Hollow_Ninja
Member
Eelcire said:
That'd be the review from Kombo bringing down the PS3 score. Conversely, ZTGameDomain helped bring up the average 360 score. Wonder why those two reviews are separated as they are?
Yeah, that's what I figured. You'd think the PS3 version being DD-only would have increased the score, since the standards are lower. But that Kombo review was horrible, it was simply whining about the fact that the game was a JRPG. I liked the RPGfan review though. It was right on the spot with the way I feel.
Quig
Member
Playstation the official magazine gave Agarest a solid 3 out of 5 and even mentioned the lower price. The also said that they cannot blame Aksys' marketing scheme for the game that is 90% tactical, 9% story, and 1% of the cheesecake stuff. All-in-all they did not have anything tbad to say.
What I want to know is what are the requirements for getting a job in marketing with Aksys?
Woa, gamespot gave it a 7.0 O-o http://www.gamespot.com/xbox360/strategy/agarestsenkirapierlance/review.html?tag=gumballs;title;3 actually i never expected it, considering most of their reviews always have low score if the battles are too hard or whatever, like monster hunter, or etc.
Anyway go agarest!
DJ Daishi
Member
masuto said:
Game Informer? I personally hate them because they hate Japanese games.
they gave BlazBlue a 7.75 (head explodes)
Hollow_Ninja
Member
WildArms said:
Woa, gamespot gave it a 7.0 O-o http://www.gamespot.com/xbox360/strategy/agarestsenkirapierlance/review.html?tag=gumballs;title;3 actually i never expected it, considering most of their reviews always have low score if the battles are too hard or whatever, like monster hunter, or etc.
Anyway go agarest!
They went with the safe number. 4 point scale, of course, we all know there's nothing under 7 except Wii shovelware.
That was a comment on reviwers, BTW, not a comment on Agarest.
That said, the review was quite fair and very accurate.
You must log in to post.
