Well, Virtua Fighter needn\'t worry about DOA...

http://www.gamespy.com/reviews/november01/deadoralive3/

It got 80%

A few snippets

Flawed throwing system, button masher friendly, general lack of depth, plays largely the same as DoA2, analog button input results in somewhat unreliable attack selection, miserable attempt at story, lame final boss.

As a way to show off your shiny new Xbox, Dead or Alive 3 has no equal. Just don\'t expect to be practicing it daily six months from now.

If you were decent at DoA2 you\'ll get the hang of this game in three seconds. Newbies needn\'t feel left out, either, as it\'s very, very masher-friendly. A newbie who has an idea of how to counter can be quite annoying, and that just shouldn\'t be happening in a supposedly deep, complex fighting game. It remains to be seen how far high-level players will take this game, but in this regard I have the feeling that Virtua Fighter 4 has little to worry about from Dead or Alive 3

They also said that it has stunning graphics, so I guess thats just all it is

kinda like oddworld, and NFL fever

all flash, no bash

*yawn*

Bahahahahahahahahaha! They suck!!!!!!:D

I wish I could still buy an Xbox still though... I\'m poor.... Like their games, hey hey!:D

I tried to tell the xbox fanboys about it, but they wouldn\'t believe me

And that guy from tecmo inlsult tekken for its weak gameplay
He thinks that he has the best fighting game out. Is this a trend or something both the doa3 abd munch developers bash great games and console while they themself cannot produce a good playing game

its just sad

it got mid 90\'s from IGN...go figure.

taking one review and judging the game off it is dumb. You guys should know that because you used to use it on us DC fans back in the day.


Eric Jacob

LOL. Check the score DoA2: HC got on PS2! We can make a poll if you want just to see if that high score was justified or not. I own both (TTT and DoA2:HC), and admit that DoA2 is overrated as hell. Along with the above preview and Ryu\'s hands-on impressions, I can say that I am not interested in DoA3 at all.

Just to add to Seven\'s response to Altered, I have read a lot of reviews on the internet.  Almost all of them say things like "it is more of the same with better graphics."  Yet, almost all of them give the game extremely high scores.  I guess graphics is the only thing that matters now. :rolleyes:

Reminds me of Toshinden for the PSX way back when...

Remember how some mags gave it like 100% and such, and then months later recanted?

Like back then, too many "professional" are being charmed by a newcomer system pulling off technically amazing graphics.

Whenever you start to rely upon, or even put any stock in the opinions of other reviewers, you must try to select the ones that value gameplay over anything else.

When I review games, I can assure everyone that the presentation, graphics, sound, and lasting appeal are but 2 points worth on the overall point scale, gameplay is the largest.  So if a game has great gameplay and terrible sound, terrible presentation, terrible lasting appeal and terrible graphics, the highest the game can get is about an 8.5 or so.  That\'s just using my scale of course going from 1-10.  The whole game has to be pretty damn good in order to achieve a score of 9 or higher.  Graphics do not make a game great, but they certainly can make an already great game much better.  I don\'t think anyone can dispute that.

IGN loves how DOA plays.  They always have and they always will so having more of what\'s great is not a problem for them since they think DOA (1, 2, and now 3) is a great fighter.  I personally think DOA2 was garbage so to build better graphics on top of that shoddy counter engine is just terrible imo.  Take any point of view with a grain of salt though, who knows, you just may grow to love the game.  Just don\'t use these other opinions as fodder for fanboy comments, that\'s all I\'m saying.

Doa3 is summed up as; Beautifull boring and shallow. Like the bouncer was. I agree that IGn is very biased towards the doa series, how can they give a 9+ for gamplay??  It deserves a 4 at highest. And lasting appeal also has been a problem with the doa series. I have played the original DC version of doa2, finished it once with every character to see the lame endings and I never looked at it ever again. Even the 2 player mode and and tag team are boring.

fighting games aren\'t made to be played one player. Even if you get Tekken 4 and VF4, you will still have the same loss of interest unless you have a friend who also wants to play and is able.

I know people like EmperorRob love the game, and to some extent, it is a good escape from the every day toughness of VF, but give it some respect. It seems you guys are only interested in IGN reviews when they are in your favor or against a system you have no intention of buying.


Eric Jacob

Originally posted by AlteredBeast
I know people like EmperorRob love the game, and to some extent, it is a good escape from the every day toughness of VF, but give it some respect.

If I want to escape from the toughness of VF, I\'ll play Tekken thank you.

Originally posted by Metal_Gear_Ray
I tried to tell the xbox fanboys about it, but they wouldn\'t believe me

And that guy from tecmo inlsult tekken for its weak gameplay
He thinks that he has the best fighting game out. Is this a trend or something both the doa3 abd munch developers bash great games and console while they themself cannot produce a good playing game

its just sad

   Kind of funny.  The review was posted from a guy who hates xbox in the first place.

   If you hate something, of course your going to give it low scores at everything.

   Find some better websites with people that are objective.

   I can give almost every PS2 game a 4 out of 10 score, its easy, most of the games are crap anyway.  See how easy that was?  Nice and easy...

   Go check it out for yourself at other sites.  Its quite easy to see whats going on.  Only a fanboy would say otherwise.

well the thing about ign is that xbox.ign is kinda biased imo

when i was checking out the pics of both games for a thread in console debate - the ones for xbox had names for the pics like

"If you bash this game you suck"
"Isnt this pretty?No?You Suck"

thats just lame and ucalled for

when checking out that for DOA2:HC i i didnt see any of that

anyway those are little things i noticed - dont like ign for either though if you ask me

Originally posted by Docwiz
Kind of funny.  The review was posted from a guy who hates xbox in the first place.

If you hate something, of course your going to give it low scores at everything.

Find some better websites with people that are objective.

I want to point out that they didn\'t give it low scores at everything.  They loved the graphics, just like everyone else.  But they did not give this game an awesome rating just because it had great graphics unlike many other reviewers.

And here is a snippet from a review of DOA3 from Gaming Age:

Honestly, if you have played Dead or Alive 2 or DOA2: Hardcore, you know what to expect. The old characters still feature all of the moves they had before and have picked up one or two more it seems (it\'s hard to really tell without consulting with a move list).

For those who couldn\'t stand DOA2 and maybe found the gameplay too shallow or the characters too exaggerated, then the same concerns would probably apply here. The visuals and attention to detail alone are worth the price of admission in my opinion.

Gaming Age gave DOA3 an "A", "Superlative" rating even though they said that it was not very different from DOA2.  If you think about it, are sites like IGN and Gaming Age really being objective, or are they just basing their whole opinion of the game on the graphics and nothing else?  

IMO, Gamespy is one of the few sites that aren\'t afraid to give a game a lower score if it is lacking in some areas.  They are the ones who are truely objective (and I\'m sure they are getting the least amount of bribes from Microsoft too ).