Serious Sam 3: BFE Video Review

It's gamespots score ofcourse.. They get payed by games to up the score so when they don't for once they dump it down by score..

Another good biased review gamespot.. keep up the work

I think they just score it down, becouse of the high expectations, after the first or the second encounter. It still looks a good game tough but not the same. And he speaks on a mobile? Where are the red phonebooths?

"You kill so many of them that they start to feel like boxes that you're checking off"

Clearly this moron has never played a SS game before

this great game too bad the xbox 360 doest support k&M

A 6.0? Of course. Mainstream favoritism from mainstream reviewers, there's gotta be scapegoats for lower scores to justify the scale being 0 to 10.

This looks like just as fun as Painkiller and that one certainly was above a 6. You see a tower defense game and they'll be all understanding because "it does what it sets out to do" or some such recycled affirmation. A game like this is simply an old styled FPS without specific genre or novelty so it gets underrated. Want a sub-genre, GSpot? The old tag of Shoot 'Em Up applies, more so now than ever before. Judge it from that perspective. For what it sets out to do, I'm pretty sure it does that well and deserves a bit more than a 6.

A tower defense game as good as this would get no less than a 7, because you'd say it satisfies the target audience. Hell, this is an action FPS, but is it meant for Battlefield and Modern Warfare junkies? About as much as tower defense is.

Lots of fun but Serious Sam is to Duke Nukem what Steven Seagal is to Arnold Schwarzenegger: you like them for all the same reasons, but the former just doesn't quite match up.

On sale at Amazon for $9.99.  Picked it up because seems to be one of the few games that support more then only the typical 4 player coop.  It's a blast playing with my friends, pretty fun game and a nice break from the tactical/Mil shooters. Brings back fun memories of the old shooters (Doom, Quake, Duke Nukem...).

it was a awsome game

bridge on river quai :D love that movie:D a good point for the game in my eyes

So, the reviewer says multiplayer in the game is bad because there aren't many people to play online with....

Let me break down Chris Watter's logic here...

Game has no multiplayer = not enough variety, give it a bad score. Game includes multiplayer = still give it a bad score, because there are so many multiplayer games now, that there aren't enough players for each game..... Hmmm, and I wonder if the reason for that is you give CoD a great score and this a crap score? And maybe there would also be more players online, if you guys didn't insist every frickin' game have competitive multipler. There's litterally less players than mutliplayer modes out there, because you complain when a game doesn't have 40 multiplayer modes. It's circular logic at best.

Also, you can't knock a single player campaign for being long. A long campaign is good. It only seemed to drag on because you are used to playing CoD games with a 3 hour campaign, and then going online for 40 hours with every pre-teen in America. Because a large player base is good, even if it's an army of 12 year old's shouting racial slurs, according to Watters.

I just finished this game and i loved it the fast combat was intense and trying to stay ahead of the hordes of enemys while trying to swap weapons on the fly takes alot of concentration which i like and also the panic feeling you get when you just dont know what to shoot at next hahaha loved the game

wow this looks like fun

Someone needs to revoke Chris Watters' game reviewing certification. Needs replaced with someone who gets the point of this game. Way more fun than some "modern shooters" in which Chris has is head buried in.

6????!!!!!!!

Stupid Gamespot *sigh*

loved the old serious sam games didnt know this was out and just gonna stop talking and go get this game. .

fuxck your advertisements

SS3 is just as good as the first two games and better than SS2, almost nothing has changed. And what as changed, has changed for the better. Chris Watters and a lot of you old school "fans" are just biased lovers of modern military shooters. Serious Sam hasn't changed at all, it's your reception of it.

This game is better than Serious Sam 2... which isn't a hard feat to accomplish, but it's still nowhere even close to being as good as TFE or TSE... Not to mention that those games were sold at $20 new in addition to being completely badass. They were also pretty damn challenging, actually making for a lot of strategy in this seemingly "mindless" series. It's a disappointment for sure. I don't think the reviewer knows the series that well, but I probably walked away disappointed for a lot of the same reasons. The first half of the game is just crap, for one thing.

Did he just complain that you kill too many enemies? Yeah, I'm thinking he doesn't get Serious Sam...

LOL!!!! "Nothing says Honey I'm home like a stick of dynamite" Are you kidding me? Seriously? That's the worst bad-ass talk I've ever heard. And that groggy voice doesn't really 'fit in' with his physical appearance. I was searching for a copy of SS 1 & 2 or the HD pack, but now I think I shouldn't bother. So much for the serious Sam Stone.... I was hopeful of finding the previous games, I still am. But this review isn't helping. Seeing all the comments of those who have played 1 & 2, I will get those and give these games a shot, and post another comment thereafter.

Yeah, I agree this review is way off base. The SS engine 3.5 looks pretty damn good for a game for 20 bucks on steam, and it's actually much closer to the superior SS1 and not cartoony like 2. This is what Duke Nukem failed to do - deliver some decent graphics, gameplay, admittedly low brow (but self-aware) humour, and challenging no-frills FPS action. And some of the scenes are downright gorgeous.

This review couldn't be further from the truth. SS3 is at least as good as 1&2 (FE/SE). I'd advise everyone to go back and have a look at Gred Kasavan's review of SS:SE. That will give you a much better idea about this game. Just newf*g reviewers marking the game down because there's no whack-a-mole cover system and/or it's not MW3/BF3.

ok, i disagree with this entirely. great friggin game is great

Just got this game form Steam for $20 and it's actually pretty fun... so long as you know what you're getting into. Do not even consider buying this game for the asking price of $39.99 or $49.99 for the special edition. If you like old school "circle strafe" games then this is going to be right up your alley. The $20 i spent on it is a fair price but it will be a better suited at $10. I also find it to be a breath for fresh air from serious "hard core" games like MW3, BF3, or GOW3. A lot of 3's in there! Might as well drop a few more: Resistance 3, Killzone 3, and Uncharted 3. Ok you get the idea. Get Searious Sam 3 and take a break from the Serious shooters out there but do try to find it cheap if you can.

Can't wait to get it, good old fun :)

@kozzy1234 I have not played it. But it DOES have lackluster graphics. And pacing problems are not a personal preference issue. The jokes were just straight up not funny. I forgot all other the things that were brought up, but the bottom line is: GS asked for this person's opinion. And so that's what this review is. A balls high 9 year old might have loved this game and given it a 10/10, but hated, say, Half Life 2 and given it a 2/10. It IS all a matter of preference. And that's what you got. It had GS level production values, showcased a lot of gameplay, and is what you would expect from GS. Reviews are good guidelines, but only take reviews for face value, and decide for yourself.

[This message was deleted at the request of the original poster]

One of the best 6/10 games in awhile..

3:23 ZOMG CYBERDEMON!!!

Very nice ingame music imnn right moments keep me crushing, bad thing is , too much kamikadzes everywhere all the way, till you ont know from where they come you almost dead, they ruin game, too annoying se them all the time

so , you guys saying the BF3 its better then serious sam ?

This is better than The Duke? Awesome, cause that one sucked!

Old school one-liners and half-meant jokes? Classic Sam! Welcome back!

man, my wife wants me to get this game for her, I don't want to !!! who's gonna clean house , dishes ?!? me ?! haha

uncharacteristically slow start? dude I seriously doubt you played a SS game before.

If you liked the first encounter, you will like this. It is the reviewer's taste. He obviously wouldn't have liked the first two serious sam games either, since the gameplay hasn't changed at it's core. Just added better graphics, some close combat weapons, bigger enemies, and awesome music. It's a niche game. It is to be expected the reviewer wouldn't like this game, for reasons he liked Call of Duty. He complained the game got boring because it dragged on for too long. Meaning, its longer than 6 hours. Don't worry about the score. This game is for fans of serious sam and old-school shooters exclusively.

Although I do think that this reviewer missed the point of this game somewhat, I'm not going to moan about the score. He reviewed it, didn't like it that much, fair enough. To be fair, it's not the kind of game that's going to appeal to everyone. But for the gamers that do like this kind of game, the score is a bit low. Maybe he was the wrong reviewer for the job?

[This message was deleted at the request of a moderator or administrator]

This is a very beautiful looking Sam Game! Wouldn't even think it was serious right off the bat. :/

Just a tip to you guys running GS, you should fire employees like this guy and Mc Shea since they are not even real gamers who understand which parts of the games the fans really like about those franchises. Also I hate it when he at first says that he adores a feature but a few seconds later he makes a critical punch below the belt and criticizes those features even harder than he embraced them. I get the feeling that he is like a redneck who just got up to the top of a escalator and just stands there blocking all the other people from getting up to the next floor.

Seeing this get a 6 and COD games get 9's and 10's really sickens me. I own SS: BFE and it is so much damn fun. I hated BlackOps and I couldn't play MW3 for more than 10 minutes before turning it off. I guess Croteam didn't send GameSpot a big enough check.

Played a trial for the first encounter and I really enjoyed it,shame this isn't that good.

did anyone notice the review was done with a pirated copy of the game? i wonder if that is how they found out about the scorpion- and if that impacted the review?

its looks extremely similar to the duke nukem forever game that recently came out

Hey guys! take a look at Metascore too. Gamespot's is only a number lower.