Originally Posted by Arkanor
Instead of giving every game a 10 they should really redo the standard.
Usually every game rated under a 7 is not that good, do we really need 6 subsequent lower levels for games that we know suck? the 10's are seeming too frequent. GS and IGN both gave 10's to MGS4 and GTAIV, but GS's last 10 came in 2001 (Soul Calibur for DC) and now all of a sudden there's two perfect games? I beg to differ. Then again, abstracting a game into a number is already not such a great practice to begin with.
Maybe I'm being a little nitpicky but I think some of these games are getting too much high praise like that, GTAIV was amazing, and an excellent technical achievement, but it's far from perfect. There's less in it in some respects than older GTA's, and it has some technical issues. MGS4 was also amazing (I sat and took turns on it with a friend for 6 hours straight) and was thoroughly impressed, but the control (a pretty important part of any game) felt sloppy and just not as well suited to the PS3 as it would have on the PC.
here is what was wrong with GTA4's reviews - the game was highly flawed technically with loads and loads of glitches and several good heavy slow downs.
MGS4 has maybe several slowdowns when things get extreme, but keeps a good FPS rate for the majority of the game that certainly is on par with Crysis level shaders, textures, and lighting. Meanwhile GTA4 didn't even look that great, but had large environment.
Away from the technicall aspect, the game combines several genres and can be played by people who like either FPS, over the shoulder, or the whole sneaking thing. Not to mention - IT ACTUALLY WORKS OUT! XD
It also obviously has the amazing story and plot that truly seems as if you're in a movie. My father mistakened it twice for a movie when he passed by, even though I told him the first time that it was a game.