bit-gamer.net

Serious Sam 3: BFE Review

Comments 1 to 21 of 21

Reply
Th3Maverick 25th November 2011, 09:54 Quote
LOL@ Cheats Enabled in the first picture.
V3ctor 25th November 2011, 09:58 Quote
Steam sales for me... Already gave my contribute to "old shooters" this year with DNF.
CardJoe 25th November 2011, 10:34 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Th3Maverick
LOL@ Cheats Enabled in the first picture.

LOL, yeah; from a co-op game I played with Paul a while ago where we were just messing around!
Kiytan 25th November 2011, 10:41 Quote
Really saddened to see they've not included all the silly little easter eggs that made the first 2 games so damned fun, I loved the "ooh a rewar...holy s**t that spawned a lot of monsters" moments.

I will miss telling monsters to go aaaaaa themselves
CardJoe 25th November 2011, 10:47 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kiytan

I will miss telling monsters to go aaaaaa themselves

That joke is actually completely recycled in one of the early encounters.
Waynio 25th November 2011, 10:54 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by V3ctor
Steam sales for me...

Me too, was hoping it would rock.
yassarikhan786 25th November 2011, 11:53 Quote
Was expecting a bit more tbh and like others I will most likely buy it via a Steam Sale. The graphics look immense though.
Everydayoddity 25th November 2011, 14:32 Quote
16 player Co-op?!!? If only I had that many friends, it'd be amazing! Having played this (numerous times) at the BT/CPC stand at LITS, I can confirm it is fantastic fun in small bursts, will probably pick this up for giggles.
Paradigm Shifter 25th November 2011, 14:54 Quote
Was going to pre-order it, much like Payback: The Heist, but decided not too. Now glad I didn't - will pick it up when it's ~£10 in a sale.
Druga Runda 25th November 2011, 15:53 Quote
What?!?

Sure a fan here, playing the game and enjoying it a lot, but comments like this
Quote:
Holes start to appear in the format when it's played in longer sittings, though, especially if you're gunning in singleplayer. Battle fatigue can set in quickly, reducing the game to a numb grind that's new to the series and which shows up mainly due to the lack of Croteam's usual humour. The draining experience of such wide-scale death-dealing isn't a huge issue in itself, but the loss of Sam's standard wit and pizazz? That's a major fumble for a game that's sold itself on its irreverence and personality.

Battle fatigue coming in from killing scores of enemies??? I mean FPS games are usually about going out and shooting stuff... I guess you are not bored from killing enemies (or letting your teammates kill them in MW3?)... to pan a game, that is OK, but to came with absolutely no arguments, and just "lack of humour" which is still there, at least from my POV... is hard to believe.

The main point of SS series is to have a ton of varied enemies in enormous locations and enjoying the thrill of fast action and instantaneous "twitch" play... SS3 delivers that better than any recent game on the market... it is like a multiplayer in singleplayer mode. Not to mention the other coop modes - which are even unique... but if you just focus on Single - SS3 delivered, and I had more fun playing it than any recent FPS game I can remember...

Complaining about a lot of fighting in SS series is like complaining that when thirsty you only got beer. I mean if you are not for alcohol (ie not for FPS) - OK... but why are you even writing a review of the beverage than?
Waynio 25th November 2011, 16:09 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Everydayoddity
16 player Co-op?!!? If only I had that many friends, it'd be amazing! Having played this (numerous times) at the BT/CPC stand at LITS, I can confirm it is fantastic fun in small bursts, will probably pick this up for giggles.

With you saying that it actually sounds worth getting still, serious sam was only playable in shortish bursts for me, super hectic game that demands near constant dodging & shooting :D.
yassarikhan786 25th November 2011, 16:15 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Waynio
With you saying that it actually sounds worth getting still, serious sam was only playable in shortish bursts for me, super hectic game that demands near constant dodging & shooting :D.

Yep, it was good in short bursts. My younger cousins used to play the first two for hours on.
Anneon 25th November 2011, 16:59 Quote
................................shame
MaverickWill 25th November 2011, 17:12 Quote
I hate to say it, but some of us found those secret areas with little power-ups and enemies that spawn as soon as you touch them, in the first 10-15 minutes in level 1. :-P
Bluefish 26th November 2011, 04:59 Quote
Wowzers 65% , your reviewer really phoned this one in huh. did the guy actually play the game for more than 10 minuites, or just leave it running in the background and go for an early lunch?

The trouble is a lot of people will look at your, and i use the word with a touch sarcasm, "review", and pass up on what is a very good game, which is a shame.
TWeaK 26th November 2011, 10:12 Quote
................................same
dark_avenger 27th November 2011, 08:06 Quote
Been enjoying it so far, the closed off levels at the start kill the serious sam mood a bit but it is enjoyable killing 100's of enemies and even thu the melee is way over powered it is good fun ripping spiders heads off :D
GiantStickMan 28th November 2011, 13:35 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluefish
Wowzers 65% , your reviewer really phoned this one in huh. did the guy actually play the game for more than 10 minuites, or just leave it running in the background and go for an early lunch?

The trouble is a lot of people will look at your, and i use the word with a touch sarcasm, "review", and pass up on what is a very good game, which is a shame.

Did you actually read the review?
Better yet, why not jump onto metacritic and have a look at the average there, at the time of writing 70/100. Gamerankings has this at 76%. So really this review isn't that far off the mark keeping in mind they use a broader spectrum when it comes to scoring games than most other sites (so 65% isn't that bad a score).

Just because the reviewer has a different opinion to you doesn't make them wrong - take it with a grain of salt. Can't believe this needs to be said everytime someone sees a score they don't agree with on a review...
Ryun 28th November 2011, 19:38 Quote
Gotta disagree with the review in a lot of respects. I paid $35 for this game and I don't feel like I wasted a penny. Funny, fun, and multiplayer/co-op is especially entertaining.

It's not perfect, but what game is?

Shame. I usually come here for game reviews, because I feel like you guys hit the mark. Oh well, what game reviewer is perfect? =P

(Just to put my comments in perspective: I've never played a Serious Sam game before).
Waynio 29th November 2011, 12:23 Quote
A summary of pros & cons of a game along with the score & if it's the reviewers kind of game or their favourite kind of game would be an excellent addition to the score I think, seems quite biased sometimes.

The game reviews here are good but sometimes I disagree quite a bit :D so would be good for the above.
sear 30th November 2011, 03:13 Quote
I think you vastly exaggerate how funny the original Serious Sam games actually were. Yes, the kamikazes are hilarious and always will be. But Sam always had lame one-liners and that was about the extent of the game's humour. Same for the number of references and Easter eggs. They were there... but hardly around every corner as you seem to imply. Rose-tinted glasses much?

By the way, poor form for this review. Way to almost entirely avoid documenting the game's features, game modes, and even basic gameplay style. Not everyone has played a Serious Sam game, and just lamenting about how it's not as "funny" as the previous ones isn't exactly helpful in creating an informed opinion.

Truth be told, I've been colossally disappointed with the quality of coverage on bit-tech as of late. Articles used to be based heavily in providing factual information and extensive, detailed evaluations of games and hardware. Nowadays, reviews seem more like an excuse to gush, or to stir the pot with "shocking" low scores of big-name titles, hardware evaluation feels half-baked (we need more than 2 pages of benchmarks), and scores given to products often seem almost entirely arbitrary. Editorial content has also taken a nose-dive. Instead of interviews with industry professionals, we get half-page-long blog posts. I'm considering deleting the site from my bookmarks more and more every day.
Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.



Discuss in the forums