| Mail |
You might also like: WoW.com, Massively, and more

Reader Comments (5)

Posted: Apr 2nd 2007 3:22PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
all you do is shit on the game, but it still gets a passing grade? Heart in the right place or not, all you say is that it's a bad game. It should get a 2 or 3 at best, especially if it's not fun, rips off old mechanics, and has little to no replay value (something that is embedded in anything calling itself a puzzle game).
Reply

Posted: Apr 2nd 2007 3:47PM Dave Hinkle said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Ry C,

You misread the review. See, the game is fundamentally sound and certainly playable, it's the ease of using the combo system that causes it to get a 6.5. If I were to give it a 2 or 3, as you say, the game would have to be riddled with bugs or some such and lack any kind of gameplay mode that is worth investing time in.

Also, I think you misjudge the grading scale, as well. See, a 5 would be average, correct? A 10 would be so perfect it makes your jaw hit the floor, right? Well, what is a 6.5? It's a little above average, just under "good" (that would be 7). I stand by my review score for the game and thank you for your input Ry C!

Thanks for reading!
Dave
Reply

Posted: Apr 2nd 2007 4:48PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
You should come up with a less objective method of reaching a final score (even if it begins with objective scoring [ie. break it into sections])

I've played this game for a few hours and found it to be quite crap. As you've mentioned, it's far too easy. The only time you start to reach difficulty is around stage 80 of the 'unlimited' mode, and that takes well over an hour of straight play to reach.

Actual gameplay and enjoyment should take up a far larger portion of your score. I'd personally put this at a 4.5/10
Reply

Posted: Apr 4th 2007 10:09PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
ah yes, TrionCube. Made by 5 people. It was pretty good. endless mode can actually be hardish when you reach the higher levels. like 60+.
Reply

Posted: Apr 4th 2007 11:04AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Ry C, this is why the 1-10 grading scale is messed up. The honest truth is that no one ever uses numbers 1 through 5 unless they are just hating on a game. And it makes sense: why do we need 6 degrees of badness at our disposal when we only have 3 degrees of good (no one ever dares to use the number 10)?

Allow me to propose a more reasonable alternative:

The 1-5 Grading Scale:

5: Among the best of games.
4: A very good game.
3: A somewhat enjoyable game.
2: Not a good game.
1: An awful game.

So there you have 3 degrees of goodness, and 2 degrees of badness. What more do you need? I say we humans are too wishy washy to be more precise about our tastes than a 1-5 scale (whole numbers only!!) can tell us. 5 doesn't represent perfection either, it just represents a top-tier game.

A 1-5 scale with decimals doesn't count, since you then have effectively changed it back to a 1-10 (or more) scale. Cheater!

I used to laugh at some magazine (PC Gaming perhaps?) that would grade on a 1-100 scale. LOL! The difference between a 93% game and a 92% game depended on the quality of their hair day I guess.
Reply
Sorry, you must be logged in to leave a comment.

Featured Stories

Engadget

WoW

Massively

Big Download

Autoblog

Urlesque

Games.com Blog

UGO.com