PDA

View Full Version : AC3- Guess the Review Score



roostersrule2
09-21-2012, 08:25 AM
This thread is just to find out what you reckon the big gaming websites will gave AC3.

IGN-9.5
Gamepsot-9.2
Game Informer-10
GameTrailers-9.4
Overall Metacritic Score-93

anik_lc
09-21-2012, 08:46 AM
IGN- 10
Gamepsot- 9.5
Game Informer- 10
GameTrailers- 9.7
CVG - 9.4
Edge - 8
GamePro - 4.5/5
GamesRadar - 10/10
GameMaster - 95%
GameSpy - 5/5
OPM - 9/10
OXM - 8.5/10
VideoGamer - 7.5/10
Destructoid - 8/10
Joystiq - 4/5
CheatCodes - 8/10
1 UP - A-
TeamXbox - 9.0
Metacritic Score: 94

roostersrule2
09-21-2012, 08:49 AM
IGN- 10
Gamepsot- 9.5
Game Informer- 10
GameTrailers- 9.7
CVG - 9.4
Edge - 8
GamePro - 4.5/5
GamesRadar - 10/10
GameMaster - 95%
GameSpy - 5/5
OPM - 9/10
OXM - 8.5/10
VideoGamer - 7.5/10
Destructoid - 8/10
Joystiq - 4/5
CheatCodes - 8/10
1 UP - A-
TeamXbox - 9.0
Metacritic Score: 94Wow you really did everyone except I think Destuctoid will rate AC3 a 1/10 as they really seem to hate the series. Seriously they gave AC2 a 4 out of 10.

AdrianJacek
09-21-2012, 09:13 AM
Wow you really did everyone except I think Destuctoid will rate AC3 a 1/10 as they really seem to hate the series. Seriously they gave AC2 a 4 out of 10.
Destructoid - 3,5/10
Oh, and every single time Connor performs an important assassination, the camera zooms in close to show his hand completely clipping through his victim's head. So much for impact.
Assassin's Creed 3 has tried all sorts of tactics to improve upon the original, but none of these attempts have worked. The game's variety and length come across as nothing more than smoke and mirrors, the endless, grinding busywork that contributes nothing to the overall gameplay is inexcusably plentiful and mind-numbingly repetitive, and to top it all off, the game can't even compete in the visuals department and somehow looks worse than the last game.
There's really no excuse for standards to be so low here. Assassin's Creed 3 is supposedly a triple-A game. It should have acted like one.
Wha, wha, wha, blah, blah, blah.

But seriously now - AC II got 4,5/10 on Destructoid. ACB got a crazy 9,5/10! There's seriously something wrong with that AC2 review...
I personally hold ALL main series AC games in a high regard.

roostersrule2
09-21-2012, 09:16 AM
Destructoid - 3,5/10
Oh, and every single time Connor performs an important assassination, the camera zooms in close to show his hand completely clipping through his victim's head. So much for impact.
Assassin's Creed 3 has tried all sorts of tactics to improve upon the original, but none of these attempts have worked. The game's variety and length come across as nothing more than smoke and mirrors, the endless, grinding busywork that contributes nothing to the overall gameplay is inexcusably plentiful and mind-numbingly repetitive, and to top it all off, the game can't even compete in the visuals department and somehow looks worse than the last game.
There's really no excuse for standards to be so low here. Assassin's Creed 3 is supposedly a triple-A game. It should have acted like one.
Wha, wha, wha, blah, blah, blah.
Written perfectly. ;)

Legendz54
09-21-2012, 09:21 AM
wow Destructoid really hates AC3.... check out this

The concept of the developer diary has always struck me as egotistical and self-aggrandizing, but Ubisoft's "Inside Assassin's Creed III (http://www.destructoid.com/assassin-s-creed-iii-over-the-river-through-the-woods-224432.phtml)" series may be the most gloriously arrogant video series yet. Watch the video above and bask in the shameless pomposity.
So dramatic! So flashy! So ... a bunch of talking heads saying things nowhere near interesting enough to justify all that movie trailer music.
Of course, I say this in good fun ... and because I am envious. My job is to be egotistical and I'm not this good at it.


Really??? i just want to smash this guy in the face.

Sushiglutton
09-21-2012, 09:45 AM
wow Destructoid really hates AC3.... check out this

The concept of the developer diary has always struck me as egotistical and self-aggrandizing, but Ubisoft's "Inside Assassin's Creed III (http://www.destructoid.com/assassin-s-creed-iii-over-the-river-through-the-woods-224432.phtml)" series may be the most gloriously arrogant video series yet. Watch the video above and bask in the shameless pomposity.
So dramatic! So flashy! So ... a bunch of talking heads saying things nowhere near interesting enough to justify all that movie trailer music.
Of course, I say this in good fun ... and because I am envious. My job is to be egotistical and I'm not this good at it.


Really??? i just want to smash this guy in the face.

That must be Jim Sterling :)! He is actually one of my favourite game journalists. He argues very well for his opinion and has a great sense of humour. In this particular case I def think he has a point. Especially those experts (historians, and a navy seal:eek: etc) saying cringe worthy things every time they open their traps lol. But it's very effective marketing and they have formulated a great tale for the project (a small elite squad of AC2 geniuses been working on the game for years, completely rebuilding everything from scratch). So I can see why he is envious :)!

Sushiglutton
09-21-2012, 09:47 AM
I think the game will get 9+ from most reviewers. Some 10s def. There are many variables we know little abouth though.

Locopells
09-21-2012, 11:21 AM
That must be Jim Sterling :)! He is actually one of my favourite game journalists. He argues very well for his opinion and has a great sense of humour. In this particular case I def think he has a point. Especially those experts (historians, and a navy seal:eek: etc) saying cringe worthy things every time they open their traps lol. But it's very effective marketing and they have formulated a great tale for the project (a small elite squad of AC2 geniuses been working on the game for years, completely rebuilding everything from scratch). So I can see why he is envious :)!

I think it's weird that the IGN series looks to be better - it certainly had more footage...

ProletariatPleb
09-21-2012, 11:23 AM
The IGN series is much better, the Inside AC was....meh, c'mon getting random "experts" saying things like "war is brutal" as if we don't know that.

About the review, I'd rather not touch that subject yet, Hutchinson said some..questionable things in the past, not saying he was wrong, but people don't like the truth :P

Slayer_WTF
09-21-2012, 11:27 AM
Oh, funny.

IGN: 9,4
OXM: 9
EDGE: 8
Multiplayer.it: 9,5
Everyeye.it: 9,2
GameSpot: 9,3
GameInformer: 9

Metacritic: 93

pacmanate
09-21-2012, 06:50 PM
Bearing in mind IGN gave AC:R an 8.5, I am HOPING that this gets a 10 but won't be surprised if it gets a 9.5. If it doesn't the reasoning is because it is not a CoD game.

MT4K
09-21-2012, 06:56 PM
No game should ever get a perfect rating because there's no such thing as a perfect game. I hate when a game receives 10/10 or something grrrr.

tjbyrum1
09-21-2012, 07:07 PM
Red Dead Redemption got a 10/10 score by someone.

I could easily be wrong, but considering how similar AC3 is to RDR, I would not surprised to see it scored 10/10 by someone.

EscoBlades
09-21-2012, 07:23 PM
No game should ever get a perfect rating because there's no such thing as a perfect game. I hate when a game receives 10/10 or something grrrr.

Most review scales don't have 10/10 as a "perfect" game, but rather, a near perfect game. In the reviewer's mind, the game is at a point where the very minor issues it has do little to detract from the enjoyment, pacing and overall consumption of the product.

Ultimately though, reviews are subjective.

tjbyrum1
09-21-2012, 07:34 PM
Yeah, the only review that matters is your own review.

MT4K
09-21-2012, 07:43 PM
That's true, and is also the reason i never pay much attention to reviews and haven't for years and years now.... Doesn't mean i don't look at the scores though to see how well things are being received :p.

Assassin_M
09-21-2012, 07:46 PM
Reviews suck..

tjbyrum1
09-21-2012, 07:51 PM
They MAY suck, but I occasionally read positive reviews just to get an idea of how the game is and what it's like.

I don't like blindly buying a game I know nothing about. In fact, I research as much as I can before I get it. I read reviews, wikia's, Wikipedia, watch gameplay videos, trailers, and many MANY other things. I just like to know what I'm spending my money on.

I practically knew everything about AC II before I bought it.

Assassin_M
09-21-2012, 07:55 PM
They MAY suck, but I occasionally read positive reviews just to get an idea of how the game is and what it's like.

I don't like blindly buying a game I know nothing about. In fact, I research as much as I can before I get it. I read reviews, wikia's, Wikipedia, watch gameplay videos, trailers, and many MANY other things. I just like to know what I'm spending my money on.

I practically knew everything about AC II before I bought it.
That may be true for you perhaps, but often, When Buying a new game that I havent been following, I NEVER use Reviews as Reference, If I did I would have never bought Mafia II which was heavily criticized for something it never claimed it was, while LA Noire got some 10s for being the same thing as Mafia II and GTA IV being the most over rated game EVER.

tjbyrum1
09-21-2012, 08:00 PM
That may be true for you perhaps, but often, When Buying a new game that I havent been following, I NEVER use Reviews as Reference, If I did I would have never bought Mafia II which was heavily criticized for something it never claimed it was, while LA Noire got some 10s for being the same thing as Mafia II and GTA IV being the most over rated game EVER.

Well I don't let the review judge whether or not I BUY the game, no. I read them and see what you can do and all.

If someone says a game is terrible, but I think it looks good, I'll still get it, regardless of review score.

Assassin_M
09-21-2012, 08:04 PM
Well I don't let the review judge whether or not I BUY the game, no. I read them and see what you can do and all.

If someone says a game is terrible, but I think it looks good, I'll still get it, regardless of review score.
I can understand, but Unfortunately, Im a person who tends to rage at his Computer when he sees crap... Yes, I can scream at my screen when I see a great looking game being described as " not living to expectations" in a Cold, Uncaring, Impassioned, foolish Voice tone, most of the time I end up not buying the game out of doubt, so I just stopped altogether..

I commend; however, for having the power to actually watch Unfair reviews and end up buying the game nonetheless

tjbyrum1
09-21-2012, 08:49 PM
I can understand, but Unfortunately, Im a person who tends to rage at his Computer when he sees crap... Yes, I can scream at my screen when I see a great looking game being described as " not living to expectations" in a Cold, Uncaring, Impassioned, foolish Voice tone, most of the time I end up not buying the game out of doubt, so I just stopped altogether..

I commend; however, for having the power to actually watch Unfair reviews and end up buying the game nonetheless

limh (laughing in my head).

I'll buy an AC game no matter how terrible it looks. I haven't been with AC from the start, but I am a huge fan of the games. I use to only have an original Xbox back in the day... up until 2009, when ACII was coming out. I had never heard of AC, but I came home one day and watched some gameplay videos and instantly wanted it. I got my first Xbox 360 and ACI that year. Maybe two months later, I got ACII and loved it.

Since then, AC comes out on or around my B-Day (Nov 15). I bought Brotherhood brand-spanking new, and also Revelations brand-spanking new. I look to buy ACIII brand-spanking new as well... but earlier this time!

Umbra_Blade
09-21-2012, 09:29 PM
I think that 'scoring' a game shouldn't be done anymore in reviews. Games come in all shapes and sizes, and so shouldn't be marked in a universal scale that has to apply to all. It's like ordering a monkey, an elephant, a lion and a fish all to climb a tree (forgive the outlandish simile :p), it doesn't make much sense, and is in no way fair. One game is designed to focus on one aspect, and a different game on another, whereas some like to cover all bases.

I think for reviews to be fair, they should at the end of the review talk about the pros and cons of a particular game in summary, instead of posting a mark. This way a reader can look at what the reviewer thinks is good and bad about the game, and can relate it to their own preferences. So if the reviewer said that a good feature was that the game was simple and addictive, but a bad feature was that it lacked depth, if the reader just wanted a game for simply passing time, instead of one to captivate them, this game would meet his requirements, and they would buy it. Rather than reading a 4/10, which is deemed to be a poor score, causing the reader to skip over a game that they otherwise would have enjoyed.

This not only reduces the reader's game library to the games that are deemed good enough by the masses of reviewers, but also harms the industry's new 'up-and-coming' developers as people are only buying games from companies churning out year-after-year rehashed titles, making the market pretty darn dull.

Also the points system is so ****ed up right now that people are judging pretty good to average games as utter ****. For example, a 10/10 is considered to be a great game (noticed how a perfect score doesn't equal a perfect game), 9/10 is considered to be a good game, a 8/10 is considered a average game, a 7/10 is considered as a 'meh' game, and anything below a 6 is hardly even looked at. 5/10 should be considered an average score, as it is the average number between 1-10, yet it is somehow considered to be bad or poor.
People get up in arms if a reviewer gives a game a god**** 8/10 for a game they like! This ensuing rage, along with companies dealing under the table to get a good mark is just messing around with the system even more, because the higher scores are so common, that anything that falls below a 7 is considered near on garbage by the reading community as a whole.

I'm not having a go at you guys or at AC, just wanted to get this off my chest as it is something that really irks me, when a game that isn't actually half bad, gets ignored simply because of the current reviewing system. :mad:
*rant over*

nitres15
09-21-2012, 09:38 PM
The IGN series is much better, the Inside AC was....meh, c'mon getting random "experts" saying things like "war is brutal" as if we don't know that.

About the review, I'd rather not touch that subject yet, Hutchinson said some..questionable things in the past, not saying he was wrong, but people don't like the truth :P

this. I hated how they got these old dudes to say "yeah, warŽnŽ**** ,also connor has a hood". the only guy i liked in there was the native american consultant

tjbyrum1
09-21-2012, 11:26 PM
About the review, I'd rather not touch that subject yet, Hutchinson said some..questionable things in the past, not saying he was wrong, but people don't like the truth :P

Explain?

sasukeuchiha50
09-21-2012, 11:29 PM
This thread is just to find out what you reckon the big gaming websites will gave AC3.

IGN-9.5
Gamepsot-9.2
Game Informer-10
GameTrailers-9.4
Overall Metacritic Score-93 It should be all tens.

roostersrule2
09-21-2012, 11:57 PM
It should be all tens.It should be, but that's highly unlikely.

MetalCreed
09-22-2012, 12:01 AM
I'm only familiar with IGN the most and bit of GameSpot
so
IGN- 9.5
GameSpot- 9.5, though I feel it will be a 9, but I WANT to believe :)

rileypoole1234
09-22-2012, 03:53 AM
10's all around.

ProletariatPleb
09-22-2012, 04:10 AM
Explain?
Things like firing the irony gun on himself.

http://www.latestnewsexplorer.com/alex-hutchinson-games-journalists-show-subtle-racism/

http://www.latestnewsexplorer.com/assassins-creed-iii-devs-easy-mode-ruin-games/

anik_lc
09-22-2012, 05:36 AM
That's true, and is also the reason i never pay much attention to reviews and haven't for years and years now.... Doesn't mean i don't look at the scores though to see how well things are being received :p.

Grand Theft Auto IV is the highest rated game to date with 98% Metacritic score in both Console version:
http://www.metacritic.com/browse/games/score/metascore/all?sort=desc

ProletariatPleb
09-22-2012, 05:37 AM
Grand Theft Auto IV is the highest rated game to date with 98% Metacritic score in both Console version:
http://www.metacritic.com/browse/games/score/metascore/all?sort=desc
Yeah it's like the most overrated GTA game at the moment.

Also, you should look at the user scores.

roostersrule2
09-22-2012, 06:00 AM
Yeah it's like the most overrated GTA game at the moment.

Also, you should look at the user scores.I never do as it is really inaccurate as there are fanboys that give it 10 and haters who give it 0's.

ProletariatPleb
09-22-2012, 06:05 AM
I never do as it is really inaccurate as there are fanboys that give it 10 and haters who give it 0's.
True, but you get an idea, I'm not talking about individual reviews, just the overall "User Score"

NOLA_Assassin
09-22-2012, 06:07 AM
10/10

or this American Revolution is gonna start looking a little more French...

anik_lc
09-22-2012, 10:40 AM
Yeah it's like the most overrated GTA game at the moment.

Also, you should look at the user scores.

Agreed. Its the crappies GTA IMO, what a stupid sequel to the great San Andreas! :(

But Metacritic user scores are ****ty though, full of fanboys, who only gave good reviews to their favorite franchise and vote negative to all other. Last year MW3 got below 2.0 for quite a long time. :p

roostersrule2
09-22-2012, 10:44 AM
GTA4 was good for the story but after that It was boring as crap, even the MP kinda sucked.

freddie_1897
09-22-2012, 01:10 PM
Agreed. Its the crappies GTA IMO, what a stupid sequel to the great San Andreas! :(

But Metacritic user scores are ****ty though, full of fanboys, who only gave good reviews to their favorite franchise and vote negative to all other. Last year MW3 got below 2.0 for quite a long time. :p
well MW3 was a pile of **** even for Call of of Duty

ProletariatPleb
09-22-2012, 01:57 PM
Agreed. Its the crappies GTA IMO, what a stupid sequel to the great San Andreas! :(

But Metacritic user scores are ****ty though, full of fanboys, who only gave good reviews to their favorite franchise and vote negative to all other. Last year MW3 got below 2.0 for quite a long time. :p
It was the crappiest GTA, EFLC was okay tho.
But MW3?
It was garbage. I like CoD that have Treyarch's work. Black Ops and World at War, they have good stories.

pacmanate
09-22-2012, 02:09 PM
Reviews suck..
YOU SUCK

Explain?
The racism thing, someone already replied, but I already multi quoted, so here is the answer again :P


well MW3 was a pile of **** even for Call of of Duty

Yeah it was! Not surprised since "Infinity Ward" is just a name now, it doesn't mean anything since the CoD4 and MW2 team didn't work on MW3 and went to Respawn. I love all the CoD campaigns though. After MW3 I vowed not to buy another CoD game, but BO2 looks pretty fun.... GAH. Anyway, AC3 WOO!

anik_lc
09-22-2012, 02:34 PM
well MW3 was a pile of **** even for Call of of Duty


It was the crappiest GTA, EFLC was okay tho.
But MW3?
It was garbage. I like CoD that have Treyarch's work. Black Ops and World at War, they have good stories.

CoD died after CoD 4.
Requeiscat In Pace. :( :( :(

FrankieSatt
09-22-2012, 02:36 PM
Who cares?

Gaming Scores mean nothing. It's all about personal preference, either you enjoy the game or you don't.

HisSpiritLives
09-22-2012, 04:39 PM
I dont mind scores ,**** destructoid,and when i readed their review i just got soo angry, they dont know anything.

AssassinZ7
09-22-2012, 04:49 PM
Destructoid - 3,5/10
Oh, and every single time Connor performs an important assassination, the camera zooms in close to show his hand completely clipping through his victim's head. So much for impact.
Assassin's Creed 3 has tried all sorts of tactics to improve upon the original, but none of these attempts have worked. The game's variety and length come across as nothing more than smoke and mirrors, the endless, grinding busywork that contributes nothing to the overall gameplay is inexcusably plentiful and mind-numbingly repetitive, and to top it all off, the game can't even compete in the visuals department and somehow looks worse than the last game.
There's really no excuse for standards to be so low here. Assassin's Creed 3 is supposedly a triple-A game. It should have acted like one.
Wha, wha, wha, blah, blah, blah.

But seriously now - AC II got 4,5/10 on Destructoid. ACB got a crazy 9,5/10! There's seriously something wrong with that AC2 review...
I personally hold ALL main series AC games in a high regard.
You know, i think you may be one of them. ;)

AssassinZ7
09-22-2012, 04:51 PM
CoD died after CoD 4.
Requeiscat In Pace. :( :( :(
Hey! CoD MW2/3 were great as well as BO.
Insult not thy series.

anik_lc
09-22-2012, 07:04 PM
Hey! CoD MW2/3 were great as well as BO.
Insult not thy series.

A few missions were good in MW2. But MW3 and BO was full of crap. They are the same game we have seen in 2007, no graphical improvement, no gameplay changed, just new scenario. They are more like DLC.

Slayer_WTF
09-22-2012, 07:10 PM
COD is not dead. It 's just changed .. too much.

Ielgon
09-22-2012, 07:26 PM
COD has changed. It's no longer about fun, new ideas or authenticity. It's an endless series of multiplayer battles, fought by casual gamers and addicts. COD, and its consumption of time, has become a well-oiled machine. COD has changed. ID tagged players carry unbalanced same-old weapons, use ID tagged loadouts. New experiences inside their minds enhance and regulate their fun. Generic control. Money control. Fun control. Gameplay control. Everything is monitored, and kept under control. COD has changed. The age of innovation has become the age of copy-paste. All in the name of averting catastrophe from not making enough money to sustain business. And he who controls the market, controls the mainstream. COD has changed. When the market is under total control, COD... becomes routine.

Anyone that recognises the speech I edited will win a cookie and my love!

freddie_1897
09-22-2012, 07:31 PM
COD has changed. It's no longer about fun, new ideas or authenticity. It's an endless series of multiplayer battles, fought by casual gamers and addicts. COD, and its consumption of time, has become a well-oiled machine. COD has changed. ID tagged players carry unbalanced same-old weapons, use ID tagged loadouts. New experiences inside their minds enhance and regulate their fun. Generic control. Money control. Fun control. Gameplay control. Everything is monitored, and kept under control. COD has changed. The age of innovation has become the age of copy-paste. All in the name of averting catastrophe from not making enough money to sustain business. And he who controls the market, controls the mainstream. COD has changed. When the market is under total control, COD... becomes routine.

Anyone that recognises the speech I edited will win a cookie and my love!
destructoids review of assassins creed revelations?

Ielgon
09-22-2012, 07:32 PM
destructoids review of assassins creed revelations?

Genius! But sadly no cookie or my love... :(

Assassin_M
09-22-2012, 07:51 PM
YOU SUCK


I do ?

Locopells
09-22-2012, 08:03 PM
Please don't go there...

MetalCreed
09-22-2012, 08:10 PM
So apparently IGN changed their score scale system back to .1 which is pretty cool
Torchlight II got a 9.1

They've been using the .5 scale system since summer 2010 I think

lothario-da-be
09-22-2012, 08:21 PM
i hope it wil get a 9.5 on most sites. And a 10 on sites that gave uncharted 3 and rdr a 10.

Ielgon
09-22-2012, 08:29 PM
It will probably be 9 or more on most sites (or 4 if they only go to 5), I don't really see it scoring any lower unless the game genuinely turns out to be awful and we've all been fooled (doubtful) or unless the reviewer is biased/full of hate for the franchise.

Nobody able to guess where my speech was from yet? Let me give you guys a hint: Snake what's wrong? Snake? Snaaaaakeee!