And the award for first negative review of Uncharted 3 goes to....

[Groo The Perverted]

NOTE: Mods please change the word in the title "Aware" to "Award". Thank you.

Scott Jones from the AV club who gave Uncharted 3 a "5/10" ratings. Apparently on another site he gave it 6.5 so... I dunno. The below was written in the U3 forums on Amazon. Not sure why I've spent so much time over there lately.

Anyway...this sounds like trolling review, but the bad thing is his review is counting against the game. It's not like some random blogger (like me) gave it a review and it doesn't affect anything.

So he's got a video review coming up...that oughta be interesting.

so the av club gave uncharted 3 a 5/10.
One bad review, metacritic is still 93, who cares.

Except they gave gears 3 a 10, and their major complaint about uncharted 3 is that the controls are archaic.....

After I saw this shill review, I did a bit more digging, and found something that wasn't cool. At all.

The av club reviewer is Scott Jones. He's a "gaming journalist" *eyeroll* who runs a weekly show in Canada called "Reviews on the run". This guy has proclaimed himself as a avid 360 gamer who says his ps3 serves as nothing more than a blu-ray player.

Not only has this guy given Uncharted 3 a bad 5/10 score through the A.V club, he turned around and scored it with a 6.5 through another website (reviewsontherun)which is completely unfair and uncalled for. For a person to go out of his way to make 2 negative reviews from two different gaming websites is simply trolling. Point blank. Him and Victor lucas are going to dedicate an entire segment on naughty dogs uncharted 3 on tuesday on their Reviews on the Run show possibly filled with "overhyped" "dissapointing" and "don't buy it!!" ramblings which is what they do for games they don't enjoy.

http://twitter.com/#!/ScottCJones

EDIT: I don't want this guy getting more hits than he'll already get, so here's the review posted. He grades it a "C"

[Show spoiler]

UNCHARTED 3: RATING: C

NOTE: He clicked that he DID play it.

Gamers are a story-starved lot. Case in point: the success of 2009’s Uncharted 2: Among Thieves. Its zippy storyline and witty, conflicted characters proved potent enough to make gamers forgive what were, even then, outdated gameplay mechanics.

In Uncharted 3: Drake’s Deception, the story still zips and characters are still conflicted, but targeting is as twitchy as ever, bad guys still require three or four shotgun blasts to the head before they’re deterred, and the game’s star, Nathan Drake, still has no clue whatsoever about how to crouch. Two years after Thieves, Uncharted’s gameplay mechanics and conventions are no longer dated; they’re borderline archaic.

Drake and sidekick Victor Sullivan cross deserts, seas, and continents in search of “the Atlantis of the desert.” The game’s dialogue, written by series writer Amy Hennig, is often funny and poignant. In one cutscene, Drake and an ex discuss their failed marriage; a running joke involves Sullivan saying things which sound dirty out of context. Yet the narrative beats are more familiar this time. Tombs are plundered, treasures are discovered, and moments later, villains arrive as usual to claim said treasures. Impressive setpieces punctuate the game—most memorably, Drake must escape from a sinking ocean liner. Yet these moments somehow always feel shoehorned into the experience, as if developer Naughty Dog concocted them in advance, then built the rest of the game around them.

Much would be forgiven if the gameplay weren’t so woefully faulty. Creeping up on a goon for a stealth kill can result in Drake inadvertently performing a somersault—ta-dah!—into the goon’s backside. Drake moves like a staggering stew-bum, and as a result, cheap, undeserved deaths abound. The fuzzy mechanics also hamper the game’s superfluous multiplayer, which gamers will likely flock to for a few nights before returning to the more reliable confines of Black Ops and Halo.

Uncharted 3 shows more people and more places, but tells players less. Gamers felt like they knew Nathan Drake at the end of Uncharted 2, at least a little. But by the closing moments of Uncharted 3, after spending 12 or so hours in his shoes, players somehow wind up knowing even less about him than they did at the game’s beginning.

[ariakon]

I knew this would happen. Some people's fanboy allegiance is shockingly juvenile. Looks like this reviewer is trying to single-handedly affect the game's metascore and, therefore, affect its sales.

[Groo The Perverted]

Originally Posted by ariakon

I knew this would happen. Some people's fanboy allegiance is shockingly juvenile. Looks like this reviewer is trying to single-handedly affect the game's metascore and, therefore, affect its sales.

See I don't understand when people take that stuff to this level. I mean I admit that I'm a PS3 guy. Never really messed with Xbox except for maybe a couple weeks when I had a regular Xbox. I got rid of it because for whatever reason the games all seemed to be much harder on the Xbox although I'm sure that makes no sense. lol.

But even I can acknowledge that there are some amazing games that are 360 exclusives, and I actually have contemplated getting a 360 just so I can play Alan Wake.

Others, not that much. PS3 is "just a bluray player" lol.

[ariakon]

The most annoying thing is that the site, otherwise, gives out nothing but Bs and As. Ratchet & Clank- All 4 One got a B plus from a different reviewer on the site. I like that game, but Uncharted 3 a C and it a B plus? Nah. Not even in the slightest.

[Ernest Rister]

I thought it was a well-written review. Few things under the sun are liked and appreciated by everyone, and even fewer liked and appreciated for the same reasons.

From where I sit, yes, Uncharted 2 did have some control issues, but that's because there are so many different actions your character is able to perform, it becomes a bit messy trying to keep up with them all. Playing it once, some of the moves are difficult, but I imagine, like most games, this improves the more one plays it.

The big difference between Uncharted 2 and other games is that the environments and graphics are so amazing, and the action so intense, that you don't really care if the controls are challenging. You're having too much fun to really be bothered.

[Terjyn]

I thought the guy was entitled to his opinion until I read his responses to commentary.

He immediately drops into grammar attacks, calls the people writing criticism against him "fanboys", and even falls back on the "People who like Uncharted are what's wrong with the video game industry".

Uhhh...yah. Ok guy.

[cathexist]

"these moments somehow always feel shoehorned into the experience, as if developer Naughty Dog concocted them in advance, then built the rest of the game around them."

If he read anything about the game, he'd know that's exactly what they did.

I'm not sure archaic controls is a reason to give a 5/10...and it is a little fishy that he would post a 6.5 elsewhere, but everyone's entitled to their opinion.

I thoroughly enjoyed UC2 (though I was replaying the train level last night and got pissed off at the boss killing me via melee) and I'm really looking forward to getting UC3 today...but to each his own.

I think the Uncharted series is one of the best in the business. I think they're raising the bar for a lot of games. I can't even play a lot of these new FPS games because the experience looks and feels like crap after an Uncharted game (even the first one). It may not be the BEST storytelling, but it's engaging and enjoyable...with a likeable character that you actually care about.

[ariakon]

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

I thought it was a well-written review. Few things under the sun are liked and appreciated by everyone, and even fewer liked and appreciated for the same reasons.

From where I sit, yes, Uncharted 2 did have some control issues, but that's because there are so many different actions your character is able to perform, it becomes a bit messy trying to keep up with them all. Playing it once, some of the moves are difficult, but I imagine, like most games, this improves the more one plays it.

The big difference between Uncharted 2 and other games is that the environments and graphics are so amazing, and the action so intense, that you don't really care if the controls are challenging. You're having too much fun to really be bothered.

Really? There's a difference between having a few issues with a game and giving it a 5 out of ten. A 5 is a game like Duke Nukem Forever, or Cursed Crusade. And the review was hideous, sparse and spartan.

[Ernest Rister]

"these moments somehow always feel shoehorned into the experience, as if developer Naughty Dog concocted them in advance, then built the rest of the game around them."

If he read anything about the game, he'd know that's exactly what they did.

Worked for Alfred Hitchcock.

[AikonEnt]

This why pretty much all review sites can't be trusted, and shouldn't be. The Uncharted games might not be for everybody, but to give it just 5/10 is definitely trolling and making a clear attempt to lower the average score. What would be the odds of him giving this game a 10/10 if it had been on the 360? I'd say it would be pretty much guaranteed unfortunately.

So from fanboys deliberately giving a low score when it's not on their system of choice, to ridiculous 10/10 for overhyped rubbish (Hello GTAIV, ), my only advice can be to stay away from reviews altogether.

On a side note, the Official UK Playstation mag gave it 10/10, that's a review you should take notice of

[ariakon]

That's why Metacritic needs a "cream of the crop" type sidebar where only the very most respected sites are referenced. Fanboys have, unfortunately, learned how to game the current system. I am a ps3 guy, generally, but I own every system and know well that every system has games that, on sheer technical merit alone, deserve at least an 8 out of 10. Gears 3 isn't my favorite game, but I don't let favoritism get in the way of recognizing that others will think it wonderful. That's the trouble with fanboys in general, not every is a "masterpiece" or "sucks." Even if you don't personally enjoy the Godfather, you can't just say it sucks and slap a bad grade on it. Games and movies receive critical acclaim for a reason, and this reviewer clearly let his own bias overtake his professionalism.

[cathexist]

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

Worked for Alfred Hitchcock.

I wasn't saying it doesn't work, but the reviewing is acting like that's a surprise when Naughty Dog has specifically said they've picked out big action moments and then built a lot of the story around that.

Like the train in UC2 and then the cruise ship and cargo plane for UC3.

[Terjyn]

The one thing he said I _really_ disagree with is that Uncharted 3 is bad because it "forces you to play a certain way".

I'd love to see a game that doesn't.

FPS: I'd love to be a pacifist, but unfortunately I can't.

Stealth: I'd love to go in guns blazing, but for some reason that doesn't work.

Sports: Oh man, my full court heaves of the basketball never seem to go in, this game sucks.

Music/Dance: Sure I suppose you can ignore what's coming at you, but you aren't exactly going to do well.

etc. etc. etc.

[Groo The Perverted]

Originally Posted by ariakon

Even if you don't personally enjoy the Godfather, you can't just say it sucks and slap a bad grade on it.

[Ernest Rister]

Originally Posted by cathexist

I wasn't saying it doesn't work.

I know. I was agreeing with you. Hitchcock did the same thing, i.e. coming up with action set pieces and then creating a plot around them (North by NorthWest being the most famous example). Happens all the time.

[ariakon]

Generally, that's how the writing process works. You have a striking idea (a scene, an image or a character) that is incredibly strong, and then you slowly unravel the thread surrounding that concept. Stephen King calls it "unearthing the fossil," and it's certainly how I started the novel I'm working on. (Please God it gets published!)

[CasualKiller]

I don't care what reviews say about games, I make my own opinions. To me, the first was fantastic, the second was okay at best. I won't be buying the third. The Resistance and Battlefield franchises had the same impression on me, a gradual down hill experience.

[Bageara]

I haven't read the review but isn't this just what always happens with high profile games? A no-name site slaps a shockingly low review score in so it gets millions hits and reaches 1000 degrees on N4G with 250+ with comments in half an hour , half of which is one set of fanboys slating the game and the other set of fanboys defending

[Hayabusa85]

He doesn't come across as anti-Sony on ROTR. G4 Canada are not as bad for that as the American version since the Canadian channel isn't owned by Microsoft.

http://www.reviewsontherun.com/game/17683/

He gave Uncharted 2 a 9.5 and brings up Uncharted 2 in this review so just seems like he is letdown by 3 to me and anybody that watches ROTR knows he can be a little grumpy at times which can lead to some harsh scores He wasn't all that positive about Arkham City for that reason too recently. But he has also recently gave good scores to Sony exclusives like a perfect 10 for the Ico/SOTC Collection. Also pretty sure he took a shot at GOW3 the other day when I was watching.

The score difference between ROTR and AV Club is just different scoring setups.

[Blu Ian]

Who cares what one person says.

Uncharted 3 is still a masterpiece.