|
Post by nolpscpj on May 1, 2003 3:08:38 GMT
yup, however, they have some really good video games that we dont have also.
|
|
|
Post by Jude on May 1, 2003 4:00:01 GMT
yep, I'd rather have their selection of games. they don't seem as formulaic as the U.S. they still mix big business with innovation.
|
|
|
Post by nolpscpj on May 1, 2003 4:55:35 GMT
yah, but if we had that big of selection, how would you be able to tell the good games from the bad.
|
|
|
Post by Jude on May 2, 2003 1:51:38 GMT
I look at reviews a lot. Gamespot is a good barometer for games. Like when they say something really sucks, I don't get it. That weeds out quite a bit.
|
|
|
Post by nolpscpj on May 2, 2003 1:56:06 GMT
gamespot gives every game a weird review, i mean kingdom hearts deserved a 9.0
|
|
|
Post by Jude on May 2, 2003 2:17:17 GMT
Yah, you are right. That's why I only pay attention to the games that they give REALLY bad reviews to, because games like that aren't just a subjective opinion...they really blow...bugs, technical and design issues, the works. So, maybe they're not the best barometer for games, but they can help weed out super sucky ones.
|
|
|
Post by nolpscpj on May 2, 2003 3:48:48 GMT
oh yah thats true, i mean an 8.0 on gamespot is worth a 9.5 on ign, they really come down hard on their game eviewing.
|
|
|
Post by Jude on May 2, 2003 6:24:24 GMT
yah, they do. I played some games they gave some mediocre ratings to that ended up being fun with a lot of imagination.
|
|
|
Post by nolpscpj on May 2, 2003 6:25:19 GMT
oh yah, anything 7.0 or above on gamespot is usually a good game.
|
|
|
Post by Jude on May 6, 2003 3:25:05 GMT
yah, it can be good for a loose guideline if you are unsure about the game.
|
|