PCgamer review... Anyone else worried? PLEASE READ PAST THE FIRST LINE BEFORE YOU RESPOND

[Wobb the Great and Terrible!!!!!]

PCgamer had a lot of good things to say about last light, but I am worried that it only scored 80%.
I am MORE worried that they said they never had trouble on normal difficulty with filters and ammo (both military and standard), and they found the game very easy.
The review even hints at it being so easy because of consoles.
This was a worry I had as soon as I heard they were making a sequel, and the first gameplay video's they released didn't do much to make me feel better about that.
The last gameplay we saw made me feel much better, but this review has me thinking that maybe it has been dumbed down too much.
And without ranger mode unless you pre-order or cough up more cash, I can see the true metro fans (like me, a proud ranger of the metro for the last couple of years) being a bit upset.
So, have they made it a bit too "modern shooter-y"?
I think they probably have.
The review also says, in essence, that it is a game that sometimes forgets that you want to play it, meaning it wrenches control from you quite often at the end of a gunfight or stealth section, or even just when you are walking around, to show you cutscenes.
The first game rarely took control away from you, except at the start of a mission where it set the scene and put you in place ready to go.
I am worried about this.
This is the ONLY game this year I have truly been looking forward to, and really excited to play. Nothing else has had quite the same effect on me as metro 2033, and I was hoping for more of the same, with a few new weapons and mutants and a new story.
I was even looking for it to be harder, NOT easier.
Looks like they are going for a wider audience rather than staying true to their original fans.
Can't blame them in one way, but on the other hand they wouldn't have such a loved series on their hands if it weren't for the true metro-heads

[deathmaster snikch]

this dumbasses gave black ops 2 10/10 inovative true to the fps genre i dont give a fliying fk about their review

[BlearyNeptune5]

Pc gamer have released their review on Metacritic.

[ALPHATT]

If I recall correctly 2033 had 75, was fine for me.

[Charade]

Not worried at all. Why would I be?

[Salad Fingers]

PRE ORDER FTW!!!! VIVA LA RESISTANCE

[ALPHATT]

Death to Infinite haters.

[sallaD]

An 80 is bad why exactly?

PC Gamer TRASHED Sleeping Dogs, and that's one of my favorite games of all time.

[sallaD]

Postat inițial de w0bbl3r:

Postat inițial de Sacri:

Which is why he is worried. What the hell? You think reviewers are better than everyone else at playing games just because they review them? Lmfao.. A lot of us have more games than reviewers have even played.

Anyway. I'm not worried at all. If it's too easy I just wont take the resources I find. Though, that will be sort of immersion breaking and annoying. Oh well.

Just pretend your inventory/backpack/pouches/etc is/are full and you can only have one extra filter at any given time, mabye?

That would be less immersion than your average medal of duty: battlefield ops 2 - spec warrior recon.
I would rather have the same great experience I had in the first game, scrounging for supplies, struggling in firefights, having to adjust when stealth goes wrong.
Seriously I am playing the first game again right now, on ranger hardcore. I have a stack of ammo (mil grade and regular), stack of nades, full health packs, and have just got to the bit where you have to save the kid. I have 5 minutes of filters as well.
So, you could say the original is easy, right? But you would be forgetting how much more difficult it was the first time you played it.
Now I know the new game won't be "new" as the original was, and we will know a lot of the mechanics now, such as hunting for filters, being very careful with ammo. But the original game is only easy now because we have all played it so many times, and many of you seem to have forgotten how much more challenging it was the first time you played through it, on NORMAL.

Not to burst your bubble or anything, but I had absolutely no problem with Ammo or filters on the Normal difficulties, you just had to explore the levels and know where to look.

Ranger mode was a different story, and I agree that witholding it is ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥...

But, I've been looking forward to this game for 3 years, and I'm not going to let a ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ pre-order bonus or a 8/10 (Which is in no way bad at all) review from the same publication that trashes games like Sleeping Dogs, but shamelessly slapped a 94 on Dragon Age 2, a publication that is, in reality, an ad-revenue whoring marketing front that scores games based on the ♥♥♥♥-tons of ad-revenue, exclusive perks, custom gaming rigs, and back-alley blowjobs they get from the developer/publisher, stop me.

[Wobb the Great and Terrible!!!!!]

Postat inițial de nvradion:

this dumbasses gave black ops 2 10/10 inovative true to the fps genre i dont give a fliying fk about their review

PCGamer UK, who did this review, gave blops2 something like 65%.
They don't even DO /10 reviews, they do a percentage review.
Of course, 65% is still way too high for call of duty, but for some reason some people do enjoy them, still, despite how ♥♥♥♥ they are.
Innovative was never used in the review either, you are just making stuff up now to try and discredit a magazine that has offered honest criticism.
The reviewer said he was HAPPY in a lot of ways about the difficulty. He didn't enjoy that metro 2033 was so difficult. For a lot of people the difficulty was a big part of what made the game so good. It was a true challenge, you couldn't just breeze through unless you were on easy difficulty. That is how ANY game should be. Normal difficulty should be a challenge.
From what he says, normal difficulty here is ZERO challenge. And coming from someone who didn't like how challenging the first game was, it doesn't look good

[Wobb the Great and Terrible!!!!!]

Postat inițial de SPLENDIDWORKGENTLEMEN:

An 80 is bad why exactly?

PC Gamer TRASHED Sleeping Dogs, and that's one of my favorite games of all time.

PCGamer UK, who wrote this review, scored sleeping dogs 80% or more, as I remember.
Maybe PCGamer US gave it a lower score, but PCGamer UK loved sleeping dogs.

[Wobb the Great and Terrible!!!!!]

Postat inițial de Databurk:

Postat inițial de SPLENDIDWORKGENTLEMEN:

An 80 is bad why exactly?

PC Gamer TRASHED Sleeping Dogs, and that's one of my favorite games of all time.

That's why scores in reviews needs to vanish. You should decide from the review you've read if it fits your tastes, not a fricking number.

I did state that 80 is a low score for metro, but my post is about the criticism of the difficulty, and lack of need for resource management.
So, you saying that people should read the review and decide from what is written is exactly why I started this thread.
If you all want to ignore something that could, potentially be a big problem for a metro game, then that's up to you.
Just don't come on the forums QQ'ing about how the game isn't a proper metro game when you play it.
Like I KEEP saying; I am not saying this is true. It could turn out to be nothing, but it is enough to have my eyes open, keep me ready for the worst.
Since games almost always seem to dissapoint these days, especially sequels, it is nice to know about anything that COULD be a problem, so you aren't taken by surprised and really annoyed by it if it turns out to be right.

I am NOT trying to say this is a problem, I am trying to say it COULD BE a problem, and that I am a bit worried that it MIGHT BE a problem

[Chabs]

Why be worried at all? The first one scored 83, and if ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ loved it.
80% for a sequel that uses pretty much the same engine sounds pretty great to me.

And not to mention that a lot of other reviews gave 2033 less than what PC Gamer gave it.
Never get too influenced by the reviews.

[Wobb the Great and Terrible!!!!!]

Postat inițial de ALPHATT:

Death to Infinite haters.

How am I a hater? All I am doing is letting people know what has been said, and that it COULD be a problem,.
I have stated time and again that the game will still probably be very good.
I am just worried that some of the things written in this review could dampen some people's enjoyment of a metro game.

[Jig McGalliger]

Postat inițial de anigmha:

So when they say Ranger Mode is "the way it is meant to be played", they really meant it. Well, I officially refuse to buy this game since Ranger Mode won't be included in a regular copy. I can't support such sh*tty business practice.

The way it's meant to be played is a marketing slogan by Nvidia... who officially supports the game. Please know what you are talking about.

[Wobb the Great and Terrible!!!!!]

Postat inițial de Jig McGalliger:

Postat inițial de anigmha:

So when they say Ranger Mode is "the way it is meant to be played", they really meant it. Well, I officially refuse to buy this game since Ranger Mode won't be included in a regular copy. I can't support such sh*tty business practice.

The way it's meant to be played is a marketing slogan by Nvidia... who officially supports the game. Please know what you are talking about.

Sorry, he made a typo, he meant to write "the way it WAS meant to be played", which WAS on the store page until PCGamer asked them why they would withhold the official way the game is meant to be played.
It has nothing to do with nvidia, it is a different slogan, he just mistyped it there for some strange reason