- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Posted on 11/18/11 at 9:16 am to sicboy
I'm pretty amazed that it's a draw, even if the two games are judged by vastly different standards. I haven't played Skyrim, but would probably give Arkham City an 8/10. I beat it in a few days and haven't thought about it since - just didn't really feel like anything that new or intriguing. It did the good stuff from the first game better, though.
Posted on 11/18/11 at 9:16 am to taylork37
quote:
Skyrim still > AC
details... minor details..
Posted on 11/18/11 at 9:23 am to Muppet
Read some of the user reviews on Skyrim. Some guy gave it a 0
Posted on 11/18/11 at 9:26 am to Devious
So Skryim obviously was not in his wheelhouse.
Posted on 11/18/11 at 9:27 am to sicboy
I have no clue if it was the same guy. I just posted something I thought you hardcore nerds would run with.
Posted on 11/18/11 at 9:28 am to Devious
K. Glad I didn't ask how you knew that.
Posted on 11/18/11 at 9:31 am to Devious
I really can't rate the Modern Warfare games anyway since I am not part of their intended audience. By that I mean that I've only liked a few FPSs since Wolfenstein 3D. I kind of subscribe to the Roger Ebert school of critiquing based on what it tries to do rather than by some perfect objective standard.
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News