The Great Question: What was so bad about it?

I've been reading a lot of reviews and comments- all of which are mediocre. The professional reviews on IGN and whatnot all say it is also a mediocre game for this or that reason.

But why? When you think about it, we got what we expected didn't we? Kick ass graphics, smooth swinging, bigger city, more foes, a new fight system and more voices from the film.

I admit, I was a tad bit disappointed but I think the real blame is that Activision was unable to live up to the previuos game. Game 1 is level based so when you jump right into free roam- regardless of the graphics- everyone goes apesh!t. So Spider-Man 2 was, and still is, a kickass game. Then the third comes out and they present with the same material but a few expansions.

So I'm gonna go ahead and make a list of pros and cons. Anyone can add if they like:

Pros
-graphics for next gen and pc stuff
-the fight system
-bigger city along with 6 bridges
-More realistic swinging
-Daily Bugle, new and improved

Cons
-dodging is harder and requries extensive precision
-very little material related to the movie
-while choosing a mission is fun, the plot and storymode is not concrete and it seems hard to believe everything is happening
-slower swinging than game 2
-lack of cheats. Black suited spidey is fun to play as but you'll have more fun playing Spidey in Spidey 2 because he is faster, quicker and overall better.

It's a hard list to an extent because you want to keep comparing it to the previous game and not the game itself.

"I'm your huckleberry."-Val Kilmer as Doc Holliday in Tombstone