The latest review from Edge gives Oblivion a score of 8.
8! Gits! My comments:
As far as the numbers on the scores go, remember that Edge always claims that the numbers don’t matter.
Still I do notice a trend: Console games get higher scores. However, frankly, I feel that this is due to Edges self imposed criteria for the top two slots.
Oblivion is a knockout. I have read the Edge review and think that he has been very shallow minded with his comments on it, plus I think I can say why. I remember the Edge issue regarding industry standards and practices in games reviewing and I bet that in the case of Oblivion the reviewer has been rushed to comment. Anyone knocking back a fine wine like water could mistake Cloudy Bay for Oyster Bay and it is only when you take your time and let the magic do its thing that you will understand and even be able to tell the difference.
Plus he was playing the Xbox version. Yuck…
One looks back at the scoring and see’s pastiche crap like Halo getting ten and wonders if there is any justice, but this is to miss the point. Don’t judge the games greatness by the numbers. Read around, feel out the community reaction, realise that there is no such thing as a definitive review of such a large game available yet.
Is Oblivion a ten? By Edge’s criteria: No, Morrowind had the greater innovation. However, Oblivion is a masterpiece in gaming and a real milestone in the First Person RPG. Enjoy and rejoice that we should live in such times that such a game has only been very very slightly watered down by the disruptive power of “multiformat development” and that we may still have games that draw you right in and make the hours disappear in adventure.
Basho & Cesca are traveling with:
Related Posts |
Digg it!
|
Share THIS |
April 11th, 2006 at 10:08 am
Some comments from the Edge forums:
Lukeim64
Halo..? …….pastiche crap?! How about defining moment in FPS history?!
Have you actually played it?
http://www.myspace.com/boilermakerband
April 11th, 2006 at 10:09 am
Are you bloody kidding?
Defining moments in FPS history:
1. Monster Maze (Fear)
2. Wolfenstein (Size and motion sickness)
3. Doom (Graphics and “gibs”)
4. Duke Nukem 3D (multiplayer, dual weaps, flying and humor)
5. Quake (multiplayer)
6. Tribes 2 (vehicles and skiing)
7. Goldeneye. (story genius)
8. System Shock 2 (true true fear)
9. Half life (Story, AI, graphics next gen)
10. Deus Ex (Free form, level design, graphics, everything basically)
11. TFC (multiplayer)
12. CS (buying weaps’, arcade gameplay)
You could add a few more but those are my picks.
Now, consider Halo:
1. Story. Stolen wholesale from the Culture Novels including the AI characters, the flood, the ring (itself stolen by Ian M Banks from Ringworld), the excession-like super weapon.
2. Graphics, genre standard; nothing special at all.
3. Level design. Criminal over use of the same rooms again and again. Nothing to even touch the barest levels of the Jedi Knight FPS games. Nothing original at all really.
4. Combat. Wow! Enemies who dive to one side… omg. Are you fucking joking? Half-Life had enemies who bloody FLANKED you.
5. Weapons. The assault rifle was utter utter shite. No wonder the humans were loosing. A pistol that was more accurate? Is that even remotely a good thing? Don’t get me started about the whole two weapons thing being innovative; have you played System Shock 2?
6. Multiplayer. Years behind PC games.
So what was good? The little squeaky fella’s that ran away screaming, they were quite funny. The physics are quite chunky I guess. The recharging shield is basically the only thing that was new in my book. Hmmm… 10? No, 9 at most if you are a total fan boy. You cant claim something has innovation and is revolutionary, when it is years behind other established games. Edges’s biggest mistake: Xbox fandom.
_________________