So it's garbage..?
And you're surprised why?
No its good
>>332741902
Can you not read? It says right there its a revolutionary entertainment experience.
>>332742273
Fuck off shill its generic as fuck with bland gameplay and the writing is as shit as "time egg go bad time explosion"
>>332741902
> 76 is bad
Even if you go by the super skewed review table where "7" is average, then that's still above average.
I dont know that much about it, but i have a feeling it will just be alright. I dont expect it to be as good as max payne or allen wake
>>332741902
>gear clone
>bullet time
is it 2006 again ?
>>332742367
>the writing is as shit
I would go as far as to predict the writing is solid (like just it was in AW and MP) but the live tv shit ruins it.
It's a fairly polished bland AAA actiony shooter that has some slightly above average novel gimmick graphics and effects. It might float your boat if you don't expect much more and aren't tired of shooty mc shoots yet.
>>332742502
Isnt it apparently really short too. I heard some people talk about it here, but i dont know if they are full of shit or not
>Critics opinions
>Being worth a shit
>Ever
Professional critics fall into 3 categories of people
A:Pretentious faggots who like to hear themselves talk (Roger Ebert, Yahtzee)
B:People who absolutely suck ass at videogames (Pretty much everyone at Polygon, kotaku, gamespot, IGN)
C:People who just plain don't know shit about games (everyone else)
Pic very much related.
>>332743241
Forgot pic, You all knew exactly what I was going to post though.
These shill reviews are so generic, why are they always so bad at telling people a game is fun?
