Topic started: Thu, 22 May 2008 15:16
Click here to view the editorial this topic refers to.
Page:»12
TimSpong
Joined 6 Nov 2006
1783 comments
Fri, 23 May 2008 13:27
PreciousRoi wrote:
oh, that grammatical wingwang of yourn...couldn't help envisioning Eddie Murphy from RAW swinging his microphone over his shoulder.


I have a icecream, I have a icecream... do you want some of my icecream?

(not Raw).

Tim
schnide
Joined 23 Apr 2004
575 comments
Fri, 23 May 2008 14:11
Spinface wrote:
Since it went up, though, I have taken a look at Metacritic to see some of the scores.


Question - why aren't SPOnG's scores reported on Metacritic?
TimSpong
Joined 6 Nov 2006
1783 comments
Fri, 23 May 2008 14:20
schnide wrote:
Question - why aren't SPOnG's scores reported on Metacritic?


Now, there lies a long and dull story. It is, however, a story that I in the midst of putting a happy ending on.

God, I could work for a platform holder with that kind of non-answer [self-slap].

I am going through the process of proving the Metacritic that SPOnG reviews meet all of its criteria.

Cheers

Tim
DoctorDee
Joined 3 Sep 1999
2130 comments
Sat, 24 May 2008 07:18
Condorman wrote:
I think I might stick to Eurogamer in future, where the editorial staff don't feel the need

You've hit the nail on the head there... the difference between us and Eurogamer. At SPOnG, every single person involved with the site plays video games.

At Eurogamer, the guy who funded the whole thing, he doesn't play games - his sons do. Their non-executive director, Greg Ingham, who made millions of pounds out of video games at Future Publishing, he's never played a video game for recreational purposes in his life.

I don't mean to pick on Eurogamer specifically here, we know the guys there, and they are good guys. Greg is certainly my mentor, and an old friend of mine. Almost all the "major" gaming sites are the same - they are run by people who don't give a f**k about games except as a way of making money. Our site is run by people who love games and gaming, as a way of enjoying ourselves.

So we view the forums here as a way of engaging with people with whom we share a hobby and interest, rather than just a way of increasing page count by having swathes of inane fanboy drivel. If those people want to argue about etymology, that's fine with us.

As for Haze, I haven't played it yet. But I will be this weekend. Once i've oiled my decking ;-)


tyrion
Joined 14 Oct 1999
1786 comments
Sat, 24 May 2008 13:16
DoctorDee wrote:
Once i've oiled my decking ;-)

"Oiling the decking" - euphemism at its finest!
DoctorDee
Joined 3 Sep 1999
2130 comments
Sat, 24 May 2008 16:27
tyrion wrote:
"Oiling the decking" - euphemism at its finest!

You know, as I typed it, I could hear you "verbing the noun".
I drilled the wall, then I hosed the patio, and finally I oiled the deck. Pausing only to stroke the cat.

Joji
Joined 12 Mar 2004
3960 comments
Fri, 30 May 2008 11:01
Problem with Haze is it took to long to get to shelves, slowly simmering on hype and vids. In that time we've had Bioshock, Portal, Call of Duty 4 and Halo 3, all better games that do some cool stuff. All those games make me glad I have a 360.

And Haze has.....nectar. The Spong review was good and fair though, but I guess most PS3 owners will bag it. Each to their own, but it still seems like an average okay shooter.

By the way, Tim, is it still okay for us Sponger's to submit game reviews?
TimSpong
Joined 6 Nov 2006
1783 comments
Fri, 30 May 2008 11:08
Joji wrote:
Problem with Haze is it took to long to get to shelves, slowly simmering on hype and vids. In that time we've had Bioshock, Portal, Call of Duty 4 and Halo 3, all better games that do some cool stuff. All those games make me glad I have a 360.


Killzone 2
Too Human
Spore
Fable 2
Halo Wars
darkSector
Home
GT4 on PSP

and... of course... GTA IV

Not sure if waiting for a game is really the problem.


Joji wrote:
By the way, Tim, is it still okay for us Sponger's to submit game reviews?


Joji, SPOnGer reviews are always welcome.

Cheers

Tim
Joji
Joined 12 Mar 2004
3960 comments
Mon, 23 Jun 2008 22:44
Okay, cheers Tim.

What I meant, is that time is kinder to some genres of game than others. FPS games are rife these days, all lookling for our dollars and pounds, and each would have to try something different to succeed.

I guess what Haze is doing wasn't enough, when compared to a Portal or Bioshock.
config
Joined 3 Sep 1999
2088 comments
Tue, 24 Jun 2008 08:59
DoctorDee wrote:
As for Haze, I haven't played it yet. But I will be this weekend. Once i've oiled my decking ;-)

I have, and I quite enjoyed it. I've only tackled the single player campaign, and while it's an accomplished FPS it's a bit short and gives me that nagging feeling that substantial chunks of the narrative (and thereby accompanying "levels") have been torn out to speed the game to delivery.

However, I found the balancing spot on - I regularly felt pressured by the enemy, often hanging on with little life/energy, but managed to just make it past them and recuperate.

I haven't played the on-line stuff yet - if past FRD games are a template, it should be a treat. Timesplitters multiplayer was fun even when playing against AI.

Now, if it would just stop pissing it down and blowing dust in the wind, I 'd get to oiling my decking...
Next >>12

Log-in or register to permanently change your layout setting.