83 Percent?

[T.I.P.]

Surely they meant 163/100.

[nadalcameron]

Gregrein, it seems like alot, but according o what their saying the game has /much/ more to offer. 20 hours doesn't give you enough to look at it all, and thus review it all, including the full storyline. Not truly do it.

 

As for the slightly off topic of two minutes of gameplay footage. The problem is that footage is one thing, but you can never really get a feel for how good or bad controls are until you have it, generally.

[GloRy]

Is it a reliable source?

 

http://www.jeuxvideo.fr/

 

Im curious why they rated GTA IV low compared to other websites/magazines.. There website doesn't even look like a good layout! It looks terrible, id never think of going there to look up game reviews. Does anyone ever use jeuxvideo?

[masaba]

You guys have to understand, whenever you tear apart a game into so many individual categories, and rate them each separately, then the overall score is going to go down drastically. This is why most mags don't use averages anymore, because sometimes, when it's all laid out on the table, it doesn't truly emulate how good the game actually is.

 

Look at it this way, 166/200 over 40 categories.

 

That's roughly 36 4/5's and 4 5/5's, so think about it, the game is "very good" in almost everything and "excellent" in everything else. It's just because the scale of the review is so vast that it seems like the game was done an injustice. The game is overall, "great" or "very good" on average, but because the flaws were weighed as heavily as the positives, even the most minor issues are valued as much as the greatest aspects of the game.

 

ie. framerate = multiplayer/action/sound/story and so on and so forth.

 

I wouldn't hail this review as being the only honest one, (because I have read all the others and have addressed both their strong points and weak points, the strong points having been so exemplary that they have completely overshadowed any flaws the game may have, thus 10s across the board) but rather one that has made the mistake of scoring the game based on an average of a bunch of categories instead of an overall score based on how the game comes together as a whole.

 

Ladies and gentlemen, no need to applaud, I know, it's God given.

 

 

[Coltrane's Muse]

You guys have to understand, whenever you tear apart a game into so many individual categories, and rate them each separately, then the overall score is going to go down drastically. This is why most mags don't use averages anymore, because sometimes, when it's all laid out on the table, it doesn't truly emulate how good the game actually is.

 

Look at it this way, 166/200 over 40 categories.

 

That's roughly 36 4/5's and 4 5/5's, so think about it, the game is "very good" in almost everything and "excellent" in everything else. It's just because the scale of the review is so vast that it seems like the game was done an injustice. The game is overall, "great" or "very good" on average, but because the flaws were weighed as heavily as the positives, even the most minor issues are valued as much as the greatest aspects of the game.

 

ie. framerate = multiplayer/action/sound/story and so on and so forth.

 

I wouldn't hail this review as being the only honest one, (because I have read all the others and have addressed both their strong points and weak points, the strong points having been so exemplary that they have completely overshadowed any flaws the game may have, thus 10s across the board) but rather one that has made the mistake of scoring the game based on an average of a bunch of categories instead of an overall score based on how the game comes together as a whole.

 

Ladies and gentlemen, no need to applaud, I know, it's God given.

In short, everyone is entitled to their respective opinion.

 

Condensed for those suffering from Attention Deficit Disorder.

[angrycupidstunt]

It only got an 83% because you can not surrender in a gun battle. problem solved lets move on!

[GloRy]

You guys have to understand, whenever you tear apart a game into so many individual categories, and rate them each separately, then the overall score is going to go down drastically. This is why most mags don't use averages anymore, because sometimes, when it's all laid out on the table, it doesn't truly emulate how good the game actually is.

 

Look at it this way, 166/200 over 40 categories.

 

That's roughly 36 4/5's and 4 5/5's, so think about it, the game is "very good" in almost everything and "excellent" in everything else. It's just because the scale of the review is so vast that it seems like the game was done an injustice. The game is overall, "great" or "very good" on average, but because the flaws were weighed as heavily as the positives, even the most minor issues are valued as much as the greatest aspects of the game.

 

ie. framerate = multiplayer/action/sound/story and so on and so forth.

 

I wouldn't hail this review as being the only honest one, (because I have read all the others and have addressed both their strong points and weak points, the strong points having been so exemplary that they have completely overshadowed any flaws the game may have, thus 10s across the board) but rather one that has made the mistake of scoring the game based on an average of a bunch of categories instead of an overall score based on how the game comes together as a whole.

 

Ladies and gentlemen, no need to applaud, I know, it's God given.

Id rather take IGN's word over theres. I always used IGN and every time I would buy a game going by its review IGN was always pretty accurate.

[Foddzy]

Its French, the only things they are good at are cheese and effemenate whining.

[E-lasto]

Well, can we find out what the gave SA?

They gave IV 83%, and at the end show it being better then SA, so that would imply SA got a lower score then 83%

 

Now, think about it this way:

Do you think SA deserves something lower then an 83?

- I am going to go with no.

So if their review of SA was wrong, what makes you think this review will be any more reliable?

 

[GloRy]

Well, can we find out what the gave SA?

They gave IV 83%, and at the end show it being better then SA, so that would imply SA got a lower score then 83%

 

Now, think about it this way:

Do you think SA deserves something lower then an 83?

- I am going to go with no.

So if their review of SA was wrong, what makes you think this review will be any more reliable?

French people are really weird..

[giants84]

They are obviously morons nothing more.

[numdmind]

Well they said its a very detailed review, I expect the control system and camera movements caused the most damage, the rest being the stupid A.I that we heard about in other reviews (trying to get the guy you protect in the co-op MP mode in vehicles, etc).

So, you don't mind if the control scheme and camera movements are bad? Is that what you're saying?

 

That's like 99% of the game. If the controls are funky, then the game's not going to be any fun no matter how pretty it is.

[numdmind]

exactly

 

sorry sweethearts this won't be my favorite game ever, or even this year. Rockstar has never been able to come anywhere near the responsiveness and control other great games provided with their cameras and 3rd person / 1st person mechanics

 

still going to be amazing no doubt but because this game will sell countless consoles to people who are helpless in any situation that involves reflexes, aim, touch, and shooting and therefore are going to buy a 360 / PS3 just to play this game -

 

of course it's going to do things that nobody has ever seen before, especially people just now getting into the next gen experience

 

im gonna love it but i play games to shoot digital approximations of people in their digitally approximate faces

 

if, as a game developer, you inhibit me in any way regarding this activity, you are docked points - simple as

 

get over it everybody - this is not going to be Bad Company or RB6V2. however if this game aspires to be a shooter in ANY WAY WHATSOEVER and fails to implement the standards met by these games in regard to camera and aiming mechanics -

 

well

 

sorry

 

Rockstar should have provided better controls and camera

 

however

 

if all you want to do is shoot people competively, go play a great shooter and shut up

Did you ever think that some people just can't stand games like Rainbow Six and Bad Company?

 

Did you ever think that maybe you can't even place those games into the same category as GTA? Not because I think that GTA is a much richer gaming experience for me, but because the games are in different genres. That's like comparing country music to opera.

 

First person shooters haven't really changed since, well, Doom. OK, that's a bit extreme, but there's nothing an FPS can do to amaze me anymore. I don't care about graphics, so no matter how much better a game looks, I'm not going to place that over game play ever.

 

Plus, I'm not playing games to get more realism. If I want that I'll watch the news or go outside for a walk.

 

Don't act like your opinion on gaming is THE opinion. It's really not. It's yours, not mine, not theirs. Some may share it with you, and that's fine, but don't come in here and act superior with your smartass remarks such as "this game will sell countless consoles to people who are helpless in any situation that involves reflexes, aim, touch, and shooting". That's showing how arrogant you are, and no one likes that sh*t. And the more arrogance you show, the more ignorance you show. Elitist.

[Mad Tony]

I never trust a Frenchman.

Why? Because of stuff like this. It's fairly obvious GTA IV is one kick ass game. The 83% score by this French magazine is the odd one out. An anomaly. I wouldn't get too worked up about it guys.

[Macauley]

You guys have to understand, whenever you tear apart a game into so many individual categories, and rate them each separately, then the overall score is going to go down drastically. This is why most mags don't use averages anymore, because sometimes, when it's all laid out on the table, it doesn't truly emulate how good the game actually is.

 

Look at it this way, 166/200 over 40 categories.

 

That's roughly 36 4/5's and 4 5/5's, so think about it, the game is "very good" in almost everything and "excellent" in everything else. It's just because the scale of the review is so vast that it seems like the game was done an injustice. The game is overall, "great" or "very good" on average, but because the flaws were weighed as heavily as the positives, even the most minor issues are valued as much as the greatest aspects of the game.

 

ie. framerate = multiplayer/action/sound/story and so on and so forth.

 

I wouldn't hail this review as being the only honest one, (because I have read all the others and have addressed both their strong points and weak points, the strong points having been so exemplary that they have completely overshadowed any flaws the game may have, thus 10s across the board) but rather one that has made the mistake of scoring the game based on an average of a bunch of categories instead of an overall score based on how the game comes together as a whole.

 

Ladies and gentlemen, no need to applaud, I know, it's God given.

Nice post. I'm having one of those "durr..." moments. It makes a lot of sence.

 

I mean come on! I'm a bloody Maths B, Maths C, and Physics student, and I didn't figure that out? Well, I guess I only got 6 hours sleep.

 

Anyway, good work.

[josh995]

What's with all these retards who keep saying "well, they're French"?

Im not retarded, a nurse comes around once a week to bathe me thats all.

LMFAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[wutangblade]

Can't blame the French for giving a low score because PSM3 (France) gave it 20/20

 

But like someone's already said at least it's an honest review

[Mad Tony]

 

Can't blame the French for giving a low score because PSM3 (France) gave it 20/20

 

But like someone's already said at least it's an honest review

How can it be honest if every single other review is outstanding?

Wait, let me guess, R* bribed every single magazine except the 83% one?

[wutangblade]

Can't blame the French for giving a low score because PSM3 (France) gave it 20/20

 

But like someone's already said at least it's an honest review

How can it be honest if every single other review is outstanding?

Wait, let me guess, R* bribed every single magazine except the 83% one?

Yes, it's a conspiracy!

 

I meant it's still a decent review from what looks like a non gaming mag

 

off topic

 

who's the girl in your sig anyway? She's hot

[Mafioso86]

i'm not worried about it. And while I made a joke earlier about some stuck up old Frenchmen doing the review... this French bashing is a little irritating. I mean there are plenty of people in France that are cool and into GTA... I just don't think the author of this was one of them. I mean I figure this was an extremely unbiased review. I mean if someone like... I dunno my sister played GTAIV I could see her giving it the same review, when I would give it a 98 or something. One of the reviews today mentioned that GTAIV wasn't inventing the genre... but making the perfect GTA game beyond anyone's expectations. The point there is that if you love GTA games, this will be the best game ever. If you don't it may just be an 83/100.

[Volvagia]

They are french, theres probably some joke in the game that goes on about them and the reviewer just had a hissy fit.

Like colonel coretez returning and saying "I HATE THE DAMN FRENCH!!!" ?

[chugen]

*frenchman enter in the thread*

 

 

hai guys

i read the entire review, THEY LOVE THIS f*ckING GAME.

 

here is what they think of the game. i'll translate a little part of what they say.

 

 

Pierre-alexandre : "i'm sure to buy it, all i have to do now, is convince my friends to play online too.

 

Christophe : "for me, it's maybe the first newgen game."

 

Denis : "Not much bugs, visually dazzling, and so much detail.

 

Alexandre : GOTY

 

-----

[MrT`]

Most video game reviews only give ratings from 6/10 to 10/10 these days, which just ignores the whole point of what a 1-10 (or 0-10) scale should be, games should be rated across the full scale. When the few magazines/sites that do use a broader rating give a game a lower score, people throw a hissy fit, but it should be remembered that even 8/10 is very good when the full scale is used:

 

• 1/10 - Terrible, the developers will be first against the wall when the revolution comes
• 2/10 - Very Bad, game not in a state to be released, or simply utter crap
• 3/10 - Bad, numerous flaws, avoid, make sure granny doesn't buy you this for xmas
• 4/10 - Below average, significant flaws, only buy (on budget) if a die hard fan of the genre or franchise
• 5/10 - Average, nothing special, some notable flaws, move along.
• 6/10 - Above Average, buy if a fan of the genre/franchise
• 7/10 - Good, worth buying
• 8/10 - Very Good, highly recommended purchase
• 9/10 - Excellent, Game of the Year contender, must purchase
• 10/10 - Perfection, Game of the Year without a doubt, you haven't bought this already?!

Take Kane & Lynch, many of you will agree its not a good game, a Gamespot reviewer got sacked for giving it a 6/10, Metacritic average is 65%, adjust the rating to fit onto the list above, it'd come out as a 4/10.

 

I just avoid most of this sort of furore by reading a magazine that gives games 1-5 stars (and isnt afraid to hand out the 1 and 2 stars, Assassins Creed got 2 stars iirc, cited as being too repetitive), since the review is the better guide to whether its a game I'd enjoy than just a big glaring number on the last page of the review.

 

To summarise, just because a review gives a game 8/10 or 9/10, it doesnt mean its a bad game, lol.

[INGAZ]

I never remember them actually giving a score. They just rated different parts with stars. The average score was over 4 stars/5. But what you have to remember is that it is significantly higher than any other GTA they have rated which was put into comparison beside it. San Andreas only got an average of about 4. Put it into context people!

[SBizz6]

What really matters here is that in every single review they have mentioned that the game is amazing and/or that could be game of the year. Seriously, what more could you ask for?

 

I think that the debate and rating confusion will be cleared up as soon as the online reviews start flowing in.