Trust me, never trust IGN for a review of a game. When actual football guys play and review the game, they notice the small differences that make it a great game, I think everyone who has a copy right now, and will have it a midnight will agree. Can't wait til the majority of the community gets to play it.
LMAO. Yeah, I don't think that was quite the word he was looking for. Maybe compilation or perhaps culmination. Of course maybe EA was responding to their customers . . I remember seeing one of the posters say that if he was going to get the game early and pay $100 that it had better "take care of him". Maybe EA is responding to that wish!Originally Posted by coogrfan
Never heard of the site but it's accepted on Metacritic so...
Game-Boyz - 9.0
Every year it appears as though EA Sports NCAA Football game is gaining more and more in the popularity department. It has come to the point where many, including myself, view the game to be on par with EA Sports’ Madden Football game. Last year, NCAA Football 11 managed to accurately capture the American college football experience in all its glory. Life like players, booming marching band sounds, and a highly enjoyable virtual football experience made for a game which was truly a must own, not only for NCAA fans, but for all football in general. Long since considered a game meant to wet your appetite before the yearly Madden installment arrives, EA Sports NCAA Football is back and looking to grow on last year’s success. After some time spent with EA Sports' latest installment in the College Football franchise (the Xbox 360 version), there is no question it delivers and the game has been improved on many levels. But is this enough? Read on to find out.
Not the best name for a site....kinda creepy if you ask me
You should take a review for what it is, one person's opinion of the game. From a mainstream site like IGN/GameSpot/1UP you get a review from someone that played the game for 20-30 hours then gave a review. They may continue to play the game for a month or so after release but likely not much beyond that. The reviewer is probably a football fan (like Greg Miller is) but chances are they are not familiar with the ins and outs of football to the extent that people frequenting a site like this are. And there really isn’t any reason they should be. These sites provide a review of the game from the perspective of the casual sports game fan that will play NCAA 12 until the next big game is out (Gear of War or Resistance or the such.)IGN gave it an 8.5. Link here.
I love how all these reviews are saying the game play is the same. That proves why you never, ever listen to mainstream reviews on football games. The subtraction of suction blocking/tackling along with the improved shotgun running, zone defense, etc... makes the game play WAY better than '11 ever was.
Just saw that Greg Miller reviewed it for IGN. That explains it all.
If you want to know about the finer game play enhancements in NCAA 12 you should wait for a reviewer you know plays the game the way you play the game. This doesn’t make the IGN review worthless. It just means it isn’t reviewing the game from the perspective you want.
There is only one good reviewer in the world - YOURSELF. I used to just say reviews are just one persons opinion but then a review hit that changed my world.
IGN - NFL Street Review - Jon (Yea I now work at ESPN) Robinson.
http://xbox.ign.com/articles/461/461811p1.html
NFL Street is the game that out-blitzes Blitz to revive the arcade football genre to a status worthy of the legends strutting their attitude across the asphalt.
If you're looking for one football game to get you through the upcoming post Super Bowl depression, NFL Street is the polygonal Prozac you've been chanting for, and you don't even need a prescription.
That is wen my faith in humanity was lost. It is one thing to write glowing reviews to keep publishers happy. A whole different ball game when you allow the publisher to write the review for you.
That is a game that got a pretty high user review and 80+ meta critic score. Sure the 9.2 review score might be high but it's not like he told you to go by this amazing game that ended up with a 50 meta critic score. By the account of most review sites and users that was a pretty good game. I seriously doubt that review would cause you to loose faith in humanity.
You are focusing on the scores, which is the least of my concern. Those numbers are used to amuse the masses. My point was geared towards the WORDS in the review.
quick question, just picked my copy of the game, after a error loading the update 1.01 (PS3) error code 80710102 all seems to working fine. I had simply followed the instructions for the error and restarted my PS3. Then it ran the update fine.
My question is, where do we go to make sure the extra uniforms are there? I downloaded the demo and sent an invite to some friends on my friends lists. It said I would have extra "Nike combat" uniforms for the real/full version of the game. How/where do we go to see if they are there?
Thanks,
Gus
EDIT: called Gamestop, he said there is a code on my receipt sure enough it's there.
Last edited by gigemaggs99; 07-12-2011 at 01:06 PM.
One thing that is VERY nice about this site...maybe it's b/c the users are more mature or maybe it's made up of more adults, not sure what the reasoning is, but it's nice that people discuss the game. In pros and cons, using normal vocabulary and not freaking out. I've been reading on other sites and people are cussing, freaking out, ranting/raving seems like they are just plain unhappy. Seems very negative, all I can really say to those people is, take it back and get your money back! It's just a video game.
SO, thanks forproviding a site we can come to to discuss the game in a mature manner.
Happy Gaming!
Gus
The comments on GamePro's ridiculous review score are pretty funny....
http://www.gamepro.com/article/revie...ll-12-360-ps3/
On the whole, for someone who isn't accustomed to playing football games, her review has a good deal of merit to it. But for someone who plays the game on an annual or semi-annual basis, that review just gives them ammunition for "girls shouldn't play sports" or something along those lines.
The problem with NCAA/Madden or just about any annual sports title is that there is a fairly steep learning curve that wards off a lot of potential buyers. Even as she mentioned the Custom Playbooks interface... yes, it makes a lot of sense to me because I've played the game every year for the past 9 years, but for any-old-schmo, it's going to be very cumbersome. The same applies to gameplay... yes, there's one-button mode for newcomers, but no one wants to buy a game just to play the watered down version. I'm not sure how EA fixes that problem without having a VERY deep training simulator telling you why you should make a certain decision, why you should run the ball on third & 1, how to look for cover 2, etc. Obviously that would be a very big undertaking but if Madden & NCAA did a joint venture on developing that one year, it could pay off for the future of the title.
game trailers has a review up
http://www.gametrailers.com/video/re...ootball/717373
Design 9.0
Game play 8.2
Presentation 8.5
Overall 8.6
This is my favorite part of her review...
Just what NCAA needs, pointless unlockable titles and vanity items to collect. Lets turn NCAA into the new Pokemon.You wanna know what a real incentive is? Unlockables. Lots of them. And maybe a title that says, "Greatest Coach in the History of the Universe."
Yeah leaving gender out of it....when you take that stance on a review of an NCAA Football game, you should lose your job
I thought the premise of Bailey's GamePro review had a lot of merits, but the scoring system "3 of 5 stars" can be interpreted as someone thinking the game is poor - 60 out of 100. One "star" can raise or lower the score 20%. I'd be interested in seeing what she would review it under a more standard 100 or even a 10.0 scale.
The worst part (for EA and for gamers who use metascores to gauge potential purchases) is that they are listed in metacritic reviews and this '60' is easily the worst review score and took their metascore from 89 to 84/85. (The next lowest was an 85 from IGN.) Metacritic should only use review scores on a 10.0 or 100 point scale.
While I don't agree with everything in the review (Unlockable "titles"? Really?), I do think it's somewhere near the truth. The writer's gender is irrelevant. Anyone who's boo-hooing because the writer is female is an ass. Point blank. On a scale of 5, 3 is average. People need to stop "converting" and definitely need to stop getting hung up over scores. I understand a score can give you a quick synopsis on whether something is good or not but people should stop being lazy or impatient and actually read the text. I've written a lot of reviews for www.themarriedgamers.net and let me tell you, writing reviews and assigning a score based on that review is harder then it sounds.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
GameSpot gave the game a 7, and here's why:
"And there's a frequent bug that turns the receivers' route markers into dancing squiggly lines. None of these problems destroy the fun of running a perfect option play, but they do take you out of what should be an immerse experience."
It sounds like the guy played about two games and lost both and hated it.
And idiots like that person is why it should be required for any reviews on sites like that, that the person has to have an extensive personal experience and history with a game, if anything, especially sports games, to be allowed to write a review about it.GameSpot gave the game a 7, and here's why:
"And there's a frequent bug that turns the receivers' route markers into dancing squiggly lines. None of these problems destroy the fun of running a perfect option play, but they do take you out of what should be an immerse experience."
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks