Discussion in 'Gamers' Pulse' started by forgotmyname, Nov 9, 2009.
I guess this puts Ubisoft back to #1 spot as the biggest pos company, right in front of Activision.
Shame too because ACII seems like it could have gotten that kind of score anyway.
The first one got high scores and it was extremely repetitive.
didnt they pull the same shit on part one, along with the fags at EA with Army of Two?
Still confuses me as to why. They possibly paid people off for that one. It set a tremendous foundation for the second game though and this one seems like it's going to be everything the first was supposed to be. I'm remaining cautiously optimistic but I'm liking the way the second game looks.
It's run by french people nuff said. I do however like a lot of their games.
Kane and Lynch not army of 2
The only ubisoft made game I'm a huge fan of is the Splinter Cell series.
no proof? no fucking care. why would they try to bribe some shitty ass german magazine
also AC2 will be
they might be bribing ALL of the videogame review outlets. Saying no = you wont get any review copies from ubisoft for any ubisoft game.
Sounds like Ubisoft isn't so sure.
Should have waited until all the dirty reviewers had theirs out before the reveal.
Activision is king of POS.
K&L was decent.
Assassins Creed was just garbage.
this probably happens with a lot of big name releases
I'm sure the same thing happened with Far Cry 2 from ubisoft with PC Gamers review where they basically called it the best game ever
I have both, thought K&L could be frustrating Was good to have another co-op game.
AC had a great engine and looked nice and pretty but did get a bit repetitive
Wouldn't say either was garbage.
Yea I suspect the reviews for that were a bit dodgy
I haven't even played SP on my copy because I watched friends complete too much of it.
I did play MP for a while but got so annoyed with the stupid lobby system which would get you banned and kicked all over the place for no reason at all and would ALWAYS have one high rank team vs one low ranked team
Try and vote to level teams? = ban
AC was terribly boring and repetitive, and Far cry 2 was almost unplayable in that regard. I never finished either because it felt more like a tedious chore than a game. Plus Ubisoft is notorious for terrible console to PC ports.
Now I can see how AC1 got good reviews. The graphics were great but the game was incredibly repetative. So much so that I can't understand how it got high reviews.
The first one had the same deal setup. You could only break embargo for a high score.
If they sent Jade Raymond over for some persuasion I would give it any score Ubisoft wanted.
My thoughts exactly. Not a damn thing in that article shows any shred of evidence.
This probably happens more often than not this generation. Why waste money and time on making a game good when you can just spend the money on a favorable review and have sweet sales numbers for shareholders