Originally Posted by TyrantII
Not at all, I actually am getting the feeling it's a pretty darn good game on all levels that has gone a ways to fixing my issues I had with GTAIV / RDR. But having played every GTA since Grand Theft Auto, I find it hard to believe that there's nothing to criticize/point out though.
My problem is most of the reviewers out there feel like they're not grounded, and are basking in the hype themselves which leads them to say terribly funny things.
A lot of times I'll find that I have plenty to criticize and point out, but I still really love the game despite all of it. Then I end up writing a review pointing all of that out, and the fact that none of that hindered my enjoyment gets lost. It's really hard to find that balance sometimes, and settling on a score is usually the hardest part of all, because people take it as some sort of objective measure of quality.
There's a game that recently came out, that I never bothered to write a full review for, because I just had no idea how to score it. What number do you put on something that you know is good game, but it's just not for you? What about something that's otherwise high quality, with the occasional thing that really, really rubs you the wrong way? What about something that's really dumb, but every other game does the same thing? Or if there's something very poorly done, but it's easily ignorable?
It's impossible to sum that up with a number.Edited by bd2003 - 9/17/13 at 5:42am