Page 90 of 112

Posted: Mon Oct 31, 2011 11:51 pm
by Matty
^

As its the start of the weekend and people will have time to play it
Plus you get people who'll nip into Blockbuster/Game etc etc on the way back home from work/school to pick something up

Posted: Tue Nov 01, 2011 4:51 am
by Twinny
(Fifty minutes late but) IT's NOVEMBER 1ST!!! YAAYY!!

Now to wait for the 22th...

Posted: Tue Nov 01, 2011 5:00 am
by TCB
I hate U.S. game release days...

Not looking to buy on launch; makes no sense on a Tuesday...perhaps on Friday or even (dare I say this) as a Christmas present...

Posted: Tue Nov 01, 2011 6:47 am
by Quills on Wheels
Reknoc wrote:Shame it's been delayed to December in Australia.
umm... no
It's still the 3rd of November...

Pitty though, I would have loved it if it was for December. I would have wanted more time to get the money for the game.

Posted: Tue Nov 01, 2011 12:05 pm
by Twinny
Well the reviews are in...but damn GameInformer...they are so biased. :mad:

EDIT: We got a nine, in fact a 9.5! Also look at the comments after the review. Now you can't bash a person like the one who reviewed this game!

C'mon Metacritic , take that score!

Posted: Tue Nov 01, 2011 2:15 pm
by Reknoc
Game Informer review seems fair enough to me, they're saying that bad levels remain to be bad levels. Their scoring system is pretty crap though, might as well have just given it a 7.

Uh wow. That 9.5 review is terrible.

Posted: Tue Nov 01, 2011 3:16 pm
by Twinny
Tell me Rek, how the hell is GameInformer's review fair and the 9.5 one not? I would love to know.

Posted: Tue Nov 01, 2011 3:30 pm
by Reknoc
mtwinny wrote:Tell me Rek, how the hell is GameInformer's review fair and the 9.5 one not? I would love to know.
How is the GameInformer one biased when the PalGN one isn't?

It's hard for me to prove or disprove the GameInformer one, but I don't feel I have to because it's a mostly positive review.

The PalGN one reeks of fanboyism though, there are some quite frankly factually incorrect stuff in there unless the full game has improved radically since the demo came out last month.
Classic Sonic handles the same way he did in the Mega Drive titles, and everything is just spot on. Did they copy paste the old school mechanics as they were? Surely that would have been enough right? Apparently Sonic Team decided otherwise. Classic Sonic, believe it or not, actually handles a bit better in Sonic Generations than he did in the Mega Drive titles.
Nope.
some minor camera naggings that makes it difficult to see what lies ahead, and the minor graphical glitch we encountered during the battle with Silver the Hedgehog. They’re little naggings, but rest assured, none of them are game breaking, consistent, or crippling.
Nope.

And I'll add this one just for fun:
That said, it’s a fantastic platformer in its own right and has every right to be praised alongside the likes of Ratchet and Clank and Mario Galaxy.
lol

Posted: Tue Nov 01, 2011 4:05 pm
by Twinny
^ Are you freaking kidding me? You favor a "positive" review from a magazine that favor games in popularity (ads,fans) but not quality? I went on the net earlier this morning and I agree with what they said about G.I.'s review, if I can call it that. Hell, Gamespot has a topic on their forum just because of how stupid the guy gave Generations.

And about that "popularity over quality" go to the Sonic Stadium Message Board as well. I would love to see you say all that up there to them.

I'm gonna say more but I'll hold off for now. Good god, it's like you want the Sonic cycle to keep rolling on and on, and then boom, this Sonic Dimensions is the saving grace.

"What a shame" indeed.

Posted: Tue Nov 01, 2011 4:07 pm
by Kaito-kun
mtwinny wrote: EDIT: We got a nine
"We"? I didn't realise you were a part of the development team.