Syndicate THE VISCERAL FPS EXPERIAAAAANCE™

[aubergine]

How do fools GET the money?

And the love...

[grimace06]

5 Stars from Jeff Gerstmann. Seems to really enjoy the cooperative multiplayer.

http://www.giantbomb.com/syndicate/61-30734/reviews/

[aubergine]

That's not the trend though, averaging 6-7 / 10.

http://m.computerandvideogames.com/3...live-round-up/

Comment quote that feels the right to my gut is that they'd have been better off fleshing out the (roundly praised) co-op and dumping the mediocre single player. In a sense Syndicate was a co op game for a single player (which you could in theory archieve in an FPS where players can cycle through squad members with otherwise good AI for unguided moments.

[grimace06]

Originally Posted by aubergine

That's not the trend though, averaging 6-7 / 10.

http://m.computerandvideogames.com/3...live-round-up/

Comment quote that feels the right to my gut is that they'd have been better off fleshing out the (roundly praised) co-op and dumping the mediocre single player. In a sense Syndicate was a co op game for a single player (which you could in theory archieve in an FPS where players can cycle through squad members with otherwise good AI for unguided moments.

Yes, but you outright dismissed the game as "shit".

I don't consider 6-7 out of 10 "shit" - that's above average to good.

It is a moot point I guess, because we're not getting the game in Australia.

[AranchineD]

In the modern rating system 7 is absolutely appalling.

[Shorty]

Four Point Scale.

[aubergine]

Originally Posted by grimace06

Yes, but you outright dismissed the game as "shit".

I don't consider 6-7 out of 10 "shit" - that's above average to good.

It is a moot point I guess, because we're not getting the game in Australia.

For starters, read the content of the reviews and hold it up against Deus Ex 3 and $80-100. If you have so much money and so little better to do than play mediocre games then I guess one man's shit is another man's pleasure.

As for scores, the range for any of these website's major advertising partners is 6-10. IGN gave it a 7.5, which might as well be a death sentence. Do you seriously think EA blew off the Australian ban without a fight to make a political point? They didn't bother fighting it because they lacked confidence in the product anyway, it wasn't worth spending thousands on an appeal.

[igotnewsuper8systemWRONG!]

Originally Posted by aubergine

That's not the trend though, averaging 6-7 / 10.

Are you just making this shit up on the spot? The majority of reviews on metacritic so far are above 7.

[texta]

The reviews probably take a point or two off their scores just because it's based on Syndicate but isn't Syndicate, so potentially it's not as bad as they say.

[Shorty]

Originally Posted by aubergine

As for scores, the range for any of these website's major advertising partners is 6-10. IGN gave it a 7.5, which might as well be a death sentence. Do you seriously think EA blew off the Australian ban without a fight to make a political point? They didn't bother fighting it because they lacked confidence in the product anyway, it wasn't worth spending thousands on an appeal.

Or that removing all of the objectionable content from the original submission (of which the Classification Board's report did not contain a complete list) would have changed the game significantly enough that EA decided not to bother. It's not like all they needed to do was rename a drug or something like that.

Besides, it's not like our media classification authorities have operated with the greatest degree of consistency in past rulings. Aliens vs. Predator (which did reasonably well) could easily have gone the other way and, had their appeal failed, Sega were perfectly willing to do what EA has done here.