Grand Theft Auto 4 Review at IGN

[Slaughter]

Read it at IGN. Sure look forwards to the PC version... (there is a PC version coming, right?)

[FullAuto]

It's a safe bet it'll be coming to PC. I have to say, I'm not bothered about GTAIV. The formula hasn't changed since GTA3, and while the city may be more convincing than ever before, better graphics and sound, more buildings accessible, it's still mostly:

 

...many missions boil down to the same basic parameter -- go to location, kill people to get to target, chase target, kill target...

 

And a seven-page review? Nothing takes seven pages.

[Azrael Strife]

10 Presentation

The story is Oscar quality. The use of the phone as a gaming portal is genius. There's really nothing more that could be asked for from GTA IV.

10 Graphics

The level of detail is astounding. Liberty City feels alive and lived in. While there are some technical issues, the artistic merits push the score to the max. A true marvel.

10 Sound

The dialogue makes the story. Without the excellent writing and the stellar voice acting, the story would fail. And the soundtrack kills -- more than 200 songs and almost all are great choices.

10 Gameplay

The cover and targeting system work great. Blind firing with an RPG is a thing of beauty. Everything works in harmony and not a single one of the missions is bad. The most fun I've had in years.

10 Lasting Appeal

The story will take anywhere from 25-45 hours to complete, depending on your skill level and attention span. There's plenty more to do once you finish the story, such as excellent multiplayer.

10

Masterful OVERALL

(out of 10 / not an average)

 

Wow, a 10, never seen a perfect 10, not even Deus Ex got that. They call it "the best game since The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time".

 

Weird, though, that being a PS3 game (as it states), it's on the XBox360 section.

[FullAuto]

Perhaps a more balanced view?

 

We

[Gimli]

You play as Niko Bellic

Yeah, like anyone from BiH would have 2 l's in his last name.

 

Unfortunately, I'm not too interested in mafia games, so I'll pass this one.

[FullAuto]

Yeah, like anyone from BiH would have 2 l's in his last name.

 

Do they chop your tonkers off for that, or is it a language issue?

[Gimli]

Language issue. Two somethings in a row in a name or last name are extremely rare and usually a sign of foreign roots. Doesn't really matter, I just found it amusing. Anyway judging from the name, the guy is either Croat or Serb, and this will definitely get some negative press once the mainstream media figures out what his nationality is. Why? Because people will say that it portrays the whole nation like that. In this case it's a bit worse since BiH has 3 nations living there. Of course that's not true, or at least not mostly true, but that's the mainstream media for you. But like I said, I don't really care much about mafia games.

 

That said, I really can't take these reviews seriously when they give all tens like this. Then again, I don't like scores in the first place.

[FullAuto]

Cheers Gimli, always nice to learn something new. Critique of another 10/10 here.

 

The game predictably receives 10/10 which, by the Officially Corrupt Xbox 360 Magazine

[Slaughter]

Yeah, like anyone from BiH would have 2 l's in his last name.

 

Unfortunately, I'm not too interested in mafia games, so I'll pass this one.

Don't tell me you never played Mafia.... If not, go do it! NOW! I don't care if you like Mafia games or not, it's THE game. So there!

 

The reviews are to be taken with a grain of salt alright! That being said, I'm very fond of the GTA games, and believe them that this is Cr

[Space Voyager]

I liked GTA much more than Mafia. Targeting and movement in general sucks in Mafia but the story is phenomenal.

[Kernel]

Read it at IGN. Sure look forwards to the PC version... (there is a PC version coming, right?)

 

PC version is not confirmed yet as far as I aware.

 

Weird, though, that being a PS3 game (as it states), it's on the XBox360 section.

 

It was going to be a 360 only game but Sony complained and so Rockstar ported it to the PS3. It was also delayed at the same time so it could be launched on both consoles at the same time. I believe another one of Sony's "requests".

 

This is also the reason why the 360 version has better graphics than the PS3 version (the game wasn't originaly written to take full advantage of the PS3's graphics), and also why extra downloadable content will definatly be available on the 360 but as of yet, unconfirmed on the PS3. That and the fact that the PS3 is STILL lacking a decent way to handle downloadable content.

 

I've got the 360 version and while I wouldn't give it a 10/10, as some reviews have done, I'd still give it a 9/10.

[The Veteran]

How can anyone give a game (or anything else for that matter) a 10/10 rating yet still have comments like 'there are some technical issues' and 'more than 200 songs and almost all are great choices.'?

 

Sure they're only little things but in my opinion a 10/10 review simply cannot contain 'buts' and 'almosts' and certainly can't contain any 'technical issues'! That's what reviews are about! If a game has 'issues' then it cleary isn't perfect and therefore is not a 10/10 title!

 

I cannot honestly imagine ever rating any game 10/10, not one game I have ever played. I think that's really the way it should be or how can you ever use reviews to distinguish between games? The point is GTA IV will at some point in time be outdone, many many times. There will be a better Xbox, a Playstation 4 and an almost limitless amount of PC upgrades in the next decade, let alone longer.

 

As platforms improve so will games and using a 10/10 rating for GTA IV simply means everything that is even slightly better must now also be a 10/10 rated game. So five years from now when IGN reviews 30 10/10 games in one year, how do we know which are worth the time and money and which are not? And is it really going to be possible for them to backtrack and say 'well we gave this game 8/10 but on the same rating standards that would see GTA IV fall into a 6/10 category'

 

Summary; 10/10 rating is b/s

[Space Voyager]

Summary; 10/10 rating is b/s

Sorry, but that does not seem fair to me.

 

If the highest score you'd ever give is 9 than your scale is 1-9. 10 does not mean perfect since there is no such thing EVER. 10 is hugely cool and if you find the game to be better than other games of the same category you have played it deserves highest possible grade.

[Bomb Bloke]

I agree with TJ, in part - If there's a defined limit to the score a game can get (10 in this case), any game that reaches that limit must be as well made as was possible. Otherwise, what's the point in setting a score limit in the first place?

 

Just because you'd never give out a score higher then 9 in practise, doesn't rule out the fact that it's possible for you to give out a 10. The reason you don't is because there'll never be such a thing as a "perfectly made" game - and as our technology is increasing at a much faster pace then game quality is, I doubt there ever will be.

 

On the other hand, I don't agree that a game that does reach 10/10 has to be better then any game that comes out in the future. Otherwise, it'd also be true that a game reaching a 9/10 score in graphics would be better then all games that reach 8/10 in the future, and so on and so forth. When reading the scores, you have to take into account what could be achieved at the time.

[Kernel]

Review scores are pretty much pointless anyway IMO.

I think Yahtzee put's the point across about scores quite well in his video article here: Zero Punctuation

[Matri]

Never been able to view any Zero Punctuation reviews. Tried 3 different times with 3 different game reviews on 3 different occasions spread out over 3 different months. Their video server always timed out before anything loads for me.

[The Veteran]

Hah I love it! Very clever. And very true. I think it is pretty sad that these people have gone out of their way to swear down someone they don't (and never will) know just because they have a different opinion to the complainer. It's something else entirely to seek advice or discuss with a group (like us) but a one-sided rant will just see everyone end up exactly where they started off but a little more angry than they were before they started... The fact that this guy actually has to point out that he's a critic just brings home the fact that the people who send emails of this sort are just not quite all there.

 

I bought silent hunter 2, didn't get it, wanted a manual instead of the crappy 'Alt-tab' PDsoddingF file that I got with the game. Sent an annoyed gamer letter to the distributors, got a sarcastic 'we're not particularly bothered but we're pretending to be so you'll leave us alone' response. I promptly decided that in future I would send queries rather than moans and since what shall henceforth be known as the 'incident' I've had a very pleasant gaming career. The only swears I use now are at erratic internet speeds, seemingly unbeatable bosses, shortcut keys that don't work and of course the dreaded blue screen of death :s

 

And to summarise with a brief game review I tried playing Silent hunter again recently and although I did better at it I lost interest almost immediately after. It really is a 'simulation' and as anyone who's ever played 'microsoft flight sim 2093X Heathrow super Afghan terrorist addon 747 helicopter scenery expansion pack' will tell you, simulators are not fun!

[Bomb Bloke]

But if GTA is a murder simulator.... then...

[Space Voyager]

I don't agree that grades are bad. Him saying that "one can't put complex opinions" into equations etc. is true, but one CAN decide how much he liked something and transform that into a grade on a scale. Unless he has a bad case of indecision.

 

Which doesn't mean we should use grades. One can create a picture of a game based on the written review.

[The Veteran]

The problem with grading as I see it is that despite it being a rating for an individual game it really ends up as being more of a comparison in the long run...

 

As already mentioned, a rating of 10/10 makes a game technically unbeatable and therefore any games better than this initial perfect review all blur into an ever expanding group of 10/10 titles and everything sort of blurs...

 

To avoid this, reviewers (by which I mean serial reviewers) must consider other reviews they have written when writing any new material in order to avoid giving a higher numerical rating to a game they rated less than any previously explored media and vice versa and so on and so forth...

 

Sounds confusing I know but it is (at least I think it is) logical if you understand where I'm coming from.

 

As I metioned earlier (and revisited in this post) the same scale cannot be used and reused indefinitely unless the media being reviewed remains at a constant level of development. For example, if we take games out of the spotlight and put films there instead;

 

Star Wars Episodes 1-3 were not even a patch on the original trilogy but the special effects were leaps and bounds ahead of the original blue screens and large scale models from Episodes 4-6. Unfortunately this only half proves my point as the real conclusion I'm aiming for is that as technology improves so will the media and therefore it is unfair to compare new media with old media as the new will invariably come out on top due to technological advances. Unfortunately I don't think this is really the case for poor old George but it made him a millionaire a few more times so good luck to him I say!

 

(I guess Episode 3 was kind of okish but still not a patch on episode 5)

[Space Voyager]

As already mentioned, a rating of 10/10 makes a game technically unbeatable and therefore any games better than this initial perfect review all blur into an ever expanding group of 10/10 titles and everything sort of blurs...

10/10 in year 1990 is something completely different from a 10/10 in 2008. Also I just don't see any difference in grading up to 9 or up to 10. Having a grade that you never give is redundant.

 

It's like saying that you will never grade any student with the highest grade because none of them knows EVERYthing. IMO one can not demand utter perfection for the highest grade. And the highest grade today is something completely different from the highest grade 20 years ago.

[The Veteran]

Yeah I see where you're coming from but grading is different. In the UK for example my parents did O-levels and GCEs, I did GCSEs and A-levels. The tests and qualifications changed but grading is still relatively unchanged.

 

An example where we could relate grades to reviews would be when schooling changes due to new information. Someone writes something about the solar system for example which is deemed entirely accurate and given an A. 10 years later there's another planet discovered or a new comet or whatever so technically that same report would no longer be marked with an A BUT based on the information available at the time the report was a good one.

 

This relates very closely to the fact that review scoring must also change with improvements in tehnology. That's really the point I'm getting at, or trying to get at! Not so much that 10/10 should be an unattainable award (though I do feel it's handed out too easily sometimes as has been outlined above!) rather that each time a new game is released it features new technology and therefore can't realistically be rated using the same system as any previous titles.

 

While this isn't true for all new releases its still true to a point and that's why I don't put much value in reviews and ratings!

[Space Voyager]

Yeah I see where you're coming from

What has Slovenia got to do with it?! KIDDING!

 

each time a new game is released it features new technology and therefore can't realistically be rated using the same system as any previous titles.

I agree and I think this doesn't only apply to new technologies. Games vary a lot and not many can be directly compared at all. Shooters for instance are games that are (IMO) most easily compared yet the grade will also be very dependant on the reviewer's bias towards different elements; some prefer the opponents' AI, some choice of weaponry, some graphics, some the opportunity to play stealthy etc. + all possible combinations.

 

In strategy games it gets even more problematic. Seriously, the content a game has is so huge I had to play SotS and SoaSE A LOT just to make up my mind what I like or don't and to think what I really miss in them. Not to mention that while both are space strategies they are VASTLY different. So much different that the grades I applied to them are not to be compared without reading the review - which defintiely proves your point to an extent.

 

The problem is that people like grades in general. Ok, ok, so you've written 5 pages of text detailing everything but can't you just say HOW MUCH you dis/liked the game. And this calls for a direct grade.

 

Appart from that, grade 10 is definitely far too common, I agree.

 

EDIT; I'm back and can write some more.

 

Grade IMO should never be taken as the absolute measure. It is just spice, the cherry on top of the review icecream. Not only because of the essential differences between games that disable direct comparison tables of any kind but also because of the bias the reviewer is bound to have.

 

So to sum it up; it is far more viable and transparent to have reviews without grades than grades without reviews.