VF5 360 Reviews

Come on guys, IGN gave it a 9 out of 10 so stop nitpicking. A damn fine score!

9 Out of 10 will always entice new players to pick up this game, because the final score line is pretty suggestive that this VF5 is near perfection (10).

Nothing about "time investment" or "rectangular stages" will put anyone off, because most gamers are out there for overall quality - not to wrangle over specific sentences that won't mean much in the broader picture.

 

It's not the score it's the content of the review. Nobody ever discusses why the game is good anyway. It just seems to be universal praise that "Reviewers" have jumped on. Every single review reads the same too.

 

Better 9 out of 10, than 6 or 7 though.

You'll always find reviews which seem to gush with praise but give a lower score, or those that give a fantastic score but have notes and provisos attached.

9 is decent, and it's no reason to rag on IGN. They're generally easier to please, but that said, what would people have been happy with? 9.5? 9.8?

It doesn't matter.

 

Gamespot gave it an 8.5. It is a turd of a review from that fat Gerstman fuck. He is a Tekken fanboy and that site lets him review VF. Go figure. He was probably totally conflicted b/c he wants to score VF poorly, but has to inflate the scores of all XBox games. The last sentence of the whole review tells you all you need to know about that idiot.

 

"The inability to stay in an unranked match with a friend is annoying," - gamespot

with a friend you can just do a rematch, i dont know what hes talking about.

 

Maybe he meant ranked match. Otherwise, he's an idiot.

 

I expected Gertsmann to repeat his condescending tone in this review like he did for the PS3. He is the type of reviewer that will hold down a score if one nit picky thing bothers him and he does it every time.

From a VF fan like Mielke giving it a 10 on 1up, to having a Tekken fan like Gertsmann giving it an 8.5 on GS.

in the end, as long as it totals in the 9s

 

The part that really irks me about the Gamespot review is the conclusion:

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Virtua Fighter 5 is a great fighting game and the addition of a good multiplayer mode only makes it better. But keep in mind that the game is geared toward players who have experience with the series and isn't always friendly to new players. If you've been playing Virtua Fighter for any length of time, this game is worth adding to your library. However, even if you're a fan of other fighting games but aren't already familiar with the series, it's likely that you're just going to keep on wondering why there is such a fuss about Virtua Fighter.</div></div>

Wow. Really? Geared towards players who have experience with the series? Just like every fighter ever made? WTF?

This whole "VF is not newb friendly" thing also really annoys me. The fact that he's a Tekken fanboy makes it seem like he's implying "Tekken is friendly to new players" (but maybe I'm just delusional). The way he words the conclusion makes it out as "for VF fans only". Way to help expand the scene jackass.

Then you have complete and utter trash like this under a screenshot:

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If you aren't already good at Virtua Fighter, expect to rack up losses online.</div></div>

Like every online game ever made? Saying that was completely unnecessary. If you point that out for VF, I want it pointed out for Tekken, UT3, Halo 3, etc.

Ugh, the guy is a complete retard. Kasavin was the VF fan of Gamespot and now that he's gone...well, we're stuck with the Tekken fanboy.

What I liked about Kasavin was, even with his bias towards VF, he still rated VF games fairly.

Taken from Greg Kasavin's VF4 review:

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Virtua Fighter 4 isn't just for hard-core fighting-game fans--the game is only as complex as you want it to be. While it will definitely appeal to you if you enjoy poring over long-winded character FAQs or spending an evening just practicing the same tough move or combo over and over, you'll also enjoy it if you just want to play for fun. The majority of the game's playable characters are very easy to pick up--by the manual's own admission, more than half of them are well suited for beginners, even for those who've never played a fighting game before. All of the fighters are competitive, yet all of them are substantially different. There's much more differentiation now between some of the characters who seemed similar to each other in previous installments.

...

You can't tell right off the bat, but Virtua Fighter 4 is the best fighting game in years. Even if you've never liked the Virtua Fighter series before--and there's a reasonable chance that's the case, considering the series has never taken off in the US like it has in Japan--you should still give Virtua Fighter 4 a try. The quicker pacing, the perfected controls, and the great-looking character designs, along with the outstanding AI and the unparalleled gameplay depth, make this a fighting game that just about everyone will agree on.</div></div>

Perfect! Describes VF perfectly! No nonsense of "for VF fans only" because VF really can be played and enjoyed by all! He pushes people to try out this gem of a series rather than tries to deter them from it.

 

I'd say VF is a lot easier to get into than most 2D fighters or Tekken. The perception that VF is so deep and hardcore that only people who live in arcades can even think about playing it is completely false.

 

You guys (Poppa, Dissmaster) throw around the words that Gerstman is a Tekken fanboy etc while he gave Tekken: DR (which isn't even a fullprice game) a lesser score:

http://www.gamespot.com/ps3/action/tekken5darkresurrection/review.html

I'm not saying he's a good reviewer etc, clearly he has weird focus on what's good in a fightinggame, but maybe him as a Tekken fanboy pulling down scores isn't true. Looking across his reviews he doesn't give out many high scores period. 8.5 isn't that bad of a score after all.

 

He gave Tekken DR an 8.3 and VF5 PS3 8.1. It was within the same week. Tekken DR was like VF5, but with less content. I'm surprised he gave VF5(X360) a higher score.

 

Well, he's a well known Tekken fan.

The scores themselves do lean in Tekken's favour at times (Tekken DR is massively barebones, not even a practice mode (it came later with Tekken online)), it's the written reviews that really tend to show his bias.

Anyways, sorry for just throwing that out there. I figured that piece of info (him being a Tekken fanboy) was well known.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Jeff is a fighting genre fan, often listing games as Street Fighter and Tekken as one of his favorite games.</div></div>

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeff_Gerstmann

I.e. He makes it well known that he's a fan of Tekken and it shows in his reviews.

 

As said, one of the reasons behind the Tekken score (look at the actual review) is it's price. And you can't argue with that from a consumers point of view.

 

I don't see how a $20 price tag for a downloadable PSP port excuses it for lacking major PSP features and modes, a practise mode (WTF?) and no online (especially for a downloadable game lol).

That's just how I see it though. VF5 was pretty barebones too. =/

It's mostly the written review I have trouble with. It always comes across as him almost selling Tekken and trying to deter people from VF. I don't even think he mentioned the lack of a practise mode in Tekken DR PS3. Even if Tekken DR was a free downloadable game, I'd still bitch about the lack of a practise mode.

Meh, maybe that's just me.

 

I have to disagree a bit with that. Im kinda of an all around fighter meaning i play almost all fighting games ( ones that are worth it meaning i dont play MK ). Im especially into Guilty gear, VF, Tekken, King of fighters and Capcom vs SNK but i play almost all of them and by my experience in trying to get all the people around me to play fighting games in order to play someone else than the dumb AI i always try to get people interested in those games. But of all those games id say VF and Capcom vs snk are the less appealing to the new fighter.

Less appealing not because of its complexity but because of the orientation of the game. And because of the level of difference between a good player and a noob. VF is a system oriented game meaning you need to learn the system even more than the moves of the characters to play well. Tekken is the contrary. While simpler for dedicated gamers Tekken is more appealing and clearly more user friendly. The precision required to do strings or Combo's is far less difficult than VF and for people that want to play for fun the moves look more bad ass than VF.

But i have to agree with one of your point. 2D is definitely less appealing than 3D. But even then Guilty Gear does a great job in that matter. its a combo oriented game with a lot of depth and a lot of focus on creativity when you Get really into it. ( personnaly its my favorite game) But even tough its far more complicated than CVS, Guilty gear is more appealing because of the impression that your doing awesome things even tough your mashing.

What im saying is that VF is not necessarily less user friendly its simply less appealing in a short amount of time. And the moves arent as cool to see then Tekken or Guilty gear. But when you really understand whats going on when you play VF the game is a blast that for sure /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif