Yeah but you would think SOMETHING would look good, right?
I meant The Conduit. If you're really judging the level design based on a fast-edited video review where no shot lasts more than 5 seconds, you're a clown.
Yeah but you would think SOMETHING would look good, right?
I agree that the 8.6 looks completely undeserved, but you really need to stop acting like the Wii killed your family and The Conduit fucked their corpses, Joust.
Personally, I think that scores should be valid across systems and not just in comparison to other Wii games. I had a similar complaint when IGN gave Area 51 a higher score on PS2 than Xbox (despite the latter version being better), because they thought it was the best FPS on the PS2 at the time. If that is true, then the other FPS on PS2 should already have a lower score in the first place. And the same should hold true for The Conduit - there shouldn't be any score padding just because the game is good for the system.
I mean, is The Conduit better than F.E.A.R. 2? Riddick? Portal? IGN gave all of those games lower scores than The Conduit.
Also, can we get this out of the hosted site thread? That's a far more important reason to hate IGN than any of their review scores.
He didn't mention anything about 'puzzles and shit'
In fact he kept talking for about a minute about how good all the 1999-era graphical effects were
closing this thread because wii sucks
Don't be gay.
Bookmarks