I don't know if you've ever heard of the game fl0w but i just saw the trailer and went "I uhhh what uh misflamoppershwcween" (you can understand i was pretty speechless at how unusually boring and well unusual it was) so i went on IGN to see what rating it got. A 7.6! For the love of roman noodles what were they smoking? They'll give Spider-Man 3 a 6.0, Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End a 5.2 (or whatever), etc. (a mediocore score) but you'll give some game where all you do is eat stuff to grow a freaking 7.6 (you're an amoeba or some kind of wormy jellyfish :|) and yes believe that's all you do. IGN has got their heads so far up their [wagon] it's not even funny (this goes for all the other poor rating sites).

I don't know if you've ever heard of the game fl0w but i just saw the trailer and went "I uhhh what uh misflamoppershwcween" (you can understand i was pretty speechless at how unusually boring and well unusual it was) so i went on IGN to see what rating it got. A 7.6! For the love of roman noodles what were they smoking? They'll give Spider-Man 3 a 6.0, Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End a 5.2 (or whatever), etc. (a mediocore score) but you'll give some game where all you do is eat stuff to grow a freaking 7.6 (you're an amoeba or some kind of wormy jellyfish :|) and yes believe that's all you do. IGN has got their heads so far up their [wagon] it's not even funny (this goes for all the other poor rating sites).

 

 

 

Just because all you do is "eat stuff" does not mean the game is bad. There are a lot more to ratings than gameplay. What about graphics, Sound, Presentation, or how well the game was designed?

 

 

 

Seriously, it's like your smoking something because of your obviously a movie video game fanboy. First a thread saying they get a bad rap then a whole thread saying how your beloved movie games got lower scores.

I thought it was pretty fun.

On G4, X play gave it a 4 out of 5 and anyway i thought it was kinda fun. I mean it may look stupid at first but it is really good. Anyway dont trust IGN...the people on there are just normal people giving there opinions, not professional game reviewers.

Yeah, alot of people have been saying it was fun so what am i to say? :|

I don't know if you've ever heard of the game fl0w but i just saw the trailer and went "I uhhh what uh misflamoppershwcween" (you can understand i was pretty speechless at how unusually boring and well unusual it was) so i went on IGN to see what rating it got. A 7.6! For the love of roman noodles what were they smoking? They'll give Spider-Man 3 a 6.0, Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End a 5.2 (or whatever), etc. (a mediocore score) but you'll give some game where all you do is eat stuff to grow a freaking 7.6 (you're an amoeba or some kind of wormy jellyfish :|) and yes believe that's all you do. IGN has got their heads so far up their [wagon] it's not even funny (this goes for all the other poor rating sites).

 

 

 

Just because all you do is "eat stuff" does not mean the game is bad. There are a lot more to ratings than gameplay. What about graphics, Sound, Presentation, or how well the game was designed?

 

 

 

Seriously, it's like your smoking something because of your obviously a movie video game fanboy. First a thread saying they get a bad rap then a whole thread saying how your beloved movie games got lower scores.

 

 

 

Ok dude calm down. The whole bad rap thread was just giving my OPINIONS on movie-based games.

 

 

 

I just saw the trailer and it looked a little bland.

 

 

 

EDIT: Look at all the other people posting, they're not flaming me but their just saying it was a decent game. Next time do the same.

Have you even played the game?

 

 

 

Just because the game isn't "omg look at those graphics" doesn't mean it's a bad game.

Have you even played the game?

 

 

 

Just because the game isn't "omg look at those graphics" doesn't mean it's a bad game.

 

 

 

Exactly. I've never heard of the game though. Just wanted to look because of the title.

 

 

 

Change the title. It's misleading.

I don't know if you've ever heard of the game fl0w but i just saw the trailer and went "I uhhh what uh misflamoppershwcween" (you can understand i was pretty speechless at how unusually boring and well unusual it was) so i went on IGN to see what rating it got. A 7.6! For the love of roman noodles what were they smoking? They'll give Spider-Man 3 a 6.0, Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End a 5.2 (or whatever), etc. (a mediocore score) but you'll give some game where all you do is eat stuff to grow a freaking 7.6 (you're an amoeba or some kind of wormy jellyfish :|) and yes believe that's all you do. IGN has got their heads so far up their [wagon] it's not even funny (this goes for all the other poor rating sites).

 

 

 

Just because all you do is "eat stuff" does not mean the game is bad. There are a lot more to ratings than gameplay. What about graphics, Sound, Presentation, or how well the game was designed?

 

 

 

Seriously, it's like your smoking something because of your obviously a movie video game fanboy. First a thread saying they get a bad rap then a whole thread saying how your beloved movie games got lower scores.

 

 

 

Yes, there is more to a game than how it looks.

 

 

 

If a game is rubbish, cant it still get a good rating if it has good graphics etc?

what are you talking about that game looks great! i'd get it if it were on the 360

what are you talking about that game looks great! i'd get it if it were on the 360

 

 

 

Well then maybe i was wrong. My bad. :shock:

IGN is not the site i would use. Go to:

 

 

 

http://www.G4tv.com

 

 

 

Click on the xplay link and then on the reviews and type in the name of your game. I trust them more than any other reviewers.

IGN is not the site i would use. Go to:

 

 

 

http://www.G4tv.com

 

 

 

Click on the xplay link and then on the reviews and type in the name of your game. I trust them more than any other reviewers.

 

 

 

K thanks i'll start goin there.

One factor is uniqueness, what makes a PoTC: At world's end video game unique? Nothing. Lord of the rings for gamecube/ps2? Just another hack and slash.

 

 

 

I wouldn't discredit IGN just based on 1 'funny' review, sure fl0w is a cheap flash game and 7.6 is pretty much just a dumb rating, but IGN has very reliable other reviews, background info etc...

 

 

 

People want 'funny' stuff even if it isn't high quality, just for the sake of novelty. :) And after all, fl0w costs like what... $8? It's like one of those 3mb games on Steam, something to take a bit 'less seriously' (not that you should take games very seriously anyways, haha)

Have you played the game?

Have you played the game?

 

 

 

Yes........no.

 

 

 

But i already said i'm wrong and i overreacted.

fl0w looks amazing but your right all you do is eat.

ive never heard of fl0w but arguing against large media ratings can not lead to anything good. Im sure you could find plenty of great games that got crappy scores, or vice versa. Its all about opinion, and people don't always agree with the general public. thats what makes us different. If i said i hated Halo (i don't but just as an example), thousands of people would flame me and try to change me. but honestly, being hated isn't going to change the games i like. If i said i loved shadow the hedgehog (i hated it but thats beside the point) there are still thousands of die hard sonic fans that would flame me. no matter what your oppinion is, someone will always disagree. sometimes, more disagree with you than in other circumstances, but thats life. get used to it.

 

 

 

wow that was a long rant about nothing :XD:

and all you do in Halo is shoot stuff, and its one of the most popular games out there (I'm not just saying that because I am not a halo fan myself)...

fl0w looks amazing but your right all you do is eat.

 

 

 

Thats basically answered the thread, its amazing (apparently), and all you do is eat :-w

It's a fancy version of snake

 

 

 

and it's waaaaaay overhyped. It is a flash game

 

 

 

IGN rated Heavenly Sword for the PS3 7.0 in comparison

I don't know if you've ever heard of the game fl0w but i just saw the trailer and went "I uhhh what uh misflamoppershwcween" (you can understand i was pretty speechless at how unusually boring and well unusual it was) so i went on IGN to see what rating it got. A 7.6! For the love of roman noodles what were they smoking? They'll give Spider-Man 3 a 6.0, Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End a 5.2 (or whatever), etc. (a mediocore score) but you'll give some game where all you do is eat stuff to grow a freaking 7.6 (you're an amoeba or some kind of wormy jellyfish :|) and yes believe that's all you do. IGN has got their heads so far up their [wagon] it's not even funny (this goes for all the other poor rating sites).

 

 

 

Many things go into rating games. Graphics, sound, playability, concept, etc. etc.

 

 

 

If you're going to trash a game, at least know your stuff. :notalk: