View Full Version : Predator: Concrete Jungle on IGN
IGN posts one of the first reviews (http://xbox.ign.com/articles/610/610864p1.html) of Predator: Concrete Jungle for xbox and gives it a very low score.
The crux of the game's problems rest in the overdose of weaponry poorly mapped to the controls and poorly implemented throughout the game. For instance, if you want to use any particular weapon, you have to collect them throughout the city. Not that big of a deal, but when you do want to blast enemies with the Plasmacaster, you essentially use all of your energy or juice. Meaning you'll have to re-charge somewhere in the city. You can basically shoot two, maybe three shots of this before having to refill. That's just weak sauce.
This is one of the worst-written reviews I've ever seen. Aside from the many misspellings, he never elaborates on many of his claims and asks the reader to take on faith the fact that the game has "bad controls" and "poor level design".
Varsity
05-08-2005, 12:37 PM
This is one of the worst-written reviews I've ever seen. Aside from the many mispellings, he never elaborates on many of his claims and asks the reader to take on faith the fact that the game has "bad controls" and "poor level design".
I hate to break it to you...but this is IGN. ;)
Knightshade Dragon
05-08-2005, 12:39 PM
Despite the review being very badly written (on a 'professional' site no less!) he is right on the controls. They are extremely complicated and the game sports one of the worst control schemes I've seen to date. Put it this way, if you want to do a high jump you have to hit the jump and hold it, meaning your Predator jumps, then crouches for his big jump. It looks fairly dumb and it causes you a lot of grief in combat. The game is also on rails and locks you into areas with obsticles that you could easily jump, like a 4 foot tall fence.
Steve_Erhardt
05-08-2005, 12:40 PM
Cinematech was showing some gameplay footage... I have to say it wasn't all that impressive to look at. Graphically it was okay, but over the minute or so they showed, it just looked not all that exciting to actually play. I may grab this used or from the bargain bin, but it's not gonna get top dollar from me unless I see it first hand and am seriously wowed.
Blade
05-08-2005, 01:12 PM
It's a poorly written review, any way you shake it. Varsity's claim that IGN's reviews are mostly poor isn't entirely true..
Go to IGN Cube and read anything by Casamassina..
Tricky Thumb
05-08-2005, 01:19 PM
I really don't go to IGN for my reviews, mostly because they leave an inexplicably horrendous taste in my mouth. However, I decided to read this review to remind myself that I don't like IGN much at all. It worked well.
Deadend
05-08-2005, 02:57 PM
So, ever notice that the lower the score IGN gives a game, the worse the review is? It gets vaguer, and tries to become a joke, as opposed to systematiclly saying why the game is awful.
Hell, they are good at reprinting the feature list off of the backs of boxes into their reviews for good games..
Why exactly does Predator suck? explain in detail, without using bad examples.
Orphiuchus
05-08-2005, 03:32 PM
Spelling errors are simply inexcusa...able.
Seriously though, I cant believe this person can keep their job when they cant even be bothered to proof read their reviews. This is highschool crap people.
Rommel
05-08-2005, 03:49 PM
Seriously though, I cant believe this person can keep their job when they cant even be bothered to proof read their reviews.
Sometimes I wonder if they even bother typing in Word.
dead_parrot
05-08-2005, 03:54 PM
Almost as bad as the reviews from EBGames.com people were posting a while back. I especially love this bit: "Graphics:.... Everything else is super dull. Sound:.....Everything else is just super blah." No kidding about not proofreading.
dr_qwandry
05-08-2005, 04:03 PM
I believe that Gamespot reviewed the game before IGN
for those who are interested the XBOX review is HERE (http://www.gamespot.com/xbox/action/predatorconcr etejungle/index.html)
and the PS2 review is HERE (http://www.gamespot.com/ps2/action/predatorconcre tejungle/index.html)
I had such high hopes for this game, oh well i'll just install AVP and AVP2 again
Switcher
05-08-2005, 04:52 PM
This really sucks, Predator is a kick ass license, and Eurocom is a pretty good developer....why did this have to go so wrong???
Orphiuchus
05-08-2005, 07:41 PM
Its a movie license, the shocking thing is that other alien and predator games have been playable.
DigiWiz
05-08-2005, 08:52 PM
Yes, the review has several spelling mistakes.
But I get the impression the original poster doesn't agree with the score and tries to discredit the review which is in fact very close to the truth. The game is utter rubbish. For once IGN and Gamespot agree on something, and I agree as well. Worst game I bought in years (through the latest SW: RotS is close), not sure why people think they have to reinvent control schemes which have been proven to be working and successful.
Last of the Red Hot Mamas
05-08-2005, 09:00 PM
Aside from the many mispellings
Pumped'Up
05-08-2005, 09:03 PM
i'm glad this game sucks. there are way too many good games these days and it's impossible to keep up with all the great games. with Predator sucking, that's 1 game less to worry about! ;)
Yes, the review has several spelling mistakes.
But I get the impression the original poster doesn't agree with the score and tries to discredit the review which is in fact very close to the truth. The game is utter rubbish. For once IGN and Gamespot agree on something, and I agree as well. Worst game I bought in years (through the latest SW: RotS is close), not sure why people think they have to reinvent control schemes which have been proven to be working and successful.
I'm the original poster and I've never played the game and couldn't care less about it. I have no doubt that the game is as bad as the reviewer said but the review itself is terribly-written. He talks on an on about the controls being bad but doesn't give one example of how or why they're bad. Same goes for the level design.
IGN have the journalistic integrity and skill of an illiterate eight-year-old who forgot to take his medication for A.D.D.
They've always been pretty low on my list of sites to visit or listen to, but after their blatantly-unfair bashing of the Return of the Sith game, they have all of the credability of a game review from Fatbabies.
amusedtoe
05-08-2005, 10:04 PM
Sometimes I wonder if they even bother typing in Word.
Well if you do any regular work in Word you'll know that as often as it corrects something right it will correct something wrong.
Really makes the stuff on GMR-Source (http://www.gmr-source.com) look like the cream of the crop. Ok, that was blatent pimpage but it's better then that at least so don't hate me. ;)
Deadend
05-08-2005, 10:05 PM
but the Revenge of the Sith game DOES suck, and was overhyped, it was a poorly made game that tries to be awesome but fails, and fails horribly. It deserved a crap score for being a crap game. The review should have been better written, as IGN is one of the most popular sites on the internet, but it does not mean the game is better.
This yet again proves that good games based on movies are not a trend, and Riddick was just a fluke.
Spigot
05-08-2005, 10:07 PM
I find it funny to read a review as horridly written as this one right after getting such a chuckle out of their review of the Revenge of the Sith review. Whether the score is accurate or not on the RotS game, it was a pretty funny review to read.
This review, on the other hand, just sucks. I think you're maligning the writing skills of 8 year olds by comparing it to their handiwork.
I'm finding it a growing epidemic not just amongst the game 'journalists', but society at large that people aren't backing up their arguments. This guy is one of the worst offenders I've seen in this regard. At least the RotS reviewer explains WHY he hated it so much.
amusedtoe
05-08-2005, 10:21 PM
Well a large part of the problem is that a lot of the people out there either don't care about the subject, or are simply decent writers at best. If you go pick up books at random about making it as a writer most of them will blatently tell you just that too. Should it surprise anyone then when the people doing the best jobs are the ones who are doing so because they love the subject matter? It's more then coincidental that the fan sites often have the greatest repor with their audience and put out some of the best work.
No love for Lego Star Wars though? I loved it and thought it turned extremely mediocre movies into a charming game and was a pleasent surprise.
Morratut
05-09-2005, 02:51 AM
I hate it when developers fuck up a licence.
A 3rd PP Predator game could have been fucking great.Should have been full of awesome moves. Stealthy action, awesome slaying of lesser species. Full of great climatic combat against formidable bosses.
But no they fuck it up. :mad:
Spigot
05-09-2005, 07:15 AM
No love for Lego Star Wars though? I loved it and thought it turned extremely mediocre movies into a charming game and was a pleasent surprise.
Oh, it seems that there is MUCH love for Lego Star Wars. It's the actual Revenge of the Sith game that is getting slammed.
ROTS rules. As with most of the people slamming it, Deadend can't provide concrete reasons as to why it "SUCKS". :p
It's biggest flaw is length. It's too short. Does that make it suck? No. Just makes it short.
Anyway, I haven't played Predator, but IGN's not going to stop me from checking it out, since their opinion means NOTHING at this point.
Spigot
05-09-2005, 11:55 PM
These threads about IGN's general suckitude just highlight the awesomeness of Gamerankings.com.
I usually read a bunch of reviews and see which points are mentioned across several reviews as being bad and which are mentioned as being good. If only one site complains about a particular issue and it's not a gamebreaker, then I won't worry about it. If it's something like, "San Andreas sucks because there's no online support for the PS2 version", well, again, I could care less as I only game online with my PC.
I like to see what a variety of reviewers think and will use that aggregate to determine if it's a game that I should waste my money on. I'll also try it out if I was looking forward to it since it might still be fun, technical issues aside. But if I were to read the problems that the IGN reviewer had with RotS or even Predator across a variety of review sites, I'd look on the game with a more critical eye. I tend to go with Gamespot and Gamespy (though I wish they hadn't been merged with IGN) as my two top review sites. After that I'll just sift through some of the high scores and some of the low scores to see what they loved or hated.
Granted, I find that going into a game store (where I know the clerks and their tastes in games) and asking their opinion is usually the best measure of how good or bad a game is. This won't work in every store, but if you are lucky enough to have a retailer who actually knows their games and will be honest if a game sucks, then that helps.