http://www.variety.com/review/VE1117935396.html?categoryid=1269&cs=1 (http://www.variety.com/review/VE1117935396.html?categoryid=1269&cs=1)
Wow. Biased much? :| This is why good companies make "teams" (like IGN) to rate a certain companies games.
And they call themselves variety, yet they're sponsored by Nintendo's self-proclaimed competiton.
Actually, there is nothing wrong with that review. EJRaven just blew everything out of proportion to inflate his ego and make his e-penis seem larger when his server crashes from the digg effect.
Quote from: Rayquarian on November 14, 2007, 07:34:15 PM
And they call themselves variety, yet they're sponsored by Nintendo's self-proclaimed competiton.
Variety has been around since the early 1900's....
"but given the vastly superior quality of the graphics in a game like “Ratchet and Clank: Tools of Destruction,” currently available for the PS3,"
Predictable.
Quote from: JMV290 on November 14, 2007, 07:35:39 PM
Actually, there is nothing wrong with that review. EJRaven just blew everything out of proportion to inflate his ego and make his e-penis seem larger when his server crashes from the digg effect.
agree;
Also, stop intercourse ing bringing it up. Some people just do not like games, get that?
Like I have disliked every Zelda game I've played. Now, are you going to ninny at me?
Quote from: ME86 on November 14, 2007, 07:37:14 PM
Quote from: JMV290 on November 14, 2007, 07:35:39 PM
Actually, there is nothing wrong with that review. EJRaven just blew everything out of proportion to inflate his ego and make his e-penis seem larger when his server crashes from the digg effect.
agree;
Also, stop intercourse ing bringing it up. Some people just do not like games, get that?
Like I have disliked every Zelda game I've played. Now, are you going to ninny at me?
Sorry I told you. This was the first time I saw this article, too. And no, I won't.
Quote from: JMV290 on November 14, 2007, 07:35:39 PM
Actually, there is nothing wrong with that review. EJRaven just blew everything out of proportion to inflate his ego and make his e-penis seem larger when his server crashes from the digg effect.
EJ
has an e-penis? News to me.
Quote from: ME86 on November 14, 2007, 07:37:14 PM
Quote from: JMV290 on November 14, 2007, 07:35:39 PM
Actually, there is nothing wrong with that review. EJRaven just blew everything out of proportion to inflate his ego and make his e-penis seem larger when his server crashes from the digg effect.
agree;
Also, stop f***ing bringing it up. Some people just do not like games, get that?
Like I have disliked every Zelda game I've played. Now, are you going to b*** at me?
What th- one of gaming's hottest guys goes shirtless and you haven't seen it? Fail. Triple fail if you missed Raiden. :P
On topic, I loathe this review, but think about it: if he does not give a bad review, Sony will find out and either have him fired or stop sponsoring. The media is a... harsh place to live.
Quote from: NINNIN6 on November 14, 2007, 07:58:15 PM
Quote from: ME86 on November 14, 2007, 07:37:14 PM
Quote from: JMV290 on November 14, 2007, 07:35:39 PM
Actually, there is nothing wrong with that review. EJRaven just blew everything out of proportion to inflate his ego and make his e-penis seem larger when his server crashes from the digg effect.
agree;
Also, stop f***ing bringing it up. Some people just do not like games, get that?
Like I have disliked every Zelda game I've played. Now, are you going to b*** at me?
What th- one of gaming's hottest guys goes shirtless and you haven't seen it? Fail. Triple fail if you missed Raiden. :P
On topic, I loathe this review, but think about it: if he does not give a bad review, Sony will find out and either have him fired or stop sponsoring. The media is a... harsh place to live.
I found his review to be fair.
He gave reasons as to why he thought it was a bad game. He didn't flat out insult Nintendo; if you read the first paragraph, you'd see that.
Just because it says "Sponsored by Sony" doesn't mean that it was some evil plot to slander Nintendo, like EJ did to Mr. Fritz. I could understand if it was SCEA (Sony Computer Entertainment of America) that sponsored it, but for all you know, that "Sony" could refer to any of Sony's other divisions, which aren't completely dependent on each other.
lololo fake
Holy Shit (http://nsider2.com/forums/TRUTH-Sony-Sponsored-Mario-t53101.html)
Quote from: Yukiko on November 15, 2007, 05:43:13 AM
lololo fake
Holy Shit (http://nsider2.com/forums/TRUTH-Sony-Sponsored-Mario-t53101.html)
I had a feeling that would happen. ^_____________^ I hope EJraven feels retarded now.
Quote from: Yukiko on November 15, 2007, 05:43:13 AM
lololo fake
Holy Shit (http://nsider2.com/forums/TRUTH-Sony-Sponsored-Mario-t53101.html)
EJ locked the other one and threatened to ban the person.
I just sent a major hate-comment the the dumbass who wrote that poop.
Wow, they have a filter to block out spam, but replacing As with @s and Is with 1s let it get through... :D
Quote from: JMV290 on November 15, 2007, 09:50:14 AM
Quote from: Yukiko on November 15, 2007, 05:43:13 AM
lololo fake
Holy Shit (http://nsider2.com/forums/TRUTH-Sony-Sponsored-Mario-t53101.html)
EJ locked the other one and threatened to ban the person.
What a intercourse ing vagina cleaning device bag.
hm...they begin with saying how SMG doesn't live up to the full potential of using the Wii remote and how the graphics aren't on par with the 360 and PS3. Those are probably the worst arguments ever. We don't want a game that overuses the Wiimote, we want a GOOD game that retains the Mario feel. And Mario has never been about graphics and whoever thinks graphics are important in Mario games should go impale themselves in the head.
Quote from: Zovistograt on November 15, 2007, 03:06:37 PM
hm...they begin with saying how SMG doesn't live up to the full potential of using the Wii remote and how the graphics aren't on par with the 360 and PS3. Those are probably the worst arguments ever. We don't want a game that overuses the Wiimote, we want a GOOD game that retains the Mario feel. And Mario has never been about graphics and whoever thinks graphics are important in Mario games should go impale themselves in the head.
Seriously, what's wrong with the graphics?
At 720x480 resolution and enough polygons to not see any lines or edges whatsoever where there shouldn't be any, there is no graphical flaw from my perspective. 720x480 can scale to good sizes without appearing pixellated or blurry (unless you put your face right up to the TV, keeping eyes like 2 inches from the screen, in which case you're an idiot).
Quote from: bluaki on November 15, 2007, 03:15:17 PM
Quote from: Zovistograt on November 15, 2007, 03:06:37 PM
hm...they begin with saying how SMG doesn't live up to the full potential of using the Wii remote and how the graphics aren't on par with the 360 and PS3. Those are probably the worst arguments ever. We don't want a game that overuses the Wiimote, we want a GOOD game that retains the Mario feel. And Mario has never been about graphics and whoever thinks graphics are important in Mario games should go impale themselves in the head.
Seriously, what's wrong with the graphics?
At 720x480 resolution and enough polygons to not see any lines or edges whatsoever where there shouldn't be any, there is no graphical flaw from my perspective. 720x480 can scale to good sizes without appearing pixellated or blurry (unless you put your face right up to the TV, keeping eyes like 2 inches from the screen, in which case you're an idiot).
well, apparently the reviewer is an idiot and only likes photorealism >_>