So basically the story sucks again. 
Its cool because the gameplay is all that matters
Its cool because the gameplay is all that matters
Far Cry 4: November 18th (PS4, Xbox One, PC, 360, PS3)
- Thread starter daze23
- Start date
Breh you can't be serious with this "85-89 is alright games, only 90 and above is worth playing" mentality.Another mid 80s game?
Bayonetta is gonna be game of the year if we go by ratings.
Dragon Age will probably win out though, given that it's not a wii u game.
Super Smash Bros is a classic and yet it's only sitting at a 79.
http://www.metacritic.com/game/nintendo-64/super-smash-bros
You called Mk 64 a classic and it's sitting at a less score than MK8
http://www.metacritic.com/game/nintendo-64/mario-kart-64
Come on breh
fake edit: Oh this is a Ubisoft game?
Those games came out before metcritic. You use gamerankings.com for those (which still isn't very reliable).Breh you can't be serious with this "85-89 is alright games, only 90 and above is worth playing" mentality.
Super Smash Bros is a classic and yet it's only sitting at a 79.
http://www.metacritic.com/game/nintendo-64/super-smash-bros
You called Mk 64 a classic and it's sitting at a less score than MK8
http://www.metacritic.com/game/nintendo-64/mario-kart-64
Come on breh
fake edit: Oh this is a Ubisoft game?
Do you know nothing?
Oh and
(but I don't really know why)Edit: smash bros scored low on gamerankings too. I actually never did like that shyt and think it deserves the 78 it got, but I know you love that shyt.
I know about gamerankings. I used them back in the day.Those games came out before metcritic. You use gamerankings.com for those (which still isn't very reliable).
Do you know nothing?
Oh and
Edit: smash bros scored low on gamerankings too. I actually never did like that shyt and think it deserves the 78 it got, but I know you love that shyt.
(Why would I be mad for? )Going by this "85 and up is good, 90 is classic) mentality is silly.
Goldeneye 007 is a corny low scoring game to you since it's only 81% on Gamerankings.
http://www.gamerankings.com/n64/914163-007-the-world-is-not-enough/index.html
Hell while we're at it, WWF No Mercy shouldn't be called a classic either.
http://www.gamerankings.com/n64/914112-wwf-no-mercy/index.html
http://www.gamerankings.com/ps2/920171-def-jam-fight-for-ny/index.html
I know that's not what you're saying but your criteria at times come off as silly man. These review numbers are arbitrary at times.
Every game doesn't have to be The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time to be considered an amazing game.
ubisoft
No, but the ratings are pretty accurate when it comes to systems that came out during the time the sites were up. For example, look at the 90+ games on this ps3 metacritic listI know about gamerankings. I used them back in the day.
Going by this "85 and up is good, 90 is classic) mentality is silly.
Goldeneye 007 is a corny low scoring game to you since it's only 81% on Gamerankings.
http://www.gamerankings.com/n64/914163-007-the-world-is-not-enough/index.html
Hell while we're at it, WWF No Mercy shouldn't be called a classic either.
http://www.gamerankings.com/n64/914112-wwf-no-mercy/index.html
http://www.gamerankings.com/ps2/920171-def-jam-fight-for-ny/index.html
I know that's not what you're saying but your criteria at times come off as silly man. These review numbers are arbitrary at times.
Every game doesn't have to be The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time to be considered an amazing game.
http://www.metacritic.com/browse/games/release-date/available/ps3/metascore
I'd say those games are a pretty good representation of the ps3 classics, wouldn't you say?
We just haven't seen that many games in the 90+ range yet this generation. It's been underwhelming. I know it's hard to admit, but the games haven't been up to par just yet. The Wii U has a few, and maybe we'll get that with Dragon Age (I dunno, I still have to play it), but the ps4 and x1 have been underwhelming. It's true
HNIC973
R.I.P Bandana P
can't wait
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/d...er&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=socialoomph
=================================
Sony's new hardware clears everything up. Despite its top-grade visual settings, the use of HRAA, plus an ambitious native 1920x1080 output, this game runs at a near faultless 30fps.
Based on four to five hours of testing, perceptible drops from 30fps are incredibly rare. For example, Far Cry 4's opening car chase produces one momentary, blunt stutter to the mid 20s during grenade fire, but after that point it's smooth sailing. Tearing is basically a no-show as well; an adaptive v-sync setup is in place once more for console, but it manifests as only single tears at the very top of the screen, coinciding with equally rare frame-rate hiccups. In other words, Far Cry 4 may not match a PC gamer's potential 60fps boast, but Ubisoft Montreal hits the target it set for itself on console - and the all-important consistency is there.
Looking back on prior PS3 and 360 versions, the Dunia 2-driven Far Cry experience clearly proved too progressive for the hardware of the time. Now we see an unleashed experience on PS4, giving us the quality of play we hoped for in the first place. Disappointments are few and minor, such as the game missing out on Assassin's Creed Unity's beautiful facial mo-cap tech. Instead, Ubisoft Montreal opts for a more approximated approach to lip-sync that doesn't showcase much of a generational leap. But on the whole, the package is a very strong initial effort on new hardware.
=======================================
PS4 version...
=================================
Sony's new hardware clears everything up. Despite its top-grade visual settings, the use of HRAA, plus an ambitious native 1920x1080 output, this game runs at a near faultless 30fps.
Based on four to five hours of testing, perceptible drops from 30fps are incredibly rare. For example, Far Cry 4's opening car chase produces one momentary, blunt stutter to the mid 20s during grenade fire, but after that point it's smooth sailing. Tearing is basically a no-show as well; an adaptive v-sync setup is in place once more for console, but it manifests as only single tears at the very top of the screen, coinciding with equally rare frame-rate hiccups. In other words, Far Cry 4 may not match a PC gamer's potential 60fps boast, but Ubisoft Montreal hits the target it set for itself on console - and the all-important consistency is there.
Looking back on prior PS3 and 360 versions, the Dunia 2-driven Far Cry experience clearly proved too progressive for the hardware of the time. Now we see an unleashed experience on PS4, giving us the quality of play we hoped for in the first place. Disappointments are few and minor, such as the game missing out on Assassin's Creed Unity's beautiful facial mo-cap tech. Instead, Ubisoft Montreal opts for a more approximated approach to lip-sync that doesn't showcase much of a generational leap. But on the whole, the package is a very strong initial effort on new hardware.
=======================================
PS4 version...
30 fps with dips into the 20's
PS4 version...
Don't read brehs.....
Where's that Larry version.....
apparently $ony money-hatted the embargo, so we don't have any info on the X1, PC, or last-gen versionsDon't read brehs.....
Where's that Larry version.....
HNIC973
R.I.P Bandana P
X1 version will run fine
I'm not sure what happened, but so far only the PS4 version has been reviewed. I think Sony also has some kind of 'exclusive marketing deal' with this game... aka 'money hat'
Money hatting embargo's? That's a good one. Repped.
spliz
SplizThaDon
Nah fam..theres plenty of great games that didnt score too high...take Silent Hill on PS1 for instance...shyt did OK ratings wise I remember like it was yesterday..but its a classic in every sense of the word...problem is even then...games that scored lower than 8.5 werent looked at as a problem...people still bought and enjoyed the games and they are what made the demand for franchises n shyt...ratings werent end all be all unless they were completely terrible...No, but the ratings are pretty accurate when it comes to systems that came out during the time the sites were up. For example, look at the 90+ games on this ps3 metacritic list
http://www.metacritic.com/browse/games/release-date/available/ps3/metascore
I'd say those games are a pretty good representation of the ps3 classics, wouldn't you say?
We just haven't seen that many games in the 90+ range yet this generation. It's been underwhelming. I know it's hard to admit, but the games haven't been up to par just yet. The Wii U has a few, and maybe we'll get that with Dragon Age (I dunno, I still have to play it), but the ps4 and x1 have been underwhelming. It's true