Be Excellent To Each Other

Infamous is an open-world game in which you have electrical powa's.

See this (hnngn) IGN video review for more:

http://uk.ps3.ign.com/dor/objects/80020 ... vgdrbs08hf

Demo was pretty good, though being shot by enemies you can't see is annoying.

is the demo available in the UK yet? I thought it was a short lived Japanese demo?

A website was giving away codes a week or so ago. I nabbed a share of one.

The demo's out for everyone on Thursday, I believe.

ta, looks good in the video, so I'm looking forward to it.

Hopefully the demo that gets general release will be the same demo I played, because it was very generous (four missions, an hour or so of play) and the game's really, really annoying at first until you get used to it. I enjoyed my second play through a lot more than the first.

I didn't realise this was a PS3 exclusive! Glad I've got one, then.

Eurogamer 7/10. Apparently the middle third of the game is tedious and annoying corridor fights, with some tedious and annoying escort missions for variety.

Bloody Eurogamer. In the first sentence he mentions a game called "Prototype" which I've never heard of, without even linking to its gamepage/a preview or review. What, are we supposed to just know everything? LAZY.

To be honest, I'm still getting it. Eurogamer's 7/10 reviews are no use to anyone. Does that mean it's shit or it's good? Fuck knows, I never agree with their scoring anyway.

You've really not heard of Prototype? Blimey.

It's another open-world superhero game due out soon, but it's over-the-top action by the guys that did the sorely-underrated Hulk: Ultimate Destruction.

Yeah I realised what it was after a quick search, but I couldn't remember it from the incredibly uninspired name.

Pretty much, yes.

I'm prepared to hate the protect stuff missions though.

7/10 is meant to be above average. I'm sure that Eurogamer treat it as so.

Jonny, you've become used to 7/10 being average in most publications.

Eurogamer are entirely inconsistent is the problem, rather than '7 is crap', the scores mean nothing.

You could always, I dunno, read the text of the review.

Na, I haven't! Eurogamer VERY rarely drop below a 7, and pretty much treat it as an average score, despite what their guide says. Also, they're inconsistent as absolute fuck.

Edit: The very fact that you and I have different interpretations of a Eurogamer 7 pretty much proves it. Their scores are worthless, and half of their review text is usually padded with unnecessary crap, with the first page of a two/three page review usually littered with a big monologue of bollocks, without even mentioning what the game is like to play for more than a paragraph in the middle. I'm all for entertaining reviews with jokes and interesting anecdotes, but not at the expense of actually reviewing the game. They write generally about the game, throw in some ego-boosting personal rubbish and tack a score on the end. Usually.

These are the important games that could be hit or miss, and detail is required to let gamers decide whether or not to buy it. If a game is obviously complete dogshit or an absolutely awesome must, detail isn't required so much and a reviewer can loosen it up and let his/her personality shine through (see Amiga Power concept reviews, Rev Stu's more amusing game-slating reviews), but not with a game that could potentially be good or bad dependent on the type of gamer looking at buying it.

I'd like to add that the inFamous review doesn't generally follow this pattern, and in fact Bramwell very rarely does. He doesn't seem to be as self-indulgent as their freelancers, but that's probably because he's the site editor and already has enough ego massaging tokens.

You should do a review site yourself, or something. Make it s-*dies*

I do, hence the comment on being prepared to hate the protecting missions.

Anything from a 7 to a 10 has pretty much the same value as far as I can tell. This shouldn't be the case.

Didn't Eurogamer famously give Sensible Soocer 2006 a whopping 9 out of 10?

Yes they did.

I like to think it was a case of "They say the bugs will be fixed by release and without the bugs it'd be worth 9/10" rather than "Here's a big bag of money", but neither option paints them in a very good light.

Is it just me or are you ridiculously fragile in this?

By the time I've figured out where I'm being shot from, I'm already dead.

I found it got easier in time. That was partly because on replays I knew where the enemies would be and partly because you get better at spotting them. It's my main problem with the game, though, being killed before you can work out who's shooting you.

Well, I don't know what Eurogamer were blathering about. I've nearly completed my first playthrough, and saw no real dip in mission quality.

It's good. Climbing & gliding round cities = good fun.

Does anyone not want their Uncharted 2 multiplayer beta code?

As far as I'm aware, I didn't get one.

Finished the game. I have to say nothing in the plot surprised me, entertaining enough though. On that play, still have 125 odd shards to get, but it should be easier than Crackdowns orbs. Won't need to resort to a map.

Recommended if you have a PS3.

Grim... got one and has very kindly donated it to me! Thanks, Grim...