The lights are on
I am confused. 10 out of 10 all the way. It does have a few flaws, granted, but what game doesnt? THere is no way that this game is better than Uncharted 2 (Which did get a 10 by the way)
hb
the ratings are based on personal fun of the reviewer.
the game is based on what the game deserved by the reviewer.just because you like it doesnt mean it's the best.your post was full of fanboyism.
Also in your post you said "There is no way that this game is better than Uncharted 2" so you're saying UC2 is better than?
theshermanator95: I am confused. 10 out of 10 all the way. It does have a few flaws, granted, but what game doesnt? THere is no way that this game is better than Uncharted 2 (Which did get a 10 by the way)
It's generally understood that 10/10 means "flawless." You answered yourself.
Kojima-san doesn't need to make Metal Gear anymore
Yeah no kidding how did this game get a 9.75 !!?? How about an 8
the main reason it didnt get a 10 was because the campaign was so darn short. as awesome as it was it was too easy.
@DeadbyDagger
Not true actually...RE4 was given perfect ratings on the GC with many glitches discovered before the PS2 port and were still in the PS2 port.Both version still gained 10s and had flaws....
I dunno, maybe a 7.5, that lack of dedicated servers really *** up the game, SP is great, but who played CoD for the SP?
I played this game for the campaign first. I'm more of a solo gamer on consoles. I do play online, though Modern Warfare 2 and LittleBigPlanet are the only games I really play online.
I would say that the enemy AI is dumb enough and the fact that there wasn't any real innovation in the game made the game lose out on the last .25 points.
But hey, 9.75 is still one heck of a good score if you ask me.
Hey listen, I'm a huge fan of this game myself, and though a bit biasedly I may have given it a 10 myself, I can see why it would get a 9.75. Though the capmaign was extremely intense, and yes, I do agree, it really did make you feel like you were fighting for America's surivival, it was very short, and I think that's what cost it some valuable points. Other than the major inprovements on guns, and the better customization on the online play, that's what I think probably knocked off that .25, really. But hey, not many games even get that high rated either. Be appreciative, I think we can all agree it was a great game.
I agree. It was too short, it did not have as much action as the first Modern Warfare, and the story line was half-baked. I rented it, played it all the way through, and was dissapointed. I have taken it off my x-mas list. I give this a 6.0
For site problems, pleas post at Site Feedback group forum and/or at The Official Bug Thread.
True that dude this game deserves a 10 out of 10 all the WAY!
No, It doesn't, the campaign is for shame. It was too short and I agree with Teg, the storyline was indeed half-baked, however, multiplayer is admittedly a blast, and I do believe the game should get an 8, or somewhere in that area.
Though this game may be long awaited and anticipated, it's really not that much better than World at War, aside from some new features and a new storyline (Which, again, isn't very impressive).
it deserves an 11