Our RalliSport Challenge 2 Review

[fossen]

Re: Our RalliSport Challenge 2 Review

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
Shamrock_11 said: If opinions are'nt welcomed then don't make a thread for comments on the review.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

Opinions are welcomed.

Can you not stand someone disagreeing with you? If you can't, you should get off your reviewing high horse now - because you obviously don't have a thick enough skin.

Yes, opinions are welcome. We do not, however, need to merely post "My God! Shamrock! You are correct! A Genius! You cleared my eyes!"

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
Shamrock_11 said:But a 2/5 is a dishonest review.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">
Nonsense. The fact you don't agree doesn't make it "dishonest".

Are you sure you know what that word means?


</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
Shamrock_11 said: I myself am a hardcore sports gamer, and generally detest 'arcade' sports games. Rallisport Challenge 2 does'nt fall into the 'arcade' category in my opinion. There are far more sim elements than arcade.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">
Fantastic. I look forward to reading your review. Where is it going to be published?

[Crucial Mike]

Re: Our RalliSport Challenge 2 Review

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
forensicd said:
i think that alot of people come to this site to read reviews before making purchases. I do alot of research before I buy games, becase 50 bones is alot to plunk down when u have a wife, kid and a race team to support. I happened to buy this game the day it came out, based on the last title. If i would have waited, and read the review, i may have missed out on one hell of a game. I dont think anybody would buy this game thinking it is a sim game, they know that going in. Therefore, reviews should reflect that mentality. I would never base my review of NFL street on the fact that it doesnt play more like madden, that is not the point of the game. The fact is there really is no solid rally game out there thats a sim, Collin is by no means a true sim, especailly with fake tracks, etc. I dont think this site understands sometimes what kind of pull they have on the sports gaming community. Some people may look at the score, read the first paragraph, and dismiss the game altogether, which would be a shame. I understand that the reviewer has his own opinion of racing games and how they should be, but dont review the game on these opnions alone, otherwise nothing would get high marks unless it is a pure sim, which none even really exist. I own a USAC sprintcar team, as well as the former owner of Paragon Speedway in indiana. I know my racing, and this game blows away the racing competition so far this year as far as addictiveness and level of fun. Just accept the games for what they are, then add a sidenote that this game is not for sim gamers. Dont bash games for not fitting into your cup of tea.



<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

Well said. I also feel that part of a reviewer's responsibility is to recognize what a game is all about before writing their review. In this case, it seemed that the whole point of the game was ignored and instead was judged based on criteria it wasn't even trying to live up to.

[Crucial Mike]

Re: Our RalliSport Challenge 2 Review

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
forensicd said:
i think that alot of people come to this site to read reviews before making purchases. I do alot of research before I buy games, becase 50 bones is alot to plunk down when u have a wife, kid and a race team to support. I happened to buy this game the day it came out, based on the last title. If i would have waited, and read the review, i may have missed out on one hell of a game. I dont think anybody would buy this game thinking it is a sim game, they know that going in. Therefore, reviews should reflect that mentality. I would never base my review of NFL street on the fact that it doesnt play more like madden, that is not the point of the game. The fact is there really is no solid rally game out there thats a sim, Collin is by no means a true sim, especailly with fake tracks, etc. I dont think this site understands sometimes what kind of pull they have on the sports gaming community. Some people may look at the score, read the first paragraph, and dismiss the game altogether, which would be a shame. I understand that the reviewer has his own opinion of racing games and how they should be, but dont review the game on these opnions alone, otherwise nothing would get high marks unless it is a pure sim, which none even really exist. I own a USAC sprintcar team, as well as the former owner of Paragon Speedway in indiana. I know my racing, and this game blows away the racing competition so far this year as far as addictiveness and level of fun. Just accept the games for what they are, then add a sidenote that this game is not for sim gamers. Dont bash games for not fitting into your cup of tea.



<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

Well said. I also feel that part of a reviewer's responsibility is to recognize what a game is all about before writing their review. In this case, it seemed that the whole point of the game was ignored and instead was judged based on criteria it wasn't even trying to live up to.

[Crucial Mike]

Re: Our RalliSport Challenge 2 Review

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
forensicd said:
i think that alot of people come to this site to read reviews before making purchases. I do alot of research before I buy games, becase 50 bones is alot to plunk down when u have a wife, kid and a race team to support. I happened to buy this game the day it came out, based on the last title. If i would have waited, and read the review, i may have missed out on one hell of a game. I dont think anybody would buy this game thinking it is a sim game, they know that going in. Therefore, reviews should reflect that mentality. I would never base my review of NFL street on the fact that it doesnt play more like madden, that is not the point of the game. The fact is there really is no solid rally game out there thats a sim, Collin is by no means a true sim, especailly with fake tracks, etc. I dont think this site understands sometimes what kind of pull they have on the sports gaming community. Some people may look at the score, read the first paragraph, and dismiss the game altogether, which would be a shame. I understand that the reviewer has his own opinion of racing games and how they should be, but dont review the game on these opnions alone, otherwise nothing would get high marks unless it is a pure sim, which none even really exist. I own a USAC sprintcar team, as well as the former owner of Paragon Speedway in indiana. I know my racing, and this game blows away the racing competition so far this year as far as addictiveness and level of fun. Just accept the games for what they are, then add a sidenote that this game is not for sim gamers. Dont bash games for not fitting into your cup of tea.



<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

Well said. I also feel that part of a reviewer's responsibility is to recognize what a game is all about before writing their review. In this case, it seemed that the whole point of the game was ignored and instead was judged based on criteria it wasn't even trying to live up to.

[TCrouch]

Re: Our RalliSport Challenge 2 Review

As soon as I posted it, I knew it would catch a lot of flack. I can accept that. For me, 2 out of 5 is because I can never see myself playing it ever again. And for the gent who owned a USAC sprint team, that rocks. I raced 360 Bandit Sprints up and down California, and actually moved out to Indianapolis to work for the IRL for a year. I know my racing, but I don't think that I know everything about it. When you post a review that is honest (honestly my opinion...that's all any review is), and it's not the "normal" score for a game, you have to be prepared to have people call for your head. Doesn't bother me one bit, everybody is entitled to their opinion. However, like I said in the end of the review, if you don't care about handling or the slightest bit of realistic interaction, then you'll love it. This is to be expected, and if all anybody does is look at the score and freak out, then so be it. I expected more of it, actually.

I know I've spent the better part of a decade racing PC sims and anything I can get my hands on, and this isn't one that I'll ever find the desire to play again...unless I'm drunk as hell and need something that doesn't take a lot of thought to it to run As a last thought: if we went through and judged every game based off of what it's "supposed to be about", then we'd end up with a lot of generalized reviews that don't really cover anything. You want football reviews from a perspective of "hey, it's supposed to be really fun, but not very realistic". That was Fever...maybe it should have been rated really high as an NFL title? Everybody has different tastes, and I tried to explain that. I actually thought about just tossing out the 4 out of 5 for the person who could care less about realism, but then I would have to live with the thought that I gave a game a high score just because everybody else was doing it, or from fear of people going "you're an idiot".

We don't do it with football, basketball, or any other major sport. I don't believe we should do it with racing. There's some merit to the argument that somebody should know what a game is trying to be. I do know what RSC2 was trying to be...but like it or not, a review comes down to that particular person playing that particular game, and his or her opinion of it. As somebody who very rarely enjoys flying around at breakneck speeds without the slightest semblance of thought going through my head, my opinion was that it's nothing I would spend a dime on. I also know other people feel very differently, but that's their prerogative.

[TCrouch]

Re: Our RalliSport Challenge 2 Review

As soon as I posted it, I knew it would catch a lot of flack. I can accept that. For me, 2 out of 5 is because I can never see myself playing it ever again. And for the gent who owned a USAC sprint team, that rocks. I raced 360 Bandit Sprints up and down California, and actually moved out to Indianapolis to work for the IRL for a year. I know my racing, but I don't think that I know everything about it. When you post a review that is honest (honestly my opinion...that's all any review is), and it's not the "normal" score for a game, you have to be prepared to have people call for your head. Doesn't bother me one bit, everybody is entitled to their opinion. However, like I said in the end of the review, if you don't care about handling or the slightest bit of realistic interaction, then you'll love it. This is to be expected, and if all anybody does is look at the score and freak out, then so be it. I expected more of it, actually.

I know I've spent the better part of a decade racing PC sims and anything I can get my hands on, and this isn't one that I'll ever find the desire to play again...unless I'm drunk as hell and need something that doesn't take a lot of thought to it to run As a last thought: if we went through and judged every game based off of what it's "supposed to be about", then we'd end up with a lot of generalized reviews that don't really cover anything. You want football reviews from a perspective of "hey, it's supposed to be really fun, but not very realistic". That was Fever...maybe it should have been rated really high as an NFL title? Everybody has different tastes, and I tried to explain that. I actually thought about just tossing out the 4 out of 5 for the person who could care less about realism, but then I would have to live with the thought that I gave a game a high score just because everybody else was doing it, or from fear of people going "you're an idiot".

We don't do it with football, basketball, or any other major sport. I don't believe we should do it with racing. There's some merit to the argument that somebody should know what a game is trying to be. I do know what RSC2 was trying to be...but like it or not, a review comes down to that particular person playing that particular game, and his or her opinion of it. As somebody who very rarely enjoys flying around at breakneck speeds without the slightest semblance of thought going through my head, my opinion was that it's nothing I would spend a dime on. I also know other people feel very differently, but that's their prerogative.

[TCrouch]

Re: Our RalliSport Challenge 2 Review

As soon as I posted it, I knew it would catch a lot of flack. I can accept that. For me, 2 out of 5 is because I can never see myself playing it ever again. And for the gent who owned a USAC sprint team, that rocks. I raced 360 Bandit Sprints up and down California, and actually moved out to Indianapolis to work for the IRL for a year. I know my racing, but I don't think that I know everything about it. When you post a review that is honest (honestly my opinion...that's all any review is), and it's not the "normal" score for a game, you have to be prepared to have people call for your head. Doesn't bother me one bit, everybody is entitled to their opinion. However, like I said in the end of the review, if you don't care about handling or the slightest bit of realistic interaction, then you'll love it. This is to be expected, and if all anybody does is look at the score and freak out, then so be it. I expected more of it, actually.

I know I've spent the better part of a decade racing PC sims and anything I can get my hands on, and this isn't one that I'll ever find the desire to play again...unless I'm drunk as hell and need something that doesn't take a lot of thought to it to run As a last thought: if we went through and judged every game based off of what it's "supposed to be about", then we'd end up with a lot of generalized reviews that don't really cover anything. You want football reviews from a perspective of "hey, it's supposed to be really fun, but not very realistic". That was Fever...maybe it should have been rated really high as an NFL title? Everybody has different tastes, and I tried to explain that. I actually thought about just tossing out the 4 out of 5 for the person who could care less about realism, but then I would have to live with the thought that I gave a game a high score just because everybody else was doing it, or from fear of people going "you're an idiot".

We don't do it with football, basketball, or any other major sport. I don't believe we should do it with racing. There's some merit to the argument that somebody should know what a game is trying to be. I do know what RSC2 was trying to be...but like it or not, a review comes down to that particular person playing that particular game, and his or her opinion of it. As somebody who very rarely enjoys flying around at breakneck speeds without the slightest semblance of thought going through my head, my opinion was that it's nothing I would spend a dime on. I also know other people feel very differently, but that's their prerogative.

[Mud]

Re: Our RalliSport Challenge 2 Review

If you can't stand arcade racers, don't review them! It's pointless. It's like, "Halo certainly seems to be well done, but I don't like shooters: 2/5," or, "Gran Turismo seems to be a great game, but I don't really like simulators: 2/5" Can you not see the absurdity of that? I'm not a fan of RPGs, so I have the good sense not to offer my opinion on them. If I was tasked with the job of reviewing one, I would have to defer to someone else.

Your oft-repeated refrain that this game requires no "semblance of thought" to play is pure poppycock. I'm a huge fan of simulation racing myself, but that doesn't mean arcade racing games require any less thought -- it just means the parameters are different. If you can corner much faster than you could in a real car, well guess what? So can everybody else. It doesn't matter if you are racing on a snowboard, a kart that shoots bananas, a futuristic vehicle that could never exist, or a rally car with exaggerated/simplified physics -- it requires the same concentration and focus and skill to compete with other skilled players.

Rallisport 2's handling is very predictable and precise, and rich in it's own way; it's just not realistic. It's not trying to be. It places emphasis elsewhere. If you think that makes it brain-dead activity, feel free to join me for a race (gamertag: mud). Good luck keeping me in your sights.

A 2/5 says this game is bottom of the barrel, well below average, basically: it sucks. It may not be your cup of tea, but to say a game as superbly made as Rallisport 2 sucks is just completely unrealistic, and it does a gross disservice to the team that spent 2 years working on it. IMO, someone with as decidedly narrow taste in games as yourself shouldn't be reviewing games for the general public, or should stick to reviewing genres you understand.

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
mgoblue said:
Terry just did the same thing with Rallisport Challenge 2, reviewing it as a sports gamer, rather than just a casual racing fan.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">
What exactly is a "sports gamer"? Someone who values realism above all else? In that case, why is Operation Sports reviewing an arcade racer in the first place?

[Mud]

Re: Our RalliSport Challenge 2 Review

If you can't stand arcade racers, don't review them! It's pointless. It's like, "Halo certainly seems to be well done, but I don't like shooters: 2/5," or, "Gran Turismo seems to be a great game, but I don't really like simulators: 2/5" Can you not see the absurdity of that? I'm not a fan of RPGs, so I have the good sense not to offer my opinion on them. If I was tasked with the job of reviewing one, I would have to defer to someone else.

Your oft-repeated refrain that this game requires no "semblance of thought" to play is pure poppycock. I'm a huge fan of simulation racing myself, but that doesn't mean arcade racing games require any less thought -- it just means the parameters are different. If you can corner much faster than you could in a real car, well guess what? So can everybody else. It doesn't matter if you are racing on a snowboard, a kart that shoots bananas, a futuristic vehicle that could never exist, or a rally car with exaggerated/simplified physics -- it requires the same concentration and focus and skill to compete with other skilled players.

Rallisport 2's handling is very predictable and precise, and rich in it's own way; it's just not realistic. It's not trying to be. It places emphasis elsewhere. If you think that makes it brain-dead activity, feel free to join me for a race (gamertag: mud). Good luck keeping me in your sights.

A 2/5 says this game is bottom of the barrel, well below average, basically: it sucks. It may not be your cup of tea, but to say a game as superbly made as Rallisport 2 sucks is just completely unrealistic, and it does a gross disservice to the team that spent 2 years working on it. IMO, someone with as decidedly narrow taste in games as yourself shouldn't be reviewing games for the general public, or should stick to reviewing genres you understand.

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
mgoblue said:
Terry just did the same thing with Rallisport Challenge 2, reviewing it as a sports gamer, rather than just a casual racing fan.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">
What exactly is a "sports gamer"? Someone who values realism above all else? In that case, why is Operation Sports reviewing an arcade racer in the first place?

[Mud]

Re: Our RalliSport Challenge 2 Review

If you can't stand arcade racers, don't review them! It's pointless. It's like, "Halo certainly seems to be well done, but I don't like shooters: 2/5," or, "Gran Turismo seems to be a great game, but I don't really like simulators: 2/5" Can you not see the absurdity of that? I'm not a fan of RPGs, so I have the good sense not to offer my opinion on them. If I was tasked with the job of reviewing one, I would have to defer to someone else.

Your oft-repeated refrain that this game requires no "semblance of thought" to play is pure poppycock. I'm a huge fan of simulation racing myself, but that doesn't mean arcade racing games require any less thought -- it just means the parameters are different. If you can corner much faster than you could in a real car, well guess what? So can everybody else. It doesn't matter if you are racing on a snowboard, a kart that shoots bananas, a futuristic vehicle that could never exist, or a rally car with exaggerated/simplified physics -- it requires the same concentration and focus and skill to compete with other skilled players.

Rallisport 2's handling is very predictable and precise, and rich in it's own way; it's just not realistic. It's not trying to be. It places emphasis elsewhere. If you think that makes it brain-dead activity, feel free to join me for a race (gamertag: mud). Good luck keeping me in your sights.

A 2/5 says this game is bottom of the barrel, well below average, basically: it sucks. It may not be your cup of tea, but to say a game as superbly made as Rallisport 2 sucks is just completely unrealistic, and it does a gross disservice to the team that spent 2 years working on it. IMO, someone with as decidedly narrow taste in games as yourself shouldn't be reviewing games for the general public, or should stick to reviewing genres you understand.

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
mgoblue said:
Terry just did the same thing with Rallisport Challenge 2, reviewing it as a sports gamer, rather than just a casual racing fan.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">
What exactly is a "sports gamer"? Someone who values realism above all else? In that case, why is Operation Sports reviewing an arcade racer in the first place?

[Crucial Mike]

Re: Our RalliSport Challenge 2 Review

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
Mud said:
If you can't stand arcade racers, don't review them! It's pointless. It's like, "Halo certainly seems to be well done, but I don't like shooters: 2/5," or, "Gran Turismo seems to be a great game, but I don't really like simulators: 2/5" Can you not see the absurdity of that? I'm not a fan of RPGs, so I have the good sense not to offer my opinion on them. If I was tasked with the job of reviewing one, I would have to defer to someone else.

Your oft-repeated refrain that this game requires no "semblance of thought" to play is pure poppycock. I'm a huge fan of simulation racing myself, but that doesn't mean arcade racing games require any less thought -- it just means the parameters are different. If you can corner much faster than you could in a real car, well guess what? So can everybody else. It doesn't matter if you are racing on a snowboard, a kart that shoots bananas, a futuristic vehicle that could never exist, or a rally car with exaggerated/simplified physics -- it requires the same concentration and focus and skill to compete with other skilled players.

Rallisport 2's handling is very predictable and precise, and rich in it's own way; it's just not realistic. It's not trying to be. It places emphasis elsewhere. If you think that makes it brain-dead activity, feel free to join me for a race (gamertag: mud). Good luck keeping me in your sights.

A 2/5 says this game is bottom of the barrel, well below average, basically: it sucks. It may not be your cup of tea, but to say a game as superbly made as Rallisport 2 sucks is just completely unrealistic, and it does a gross disservice to the team that spent 2 years working on it. IMO, someone with as decidedly narrow taste in games as yourself shouldn't be reviewing games for the general public, or should stick to reviewing genres you understand.

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
mgoblue said:
Terry just did the same thing with Rallisport Challenge 2, reviewing it as a sports gamer, rather than just a casual racing fan.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">
What exactly is a "sports gamer"? Someone who values realism above all else? In that case, why is Operation Sports reviewing an arcade racer in the first place?


<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

Quality first post mud.

Unfortunately, Tim seemed to have too much freedom with this review...A 2/5 score and having to read through paragraphs of how RSC2 isn't a sim is just subpar for a site as great as OS.

Unfortunately, there doesn't seem to be a site philosophy when it comes to reviews. One week, NBA Ballers can score high impressions despite it's arcade style and then the next RSC2 gets bashed for not being a sim.

[Crucial Mike]

Re: Our RalliSport Challenge 2 Review

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
Mud said:
If you can't stand arcade racers, don't review them! It's pointless. It's like, "Halo certainly seems to be well done, but I don't like shooters: 2/5," or, "Gran Turismo seems to be a great game, but I don't really like simulators: 2/5" Can you not see the absurdity of that? I'm not a fan of RPGs, so I have the good sense not to offer my opinion on them. If I was tasked with the job of reviewing one, I would have to defer to someone else.

Your oft-repeated refrain that this game requires no "semblance of thought" to play is pure poppycock. I'm a huge fan of simulation racing myself, but that doesn't mean arcade racing games require any less thought -- it just means the parameters are different. If you can corner much faster than you could in a real car, well guess what? So can everybody else. It doesn't matter if you are racing on a snowboard, a kart that shoots bananas, a futuristic vehicle that could never exist, or a rally car with exaggerated/simplified physics -- it requires the same concentration and focus and skill to compete with other skilled players.

Rallisport 2's handling is very predictable and precise, and rich in it's own way; it's just not realistic. It's not trying to be. It places emphasis elsewhere. If you think that makes it brain-dead activity, feel free to join me for a race (gamertag: mud). Good luck keeping me in your sights.

A 2/5 says this game is bottom of the barrel, well below average, basically: it sucks. It may not be your cup of tea, but to say a game as superbly made as Rallisport 2 sucks is just completely unrealistic, and it does a gross disservice to the team that spent 2 years working on it. IMO, someone with as decidedly narrow taste in games as yourself shouldn't be reviewing games for the general public, or should stick to reviewing genres you understand.

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
mgoblue said:
Terry just did the same thing with Rallisport Challenge 2, reviewing it as a sports gamer, rather than just a casual racing fan.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">
What exactly is a "sports gamer"? Someone who values realism above all else? In that case, why is Operation Sports reviewing an arcade racer in the first place?


<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

Quality first post mud.

Unfortunately, Tim seemed to have too much freedom with this review...A 2/5 score and having to read through paragraphs of how RSC2 isn't a sim is just subpar for a site as great as OS.

Unfortunately, there doesn't seem to be a site philosophy when it comes to reviews. One week, NBA Ballers can score high impressions despite it's arcade style and then the next RSC2 gets bashed for not being a sim.

[Crucial Mike]

Re: Our RalliSport Challenge 2 Review

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
Mud said:
If you can't stand arcade racers, don't review them! It's pointless. It's like, "Halo certainly seems to be well done, but I don't like shooters: 2/5," or, "Gran Turismo seems to be a great game, but I don't really like simulators: 2/5" Can you not see the absurdity of that? I'm not a fan of RPGs, so I have the good sense not to offer my opinion on them. If I was tasked with the job of reviewing one, I would have to defer to someone else.

Your oft-repeated refrain that this game requires no "semblance of thought" to play is pure poppycock. I'm a huge fan of simulation racing myself, but that doesn't mean arcade racing games require any less thought -- it just means the parameters are different. If you can corner much faster than you could in a real car, well guess what? So can everybody else. It doesn't matter if you are racing on a snowboard, a kart that shoots bananas, a futuristic vehicle that could never exist, or a rally car with exaggerated/simplified physics -- it requires the same concentration and focus and skill to compete with other skilled players.

Rallisport 2's handling is very predictable and precise, and rich in it's own way; it's just not realistic. It's not trying to be. It places emphasis elsewhere. If you think that makes it brain-dead activity, feel free to join me for a race (gamertag: mud). Good luck keeping me in your sights.

A 2/5 says this game is bottom of the barrel, well below average, basically: it sucks. It may not be your cup of tea, but to say a game as superbly made as Rallisport 2 sucks is just completely unrealistic, and it does a gross disservice to the team that spent 2 years working on it. IMO, someone with as decidedly narrow taste in games as yourself shouldn't be reviewing games for the general public, or should stick to reviewing genres you understand.

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
mgoblue said:
Terry just did the same thing with Rallisport Challenge 2, reviewing it as a sports gamer, rather than just a casual racing fan.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">
What exactly is a "sports gamer"? Someone who values realism above all else? In that case, why is Operation Sports reviewing an arcade racer in the first place?


<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

Quality first post mud.

Unfortunately, Tim seemed to have too much freedom with this review...A 2/5 score and having to read through paragraphs of how RSC2 isn't a sim is just subpar for a site as great as OS.

Unfortunately, there doesn't seem to be a site philosophy when it comes to reviews. One week, NBA Ballers can score high impressions despite it's arcade style and then the next RSC2 gets bashed for not being a sim.

[adamcz]

Re: Our RalliSport Challenge 2 Review

Here's the problem with the score: OS gives almost every single game a 4/5. I came across this review while making a list of all the games I'm considering, and their scores from the sites I trust, and it was the first time I noticed the frequency of 4/5 reviews. That being said, a 2/5 means that this is one of the worst games ever reviewed on this website. Based on the reviews from other websites, I don't believe that can be true.

[adamcz]

Re: Our RalliSport Challenge 2 Review

Here's the problem with the score: OS gives almost every single game a 4/5. I came across this review while making a list of all the games I'm considering, and their scores from the sites I trust, and it was the first time I noticed the frequency of 4/5 reviews. That being said, a 2/5 means that this is one of the worst games ever reviewed on this website. Based on the reviews from other websites, I don't believe that can be true.