to go against the grain by trying for a 3rd person, unique game like AC.

AirRon_2K7
11-13-2007, 11:01 AM
Don't whine Dvlos, you're the one who insulted me...

You're topic wasn't closed 'cos you insulted me, it's 'cos you couldn't prove you played it

I still want to see that review.

Good day.

Dvlos56
11-13-2007, 11:03 AM
Originally posted by AirRon_2K7:
it's 'cos you couldn't prove you played it


Not even sure how I can go about doing this any more clearly. However you do own a PS3 you almost have to buy this game to go with Ratchet and Clank, every good gamer deserves more than just 1 game to play.

AirRon_2K7
11-13-2007, 11:06 AM
You haven't been clear at all. But you're making fanboy comments so I think it's about time you killed yourself.

Explain how you played it, and I won't look at you like you're a dribbling muppet.

Dvlos56
11-13-2007, 11:15 AM
Originally posted by AirRon_2K7:
But you're making fanboy comments so I think it's about time you killed yourself.

I didn't pay for it, but someone I work with has gotten his hands on it, I have played it, and I am reviewing it for a very small magazine (it's not national).

That is my answer, I can't point you to a link because none exists, and when it's in print I could point you to it if you live in the midwest. That would have to be at a later date. I really do not care, as to the amount of time I played I would estimate 2 hours of hands on, and 3-4 hours of watching, like I said its not MY game. Again you can poke holes at my story anyway, you undoubtedly will. But if you cannot sway me to rave about your game in 2 hours and neither of us agree that it is a "stupendously fantastic game", then you simply cannot.

I have been waiting to play this game for 2 years, and honestly I started getting way worried for the fate of AC before it came out. If you have lowered expectations, and the game is fun, you are usually MORE boisterous about the game, "A diamond in the rough" is usually what you think. For such a BEAUTIFUL game the real stunner is how dull it is mid-game and late game. How badly the story telling acting is presented, after all this development.

Now.. mark my words, IF there is a AC sequel AND they either, make AI as advanced as they originally intended, or truly go the action game route for combat, OR focus themselves into a more standardized stealth game like Thief or Hitman, and vary the side missions a lot more... that game wouldn't be a 10/10 in my book, with the graphics and the artwork and sheer size of the game.. not it wouldn't be 10/10 but a 12/10 game.

IHS_Spitfire
11-13-2007, 11:17 AM
it is really hard to figure out what Assassin's Creed is trying to be

What the hell, they are trying to get AC on what type of genre it is, they should be focusing on the fact that it is a unique game. Fools. 6.7 pfft!

Dvlos56
11-13-2007, 11:22 AM
Originally posted by IHS_Spitfire:
What the hell, they are trying to get AC on what type of genre it is, they should be focusing on the fact that it is a unique game. Fools. 6.7 pfft!

No, it just might be a tad overambitious, like a jack of all trades master of none, type of deal. I think that's another valid statement... Heavenly Sword and Ninja Gaiden have tight action/hack and flash/fighter controls.. the combat IS the game. This isn't the case.. other games present stealth AS the core mechanic and everything revolves around that. That is not AC either, it seems free-roaming is the center piece but.. big but.. free-roaming with nothing to do is dull or gets dull after a while.

Solid improvement to combat and stealth wouldn't be a bad thing for this game.

b-busher
11-13-2007, 11:24 AM
Originally posted by Dvlos56:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by IHS_Spitfire:
What the hell, they are trying to get AC on what type of genre it is, they should be focusing on the fact that it is a unique game. Fools. 6.7 pfft!

No, it just might be a tad overambitious, like a jack of all trades master of none, type of deal. I think that's another valid statement... Heavenly Sword and Ninja Gaiden have tight action/hack and flash/fighter controls.. the combat IS the game. This isn't the case.. other games present stealth AS the core mechanic and everything revolves around that. That is not AC either, it seems free-roaming is the center piece but.. big but.. free-roaming with nothing to do is dull or gets dull after a while.

Solid improvement to combat and stealth wouldn't be a bad thing for this game. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

So its getting punished for trying to re-invent action games I think it should get rewarded for this.

unnamedninja
11-13-2007, 11:24 AM
The thing that's totally baffled me is that everybody, and i mean everybody is saying the combat is awful.

Well i got PoP free with my slimline, and i thought the combat ruled, although i never read any reviews on that. Did they say the combat for PoP sucked as well??

Oh yeah and i'd like to add, all of these bad reviews that are coming in, are from people who are saying stuff like "get cod4" instead. Well i'm not knocking cod4, but it's kinda more action type of game and for adrenaline junkie type of gamers, who are typically younger. I think older gamers will really appreciate AC lot more, that's why IGN and a lot of the more established sites and mags have given AC a better score.

Bottom line, if you have the attention span of a gnat, and you chew on some ritalin every day to stop you bouncing off the walls, you will not like AC.

IHS_Spitfire
11-13-2007, 11:25 AM
I half agree with you, but still I shouldn't be hyping this game or it will get OVERHYPED.

Katatonia.
11-13-2007, 11:27 AM
Hard to take any review seriously that says this at the beginning:

"Don't get me wrong there is some really good stuff here but at the end of the day the horrid combat system and repetitive missions assassinate the game's chance at being a success."

And follows up with:

"This is how fighting works in the game and it works very well. No longer will a few button mashes win a fight, most of the time sword fights will take a few minutes and involve a lot of blocking then attacking. The system works well and it is nice to see the developers stay true to the time period of the game."

So is the combat system horrid or does it work well?

Then of course there is also his score in the graphics department of "8" yet he says:

"Graphically Assassin's Creed is a wonder to look at. The screenshots we have seen up until today do not do justice to how beautiful the game looks."

So is it an "8" or the "10" you seem to describe .

Lets not even get to calling out a game for lack of multiplayer when it has been known for a long time that there would be no multiplay.

I smell a hack.

IHS_Spitfire
11-13-2007, 11:28 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/agreepost.gif

MasterNeilson
11-13-2007, 12:00 PM
I think everyone should play it first before making any comments, good or bad.

Also, it would be cool if we come back to these forums a week or two after AC's release and make up a review topic, everyone sould post their review and comments about the game and after about 3 weeks of the topics opening, me and a couple of forum members will post a user review score together in this topic, and everyone must give a clear reason why they gave this game the score too as will i and the forum members when we post the user score, in the meantime i say everyone should stop posting their personnal opinions, Dvlos56 to be precise, and enjoy this *** kickery of a game!!

I'd like to hear your thoughts about this idea too, have fun people!!

P.S Anyone wanna volunteer to post the user score with me, we'll have a discussion together and come to a reasonable score, if your interested just send me a PM or post in here, thankz.

Dvlos56
11-13-2007, 12:05 PM
Originally posted by b-busher:
So its getting punished for trying to re-invent action games I think it should get rewarded for this.

How is it trying to re-invent action games, purposely trying NOT to be an action game but a blend of genres.

It should be praised forever if it succeeds.