Same here as well but damnit this looks like fun.Onyx Oblivion said:I actually want to get this damn game now. I do believe the game would fare better on a 360/PS3, where they could up the graphics to make game just feel more...alive.
I'm fairly certain it's near impossible for Piranhas to kill a man, especially if they know what they're doing (the person, not the fish). Of course, they're fucking lethal in James Bond, so I don't know what to think...Tonimata said:...Piranhas...
YOU RUN INTO BANKS OF PIRANHAS...
AND JUST STAY THERE?!
God the Japanese are crazy...
Well, I've read a large school of piranhas can eat a cow clean within a couple of minutes, so I'm not sure either. Would definately not take any chances, though.Chipperz said:I'm fairly certain it's near impossible for Piranhas to kill a man, especially if they know what they're doing (the person, not the fish). Of course, they're fucking lethal in James Bond, so I don't know what to think...Tonimata said:...Piranhas...
YOU RUN INTO BANKS OF PIRANHAS...
AND JUST STAY THERE?!
God the Japanese are crazy...
OT - This looks... Surprisingly calming. It reminds me of Flower in a way, just with a pulse gun and creatures that can kill you.
Did you ever wonder why the cow was the standard unit of measurement when talking about the skeletonizing capabilities of small angry animals?Chapper said:Well, I've read a large school of piranhas can eat a cow clean within a couple of minutes
Uhm, no. I didn't.rembrandtqeinstein said:Did you ever wonder why the cow was the standard unit of measurement when talking about the skeletonizing capabilities of small angry animals?Chapper said:Well, I've read a large school of piranhas can eat a cow clean within a couple of minutes
Oh yeah, I would probably pay 60 for this if it came out on 360/PS3 or even PC. I'm not a big "OMG GOod GRAFIX = GG!" person, but a game like this could really be amazing if the graphics were top-notch.dalek sec said:Same here as well but damnit this looks like fun.Onyx Oblivion said:I actually want to get this damn game now. I do believe the game would fare better on a 360/PS3, where they could up the graphics to make game just feel more...alive.
I debated for a long time whether to give EO:BW 3 or 4 stars. In the end, it's a solid game which will only appeal to a few people. As a game, it works, but there's no single feature or gameplay element that pushes it into excellence. It just has a lot of features that add up to a really fun game. That's a 3.Echolocating said:When I read/watched the review, I got the impression that the game is excellent for what it is, but why only 3/5 stars then? I don't get it. I think I've been conditioned by other websites to believe that 3/5 (or 60%) is mediocre. Perhaps you should have a link by the score to explain what the different ratings really mean. Or... are the scores meant for the hard-core gaming audience only? Like, if you liked Assassin's Creed, you might rate Endless Ocean at 3/5 stars? As I said, I'm confused.
Greg Tito said:I debated for a long time whether to give EO:BW 3 or 4 stars. In the end, it's a solid game which will only appeal to a few people. As a game, it works, but there's no single feature or gameplay element that pushes it into excellence. It just has a lot of features that add up to a really fun game. That's a 3.
Well, it's a pretty unique "average and forgettable game". ;-) Sometimes, the atmosphere and experience is the element that pushes a game to excellence. Anyway, this is a great review. Seriously. I just don't get the scoring thing though, and probably never will; it feels like it contradicts your review.Three stars. An average game. You'll play it and probably enjoy it. A month from now, you'll likely have forgotten all about it.
Welcome to one of the several reasons the escapist never should have bothered with review scores. The comments are going to be swamped with squabbling over why it got a 60 instead of a 70 or why something got an 80 when it was "so totally a 90".Greg Tito said:I debated for a long time whether to give EO:BW 3 or 4 stars. In the end, it's a solid game which will only appeal to a few people. As a game, it works, but there's no single feature or gameplay element that pushes it into excellence. It just has a lot of features that add up to a really fun game. That's a 3.Echolocating said:When I read/watched the review, I got the impression that the game is excellent for what it is, but why only 3/5 stars then? I don't get it. I think I've been conditioned by other websites to believe that 3/5 (or 60%) is mediocre. Perhaps you should have a link by the score to explain what the different ratings really mean. Or... are the scores meant for the hard-core gaming audience only? Like, if you liked Assassin's Creed, you might rate Endless Ocean at 3/5 stars? As I said, I'm confused.
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/editorials/7149-What-Our-Review-Scores-Mean