It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
It's definitely underrated. It's not a good game, but it's definitely better than newest MOH. I would give this game 6/10. 7/10 if you play in coop.

If there would be more horror and better AI, then I bet it would get 8/10 on Eurogamer.
yeah i agree. im another that likes it, enjoy playing it but definitely can see all the faults and would have liked it to be better. but im a HUGE Aliens fan, just not a stubborn one :p im finding my own ways to enjoy it.

the demo vs final comparison is quite strange.. makes you wonder when that demo was actually created.

im not far into it but one thing i heard someone post elsewhere regarding the story, something i actually like about the game, is that the story is indeed pretty good, its just the way its told/acted out that isnt doing it justice.

that, plus im not liking having to fight human forces so often.

give me a re-vamped version of AvP from 1999's Marine Campaign, expand it more, running on CryEngine, and charge me whatever you want for it :)
avatar
Wraith: ...
avatar
StingingVelvet: Reviewers tend to pick games they are allowed to really tear apart, for some reason. Medal of Honor Warfighter was another, torn apart for things Call of Duty does every year but still gets awards for. I don't really know why this stuff happens, I don't think it is bribery I think it's all socially driven, reviewers swapping stories and grudges and whatnot. Who knows, really.
It's this: Almost everyone knows that reviews often are too positive, there's a constant discussion whether "professional" gaming reviews are even trustworthy at all. Therefore, game reviewers are constantly under pressure not only from the publishers (who want positive reviews), but also from their readers (who demand a professional level of criticism). This conflict is very hard to solve when your whole business depends on ads from the publishers. The easiest way out is to give a very bad rating, every once in a while, to a game that might indeed be bad, and that's either not backed up by a major publisher, or that's slammed so universally that the publisher can't really complain about your specific review.

This happens regularly. When a game is an easy target, many reviewers go into dogpile mode. Which makes the game an even easier target for others. And so on.

The game may still be bad though - it certainly doesn't look good.

Elemental: War of Magic is another example. Yes, it was bad, but it also suffered from the fact that it wasn't backed up by a major publisher, so it was an easy target for reviewers who want to "prove" that they can indeed be critical.
avatar
Cormoran: poor poor extremely angry Joe.
avatar
F4LL0UT: TET should cheer him up with free GOGs again.
Oh?
Again?
avatar
StingingVelvet: Reviewers tend to pick games they are allowed to really tear apart, for some reason. Medal of Honor Warfighter was another, torn apart for things Call of Duty does every year but still gets awards for. I don't really know why this stuff happens, I don't think it is bribery I think it's all socially driven, reviewers swapping stories and grudges and whatnot. Who knows, really.
avatar
Psyringe: It's this: Almost everyone knows that reviews often are too positive, there's a constant discussion whether "professional" gaming reviews are even trustworthy at all. Therefore, game reviewers are constantly under pressure not only from the publishers (who want positive reviews), but also from their readers (who demand a professional level of criticism). This conflict is very hard to solve when your whole business depends on ads from the publishers. The easiest way out is to give a very bad rating, every once in a while, to a game that might indeed be bad, and that's either not backed up by a major publisher, or that's slammed so universally that the publisher can't really complain about your specific review.

This happens regularly. When a game is an easy target, many reviewers go into dogpile mode. Which makes the game an even easier target for others. And so on.

The game may still be bad though - it certainly doesn't look good.

Elemental: War of Magic is another example. Yes, it was bad, but it also suffered from the fact that it wasn't backed up by a major publisher, so it was an easy target for reviewers who want to "prove" that they can indeed be critical.
This is one of those instances where the outrage is more than warranted. Considering development time and the end product, this should go down in gaming history as one of the colossal fuck-ups of epic proportions. What's even more sad is the level of dishonesty Pitchford was using to pitch the game.
I was aware of the development issues but was honestly expecting at least the quality of AVP 2010 with some co-op. I was sadly mistaken. My wife thinks we should send this coffee mug to Pitchford.
Post edited February 17, 2013 by HampsterStyle
avatar
Wraith: As a fan of the game, I would just like to point out that many people passing judgement on it are people who have not played it themselves and are relying on reviewers and their critical scores.
Several of my friends who bought this, who are also huge fans of the movies, were hugely let down by this game. So while I may not have played it myself yet (canceled my pre-order plans due to the last minute season pass), I do trust their opinion of the game as I can see that they did play it for some time on Steam.

But I am indeed looking forward to eventually experiencing this for myself when it's cheap enough.
avatar
F4LL0UT: TET should cheer him up with free GOGs again.
?
avatar
StingingVelvet: Reviewers tend to pick games they are allowed to really tear apart, for some reason. Medal of Honor Warfighter was another, torn apart for things Call of Duty does every year but still gets awards for. I don't really know why this stuff happens, I don't think it is bribery I think it's all socially driven, reviewers swapping stories and grudges and whatnot. Who knows, really.
Or maybe it's just because they actually really consider that it's a bad game.

MoH Warfighter wasn't torn apart by reviewers/gamers for doing stuff that CoD gets away with every years, it was torn apart because it was doing them badly.

IMHO it's a little too easy to dismiss negative/positive reviews as being biased/"peer pressure"'ed just because there seems to be a consensus among reviewers; It's is the review's equivalent of saying "it's popular therefore it sucks". What's important in reviews is not whenever or not they are "following the trend" of other reviewers but more the "arguments" the reviewer use to justify its position.
Post edited February 17, 2013 by Gersen
avatar
orcishgamer: Interesting editorial on why most Alien themed games are probably going to be shit: http://www.penny-arcade.com/report/editorial-article/colonial-marines-failure-why-it-may-be-impossible-to-recreate-james-cameron

There's still no excuse for this appalling spectacle, but whatever. I suppose I'll be able to get it for 5 bucks in about 8 weeks and confirm for myself that it sucks, perhaps enough liquor will make the confirmation process entertaining regardless.
avatar
FAButzke: Remember our little discussion on this subject a while back?
If you want to blame something for the decline in pre-orders and day 1 purchases (which IS NOT nearly as low as you thought) blame this kind of release. People pre-ordering and getting this level of quality makes them do exactly what you described above: Wait for a sale. (That's what I will do as well as far as this game is concerned. I will pre-order Heart of Swarm, though ;) )

You can also blame this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mf5Uj4XIT1Y
I didn't pre-order this though I was fairly optimistic about its release. I agree getting burnt like this will put people off pre-ordering at least for awhile. I pre-order quite a bit and can keep the ratio down to one stinker out of 5, in general. In fact my stinker of 2012 is something most people liked: Dishonored.
Am i wrong or online CD key stores are trying to get rid of their Steam keys of the game as soon as possible ?
Post edited February 17, 2013 by ne_zavarj
avatar
F4LL0UT: TET should cheer him up with free GOGs again.
avatar
ne_zavarj: ?
Joe was at the CDP headquarters some time ago and paid also a visit to GOG on that occasion:
http://angryjoeshow.com/2012/05/gog-com-interview-free-game-giveaway/
Post edited February 17, 2013 by F4LL0UT
avatar
KneeTheCap: Okay, why isn't it a 9 out of 10? Reviews are opinions, no? How is a review that states a game is 9/10 worse than one stating the game is poor 3/10?

Two opinions, both are correct.
My review of Aliens: Colonial Marines

I hate FPS, this should have been a platformer.
0/100

Good thing all reviews are created equal huh? Mine is just as good as any other review out there.


avatar
granny: 1) If the information upon which an opinion is based is incomplete or inaccurate, then the opinion can be disregarded. Despite popular belief, an opinion can be wrong.
I'd argue it's not that the opinion is wrong, but that it is based on wrong information. More like the guy is giving a correct opinion, but of some fictional thing based on the actual thing he is suppose to have an opinion of.
Post edited February 17, 2013 by Immoli
Thanks .

100 game codes ? Nice .
Post edited February 17, 2013 by ne_zavarj
avatar
ne_zavarj: Thanks .

100 game codes ? Nice .
Screw the codes. What counts is seeing the two most charismatic men of the interwebs on screen at once. :D
I feel like with games reviews will happen the same thing that happened to movie reviews. They will become an obscure thing that nobody cares about.
Post edited February 17, 2013 by Aver