Edge has awarded Sega's European version of Yakuza 3 6/10.
The mag reports: 'The opening act of Yakuza 3 is a shockingly sedate affair, shunning the uber-violence of the series' lore in favour of some bold, if laborious, attempts at actual character development.'
It gives props to Yakuza 3's story and 'simple, responsive controls shaken with visual flourishes' and 'item collecting capable of eliciting otaku fever.'
However, it calls the overall game 'a functional, pared-down JRPG and a feisty but flawed translation of the side-scrolling beat 'em up into the third dimension'.
The Official PlayStation Magazine gave more applause to the title, awarding a stellar 9/10 in its Yakuza 3 review.
First they gave Aliens V Predator 5/10 and now this? Somebody wants to attract attention to themselves but guess what, this is not the right kind of attention Edge wants. I have not played Yakuza 3 but have played the first one and hope this will be on the same level if not, better than the first one. As far as the reviewer is concerned, let me remind people, it is only one person's opinion who is probably underpaid and wants people to buy the mag he is reviewing for by giving it a crap review. But really, its one person's review.
If you want to know more about a game, never trust one source.
Anyone that takes Edges reviews as gospel are sadly misguided. The magazine tries too hard to be controversial and has become a joke. They should have their reviews stricken from metacritic in my opinion.
It got a really bad review on Playr the other day too. I know it's just a TV show but it's just the same as paying attention to any other reviews. They are only opinions.
And 5/10 for AvP means its rated as average, but still playable.
Apparently not in the world of computer games. 9+/10 is great, 7-8/10 is good, 6/10 is mediocre, and everything below that is dross. Seems to me Edge is actually trying to use the 'out of 10' scoring that the rest of the world outside of video game reviews use. Sadly, it means that as a consequence, they are being shunned...
y is every1 against sega taking out some content for europe??? would the extra content give it better ratings??? i doubt it, they were only some extra mini-games, theres still a fair amount of mini-games still in.
I don't listen to Edge (FFXIII a 6/10, Bayonetta 10/10 and GowIII 8/10?, Lol), but I agree on the Yakuza 3 score.
Enough. Reviews are subjective..if the reviewer doesn't like it, or if they think it lacks something they will review it so. FXIII has either been seen as over linear clickfest or a needed evolution in the game design: Thus the disparate scores. Bayonetta has either been seen as a too hard, crazy, japanese game or a reinvention of the hack and slash. God of War III has either been seen as the same old crap..or the same old crap but its so good that doesn't matter. Yakuza 3 IS the successor to Shenmue, which was marmite in itself.
I don't listen to Edge (FFXIII a 6/10, Bayonetta 10/10 and GowIII 8/10?, Lol), but I agree on the Yakuza 3 score.
It should tell Sega that what they've done to our version is unacceptable.
Is it just the Euro version thats been cut? Is it even out in the US?
FFXIII got a 5.
A 5/10, wtf Edge, have you even played FFXIII, I give it an 8 (It's up there with VI,VII, VIII and X).
They gave FFX a 6/10. Enough said really. I've glanced over their scores in this database:
http://www.lowbrowculture.com/edge/
They score nearly all Japanese RPGs around 5/10. Then again Dragon Age got a 5 and the original Mass Effect a 7. Nearly all PS3 exclusives score much lower than their Xbox 360 counterparts (LBP being an exception - it got 10/10).
I'm all for honest reviews but when you compare games that got the same mark as each other something really doesn't add up. I thought the whole idea of a grading system was so that you could compare the quality of titles?
I have a few years under my belt and have been reading edge off and on,since day one. The magazine dosen't do impartial, never has. Depending on the editorial team it always favours one console at anyone time. It has it's little favourite and cannot see past it. At present its the Xbox 360's turn. They are humans after all and every human has a side that thay feel most at home with when it comes to choice. No one is impartial.
I like the fact no-one has noticed CVG haven't got any real news to post so use diversion tactics to steer people towards would-be controversal EDGE reviews which in my opinion offer a far more mature and honest view to gaming.
When it comes down to it I think we all know edges reviews are right. They award innovation over graphics and hype and the 'score' they give you is a guide. If you like the yakuza games I'm sure you're gonna buy and love this no matter what score edge gives it. Although I bet the people shouting shenanigans haven't even played the game
I'm still really p**sed off with edge about the 8/10 GOW 3 review,but on this occasion they may be right. I'm in canada and it is released here,i only played the demo and it was Crap and slow,some good fights but its overshadowed by the long,drawn out cinematic scenes. I might seem fussy,but its really bad.
I'm still really p**sed off with edge about the 8/10 GOW 3 review,but on this occasion they may be right. I'm in canada and it is released here,i only played the demo and it was Crap and slow,some good fights but its overshadowed by the long,drawn out cinematic scenes. I might seem fussy,but its really bad.
You have only played the demo so enough said. Play the full game then pass judgement not on a year old demo and build.
And 5/10 for AvP means its rated as average, but still playable.
Apparently not in the world of computer games. 9+/10 is great, 7-8/10 is good, 6/10 is mediocre, and everything below that is dross. Seems to me Edge is actually trying to use the 'out of 10' scoring that the rest of the world outside of video game reviews use. Sadly, it means that as a consequence, they are being shunned...
This.
I find it rather refreshing that someone finally appears to be using the actual middle ground on the ten point scale instead of mindlessly assigning 8,9 and 10s like there's no tomorrow. What many other reviewers are doing - including many at CVG - effectively diminishes the accolades truly great games receive because the readers have become accustomed to sensationalist reviews which may look great in the short term, yet have unfortunate long term consequences for the reputations of the reviewer(s) and associated publication(s), IMO.
I like the fact no-one has noticed CVG haven't got any real news to post so use diversion tactics to steer people towards would-be controversal EDGE reviews which in my opinion offer a far more mature and honest view to gaming.
Just played the demo, it's absolutely terrible. The graphics are worthy of a PS2 title and the fighting is ok, but annoying, and the long drawn out cutscenes just a chore to sit through.
Edge are clearly teh best souce of accurate reviews. Their wank tastic 10/10 for Bayonetta was a bit over the top but Final Fantasy XIII is only worth 5 or 6. It is deeply uninspiring comapred to the great games in the series. I;d rather play VI again. Spending millions of pounds on flashy animations and cut scenes does not in my book constitute a good game.
A v P is totally s**t and I'm surprised it got 5. If you played the original you would understand why. The multiplayer is also horreendous. If Bad COpany 2 is a9/10 for multiplayer how can A v P get anywhere near that?
God Of War is exactly the same game as God of War one. I love god of war but that was made 5 years ago. You can;t give a game like that 9 or 10 even if it is fun.
The reviewers at Edge have all been playing games for years and years. They just don;t hand out good scores unless something comes along that really excites them. And anyone who is using God Of War 3 and A v P as poster children for good games is f**king moron.
Same game or not, if you pick it up and play it and it pretty much blows you away then why give it a s**t score because the mechanics haven't completely changed? it makes no sense.
I can think of lots of games which play like Uncharted 2 but I'd rate and play Uncharted 2 over any of them despite some of them creating and defining the genres (Tomb Raider, Gears of War etc etc).
Final Fantasy XIII is also completely over the top and makes cuts to RPG elements that other games, such as Mass Effect 2, have made, but got blasted for it. Final Fantasy XIII is a great game.
It seems if a game has a marmite appeal then Edge will give it a s**t score. I'm currently playing through Heavy Rain (after much deliberation) and love it (9-10 in my opinion) but Edge gave it 7!
God Of War is exactly the same game as God of War one. I love god of war but that was made 5 years ago. You can;t give a game like that 9 or 10 even if it is fun.
and this...
And anyone who is using God Of War 3 as poster children for good games is f**king moron.
Edge kinda remind me of the goth's/emo's from south park. I bet every time the editor of Edge reads another review he flicks his fringe from his eyes and mutters "conformists" under his breath
God Of War is exactly the same game as God of War one. I love god of war but that was made 5 years ago. You can;t give a game like that 9 or 10 even if it is fun.
and this...
And anyone who is using God Of War 3 as poster children for good games is f**king moron.
Is a f*cking moron.
The truth is that you know that Edge review games fair and the collection of rabid fanboys are going totally overboard about this review score.
AVP is an awful game, it's getting universally slated. 5/10 is accurate.
Heavy Rain is in my view totally over-rated graphically, on a story front and on a gameplay front (it's not a game) so 7/10 is accurate.
God of War III I will most definitely be playing, but if graphics are all that changed then it can only be worthy of an 8/10 (still a great Edge score).
Final Fantasy XIII is rated at 5/10 because they say the first 25 hours of gameplay is awful and if you endure that you get to a great game that lasts another 25 hours. The reason they give it 5 is totally down to the fact that most people will give up long before that time, except the fans.
I know a lot of people use the Halo 3 example. Maybe from a single player point of view 10/10 seems a bit rich, but from a multiplayer point of view Halo 3 brought some massive improvements to online gaming that were innovations on a console at its launch.
You have the forge editor which has kept a massive online community of players creating their own maps and game types which had never been done before to this level. Then you have the theatre which has only just recently been replicated (Uncharted 2) where you can watch back any match from any angle from any player.
Two and a half years ago these were a big deal and the fact that Halo 3 has still only be knocked from the most popular title on XBL by CODMW2 is surely testament to the fact that a lot of people consider it a 10/10 game. It still maintains that number 2 slot.
Haven't a huge amount of experience with Edge so can't comment with conviction but I would say that I was astonished Bayonetta hit 10/10. Ok, I only played the demo but it did nothing for me. Maybe its just not my kinda game but I'd have given it 7 or 8 tops, and that's being generous. I agree with whoever said that top end scores seem to be handed out way too easily these days. In the end a review is just an opinion, and two people can differ hugely in how they view a game. I have a distrust of reviews anyway because I know how influencial games companies are in 'influencing' reviews, and reviewers have their 'favourites' anyway, just like in the music industry. Not all the time or across the board granted but it happens. Its nothing new in the industry. I remember back in the days of Ultimate (Sabre Wulf, Knight Lore etc) when their reputation seemed to precede them and every game they released seemed to get top marks, though not all deserved it. Wonder if they're still on the go...?
Haven't a huge amount of experience with Edge so can't comment with conviction but I would say that I was astonished Bayonetta hit 10/10. Ok, I only played the demo but it did nothing for me. Maybe its just not my kinda game but I'd have given it 7 or 8 tops, and that's being generous. I agree with whoever said that top end scores seem to be handed out way too easily these days. In the end a review is just an opinion, and two people can differ hugely in how they view a game. I have a distrust of reviews anyway because I know how influencial games companies are in 'influencing' reviews, and reviewers have their 'favourites' anyway, just like in the music industry. Not all the time or across the board granted but it happens. Its nothing new in the industry. I remember back in the days of Ultimate (Sabre Wulf, Knight Lore etc) when their reputation seemed to precede them and every game they released seemed to get top marks, though not all deserved it. Wonder if they're still on the go...?
That's the thing about these reviews, they're just opinions. I happen to agree with the score Edge gave Bayonetta, as it just felt like a breath of fresh air compared to other games in it's genre.
God Of War is exactly the same game as God of War one. I love god of war but that was made 5 years ago. You can;t give a game like that 9 or 10 even if it is fun.
and this...
And anyone who is using God Of War 3 as poster children for good games is f**king moron.
Is a f*cking moron.
The truth is that you know that Edge review games fair and the collection of rabid fanboys are going totally overboard about this review score.
AVP is an awful game, it's getting universally slated. 5/10 is accurate.
Heavy Rain is in my view totally over-rated graphically, on a story front and on a gameplay front (it's not a game) so 7/10 is accurate.
God of War III I will most definitely be playing, but if graphics are all that changed then it can only be worthy of an 8/10 (still a great Edge score).
Final Fantasy XIII is rated at 5/10 because they say the first 25 hours of gameplay is awful and if you endure that you get to a great game that lasts another 25 hours. The reason they give it 5 is totally down to the fact that most people will give up long before that time, except the fans.
I know a lot of people use the Halo 3 example. Maybe from a single player point of view 10/10 seems a bit rich, but from a multiplayer point of view Halo 3 brought some massive improvements to online gaming that were innovations on a console at its launch.
You have the forge editor which has kept a massive online community of players creating their own maps and game types which had never been done before to this level. Then you have the theatre which has only just recently been replicated (Uncharted 2) where you can watch back any match from any angle from any player.
Two and a half years ago these were a big deal and the fact that Halo 3 has still only be knocked from the most popular title on XBL by CODMW2 is surely testament to the fact that a lot of people consider it a 10/10 game. It still maintains that number 2 slot.
Halo 3 was a very poor edition into the series. The graphics were last gen, the controls where last gen (still no iron sights), the campaign was far too short, the Brutes were no were near as fun as fighting Elites etc etc. When they reviewed the game, they completely missed the campaign, who does that? Given how important Halo: Combat Evolved's story was, it moved away to focus online and pompus twits like Edge avioded it to stick its pompus nose up the bum of Microsoft online market.
Killzone 2 had a better campaign and in many ways and moved from last gen to next gen in glorious eye melting fashion while adding and improving on the excellent, if a tad generic-like Halo and COD MW combat, with arguably better online modes (32 player online battles with the ability to build your stats and merge various abilities to create your own independent character not to mention changing directives mid fight to increase tension) but Edge gave it …
Browser playing up and quotes messing about so Ive removed the previous quotes.
Halo 3 was a very poor edition into the series. The graphics were last gen, the controls where last gen (still no iron sights), the campaign was far too short, the Brutes were no were near as fun as fighting Elites etc etc. When they reviewed the game, they completely missed the campaign, who does that? Given how important Halo: Combat Evolved's story was, it moved away to focus online and pompus twits like Edge avioded it to stick its pompus nose up the bum of Microsoft online market.
Killzone 2 had a better campaign and in many ways and moved from last gen to next gen in glorious eye melting fashion while adding and improving on the excellent, if a tad generic-like Halo and COD MW combat, with arguably better online modes (32 player online battles with the ability to build your stats and merge various abilities to create your own independent character not to mention changing directives mid fight to increase tension) but Edge gave it …
What games are you referring to? I've played, completed and traded Halo 3.
I enjoyed Killzone 2 more than Halo 3 and COD MW 2 and while that is my opinion, here is what Edge said about Halo 3 ...
"merely a magnificent, beautiful monster of an FPS sequel. In concept and execution, though, Halo 3 is the future."
And hell, what about Halo: ODST, they gave it 9!! And said this ...
"stands on its own two feet as a spin-off that’s better than the vast majority of original games."
Is it?? I can't agree on that and I certainly don't think it's a Universal opinion, a game that lasted 4 hours if you did everything and provided maps already available on Halo 3! For the apparent connoisseur of magazines, it sure seems to be decidedly biased.
Never played anything of it so cant comment in detail but from everything I'm hearing it's pretty fun. God help the poor souls who actually live by Edge reviews.
What games are you referring to? I've played, completed and traded Halo 3.
I enjoyed Killzone 2 more than Halo 3 and COD MW 2 and while that is my opinion, here is what Edge said about Halo 3 ...
"merely a magnificent, beautiful monster of an FPS sequel. In concept and execution, though, Halo 3 is the future."
And hell, what about Halo: ODST, they gave it 9!! And said this ...
"stands on its own two feet as a spin-off that’s better than the vast majority of original games."
Is it?? I can't agree on that and I certainly don't think it's a Universal opinion, a game that lasted 4 hours if you did everything and provided maps already available on Halo 3! For the apparent connoisseur of magazines, it sure seems to be decidedly biased.
Probably why I don’t buy it.
Killzone 2 is not in the same league as Halo. How many people are still talking about Killzone 2 a year on, nobody and even the developers are no longer supporting it. Halo 3 has seen map updates regularly for two years.
Why are you talking about Iron Sights? What has that got to do with anything? Halo doesn't need Iron Sights? It's the future, the Spartans have a heads up display instead.
The graphics are hardly last gen, grow up.
The campaign still has a great story to it, more than any story you see in Killzone 2 which has some of the most clumsy controls I have ever seen. Weighted is just an excuse people use for god damn awful. The fact is that besides COD, the PS3 has no exclusive FPS game to counter Halo and the fanboys get enraged by that fact so they attack Halo.
Halo is popular because it's balanced, takes skill to compete in and some of my best multiplayer shooter experiences have come from that game.
More players online does not make an experience better, it makes it more casual. If anything getting four mates together for Ranked slayer in Halo is far more rewarding than 16 people all talking over one another. It becomes more casual and unrewarding.
Funny how everyone tries to claim an anti-PS3 bias in Edge but everyone disregards some of the positive reviews they've done. For example, a 9/10 for Uncharted 2.
Lol you t**t. Get some standards and some taste. You are clearly a stupid 12 year old fanboy. f**k off. There is literally no point in you even posting anything.
@Starsail
Apart from they didn't give it a crap score did they dick head. They gave it an 8. Which in Edge is really good score. The game is identical to god of war 1. IDENTICAL. As in there has been no evolution of the gameplay AT ALL in five years. I loved god of war 1, I loved god of war 2 but it wasn;t nearly as exciting because I'd already been exposed to it. I also like god of war 3. But you can't give a game that has not changed even slightly the top review scrores. It makes a complete mockery of the whole idea of criticism and reviews.
And you comments about Halo 3 are stupid. Millions and millions of people loved and enjoyed it. Milions of people still play the multiplayer. Playing through it cop-op was brilliant fun. I also loved Kill Zone 2. But this repeated wank halo bashing is f**king ridiculous. And only sad elitest geeks do it.
Plus your comments on uncharted 2 are nonsense. You can't compare uncharted 2 to Gears of war for a start. Just because they have shooting and a cover system does not mean they are the same sort of game. They share two mechanics and that is it. You can't use this as a game to support your crap argument that
'Same game or not, if you pick it up and play it and it pretty much blows you away then why give it a s**t score because the mechanics haven't completely changed? it makes no sense. '
Uncharted 2 is a monstrous leap forward over any similar game OF COURSE you would rather play it. Narratviely, cinematically, in pollish etc etc it is a NEXT GEN game. God of War 3 is not at all the same as this
Besides we are not talking about completely changing the mechanics but evolving the central idea. New decapitation animations don;t f**king count.
So what are you going to do when God of War 6 comes out? Give it a 9. Great. Lets us e the massive jump in prosessing power for prettier games and thats it. Good one. If it was left to people like you we would all be playig f**king god awful games. You are an idiot.
i really can not see what people see in yakuza 3. ive been playing it for 6 hours now and never has a game bored the f**k out of me as much as this. i mean the whole game is go talk to this person, go talk to that person, go gather everyone at the table, find out who took the money, go find the doggy, go buy milk for the doggy, go find a rubber ball for the doggy, go find tachi or whatever his name is from the movies because he looked sad. if anything puts me to sleep its this, i mean jesus tap dancing christ what part of that sounds like fun? seriously? is this yakuza 3, or babysitters 3? in fact all this is, is a japanese version of the sims.
Copyright 2006 - 2009 Future Publishing Limited, Beauford Court, 30 Monmouth Street, Bath, UK BA1 2BW England and Wales company registration number 2008885
