These are the same professional reviewers that will claim that UC2 is the only game to rival MW2 graphically when Killzone 2 looks better? The same professional reviewers who never point out that console shooters tend to feature control presets that render certain actions like moving and jumping at the same time physically impossible? Yes their opinions are worth deferring to. Even though they demonstrate time and time again that they do not even LOOK at the options screens so that people know what to expect. So I guess the other user here on the Escapist who mentioned how lag tastic his experience was on the PC was just making it up right?scotth266 said:And yet, the console version (and therefore the PC version, since they run off the same principles) is lag-free! So what's the problem, again?Hitari0 said:
Considering that all the posts explaining the low scores (mostly 0's) were all complaining about the same things that professional reviewers ALL HAPPENED TO SOMEHOW MISS, yeah. I'm gonna say that it's just people trolling Metacritic.Vanguard_Ex said:
Oh, come on Root, I expect better of you. That's REALLY petty.The_root_of_all_evil said:
Even if the game doesn't have dedicated servers, that does not even come fucking CLOSE to warranting a 13% score, especially when the LOWEST critic score is a 60-something. I agree with the OP. THIS is what I was trying to tell you, Root. People like these trolls make the reasonable complainers like yourself go unheard: your legitimate gripes are overlooked thanks to the countless douche-bags doing nothing but saying "it's BAAAAAD!"
I want to see somebody actually make a GOOD post on Metacritic with a low score (only thanks to the multiplayer) where they spell properly, use grammar, and actually attempt to give a good analysis as to why the multiplayer isn't good. Otherwise, I'm just going to chalk it up as some more trolling.
(Hell, a good deal of the comments make it clear that they've never even PLAYED the game.)
This illogical MW2 hate has got to stop
- Thread starter Treblaine
- Start date
I have no respect for a gaming organisation which came to exist from the success of CoD 1 A PC GAME, when they start talking about shit like mouse aim and customiseable graphics as a perk!
If they were in the car manufacturing business in America, maybe they'd boast left hand drive as a perk too?
Mouse aim and customiseable graphcis are a fucking standard on the PC! Like controller support and no system requirements are the standard on a console!
If they were in the car manufacturing business in America, maybe they'd boast left hand drive as a perk too?
Mouse aim and customiseable graphcis are a fucking standard on the PC! Like controller support and no system requirements are the standard on a console!
Actually the really stupid part of this was the fact that for the Xbox 360 version people were giving it low rating because of lack of dedicated servers on the PC.
http://apps.metacritic.com//games/usercomments.jsp?id_string=11199:CrOq8XVdqIxvh8vPE28-ZA**
http://apps.metacritic.com//games/usercomments.jsp?id_string=11199:CrOq8XVdqIxvh8vPE28-ZA**
Have you ANY idea how many PCs there are out there which are capable of playing Modern Warfare 2?SomeBritishDude said:
Way more than the 30 million Xbox 360s or 25 million PS3s, combined even.
http://www.npd.com/press/releases/press_080131b.html
"Retail sales in the PC game software industry reached $911 million in 2007"
That's ONLY the games ONLY in America and ONLY those sold in Retail stores!
That doesn't even factor in global PC Games sales or legitimate online distribution (via Steam/Direct2Drive which makes up a huge proportion) or even the revenue from hardware like Graphics Cards.
PS3, 360 AND Wii were able to beat that but only by combining all their software sales (that are generally higher per game) and also factoring in hardware sales of consoles, peripherals as well as online subscriptions. And does anyone really care about the fact that Wii earned more revenue than PC gaming? People don't care that it made more money than 360 or PS3...
I guess MW2 wouldn't be disagreed over so much if it wasn't for the multiplayer. On one side, aat least they have a multiplayer instead of pulling it out, and on the other, they didn't do a brilliant job to retain over it's predecessor.
....aaaannnnd you just lost all credibility.bagodix said:
Its "survival horror". Zombies = horror. Shawn of the Dead, Horror Comedy. Zombieland, Horror comedy, anything with a zombie in it...horror.
The first game went outs of its way to try and scare you, IE: hunter pounce, music shifts, dialog, general atmosphere and darkness.
Replace that dialog with a southern hick saying "WOOOEEEE!!" and make everything really bright and well lit. And you turn the game into a shooting gallery, which is frankly, BORING.
I haven't even gotten around to hating the game yet since I didn't buy it because they are the stupid cunts who sparked a price rise.
But I notice the only people who give it a low score are PC gamers, and from what I can tell this game butt-fucked them over.
But I notice the only people who give it a low score are PC gamers, and from what I can tell this game butt-fucked them over.
Ok then. So you're saying that we shouldn't trust the professional reveiwers that say the game is really good, the best thing since sliced bread? I can dig that.shadow skill said:
I can't dig people marking the game as a 0 though. That, my friend, is what we call bullshit. The lowest professional review, WHICH COMPLAINED MIGHTILY ABOUT EVERYTHING THAT PC GAMERS HAVE BEEN CRYING OVER, is a 50-something. Which translates to a 5 in user scores, who have marked the game as a 0 or a 1.
So either the people using Metacritic aren't very good reviewers, or they're trolls.
Also, the negative critic reviews are sort of weird. You don't mark a game down for some of the stuff that they mentioned, and the rest is directly contradicted by the higher scoring reviewers.
As a 360 owner, it's a 95 for me.
If I were a PC gamer, it would be an 80.
No dedis really is a kick in the pants and having to put up with the shitty lag, host advantage and matchmaking we do sucks for the PC guys.
It's still an amazing thrill ride of a game though.
If I were a PC gamer, it would be an 80.
No dedis really is a kick in the pants and having to put up with the shitty lag, host advantage and matchmaking we do sucks for the PC guys.
It's still an amazing thrill ride of a game though.
What are you TALKING about? My response to his complaining that the lack of dedicated servers was that it would be laggy was that the 360 version, WHICH RUNS OFF OF THE SAME SYSTEM, isn't laggy when you have a good connection; therefore, the PC version isn't laggy unless you have a bad connection.bagodix said:
If you're upset about the lack of dedicated servers FOR ANY OTHER REASON, I don't care, that's all cool. But complaining about lag is rather pointless when it's been proven that if you have a good connection, your multiplayer shall be lag-free.
You know while I agree with the OP this as well as the boycott ultimately solves nothing. As most boycotters are talking out of their ass and either pirate the game or buy it secretly.
What will however tell the absolute truth is the sale figures, and from what the initial reports are is that the PC boycot utterly have wasted their time on this silly little boycott. Now go play some other game and quit trolling the internet.
What will however tell the absolute truth is the sale figures, and from what the initial reports are is that the PC boycot utterly have wasted their time on this silly little boycott. Now go play some other game and quit trolling the internet.
I found the easiest way to "boycott" MW2 on PC was to buy it for 360.
The ONLY reason I play PC games over consoles is because I grew up playing PC FPS over consoles, so my gamepad skills are crap compared to alot of console gamers today, and I'm much better with mouse/keyboard. Recently however, I started playing more console FPS games to try and get my skills with a gamepad better, and I wound up beating MW2 in 5-6 hours, and I felt like the game was just as comfortable on the gamepad as it was on the PC.
As far as low scores for PC versions go, show me one PC game that has a higher score than it's console counterpart, with the stipulation that they were released at the same time. PC games will almost always have lower scores. Example: Modern Warfare 1 got a 92 on PC, but 94 on both consoles. Yes, its only 2 percent, but there are other games with a higher margin. If the PC community wants to piss all over MW2, let them, it's not going to bother the console gamers whatsoever.
The ONLY reason I play PC games over consoles is because I grew up playing PC FPS over consoles, so my gamepad skills are crap compared to alot of console gamers today, and I'm much better with mouse/keyboard. Recently however, I started playing more console FPS games to try and get my skills with a gamepad better, and I wound up beating MW2 in 5-6 hours, and I felt like the game was just as comfortable on the gamepad as it was on the PC.
As far as low scores for PC versions go, show me one PC game that has a higher score than it's console counterpart, with the stipulation that they were released at the same time. PC games will almost always have lower scores. Example: Modern Warfare 1 got a 92 on PC, but 94 on both consoles. Yes, its only 2 percent, but there are other games with a higher margin. If the PC community wants to piss all over MW2, let them, it's not going to bother the console gamers whatsoever.