New Xbox 360 Video, Game = Prey.

Talk about anything and everything not related to this site or the Dreamcast, such as news stories, political discussion, or anything else. If there's not a forum for it, it belongs in here. Also, be warned that personal insults, threats, and spamming will not be tolerated.
User avatar
Nyarlathotep
Soul Sold for DCEmu
Soul Sold for DCEmu
Posts: 7390
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2002 1:37 pm
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0

Post by Nyarlathotep » Wed Jun 15, 2005 12:38 pm

Lazy Lunchbox wrote: The only part of IGN I go to where I always follow what they say would be Head-To-Head, only because facts are facts, theres no opinions there. I don't need to experience first hand and form an opinion on which version of a game has the better framerate and quicker load times.

Apparently you DO when 'facts' AREN'T facts, and are EASILY proven untrue simply by LOOKING FOR YOURSELF.


What are 'facts' that are demonstrably UNTRUE if they are not opinions?
Random_Troll wrote:
Pixelated pixel wrote:You don't seem to understand. I know that Gamespot/IGN are absolute crud. We're just cranky about that AuroEdge made an honest mistake and got burned for it.
He never will.
Meritless topic of a game video on a system unrelated to the topic title is better than yet another retarded wikipedia spam I guess :dontknow:
Image
User avatar
Lunchbox
1337 Food Container
1337 Food Container
Posts: 4171
Joined: Sat Aug 16, 2003 12:30 pm
Location: Right where I can see ya ;)
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
Contact:

Post by Lunchbox » Thu Jun 16, 2005 10:34 am

Dr Wily wrote:
Lazy Lunchbox wrote: The only part of IGN I go to where I always follow what they say would be Head-To-Head, only because facts are facts, theres no opinions there. I don't need to experience first hand and form an opinion on which version of a game has the better framerate and quicker load times.

Apparently you DO when 'facts' AREN'T facts, and are EASILY proven untrue simply by LOOKING FOR YOURSELF.


What are 'facts' that are demonstrably UNTRUE if they are not opinions?
Why should I assume that IGN would be incorrect? I have no reason to believe so.

In the case of the SCII Head-to-Head (of which you've only read a small snip, if that), not only are the hard facts laid out on the table, but evidence in the form of comparative screens (and sometimes video, a nice San Andreas one was released this week) are shown as well. Load times are timed and compared, framerate issues are discussed, etc. The 3 versions are disected and compared in every area to such a great degree that I don't doubt what they say for a second, and after reading almost all of the Head-to-Heads on that site, I don't think for a second that Nintendo, MS, Sony, or the great God of PC paid IGN to make 3rd-party multiplatform games look better on their respective system, if thats what you're getting at.

I'd also like to point out that since that Soul Calibur thread, I have played the Gamecube version at my buddy Huy's house, a memorable moment indeed when my initial pair of batteries for my Wavebird finally began to wear out on me mid match (and made a great excuse for future lossses). Having said that, I still agree with everything IGN said, and the little things they pointed out in their article I probably wouldn't have noticed myself. If anything they were demonstratably true.
Image
User avatar
Nyarlathotep
Soul Sold for DCEmu
Soul Sold for DCEmu
Posts: 7390
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2002 1:37 pm
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0

Post by Nyarlathotep » Sat Jun 18, 2005 1:42 pm

In which case I can only conclude the folowing:

either
a) Namco horribly messed up the PAL Xbox port of SC2 to introduce noticably longer load times that were not present in the NTSC original

or

b) You're lying just to win an argument with someone you don't even know on the internet.

Even if a) is the case, there are numerous examples of IGNS (frankly shoddy) 'journalism' where they print speculation and wishful thinking as 'news', and even more evidence that they rate games from certain publishers (EA, MS, Ubisoft) higher than they actually deserve - which is either heavy bias towards certain publishers or (more likely) they actually take bribes to increase review scores.

Note that this isn't an attack on Microsoft bribing western games media into seeing things 'more their way' because there is a recent example of Gamespot bumping the review of Donkey Konga 2 upwards in Nintendos favour (and later having to withdraw their review of it because the reviewer was so disgusted that so much of his review was removed, and his score of 4/10 was then bumped up by gamespot editorial staff to 8/10, presumably as part of Gamespots newest corporate alliance with Nintendo for online play) - I expect MS to do everything in their power to make Xbox / Xbox360 the most hyped and 'desirable' piece of kit on the amrket.

It is an attack on the larger Western gaming media sites who I do expect (and I don't think unfairly) to not publish lies, speculation and press releases as 'impartial news and reviews'.
Image
Orange_Ribbon
DCEmu's Cheerleader
Posts: 2553
Joined: Tue May 27, 2003 7:38 pm
Location: Insert Witty Comment here
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
Contact:

Post by Orange_Ribbon » Sat Jun 18, 2005 4:39 pm

Dr Wily wrote:Well you say that to try and mock me, but theres been a few times you've come on here spouting fanboy bollocks and recycled IGN opinions like some corporate drone without any critical or analytical abilities of your own.

I guess an opinion about something that MS sold to IGN on your behalf is better than no opinion at all, or an opinion based on your own observations or facts, right?

Jesus, and you'll be elligible to vote someday too

:x
I personally blame them for using the internet to find information. Then not spending a day or so to filterout all the bad info. BASTARDS HAVING A LIFE! The Internet is serious buisness.
segasweet
Insane DCEmu
Insane DCEmu
Posts: 137
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2002 6:45 pm
Location: USA, Michigan
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
Contact:

Post by segasweet » Sat Jun 18, 2005 4:47 pm

OMG everyone......can't we just discuss the damn graphics?
:dc: Sega is sweet! :dc:

:mg2: Sony sucks! :mg:
User avatar
Skynet
DCEmu T-800
DCEmu T-800
Posts: 8594
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2001 6:27 pm
Location: Adelaide, Australia
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
Contact:

Post by Skynet » Sat Jun 18, 2005 8:58 pm

NEVER! This is DCE remember ;)
Live gamertag: SKYNET211

Steam gamertag: SkynetT800
User avatar
Wagh
Wagh
Posts: 5736
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 7:59 pm
Location: YSOH
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
Contact:

Post by Wagh » Sat Jun 18, 2005 9:26 pm

Dr Wily wrote:In which case I can only conclude the folowing:

either
a) Namco horribly messed up the PAL Xbox port of SC2 to introduce noticably longer load times that were not present in the NTSC original
.
Maybe he just has more patience than you so load times don't seem as long.
Bush and Hussein together in bed
Giving H-E-A-D head
Y'all motherfuckers heard what we said
Billions made and millions dead
User avatar
Skynet
DCEmu T-800
DCEmu T-800
Posts: 8594
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2001 6:27 pm
Location: Adelaide, Australia
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
Contact:

Post by Skynet » Sat Jun 18, 2005 9:39 pm

:lol:
Live gamertag: SKYNET211

Steam gamertag: SkynetT800
CoasterKing
Gone Postal...
Gone Postal...
Posts: 2775
Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2002 5:45 pm
Location: UK
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
Contact:

Post by CoasterKing » Sun Jun 19, 2005 6:06 pm

It looks excellent. I like the way the players sense of gravity and direction is constantly messed with.
Image
User avatar
Lunchbox
1337 Food Container
1337 Food Container
Posts: 4171
Joined: Sat Aug 16, 2003 12:30 pm
Location: Right where I can see ya ;)
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
Contact:

Post by Lunchbox » Sun Jun 19, 2005 6:10 pm

Dr Wily wrote:In which case I can only conclude the folowing:

either
a) Namco horribly messed up the PAL Xbox port of SC2 to introduce noticably longer load times that were not present in the NTSC original

or

b) You're lying just to win an argument with someone you don't even know on the internet.
The hell if I know. I'll stick with A.
Even if a) is the case, there are numerous examples of IGNS (frankly shoddy) 'journalism' where they print speculation and wishful thinking as 'news', and even more evidence that they rate games from certain publishers (EA, MS, Ubisoft) higher than they actually deserve - which is either heavy bias towards certain publishers or (more likely) they actually take bribes to increase review scores.
Who are you to say what a game actually deserves? Just because you didn't agree with a review doesn't mean they are wrong. It doesn't mean you are wrong either. Opinions are opinions.

And no, I don't think EA, MS, and Ubisofts review scores are inflated. Hell I could point you to the reviews for pretty much all of MS's XSN sports lineup (except Top Spin) alone to debunk said theory. On top of that, the Conker review that got posted a day or two ago scored an 8.1. From what I played in the demo I thought it would have scored a bit higher. Hell, there's plenty of MS published titles that got average to low scores to choose from. EA? The recently released FIFA Street for example. Ubisoft's games are mostly quality though.
Image
Post Reply