Is That a Typo?
so. here i am, browsing the resistance: fall of man reviews.
pretty much, they’re looking like i anticipated — which is good. i’m not a big fan of surprises. and, personally, i think the whole alternate history thing kicks ass.
but, what do i come upon? the review from gamezone on gamerankings.com.
what the hell? at first glance, it looks fine — a 9.5 — but, after looking at his little chart? that “gameplay” has to be a 9.6 and not an 8.6.
that, or the “med/hard” part factors in a 10 somehow. the overall rating is higher than any of the others? huh? and the gameplay is an abysmal (by comparison to the other stats) 8.6? that has to be a typo.
heh. or maybe the game is greater than the sum of its parts.
and, in this day and age why are we still breaking reviews down with “graphics” and “sound?” if you feel like you absolutely need to break it down, try something like this:
design (you know, sound, graphics, artistic vision): 9.6
execution (programming — where the rubber hits the road): 9.4
features (replayability, weapons, multiplayer): 9.4
overall (to hell with all that. this is what i think): 9.5
disclaimer: those are translated numbers, of course. i don’t (and sadly, probably won’t ever because it’s likely not coming to the 360 or wii) have the game.
not that i really want to get into the whole 7-9 grading scale thing. you know how i like to rate games: good. bad. or meh.
p.s. speaking of — i’ve got a gears of war review coming. holy-mother-of-god-awesome….