Gamespot Review
 

http://www.gamespot.com/ps2/action/t...les/index.html

6.5 : Fair

OH COME ON! http://cube.ign.com/articles/455/455939p1.html

5.3? Geeeeeeeeeeeeeeez! And actually people voted it to be 8.3! GO TMNT FANS!

After reading that review I don't know what to think of this game. I did already buy it so I'm gonna play it but I hear nothing but bad things about it. I'm hoping that I will like it though.

They all complain about how repeatitive the game is... Maybe they should play the old TMNT games. I think that all fans of the old games will like it.

Funny how they give TMNT poor scores for it's old-school repetative gameplay, but they give Mario Advance 4 high scores when it is plagued with the same redundance (hop and Bop). I speak as a lover of old school games, but it is unfair how they can complain about repetative in one game because it doesn't have the Mario name on it, and give a similarly old-school and repetative game high scores because it is expected.

Don't pay attention to what those elitist gamer a**holes say about old-school gaming styles. IMO, this type of game will milk today's generation back to the way games SHOULD be played, not this "real-time have a bloated inventory press six million buttons to switch to another weapon and have to memorize so many button combos just to kill someone effectively with chat macro combinations deciding how the game progresses yada yada yada" bullcrap out today...you know, "games" like Knights of the Old Repubic and Syphon Filter, no offense to any fans of those games on here, that is :wink:

I liked Knights, but you are correct anyway. And besides, I know I will enjoy TMNT more (been playing the hell outta the demo)

What bugs me in the IGN's review, is that the reviewer says She liked TMNT: The Arcade game, but then complains how this game is just button smasher and too simple... Old game had one attack button, as opposed to the new one, and it's too simple. right.

Hopefully somone who has played the original game in last 10 years reviews PS2 or PC versions.

EDit: Just notcied PS2 review is exactly same... I don't remember when I would have been this disapointed to IGN's reviews.

The TMNT can't be bad game, because her has done "Konami" !!!

Judging by the Demo, is excatly what I was waiting for.

and it's not Cosmos. those who have played the demo loved it. IT is a fun old-school game with added moves, and some great voice work. Look at the player review, not the anal (we judge games unfairly) reviewers. One thing they don't fully mention is how good it feels to plow through the thugs. It a very entertaining, old school game. And like Karpo said, the old game was a button masher, where the same move was used through the entire game. This actually adds Dynasty-Warrior like combos.

Would be nice if someone expanded on the TMNT mythos and added some missions to it, like sneaking around and having Donny decode door locks and things like that, but for what it is, and what genre is represents, the game delivers in spades.

i told you that shouldnt have went with the beat em up style. they should have done rpg or stealth.

I think they did it just right.

ah, thats stupid. How can you love the old games and not like the new one because of its button smashing, repetative gameplay?? The only difference I see is better graphics. That doesnt make sense.

I'll probably get the game eventually anyway, reviews be damned.

I have it preordered.. should get it tomarow..

I sure hope it doesn't suck near as much as I've heard.

I just now bought the game. I'm gonna play it now.

I didn't expect anything more.

Jesus Christ....
 

I just HAD to embed this one, because... it's just completely sacrilegious to compare the two! And absolutely hilarious to boot. Mario Advance 4, or SMB3 as one would prefer to entitle it, is one of the GREATEST platformers ever made! By using the same logic as illustrated by yourself, one would think that every single platformer in the history of the universe is as cloyed with repetition as the TMNT-fanfare.. and that's so inaccurate it isn't funny. First of all, you fail to mention that the Mario-games were some of the most innovative platformers when they hit the market. And second... yikes, that "hop and bop"-comment, I really don't know what to say. The TMNT-zealotry sure shines through, though.

The first TMNT for the NES was a GREAT, GREAT game. The sequel - THE ARCADE GAME - though, holds the distinction of being one of the most repetitive games I have EVER played. Sure, it tagged along nicely back in 1990; but I was freakin' 7 years old then. We slashed and hacked away... but growing up... Some 1-2 years ago, I actually ventured to finish the game in the company of... well.. any number of people really, and LO AND BEHOLD, it was still almost as stale and sleep-inducing as the 'going solo'-mode. But yet, I played and PLAY it due to the TMNT-brand attached to it. It's the sole reason. TMNT IV was and is a definite improvement, but.. you know, surely there must be something more to the TMNT-license ?

I mean, COME ON. Some of you are so engulfed by the light that blinds you, that you fail to see the FAIR criticism that is being expressed in the majority of the reviews that we've seen so far. No block/defence function (which indeed is criminal in this case), the ridiculous catch-phrases, the overt sameness, unbalanced difficulty, levels being too long.. and so on. In some reviews, the reviewer of choice even underlines the fact the he or she REALLY tried to like 'it', but just couldn't, due to all the flaws.

And YES, Prowl, it would be nice if Konami could see it in their hearts to expand on the true and tried formula of TMNT-mechanics.. then maybe, just MAYBE, I wouldn't have to be such a bitch about this ;)

So.. err.. in conclusion: Super Mario Advance 4 gets a favourable grade BECAUSE it's a great game (bearing no resemblance.. AT ALL, to the TMNT-franchise)... TMNT gets an average grade because... oh my, here it comes... it's an average game!!

But you know what.. I'll still play it. Yes siree, it still does good to the TMNT-spirit within to be able to steer the Turtles in the year of 2003, though I don't expect it to tide me over to the next installment (if applicable). But I seriously hope that Konami will deviate from the present sameness, and try something new. That'd make me happy, at least.

PS. I can't comment on the GBA-version, since I'm not familiar with it. DS.

The reviews aren't fair, peroid. A block button would be nice, but it wasn't in the old games either. The game does not create anything new, but it's fun as hell. fact is, that if you really like the old games, you will like the new game.

They sau they like the old games, but new is not fun. It's the same thing if you say you like Super MArio Bros 3, But Super Mario world is not fun. Like I said, the game does not offer anything that haven't been seen before, but it's a good and fun game. As the review is now, it's far from fair critcism.

The reviews are fair (this is generalizing, since it's impossible for me to take every single review in defence) in that they portray what's inherently WRONG with the concept... though it sure is a mystery, those who cling to the old TMNT-mashers (well, mainly the Arcade Game, since it's the most basic one) in favor of the new one(s), as the presentation is nearly identical. I mean, seriously, the Arcade Game was/is a snooze-fest... one button for attack, one for jump ? This genre doesn't need simplicity, it needs a spark of complexity. Oh, and the ability to block wasn't a necessity in the previous incarnations; this time around, the enemies can throw combos at you. It would have been a welcome addition for sure, along with some other stealthy moves..

I feel that the following line in the very first Gamefaqs-review of this altered beast, sums it upp pretty nicely:

"It's understandable that Konami wanted to implement the classic button masher arcade we all liked, however, as time went by, a lot of us lost our simplistic taste and require the much needed variety to liven up gameplay."

I'm just saying, they (Konami) could've done so much more with the main fundamentals. But you know, they didn't. Too bad.

Tell me when your 10th birthday comes around, maybe I'll give you something :P

On the contrary, this complexity that you speak of is the main thing I absolutely HATE about video "games" today. A game is not meant to be something complex and realistic *coughKNIGHTSOFTHEOLDREPUBLICcough*. What's the fun in using most of the game time to select which response to choose out of umpteenbillion, pausing the game to switch weapons and spending 5 minutes in the process of targeting the enemy the right way, gathering an entire dictionary's worth of information just to raise your intelligence/cunning/strength/other pointless attribute one lousy point, and things like that?

And you have the nerve to call the orignal TMNT game a snooze fest? At least in a game like that you're active in it all the time as oppposed to to wandering around like an idiot to gather information and fending off an occasional tough guy here and there.

As you can see, I hate these modern-day lousy excuses for video "games".

don't like it, don't play it :)

Er, what you say ? A game DOES NOT have to be too intricate for its own good, but that doesn't automatically mean it has to be stripped down to its bare essence, containing no deph (PLEASE don't take that literally) whatsoever. There's something inbetween you know. Your logic is so unreasonable. I'm not talking about transforming the franchise into a deep strategy title, I'm talking about adding some elements, enhancing the basic gameplay into something a bit more fresh, with some VARIETY for God's sake. Again, you're going to extremes, and that's quite bothersome...

And WTF. Since WHEN did I call the ORIGINAL TMNT-game a snooze-fest ? I was CLEARLY referring to the Arcade Game, I mean, by God, you quoted that particular line yourself.. Jebus... as I was EXPLICITLY saying in my original post, I love that game (the ORIGINAL for the NES!), I hold it in the highest regard when it comes to the TMNT-branch of games. You know what you doing ?

I'm not sure... if the OVERLY simplistic stuff such as the current TMNT-games (hack & slash yourself into chronic boredom) is the only thing that appeals to you, I must say you're limiting yourself in ways I didn't think were imaginable.

For clarification's sake, the Arcade Game in the context I uttered it, is short for TMNT II - The arcade game, for NES. Which means, to me, that the ultimate 'original' is the NES-one.

I'm gonna have to agree with the minority on this one. The game is fun, yes, but to an extent! There isn't enough variation. The game DOES getting boring quite a few time. I found myself playing through just because it was TMNT and not because I was really enjoying myself. After the subway area in the Nano stage I was begging for it to end. Every time I thought I'd come to the end in the Notes to the Underground level it kept going. It was just the same thing for TOO LONG! The levels weren't anything new either. While each one sported it's own look and feel they were all basically flat. Just run forward into a crowd and hit. Let's just face the facts. If this game wasn't based around TMNT and instead was just some random other franchise almost nobody here would buy it. My friend is the perfect example of this. He plays Hulk for about half an hour and says "This is such a boring game. It's all the same." He plays TMNT and says "THIS GAME FRIGGIN RULES!!!" and Hulk has more variation that TMNT has. TMNT is a fun game. If you want to play it and say it's the best ever then by all means do it, but when you start calling down these reviews and the reviewers because they don't have the same kind of hardcore love for TMNT that we have...well that's when you need to stop and think.

The reviewer said It is not a fun game, and that She does not recommend it, even to TMNT fans.

And Slipmasking, when we are refering the original game, we are of course talking about the Arcade game, since it's the first TMNT game ever made. The NES version of it was simplified, it's should not even be meantioned.

It seems you don't like the Arcade games, then I'm sure you won't like this one either. It is more complex than them, but still very simple game. Not everyone enjoys the genre.

'NUFF OF THIS PLEASE! this topic is turning a lil' bii defensive, if u want to play it play it, if u think is bad, its bad to u, if u think it needs new stuff but u like it, then amen, play it, but let's not argue about it anymore ok :sick:

I agree, there is no reason to argue about the game, you like it Or you don't. But a reviwew that says tha the game is worth it, even to TMNT fans, I will never consider fair. And I'm talking about IGN's review of course, most of the others are decent.

IGN constanly makes reviews like this. I've learned to take them with a grain of salt. That all started when they came out with all these previews for Brute Force saying it was going to be the next Halo. Saying it was an amazing game and telling people to pre-order on their site right away. Then the game comes out and they give it an 7 or something like that. Pretty pathetic.

Yeah, if we're supposed to be anal about it, sure. But they were both released in 1989 (The Arcade FOR the Arcades, contra the first entry for the NES), and quite frankly, I acknowledge the NES-debutant to a larger extent, simply because it's much more interesting.

Let's be true to ourselves. And yes, that includes those of you who seem completely satisfied with what we've been offered so far. We DO want more than this, right ? More than GENERIC (and I mean that in its truest sense) Beat 'em up, right ? The games are, granted, not TOTAL duds, but they can be bettered, RIGHT ? Are you with me or against me ? ;)

And yeah, this is going nowhere fast... a one-way street is a one-way street no matter how you look at it. The reason why I'm bringing all this up, is to stray from all the conformity that's pouring from the group and its unified embrace of the game(s). Dissuading opinions so far have been.. well.. ultimately ignored, and that's a shame. Cudos to Michaelangelo (the boarder :P) for agreeing with me, I'm not fighting the lone fight after all :) Anyway, I feel I've expressed some valid views, I'm not agitated at all, but yeah, it's time to put it to rest. Bury the hatchet even. I respect your values, but I don't entirely agree with them :)

To go on a tangent... has any of you lot played Viewtiful Joe yet ? That's one Action/Beat 'em up-oriented tale I'm actually looking forward to, as it feels.. well, you know, FRESH. Yes.

Well, yeah.

Yours truly,

/Matte

Yeah, I must say those particular 'tactics' are quite the misleading slap in the face.. better to be safe than sorry!

Of course no game is perfect, for a sequel I would wan't atleast four player support

I don't really see the four player happening. Mostly because the game slows down quite a bit with two players. I couldn't imagine it with 4.

I've played Viewtiful Joe. Great game. Really great. It feels so old skool yet it has the depth of a next gen game. It's the game that made me believe in love at first play! :wink:

I believe the Gamespot review is accurate.

You're right, I haven't played it yet but all reviews are positive and the game looks really cool. I just wish it had a multiplayerpart. For the new TMNT-game, I'm not going to buy it, even the demo got boring after a while. Ok, it might be better than the other TMNT-games which were released a hundred of years ago ( :wink: ) but compared to current standards that's just not enough. Games like Viewtiful Joe show that simple games can be innovative, too.