240°
8.0

MSNBC: God of War III Review

MSNBC has posted a video review of God of War III.

Read Full Story >>
msnbc.msn.com
sinncross5186d ago

I didn't find that a very convincing review. I found little justification for the 8 score beyond him saying that game feels like GOW and over the top acting (even though other reviews have clearly stated how good the voice acting is)

Oh well, cant wait to get my hands on this game! I mean even accidently rip the cover in half
>.>
<.<

Mr_Bun5186d ago (Edited 5186d ago )

A Sony exclusive getting an 8 from a company with MS in the name, is pretty good...Still, I'm not sure if there are any Sony companies that review MS exclusives

mastiffchild5186d ago

Well, you rarely get other major series beaten in reviews for not changing what maede them great. doesn't happen to Halo, does it?

And anyway, there's a LOT of new risks taken with GOW3 and all the voice acting has been praised everywhere else so I just think whoever reviewed this here had made up their mind, or disliked GOW, before starting his review.Who cares about no marks like these tools anyway? Big meh.

Seriously, does the MS stand for MS here? That can't be right, can it? Anyway, I'd hope if it were that they'd have the decency NOT to review the oppositions games as if they do, and say this is the case here, they do so well below average it looks VERY bad indeed.Nah, can't be the same MS, can it?

offwhiteazn5185d ago

seriously? msnbc reviews games? what a joke.

kratos1235185d ago (Edited 5185d ago )

lame lol msnbc this must be a joke

pangitkqb5185d ago

(and am even one of those few that actually likes Games For Windows Live) but I just can't help but think there is some bologna going on when a Microsoft site gives a Sony exclusive a score well below average. I mean, honestly? Imagine if Sony.com started reviewing games from the Halo and Gears of War series. Would they be as fair and open minded as they should? Ha!

My point is this:

Having Microsoft or Sony "review" each others products is the height of questionable journalism. It's like asking democrats and republicans to fairly rate each other, like asking the Black Panthers to judge a book written by white supremacists with an open mind; it doesn't work for obvious reasons.

Again, doesn't matter who (Sony, Microsoft, even Nintendo); direct competitors can't be counted on for fair and equitable judgement.

table5185d ago

In the past msnbc have been very fair with their reviews and have given good scores to ps3 games. What I'm saying is, don't cry bias at every review the doesn't give the game atleast a 9.

mastiffchild5185d ago

Thanks Mr Bun. I really didn't know that and find it hard to believe(that they have the barefaced front to review a rivals stellar game so badly)even now you told me! It'as one of the most disgraceful things I've ever heard about and whoever agreed t doing it needs to look really hard at why they work as a reporter/reviewer.

This is just the same as Qore reviewing (somehow!)Mass Effect 2 and giving it an 8/10. It's outrageous and doesn't paint either MS or our media in any kind of good light.Frankly, I'm speechless over this.

-Alpha5185d ago (Edited 5185d ago )

Why all of a sudden is a MS owned review site held questionable for a game that they gave an 8/10 to, just because it's a Sony exclusive? Where on earth were you people when they awarded so many high scores to so many other PS3 games? Uncharted 2, LBP, K2, etc? If msnbc is a joke then where were all the haters when they reviewed UC2? Where they credible then?

Some of you guys have such arrogant and elitist beliefs that if a game doesn't get a super high score the site has to be paid off or biased. God forbid God of War get a 8/10. The way people cry about reviews when it doesn't go their way is borderline juvenile. Please grow up. MSNBC is now a joke because it reviews games but when it gave Uncharted 2 its high score its "even MS can't deny how great PS3 games are!"

Some people love to question the integrity of a journalist only when they hurt an egotistical expectation or when it doesn't meet the hype people may falsely create themselves. You guys haven't played God of War. The reviewer is in a much better position than you. If you don't like the review, that is fine, one review is one man's opinion. But don't praise a site for reviewing a game high and then criticize it for reviewing it low and think that you are uncovering some media conspiracy. If there is such a big problem with the review then at least give some good reasons instead of childishly mocking the site's domain name. It's sad how people try to control the outlook of a game by bashing the media for saying something negative. I know how great God of War is and I actually like reading the problems people have with the game so that I can get a clearer, all around picture of a game. There's only so much "GoW graphics are so great and GoW is so epic" I can read from every single review, yet people love to read those reviews that fall in line with the hype.

People shouldn't be afraid to say something negative just because it goes against hype-- that would be the real crime against "gaming journalism"

Minimox165185d ago

Guys dont worry this site its not included in the list of website of metacritic.

http://www.metacritic.com/a...

devsgreat5185d ago

lol...=)...well not even the microsft guys cant resist to the god

Mr_Bun5185d ago (Edited 5185d ago )

As one of the youngest people on this site, I find it ironic that you would tell people to "Please grow up"

If you saw a Ford company reviewing a GM automobile, would you not at the very least question the motives?

A company that has direct ties to the main competitor of the PS3 gives an exclusive one of the lowest ratings, and we're all wrong for questioning it....How about using some common sense?

@Mastiff
I'm with you. How do you take a review seriously when it comes from the direct competitor...Again, I will say that 8 is still a very good score and so far that seems to be the lowest....says a lot about this game

N4Flamers5185d ago

I stopped reading right about there. I mean who gives a f**k what they have to say. I dont look to them for gaming reviews. I look to them for biased opinions about current events.

This is the equivalent of an MTV review, or a fox news review. I dont check the local paper for insight into the gaming culture. I just dont get why anyone would give a damn, especially when their review is so counter to the main stream reviewers score's.

Lifendz5185d ago

Written by Aaron Greenberg? Yeah, no conflict of interest here.

-Alpha5185d ago (Edited 5185d ago )

What does my age have to do with me telling people to "grow up"? I didn't say it in a literal sense. I said people are being juvenile in not minding when MSNBC gives a high score and then calling them out when they give a low score.

You missed my entire point. Where did I say that we shouldn't question MSNBC? I'm saying that we shouldn't question them ONLY when they give a low review. If MSNBC is questionable, where was this criticism when they were giving UC2's review? If they gave GoW 3 a 9/10 or 10/10 nobody would be having this conversation.

People cherry pick constantly the review sites that they like and don't like. That's what's "juvenile". What on earth does my age have to do with that?

How about YOU use some common sense and try not to use my personal information to make a straw man argument?

Mr_Bun5185d ago (Edited 5185d ago )

What does your YOUNG AGE have to do with telling people to GROW UP????....Only EVERYTHING...I feel like I am taking advantage of your ignorance.

It doesn't matter that an MS site gave a PS3 exclusive a "high score"....they shouldn't be reviewing ANY of Sony's exclusives. You would then have to question EVERY review...."Did they give it a high score because people are expecting it"..."Did they give it a low score because they are funded by the competition"

The fact that I had to explain this to you says a lot about you. Don't be so angry about your age...I had nothing to do with it (until DNA tests prove otherwise)

-Alpha5185d ago (Edited 5185d ago )

Oh Gee! Only Everything? What a CONVINCING sentence! /sarcasm

You do realize that I am not talking about physical age, right? Being juvenile doesn't mean you are of young age no more than being mature means you are "old"

And yes it does matter that a MS site gave a PS3 exclusive a high score because credibility doesn't matter when it does to people. Why then does it matter when it gives a game a lower score than expected? I'm not arguing about the website I am arguing that people are bashing the site based on an 8/10 score when they praise the same site when it gives a 9+/10 score. I never said we should be listening to msnbc in the first place, but people have no problem with their reviews when they score a game high. Again, if GoW 3 scores 9+ we wouldn't be having this conversation.

You are once again resorting to straw man since you are explaining something I never argued in the first place. You don't have to explain to me something that I never dedicated to defending.

lovestospoodge5185d ago (Edited 5185d ago )

jesus tap-dancing christ calm down you two. just a week from now u'l both be jizzing with delight from this masterpiece

Mr_Bun5185d ago

I get it...without reviews you have no way of copying opinions of others and posting them as if they were your own like you usually do.

Get over it. You were proven wrong, and no amount of over analyzing is going to cover it up. I'm done wasting my time with you....move along

ikkokucrisis5185d ago

This review is about as useful as one from Playstation Magazine!

sikbeta5185d ago (Edited 5185d ago )

Who gives a F*ck about this site reviewing this Game, GOW3 is Beast, nobody can't deny that and seriously after playing this Amazing Game, someone will really care about Reviews...

3sexty rulzzz5185d ago (Edited 5185d ago )

gave heavy rain a 9/10. you fyuckers just make me sick. you say sh!y just to please the person who have the same system as you, which is bs. none of you ever tell you true feelin about a game, even if it's on the competitors system. here's the link, so STFU already. click on this prick: http://entertainment.msn.co...

-Alpha5185d ago (Edited 5185d ago )

typical cowardly move. this isn't the first time you've chosen to run away while claiming you are right and I am wrong. How delusional. Go ahead and run, I understand that it's hard for you to make any form of relevant response or actually have a level headed argument ;)

Like always you twist the facts, resort to name calling like a 3 yr old, and make vague claims without ever having the decency to back them up. Your continuous use of ad hominens and straw man fallacies are incredibly entertaining and the irony of ragging on my age is rich coming from someone who resorts to such tactics.

Once again you are right because "my age means everything" and because you got it into your thick head that I make claims based on reviews when I was talking about how if sites should be blacklisted they should be blacklisted regardless of review. Is English your first language? I ask because you clearly are unable to comprehend what I'm saying. it's like i'm talking to a wall.

+ Show (20) more repliesLast reply 5185d ago
Mr_Luke5186d ago

what could you expect from MSNBC.... unless it's a joke

GiantEnemyCrab5185d ago

You know that's funny because nobody seemed to have a problem with them when they reviewed Heavy Rain with a 9 or gave Uncharted 2 almost a perfect score.

http://www.n4g.com/ps3/News...

All I see are kids who will freak out on anything that doesn't give them what they expect.

mastiffchild5185d ago

No GEC. If a company is tied to one of the competitors it just shouldn't review their games like this. I don't care how honest the last ones were and had I even thought about it before would have said exactly the same then as it's only a matter of time before this happens and you can't help but wonder why they allow it to happen-even if it's the reviewers honest opinion it looks REALLY bad.

I'd say the same if yuo were talking abot a Sony owned site opr whatever. It needs to stop as the temptation is always going to be there and so are the accusations whether merited or not. t's plainly the wrong position to be in and n amount of you trying to spin it to say "well no one minded when they gave decent scores before" matters. It's just the key to a can of worms that reflects really badly on gaming, games media and MS. So easily avoided too-you don't enter itno things where there's a massive conflict of interest like this as it's wholly unprofessional.

I'm not even suggesting the review HAS to be dishonest but it;'s always going to be painted that way whatever and MSNBC and MS themselves should know this and just stop the chance of it happening again in the future. It might even harm the career of a writer there or anything and as such isn't fair and certainly isn't needed. Being English I guess I never even considered what the letters represented before but had I done so my opinion would have been exactly the same as this scenario was always unavoidable, imo. I find it staggering that it's been allowed to happen as it's such an amateur hour mistake to put yourself in such a sticky position when there's no need to do it at all.

Needs to stop. It's that simple, otherwise it's just gonna happen again and again and looks crappy whether intended or not.

table5185d ago (Edited 5185d ago )

Does it really matter that much mastiffchild? Give the reader some credit in forming their own opinion on it... and by reader I mean normal people... and by normal people i mean people other than the fanboys on n4g.

huflungpu905186d ago

lol an 8 really this game should not recive anything under a 9.5 but hey this is a M$ review so whatever

ps3gogetitt5185d ago

You guys need to relax... its only one review..

This MS site give uncharted 2 a 10/10, what do you say about that... Its an MS site but a lot of their writers have independent minds...

2FootYard5185d ago

Didn't even know they reviewed games. Its a good score though and I don't think anybody should get their panties in a bundle about it, though I'm sure they will.

ELite_Ghost5185d ago

Idk if you realised, since ur a dumb bot but...

MSNBC plz tell me what MS means? Do you really think they'll give a good ps3 exclusive 10?

2FootYard5185d ago (Edited 5185d ago )

Lol, you stupid cunt. Spit out the God of War's penis please. When Halo Reach gets a few eights or even possibly lower your not going to see me whining about it.

sajj3165185d ago

One review I will ignore because of ownership concerns. Its like trusting FOX news to give a liberal view on politics!

Gimped Hardware5185d ago

I guess the 9/10 they gave Heavy Rain - a PS3 exclusive, isn't worth trusting then.

People and their conspiracy theories!

sajj3165185d ago

That is right, ownership concerns. If it was SNBC and Sony partly owned the news agency ... I would still have the same ownership concerns. Its why we have other websites and review agencies. The 'hope' is that there is no bias in the reviews. That is a 'hope'.

Show all comments (73)
70°

The Best Video Game Opening Levels In Gaming History

The Opening Levels that hooked gamers from the outset.

Read Full Story >>
wealthofgeeks.com
240°

Ranking Every God of War Game From Worst to Best

Cultured Vultures: Let’s delve into Kratos’ long and rampageous history and find out which games are worth the hype and which are better left buried under the weight of Kratos’s might.

Read Full Story >>
culturedvultures.com
JL2930194d ago

Both requels over 2 and 3? Clowns. Those are two of the most boring games I've ever played.

Snookies12194d ago

GoW 3 was amazing, but I personally hated just one thing. (This is on me alone, because I was dumb, lol.) I hated that you couldn't skip cutscenes on repeat playthroughs. I had to go back through the game a third time because I missed one trophy accidentally on my way to the platinum... The cutscenes were great the first go round, even the second... But the third was pretty agonizing.

Haven't played Ragnarok, but I still think GoW 4 is a wonderful game in its own right. Not sure how I would stack them up against each other honestly.

Monstieur194d ago (Edited 194d ago )

I don't consider the reboot part of the original series. The original series were high-skill games with combos and rewards for mixing things up.

solideagle193d ago

lol square, square and triangle is the only combo you needed. I have played all of them on the hardest difficulties...

Golfcoachh194d ago

Maybe I’m just old school but I just couldn’t get into the last two. Maybe it’s the slower action and more story telling but the original trilogy was by far my favorite.

Crows90194d ago

It's not that youre old school. They're different genres

JL2930193d ago (Edited 193d ago )

Me either, at all. It's just yap yap yap. They try to be a RPG's instead of being action games like they used to be.

Fluke_Skywalker194d ago

I'd put the two psp games over 3 in terms of story any day. But not over 2.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 193d ago
TheEnigma313194d ago (Edited 194d ago )

My favorite was part 2 and I think Ragnarok is better that 2018.

Shane Kim194d ago

The newer games are better imo.

ravens52194d ago

There is no worst. Except for Ascension, only cause I didn't play it lol. They are all masterpieces. 1,2,3, 2018 and Ragnarok. 1 of, if not the greatest video game franchise...besides MetalGear.

Snookies12194d ago

Oh wow, I actually forgot that Ascension even existed... I never played it either.

Crows90194d ago

I like ascension. It was different and some interesting combat additions.

darthv72194d ago

If you didnt play it, how could you call it the worst? Its not as bad as the media portrayed it. Honestly the worst are those flash games. they arent even considered true GoW games but in name only. At least Ascension is a real GoW game.

ravens52193d ago

Not saying it's a terrible game. Just mean it's at the bottom of my list. I played a little bit of it. Jus to me, compared to the other main games, it's last.

Fluke_Skywalker194d ago

Ascension is the only GOW game I never finished. Hated it.

Inverno194d ago

Can't agree, older games do so much more than the last two. More weapons, magic abilities, enemies are more varied, level design is also more aesthetically pleasing, and agree with those who say that they shouldn't have removed jumping. Was a time I'd agree, but those old games are so so much better, that they really should've looked into bringing into the reboot/sequels.

Crows90194d ago (Edited 194d ago )

If a game is good then a game is good. Doesn't matter what came before or what comes after.

Inverno194d ago

Of course it matters. If not for what what came before there wouldn't be an after. And if something is great before then you strive to make it just as good if not better, after. I personally don't think there's a fair way to judge the new with the old because the newer games are still essentially a reboot, and went a way different direction. But I still believe the old games did it better. I'm probably bias though since I've been going back to old games and have been finding that they lack all the annoying aspects that devs have shoehorned into new games to fluff out game time.

Crows90193d ago

@Inverno

Im not talking about the passage of time here. Im talking about individual pieces of software. If a game is good then it is good. Thats not a controversial statement. You can compare good with good...sure. But you still end up with good. Now if there is a bad game in the mix and you compare you do end up with some differentials between them...makes sense to compare and see where it went wrong.

But theyre different genres and styles which were individually executed very well.

And no. The new games are not a reboot. Theyre a new direction but simply a continuation.
Tomb raider was a reboot.

Inverno193d ago

The new games are definitely a reboot, and a continuation, it can be both which it is. And a good game might be good, but my point is that if there are things done better before it then there's plenty of room for critiquing and trying to make whatever comes after better rather than just good.

Show all comments (31)
170°

God of War 3 Remastered Has Sold 4 Million Copies To Date

God of War 3 Remaster has sold 4 million copies since its inception, making the franchise PlayStation's most profitable gamer merch brand.

purple101355d ago

Haha I still remember my brother playing the opening scene on ps3!!!

Yeh he had to put the controller down his heart was beating too fast trying to get past first 10 minutes. He said "it's too much". Best thing I've ever seen in gaming. Haha

robtion355d ago

A great game from an era before things went politically correct and gaming turned serious/'mature'.

It certainly wasn't concerned about upsetting or offending anyone and was more fun because of it.

The boss battles and set pieces still top most games released today.

SullysCigar355d ago

This game was absurdly good for it's time. The very definition of 'epic'.

robtion355d ago

Yes. The graphics were just ridiculous compared to most other games on the market at the time.

masterfox355d ago

I wished Ascension had the same treatment.

Heavenly King355d ago

Ascension SP had some things better than GOW3, and also some things worst than GOW3. But in general it was a really good game, for me it also deserves a REMASTER. The problem per se with the game is that most people were satisfied on how GOWIII ended, so Kratos got his revenge, so in order to rise the interest in the game how have to make it MORE EPIC is that the game did not had the epicness of fighting huge bosses (I guess due to technical difficulties,the game had actually a lot more colors (because the world is not dying like in GOWIII) so it is graphically more demanding that is my guess), but it compensated with having in general a more complex combat system, and an amazing soundtrack. but in general the game needed to be more epic than GOWIII somehow, and that did not happened, after GOWIII people had expectations through the roof. They should have waited and release it for PS4 so the vision of the game is not compromised.

My list of good and bad compared to GOWIII

GOOD: THE COMBAT
The combat was more elaborated, which allows you to be more immersed in the fights. Also every enemy was more resistant, even those that you could usually kill in 2-3 attacks in previous games. THE LAST BOSS is so damn epic!!!, but there is only one moment like this in the whole game.

GOOD: LESS QTEs
I love the fact that "cicle" in the new enemies (killing animations) are not QTEs, in Ascension they are mini-games on their own, depending on the enemy, making it more engaging. You had to dodge and hit when the window was open in order to eventually do the killing blow.

GOOD: The Soundtrack
it has the orginal trilogy musics, but with a new perspective since the game had a new composer. The ST was amazing also the new music written specifically for this game were badass

GOOD: The puzzles actually require you to think.

BAD: There are bad camera angles during the game, like zooming way too out of vista, and then swarming you with "light units" that like I said before had better AI and did not die of 2 attacks. those parts a few, but are a mess.

BAD: EMPTY ARENAS
Other thing that really annoyed me is that when you fight a sub-boss/heavy unit in a big arena; that ARENA WAS EMPTY, it was just you and against the medusa, or against the manticore. They should have zoom in into the action to avoid noticing the void scenario. I guess emptiness was because of the game having a lot more colors (because the world is not dying like in GOWIII) so it is graphically more demanding. My guess is that it was not possible technically, since in most of those cases you had huge vistas or intricate scenarios that needed to be rendered. The fact that the cerberus is smaller in this game disappointed me.

BAD: Only one BADASS EPIC moment, the others moments of the game were great but, they needed to set the bar even higher than GOWIII and they failed miserably.

BAD: The graphics did not improved much. I was GOWIII with more colors, and that's it.

So 4 good things against 4 bad ones. The problem is those 2 last BAD aspects are actually why the game was received so poorly. Everyone expects the next game to have a really BIG improvement in all aspects in contrast to the previous one, and that was not the case in ascension. And also GOW is the definition of EPIC, and that was not there neither. The jump on every aspect from GOWI to GOWII was huge being on the same console, and the jump from GOWII to GOWIII was humongous (obviously because a more powerful console). While the jump from GOWIII to Ascension is too little, and people expected more.

On it's own is a good game; but is not sufficient when GOWIII was released before it.

CrimsonWing69355d ago

I know this is unpopular opinion, but I prefer these over the new ones. I’m not saying the new ones are bad or anything, but they sort of get boring to me, whereas the older games were like non-stop roller coaster rides.

ChiefofLoliPolice355d ago

I love the new ones but I understand what you mean. The older ones had more action and was more arcady like.

MIDGETonSTILTS17355d ago

Ragnarok was not BIG at all… GoW1 had larger set pieces, and it was on ps2.

GoW 2018 had big moments in its own way…. Ragnarok abandoned these aspects though

robtion355d ago

I agree. It was just less serious and more fun.

victorMaje355d ago

One of my all time favourites.

Show all comments (16)