with many games delayed such as GTA 4, devil may cry 4, army of two, lost odyssey (US/pal) , and the various disapointments from many game that were supposed to be AAA titles , 2007 is not " that" great.

Assassins creed is the biggest disapointement this year, metacritics score is 84% only, good but far from the score we were expecting, the game has many flaws and if it weren' t for its high production value it will be mediocre. what a waste...

Kane and lynch another game that i was really looking forward to but ends up with averages reviews everywhere, a 68% in MC which is horrible, the game had a potential and seemed very promising.

Blue Dragon, this one was too much anticipated for its own sake, coming directly from 3 legends, it failed to deliver what we fans expected from sakagushi on the 360. A good and fun for any traditional jrpg fan. 78% MC.

Eternal sonata, again a supposed to be AAA titles that disapointed, a mere 79% in MC says it all. i was so impatient to have my hand on this game and though it' s a good rpg, boring battles and few enemy species don' t make up for the gorgeous graphics.

Blacksite Area and Timeshift, i certainly wasn' t expecting an AAA but rather good games scoring in MC at least 80%... too bad it' s 69%.

same for naruto , i expected much more from this game. mc = 79%

heck it started with the darkness, the game is great to me, but i expected more from the developers of riddick, it' s a love it or hate it game, it could have been better. 83%.


THE CHAMPIONS

Call of Duty 4
Halo 3
Crysis
Mario Galaxy
Metroid Corruption
Bioshock
Virtua Fighter 5
Motor Storm
GRAW 2
Half life the orange box
Uncharted

I really don' t care what metacritics says. But even if I did I wasn' t looking forward to any of the disappointing titles you' re mentioning, except for Eternal Sonata which I think met my expectations.

ORIGINAL: ginjirou

I really don' t care what metacritics says.

Agreed. I couldn' t give a shit even if I tried. Play the game then draw your own conclusions. Don' t bother with the jaded reviewers of the internet.

The only three that you were disappointed with that I had great hopes for were Assassins Creed, Kane + Lynch and Blue Dragon. I agree BD let me down, but I reckon I' ll still enjoy AC and K+L, despite the reviews.

I think 2007s been a great year. Especially enjoyed HL2: Orange Box, Halo 3, COD4, Bioshock, Forza 2, Gears PC, PGR4 etc Its just 2008 will be even better.

Agreed. I couldn' t give a shit even if I tried. Play the game then draw your own conclusions. Don' t bother with the jaded reviewers of the internet.

what' s that supposed to mean?? i mentioned MC or gamerankings just for the information and reassurance, and yes it does matter unless if you don' t give a fuck about your money and time, you don' t care well nobody care if you don' t but that score has a weight , and when a game scores high , its hype goes to the roof, heck even professional journalists take that score into account, and why the hell wouldn' t they?

and put it simple, from my experience, all games i have played (except for very few ones) that suck scored below 70%, for me this is a fact and for everybody game scoring below 70% is definitly a bad sign, there are many other games that deserve your money and attention.

as of right now, i' m 100% sure that assassins creed is not THAT great, that score is low to what was expected, something is definitly fucked up in the game and you will find it out just remember this.

Assassins Creed, Kane + Lynch and Blue Dragon

those were my biggest disapointement as well , but i won' t miss playing assassin' s creed and kane and lynch even it' ll be a chore in som segment of the game. i hope they are good enough to finish them.

Can' t really agree. While it is true that 2007 had a lot of disappointing games (The biggest failure is imo Assassin' s Creed....but at least it' s a nice set up for the sequels to come) the overall quality of the other games released this year imo make up for it. 2007 is still the greatest year in gaming so far.

Assassins Creed makes me so angry, not because I think it' s a bad game, rather because I hate of teenage cool they made the game. Ofc there are parts about the game, other than the story that bugs me, like bad A.I and 1990' s objective designs, but imo, the game would' ve been twice as good, had they simply skipped the whole Sci-FI Matrix Mumbo Jumbo.

I bought CoD4, which seems to be a defenitive contender, but unlikely winenr of Goty! I bought it for Xbox 360 of all alternatives! The only version which requires me to pay to play online. I choosed this version, simply ' cause most my friends have a 360, and CoD4, and ofc Live. What bothers me, isn' t so much tjat I have to pay extra to play it with them, but because I' m forced to pay for a full year membership, as I know there are no other current or comming games I want to play over Live. So I wonder, am I a fool, for paying for 12 month' s of Live, when I will only play Cod4 for about a week?

Why didn' t you use those 48h trial cards or simply just bought a 3 month subscription?

A year is a long time, I' m sure you' ll end up playing other games in that time online. Besides its like 3 quid a month, probably less in Sweden isnt it?

Should be getting AC tomorrow.

Well as long as SSBB comes out 1st half of next year ill be fine.

Has anyone on this forum even played AC? Everywhere I hear people talk about the game and none of them even played it. From watching the trailers on IGN, it seems the only thing I might not like is the fact that it looks sort of easy. In the trailer he gets stabbed like 30 times and I cant even see a health bar

And has anyone played K&L yet?

Who was looking forward to Area 51?

To me, The Orange box has lost my interest because it seems like I can never find a game on TF2. I' ve finished portal and most of HL so the only thing I care about now is TF2 and the only game I found last time I tried was some guy who kept leaving.

I havent played AC or K&L So i dont make assumptions about them.
As for Area51 never heard of it.
And Orange box was great and all but TF2 wasn' t my cup of tea, The snipers were too underpowerd, and a good sniper would get like 10-20kills while a heavy would be just running everywhere getting like 40 kills for being a idiot and not requiring any skill.
And sure you may say, Yeah but maybe you dont like it because you only play as a sniper. Yeah well if the game was as balanced as they made it out to be i wouldnt have to change now would i.

My biggest disappointment for 2007 was the total lack of any news related to Huxley. I didn' t expect the game to be released this year or even next year but shit, I want some screenshots, a video, anything that would show me the game still exists.

If the game does get released and it' s just half as good as it' s potential, it will be the last game I' ll need to buy. That' s how good I expect the game to be. Maybe I would get the successors of it. Huxley is potentially what I would call a complete videogame. It could be the first game to have everything that counts.

I play all these games and even the best ones leave me feeling a little disappointed. So far no videogame in my eyes has perfection or anything resembling a lasting appeal. I get tired of games so quickly.

Huxley might be the game that can stand up against even my most jaded tastes.

I dont think I' ve seen anything on Huxley. The only thing I know about it is what you' ve mentioned in other threads.

Yes, I' ve played (and beaten) AC and trust me, while the game is easy (as soon as you learn how to counter enemy attacks every fight is a breeze) the most annoying thing - by far - is the factor that the game is only entertaining for like an hour because after that hour you' ll spend most of your time doing the same thing all over again. There is no kind of alternation. You go pick pocketing, beating people up, get the intel you need and assassinate your target. The assassinations themselves are pretty entertaining, though....but 5 minutes of fun are not enough to make up for the 30 minutes of dullness you' ve to undergo. In my opinion the best aspect of the game is the story that sounds very promising and is developed very well with lots of dialogue. But, on the other hand, the story is just the start and we' ll have to wait for AC2 & 3 until we will be able to truly judge it. Still, if they keep going the same way they did in AC1, at least story-wise, the series would be great.

as of right now, i' m 100% sure that assassins creed is not THAT great, that score is low to what was expected, something is definitly ***ed up in the game and you will find it out just remember this.

Not neccesarily. What if I can' t find anything wrong with it at all? Not that I' m going to go looking, rather than just playing through the game. That would be retarded (although, funnily enough, a lot of people seem to do it).

don' t need your approval there , people are already complaining about many things that keep it from being an instant classic. just read the post above you.

games dont need to be an instant classic to be fun, though ubisoft needs to go back in the box, to figure out how to make AC2 ace

don' t need your approval there , people are already complaining about many things that keep it from being an instant classic. just read the post above you.

But you haven' t actually played it have you? I don' t care about the opinions of others like yourself.