Must be sad to not be able to get any simple enjoyment out of any game. Ever.
Come for the review. Stay for the shenanigans.
Because the current "7-9" scale that most large sites is better than someone's real opinion of the game?
I would much rather have an honest opinion of game, even if I disagree, then the kind of cheerleader reviews at places like IGN. Big games from big publishers almost NEVER get panned by the larger outlets unless the game is just 100% awful. They are too afraid of losing early access or opportunities at exclusives, they have become just a part of the marketing engine.
So complain, whine, boo-hoo all you want that the mean Mr. Chick panned a game others have praised. I hope Mr. Chick keeps on giving us his honest opinion for years to come, if I ever felt he wasn't I would read his reviews.
Thanks Tom!
Do't be pathetic. It's reviewed as he sees it. While you may not agree with it to be sad enough to post about it as if it's going to change is pathetic. You like the other complainers seem to think a game should be scored between 7-9 regardless of how good or bad it is. The game isn't any different if Tom thinks it's 1 star or 5 stars to you. Unless that is you game magically changes it to something totally different and rubbish to you
In what way, in the fact it didn't get the score you think it deserves? It doesn't make the game any different to play and be enjoyed by you regardless of what score anyone in the world gives it. It's sad that you feel you opinion needs to be reaffirmed by people you don't know rather than just enjoying the game yourself regardless fo what other people think.
No you miss the point totally, you like it he doesn't that's fine everyone has their own opinons that's why you read the text and don't just look at the score. The fact you like it is great it really doesn't matter if everyone else thinks it's rubbish just as long as you are happy should be all that matters to you.
Lets be honest, when there are a 50 reviews out there the aggregate will not move at all. Now if you are sad enough to work for an employer that pays you or bonuses you on stuff like metacritic you get everything you deserve.
YOur nan probably has more manners than you as well and doesn't find the need to swear to get their point over or make personal attacks. QT3 has been here for 10 years and certainly doesn't do poor reviews for hits but it must work as the trolls are out of the woodwork today.
Yes because everyone lives in lala land that can work anywhere they want and can easily quit a job and find that perfect work place. They have no family to take care of, kids, to feed, etc.
based on all your "rah-rah" replies, how much are they paying you?
And even if it's 100% awful, it'll still get a 7. I heartily disagree with a number of Tom's reviews, but I can respect that he thoughtfully explains what's important to him in a game and why he dislikes what he does.
hahahaha
I prefer the "If game plays, then 3 stars" approach.
Good review. I had a feeling this would turn out to be a mediocre release. Looking forward to reading what you thought of Darksiders 2.
Couldn't have said it better myself. There's nothing wrong with getting your own opinions challenged, but then this is the internet, where insecurity runs wild, and usually ends up trampling common sense.
I've played a few hours of the PC Version and have enjoyed the experience so far. I'm guessing, unless things take a horrible twist, that I'll end up enjoying the time I spend playing Sleeping Dogs. I have no issue with Tom's opinion of the game as everyone has their own unique experience during a play-through. I know for a fact that there are plenty of games that are loved by a large amount of gamers that I simply haven't been into, so again I've no issue there.
The issue I do have however, is with the review itself. I found it be poorly written, flippant and lacking of any genuine critique. I counted 12 different references to other games while "slogging" (to quote Tom) through the review. It's as if Tom wanted to say something and then was either too lazy or lacked the words to complete his thought. For example: "Sleeping Dog has all the localized flavor of a Yakuza game, yet all the atmosphere and energy of a Rockstar game" or "It’s as grounded as LA Noire, but with none of the storytelling heft of LA Noire". Grounded as LA Noire, but none of the storytelling heft of LA Noire?. How about saying why and how it's grounded and then going into what is was about the storytelling that you didn't care for? When Tom did get around to the story itself in the next paragraph he simply stated: "The story is trite and familiar, most likely a holdover from when this was one of Activision’s True Crime games. You’re an undercover cop infiltrating the Triad in Hong Kong blah blah blah." Again, What makes it trite and familiar? The setting? The characters? The plot?
I'm stopping there as this is probably too long already. I'm sure I'll get trolled or deleted etc. but when I read something as egregious as this review, it's hard not to comment.
What a terrible review
Trying to get more views to the site, hilarious
Finally someone not thrilled by SR3 so I can convince myself I won't like it, just like I don't enjoy most other mainstream third person open world games. I love saving time!
Mr. Lowkey, thanks for your detailed feedback, but I feel you and I have a fundamental difference of opinion on how to critically discuss a videogame (I feel the same way about movies, musics, books, etc). To my mind, context is one of the most valuable things you can bring into a critical discussion. How does this game (movie, book, etc) fit into the larger context? How does it compare to others in the same genre? How does it compare to other entertainment? What is its relationship to the other games that obviously inform its design?
Open-world games are a really exciting genre for a number of reasons, and I'd rather bring that into a discussion about why I didn't care for Sleeping Dogs rather than talk about Sleeping Dogs in a vacuum.