some people won't like it... thats a given. also any game like this is a nightmare to score when there's so many parts. i mean, if there's two brilliant campaigns and one terrible one does that make the single player 6 out of 10? different reviews will find different answers to these things.
a game without multiplayer will score more than a game with mediocre multiplayer and as good as a single player campaign by one sites review metrics, but the other way around from another.
does mediocre multiplayer add to the experience or detract from it? should a game be marked down for having no single player etc etc.
then look at AvP. three completely different campaigns. three completely different characters to get to wraps with. numerous multiplayer modes... putting a score on that was always going to be hard.
it's getting knocked for the Alien controls being hard... well yeah... they are. if you start the alien campaign before playing on line... you're going to struggle with them and probably get frustrated... but that isn't because they're broken. they're just hard. those of us who've been playing the demo won't find any issues controlling the different species.
But I can see how a reviewer that's never crawled on walls before being completely disenfranchised with the Alien campaign.
The super jump criticism... I don't know, I like that there's a clear marker telling me when I can jump. That makes a lot more sense to me than not having such a thing. Sure it's not always going to make sense, but levels always have to have boundries that can't be crossed. At least the HUD lets us know before we press the jump button.
The alternative would be what? making everything take place in canyons with giant walls? I don't know if there is an answer for that... again, I prefer having the super jump in, and in this form than the way it was in previous titles.
Shared levels is something I wanted in the game. It makes sense to me really that these three stories should be happening in the same places, and I look forwards to playing through those same levels with a different tool set, just as I enjoyed all the bonus levels in the first AvP.
It won't be perfect... it may not be a game for people who aren't fans of the franchises (or even all the people who are)... but we gamers, we only need one or two parts of the game to be awesome for it to be worth our time. I've probably played 50+ games of DM at this point... and even that mode is still fun to me on this one map.
Even if I never touch one or more of the campaigns, or one or more of the modes... I know from the demo that the game looks and plays brilliantly, even if certain parts of it may be lacking. I don't have to play every bit of it like a reviewer. I can just play the parts I love, and I know that the MP is only going to get more fun with the new modes and new maps.
Reviewers just don't think of a game that way. They can't say 'this one part of this game makes it worth buying, 9 out of 10'. People bought COD:WaW for the zombies mode and put hundreds of hours into it. People that had no interest in any COD game before or since. No interest in realistic war games.
That's the world we play games in. Reviewers... they have to disect every part of the game... it just doesn't always translate to something that reflects real world experiences.
