HazaRDReborN

Wow, barely any reviews for this game says it **** seeing such positive praise from even the few available is beyond me completely. The game online connection is bad, cheating, and the most atrocious of all, 12 character roster? For a 2v2? Are we joking? 6 years since announced and this is it? I am baffled as to how far fanboys would go to excuse a game. If street fighter or tekken or mortal kombat launched with 12 characters people would tear them appart, and those games are 1v1 were a 12 character roster is not half bad but not half great either.... Just, wow! Mainstream slop for people that have zero idea what a fighting game even needs to be great. One of those things is a healthy roster... not a lackluster roster much less a small one. Nobody cares if a fighting game has good mechanics in it if the roster ****. Again, just, wow.. fanboy and critic glazing at its finest.

Dont want to fanboy out on this game, my review is a little late and my love for this title is so HUGE I have enjoyed so many hours on end on it. It is simply right there in my heart as one of the best SF titles ever made. But, it has its flaws. With the new release of SFV, I though I review this as well. The game fights great, it is really balanced finally and a lot of content changes have gotten rid of unblockables and exploitable tactics. New added characters are also cool, and the final roster is large and a lot of fun to go through. The drawback to this game was and always will be something that bugged me from the go. The Ultra Combos. They are there as a mechanic primarily to get casuals more into it. Basically they have and always will be nothing but a revenge mechanic that gives access to the BEST SUPER of a character. Derp. In other words, you want to have access to your most powerful move, then get your face punched in enough >.< Despite this, the game is still too hard for some newcomers. That is a little all because we live in a generation that wants everything handed to them. Play the game guys and learn it. We used to learn these games on Arcades that the owners would put on hard difficulty just to get more coins from us and other **** veterans popping in whenever they wanted to challenge us. We lost over and over again until we learned it. Simple. And this is too much to ask for on a game that now has training modes, challenges, and that same arcade more that can now be difficulty adjusted so you can learn it better? What more do you people want for crying out loud? This all backfires on the game regardless, since newcomers find it too hard (wrongly as they simply expect a game with no learning curve, and this is not the case for a true fighting game, but whatever) and veterans finding mechanics like that FDACblahblah whatever its called and Ultra Combos being exploited as a means to never commit to moves and access more "combos" for pros in the end as well. Talk about mechanics that backfire. It is also a shame that the game is sold again as a separate version, when it could simply have been a downloadable update for a small price or heck, even for free like updates in SF5 will be. All in all, my love for this game and fanboy-ism aside, I believe that it got a lot of things right but missed the mark on some other things, coming to a score of 7/10. Story mode is also lacking for people used to things like MKX and MK9, however it did release before BOTH of those games and a story mode was simply the answer Nether Realms had to at least have ONE thing better than SF. Even so, this is a fighting game, and its all about the fighting from as far back as the first days. The days when we played it in the arcade. No stories and RPG's or what not. Its not an adventure game. Jump in and fight, and enjoy yourself and have fun doing it. That is what it is about. Great title, a little short in some ways, and compared to other SF titles I would rank it third. 1st and 2nd place I reserve for SF5 and SF3. SF5 is too new for me to be able to be 100% with the notion of it being better than SF3 or not, and although it has a lot of balance and diversity and better in many ways than SF3, SF3 still holds the title in other ways. So only time will tell. Point being, SF4 comes to a close second after those two (if they are tied) or a third (depending on which people find to enjoy more). And that is a great achievement regardless of new version costs and what not from Capcom. Every SF ever was founded on different versions. That was the point to SF4 too, to throw back to the classics with namings such as Super Street Fighter 4 and Arcade Edition, etc. Different times perhaps, and wrong price-tags, and this is something that no longer exists for the franchise. All in all, this is well deserving a 7/10! My final score is upped a little to 8/10. Although I don't want to go completely fanboy on this, as a personal review I believe some objectivity should be allowed from my personal experience and fun with the game, pushing that 7 up to 8.

Well, this is the only review you will ever need. So many haters out there trying to throw people off. Check their profiles guys. Half of them have made a profile simply to try and decrease SFV's score, more like smurf accounts from haters than anything else. Some of them have even rated both PC and PS4 versions XD Its ridiculous. Simply pay no attention to the cry babies. SF5 is the best SF to date since SF3, perhaps better as it is achieving the impossible with making it more accessible to casual players in the execution of mechanics and as competitive as ever for veterans. The graphics, amazing. The music is simply superb. You thought SF4 had some nice remakes of those classics? Wait till you hear the theme songs for Ryu, Ken, Nash and Chun Li. Responsiveness, perfect (although a little to accessible for veterans and now Critical Arts come out too easy, over-riding smaller moves in combos now). Combos, there are actually more than SF4 if you take out that FDACblabla idiocy out which made no-one commit to a single move. Speed is also almost identical, keeping to all they learned with SF4 all these last years (watch speed comparison videos if you do not believe me). Smoothest online play AND launch when compared to other games. It is a cross-platform launch mind you and is in under a week already flying on nitrus. Simply perfect. And Capcom says they will improve it? How? I can't even tell what they are seeing that is how good it is. Roster is so fresh. Even the classic characters feel fresh, if not in looks (like Zangief, he is really dissapointing they changed nothing on his look) at least on their skill set. 16 characters, yes, 16, so what? You are all going to learn every one of them are you o.O And another 6 coming out. More characters means less balance, about time people got that. This is a great size for a roster. Anyone that complains about it is all about quantity over quality. Most balanced fighting game I ever touched out of the box. Been playing fighting games for 20 years. I don't think I ever played a single fighting game that was THIS good on its first launch. I am really having a hard time remembering one that came close. Even SF3 had to get 3 versions out to iron out so many problems it had, and lets not get started on SF4. Multiplayer mode is awesome (lobbies a little small, but they did it on purpose to figure out server loads and increase size over time, so completely cool) and the single player which is about the only thing that is lacking, is actually not lacking that much when compared to SF4. Even incomplete, it is a step up. Story mode is even in its intro version better than any story in any SF game thus far. Individual character stories and all (although easy since they are the first stages). In place of Arcade (I am guessing for obvious reasons, that being story spoilers) we have a survival mode which lacks in some ways compared to arcade, and makes up in others, being overall just as fun. Training is there and probably has even more depth than previous training modes. With the only thing lacking is the complete story and the challenges (and hopefully an arcade mode). If you are a casual... well you know what? No, even if you are a casual then you should still get this game. The training mode is the perfect place to learn, tutorials and videos are up (even from Capcom) and the game is more accessible than ever. I don't see you casuals whine over LoL and Dota 2 having no single player and no story. This is an online game at its heart, this is a fighting game, not an adventure game. So get in there and fight. Enjoy your life a little and have some fun already. It has a learning curve, as any respectable game would have, and learning it is rewarding with even more fun. Late content that is not here is NOT and NEVER was the point to a fighting game especially to a Street Fighter. And regardless, we have some pretty amazing single player coming with the new story mode in a few months. No, they did not rush it as some are whining and crying. If they had rushed it, the Story Mode would be here. They took their time to get it right. And instead of waiting and missing out on tournaments and what not, they polished the game in time and gave us an early release as opposed to have us STILL waiting thanks to a story mode most people don't even care about. Relax your horses, it is coming. See this as an early release on the main core of the game. And don't forget, NONE the whining from hater fanboys is excusable. They were warned of major elements to the single player coming soon. See it for what it is, Capcom giving you early access to the game in a complete online marvel of a result. The rest is coming. Its a fighting game. Casual or not, the whole point to it is and always will be the fighting. You don't like that? Then this isnt for you to begin with, story or not. Giving this game a 10/10. Shaping up by far to be the best SF on launch. From mechanics to everything.

The critics obviously don't know how to review games... or films. Either that or there is no pay for help advertise a free to play game? Who knows. Warframe is: 10/10 for a free to play game. 8/10 for a normal release game in beta phase. Overall 9/10. Warframe is Space Ninjas at their best, with action packed maneuovers, wall running and climbing, melee and ranged combat, special skills, character customisation to some level, lots of grind-like based PvE fun, and content that keeps adding more and more to the game. With dynamic events and operations that allow all players to change the outcome of entire planets and sections, a variety of 11 mission types and something like 7+ different tileset/maps that are also fixed somewhat to a random-map method, along with visuals and polishes being constantly made, Warframe is by far the BEST PvE free to play game out there, let alone the best Space Ninja game as it is pretty much the only space ninja game made. This is how Free to Play games should be made. The funny thing with this is, that although it has a grinding character, and a somewhat repeating nature to the things you do, it so much damn fun that you completely lose hours on end building characters and weapons and hacking and slashing your way through piles and piles of enemies. Still in beta phase, I foresee the end result being a 9 out of 10 when compared normal release AAA titles, if not perhaps even 10/10 (depends on how much more they add, they truly are constantly expanding the game more and more), bumping up my overall score of 9/10 to 9.5 or 10/10. Amazing. A must play game for 3rd person action shooter fans that love sci-fi and ninja themes. Don't take my word for it, try it out yourself. It is completely free!

1) Quicktime events that people complain about? What quicktime events? The quicktime events were rarely 5% of the games length. 2) 6 hours long campaign? Well sure, anything can be rushed to become a much smaller scale. I took the game without rushing and it lasted me 10hours and 50 minutes (without reading all the extras and lores). Quake 1 could be finished in under 20 minutes, that does not mean it was 20 minutes long. 10 hrs for a game like this is awesome. More or less 7 hours on different difficulties. Think 7 huge open levels that will take you about 1 hour each to complete, all having several possible ways to go about them and side objectives. 3) Too much stealth play? Well, as soon as you read someone saying Crysis 3 had too much stealth play you should quickly disregard their review. The game is a stealth game, complaining that it is a stealth game is void of logic. Same way if one complained about a sniper game being a sniper game would be void of logic. The whole initial idea to the first Crysis was to make you "the Predator" of the "Jungle". The minute cloak was put into the game it became a stealth game. Of course you could approach everything without stealth (with dodgy AI at the time) but guess what, the same can be done now as well. Hard difficulties force you to use more stealth because, guess what, it is hard difficulty! The idea is for you to use all the tools available to be able to complete the game. Stealth did not make the hard difficulty a breeze, it made it possible. The game has gone a long way to make it obvious it is about stealth, and people are complaining about it...... Ahem, wrong GAME guys, move along now. 4) Great level designs. The maps are large and very versatile. You can go about them in so many ways. Crysis 1 was not as open neither as versatile as this, ever. It had in so many occasions just one path leading to objectives, but because the path was very wide people call Crysis 1 sandbox and Crysis 3 linear? Obviously haters that don't know a thing about gaming and level design. 5) AI and enemy designs are much more varied and deeper than ever before and any Crysis title to date, including hacking elements and enemies that approach you with different strategies. The cell also seemed much more organised and called each other to group up on you rather than the first title were they simply walked towards you no matter what. 6) Cover and stealth play. Improved, of course, and cover works much better as well now, with an added Predator Bow. I think the direction of the game is obvious 7) Story. OMG! I have never seen a more involving story for a FPS action game. Seriously, it was immaculate. While the boss fights were truly epic. The ending was amazing, best way to ever end the Crysis franchise. 5 out 5 stars! Simply amazing. 8) Soundtrack. Better overall than Crysis 1 and 2 (C2 included a track that was better than all titles, but overall ingame music was not as good and the great one track created was overused - whereas Crysis 3 had much better in game score than ever before and it fit perfect to the mood of the game as well which was much more sentimental. 9) Graphics. Next Gen graphics and one year ago. What more do you want? The game still melts PC's now. PC's, not consoles, PC's! The graphics are simply on another planet, and again, it came out a year before any other game to try and challenge it. 10) Bugs. Minor. I found little small glitches with regards to my user interface but rarely. Had a problem with one specific key mapping as well, but fixed that too. The game was mostly polished to perfection, a true AAA title with AAA quality. The more evident problems the game had was with regards to AI when the CPU was stressed to it's limits. At which point it created bugs like enemy not seeing you and things like that. As soon as the game is running on the specs it needs, it runs flawlessly. Among the fewest titles ever launched with so little problems if any and such great quality. Crysis 3 is the ultimate conclusion and addition to the franchise. An title any FPS player MUST experience (especially if you enjoy both stealth and action). The rest, please, go review on a genre that is actually to your taste. You sound like WoW boys or Fallout boys crying over a game that was never meant to be like the games you are used to, neither include the elements you wanted. For those crying about linearity....... it is a First Person Shooter..... It is meant to be linear and even so, it did a great job to be colourful in it's approach and colours. 10/10, this game deserves it!

I can't in my right mind give this game a good review when it has destroyed such a wonderful and one of my favourite ever franchises. There are those who would applaud Diablo 3 as a model of great AAA quality, others just because it is Blizzard, and most because they are fans of the franchise although they don't know it, they prove to actually not being true fans to the franchise as this is in a completely different direction than the originals. To make things clear, I will review the game in two ways. The first is as a New IP, the second as a sequel to an Old IP. As a new IP, the game direction, design and style is not that bad. Blizzard has the budget to back up quality in the product and it shows, from the wonderfully detailed menus, to everything, it is simply polished up real nice. What starts to then weaken it is the fact that it really seams simple in it's structure, especially for a game being developed for so long and especially for a hack and slash game released on 2012. Expectations are far beyond what was given from a company with such a budget and resources as Blizzard, but expectations are also larger from what is actually possible in such a game and genre in our time. The length was quite short. The story was ok-ish. Included DRM and other online things that simply shouldn't be there for a game like this. Limited party size, to simply later reveal that the game was indeed aimed for consoles as well. I have nothing against a game being also made for consoles, as long as it doesn't take out features from the PC version just to do this, the way Diablo 3 did. The game felt 5 years old and that is the best that can be said about it as a new IP, no matter how polished it was. The game ends up being marginally a 5/10 as it doesn't deliver in a surprisingly new way neither lives up to the expectations of a company as large as Blizzard and so much time being put into it. RAGE from id was longer, for crying out loud, and it was a first person shooter. Skyrim took around the same time to develop, and the results show why. Diablo 3 does not convince in any way that it is a project taken seriously, especially with regards to the original fans, which takes us to part 2. Reviewing it as the sequel to the original franchise (which is the true review) the game is simply not Diablo. Diablo 2 delivered, in size and content 4 times that of the original, and it kept to the original style which is what the Diablo universe was all about that Lovecraft styled and gothic demonic look and atmosphere created. Something that the previous Blizzard employees that actually worked on and made Diablo 1 and 2 managed to recreate on their next project, Hellgate. The direction was a slap in the face. It is like playing the TES universe and the third iteration being in a completely different direction than the other two. Blizzard saw into simply scrapping the original franchise and making something new, make it marginally as long as the previous titles if not shorter (much shorter actually), get rid of entire features, apply it to consoles, use the old franchise name and their own to sell and advertise it, and deliver a product that did nothing of create the feeling the old titles created. Art direction was mostly changed to appeal to a larger scale target market as well, also evident in the fact that it was ultimately aimed at console launches as well. To further prove that they really don't give a damn about the old franchise, neither the fans, at the complaint on the new direction and art for Diablo 3 from many fans, they released a troll Cow Level with rainbows claiming that "this is childish", not Diablo 3. Hardly the approach of a serious company, but rather the actions of a child arguing it's point, going completely out of their way to simply try and prove they are right. They are not right, not by a long-shot. The feel of the original franchise which was spectacular simply wasn't there, it was something else. The Cthulu-ish designs and dark sinister world worthy of the name Diablo was scrapped, and they have the audacity to try and say otherwise even though the results are so evident? I am ashamed in them, and the title. Diablo 3 brought nothing new to the genre instead it simplified it, while it also ruined the original franchise, and instead of delivering at least an attempt to show that they put twice the work in it than previous Diablo titles, we get results that require half the effort. Path of Exile felt more like the original Diablo franchise, and it was a free to play game from an indie developer. The results Blizzard achieved here are appalling and not nearly in the lowest of their standards that we deserve to have. But then again, Blizzard hasn't been Blizzard since 2002. The game is barely 2/10. I would have given it 3/10, but Blizzards stance on it, the continuation of supporting their decision rather than admitting to fault, along with other things, drops it to 2/10... And I am being nice.