Hype and review scores.

[Geeforcer]

Looking at the review scores for certain games, I can't help but note an interesting trend: when a much published game from a huge widely recognized developer comes along (especially if the game is a sequel), the first wave of the review scores is rarely reflected in the comments by people who actually bought and played it. You know what I am talking about: a good game deserving of high 8/low 9 scores suddenly end up with 9.9s and perfect 10s. Mediocre games that should have gotten 6s end up with 8s.

Here are some examples:

Halo: Certainly a very good game, deserving of 9+ score. But 9.9? 10? Come on - the game was not perfect. If the absolutely identical game was released, but without the hype and the name, it would have ended up with 9.2s and 9.3s.

MGS2: Again, a good game - but it did become repetitive and the story made no sense whatsoever. IMO, it was in the high 8 range - but how many 9.7 reviews have you seen?

MarioSunshine: Another game that received a hefty tilt. High 8/low 9 range, but it still got many 9.5s, 5 out of 5s, etc.

State of Emergency: I’ve seen scores, of 8.5, 8.8, 9.0, etc. I am still wondering what game all those reviewers where playing.

The biggest offenders: FF 8 and 9. Every 9.5 review made me cringe - and there were plenty

So, the question is: do the highly publicized games (esp. sequels) coming from famous developers get an unrealistic tilt, or is it just my imagination?

 

[Mr. Angry Pants]

Yes, hype has an enormous impact on a game's final score. You will never, ever, no matter how good it is see a game without hype recieve a perfect score.

 

[CaptainHowdy]

I dunno, I think it comes down to the individual who is reviewing, I personally thought SOE was a turd on a stick, but there are many people out there who loved it, if the reviewer is one of them, if he LOVED a game, he is naturally going to want to score it high.

Same with Halo, I dont know many people who have played it and not loved it, I think it is very deserving of a 9-9.5 score, it was epic, and though it had many flaws(level design my biggest gripe), it certainly should be placed higher than most games out there..

MGS2 reviews, I don't know what they were smoking, but I think everything comes down to personal taste..

Commandos behind enemy lines for PC got mainly 5's to 7's
and if I were reviewing it, I would have given it a 10..
I think thats why sites like gamerankings.com is important, you
see every view from every side..
though on games like Halo and Metroid Prime, the few low scores you find tend to be from some very misinformed people who are usually showing heavey signs of bias, or just plain were not good enough to handle the game.

 

[Blade]

Some would agree that those games deserved such scores.

I don't agree with perfect reviews unless a game is heavily polished and very fun, but fun factor plays a major part in reviews.

If the audio/video/presentation suck, and the gameplay/control/fun is the best.. I wouldn't hesitate to give it above a 9.

You mentioned Mario, which was one of my favorite games this year. It had its problems, but I still spent almost 2 weeks straight with it being the only console game I played.. and I had just bought Halo and some other Xbox titles beforehand. I even got around to renting Monkey Ball 2, but even then I was too intrigued by SMS to get serious with Sega's monkey sequel.

IMO, IGN's review states it the best.. sure the game was apparently a little rushed and lacked the polish that most other "AAA" Nintendo games do.. but it still comes through as an addicting gameplay experience. 5/5? Maybe not. I think SMS deserved the 9.4 that IGN (and GameSpy) gave it, though.. just for the fun factor. It could've been better, but eh.. it was great anyway. If it was any other game by any other name, it would have done the same! This is Jesse Jackson signing off!

 

[Johnny Awesome]

I agree that hype/bias is really screwing up game reviews lately. These are the adjustments to the general review consensus I would make to a few recent titles:

Halo 9.5 -> 9.5 (I think it deserved the scores it got)

Morrowind 9.1 -> 8 (buggy, ugly, nothing truly special)

GTA (both games) - worthy of 9.0, but not any higher

MGS 2 9.5 -> 8.5 (ridiculous that it got 9.7s in some places)

Mario Sunshine 9.5 -> 8.5 (poor control and presentation, nostalgia really helped this title)

Quantum Redshift 7.3 -> 8.5 (great game)

BLiNX 7.3 -> 8.3 (underated, not quite as good as SMS though)

Splinter Cell 9.5 -> 9.0 (good, but overated)

MechAssault 9.2 -> 8.9 (lobby problem is inexcusable)

Metroid Prime 9.7 -> 9.2 (control problems were easily avoidable)

Sometimes games are over-hyped and there's a backlash, like BLiNX and Quantum Redshift, but other times it translates into ridiculously high reviews, like MGS2. It's pretty rare when a game is off by more than 10 points and it's a shame when this happens, but that's why it pays to read reviews and not just look at the final scores.

 

[Vince]

MGS2: Again, a good game - but it did become repetitive and the story made no sense whatsoever. IMO, it was in the high 8 range - but how many 9.7 reviews have you seen?

Ohh, you did not...<covers mouth in shock>

Yeah, I mean, God-firbid a video game act as a vehicle to instill questions of morality and our own future. I mean, the nerve of that Japanese son-of-a-bitch for making a two part series that tackled questions like, "How much of life is derived from my Genes" and then follow it up asking "How much of life is derived from Information". Not like we're facing that same philisophical question in contemporary society or anything - so where does he get off?

Doesn't that ass know that all gamers want to do is mindlessly shoot other moving targets? I mean, you don't even have to shoot a single person in this game.. please!

So, next time Kojima, don't follow the MG tradition [way before the MG-Solids came out] of Codec and intense story telling that has philisopical and moral overtones because people don't want that. Just give then a 1st person camera, an M-60 with infinate ammo, and tell then that an alien race is overtaking this world. It'll be HUGE


Now, excuse me why I go ponder my own philisophical questions like - Perhaps the leftist media is right, all these people can comprehend is killing and simplistsic ideals. Or, Perhaps trend this ties into the undereducation of the average American that I previously said was BS... hmm


EDIT:

JohnnyAwesome: You know I have a HALO fetish, but common. HALO deserves a 9.5 for being a strait-up, blast the aliens, FPS; but MGS2 doesn't for being a game thats not a FPS, maybe a game that makes you think about the world around you, not just how to kill the next guy in GTA or HALO or Max Payne?

If anything, MGSx deserves a higher score because unlike the other strait-up FPS games, it veers from the path and uses the fact that it's an interactive media to teach you something.

[not personal as you should know GeeForcer, just the principle]

 

[Vince]

Oh, yeah, I knew there was a point in there somewhere...

Perhaps if you understrood the plot in a game like MGS2, you could appreciate it for what it is and the developer anticipated. While theirs no doubt there is some inflation of any hyped game's scores - the reviewers are 'professionals' what ever that means. They do this alot more than you, know alot more about the games than you - if you don't like the reviews then don't read them.

Also, unlike the 'preofessional' reviewers, you aren't exposed to the turds that some games truely are. So, of course when looking at a top-down perspective--having only played the, say, top 10% of games--you miss the vast amount of shit down at the bottom of the hill.

I learned this after playing that Extreme Paintball game on PC a few years ago... still get the occasional nightmare from that.

 

[marconelly!]

It's all a matter of an opinion and how the reviewer feels while he's playing the game.

For example, MGS2, in my opinion, is one of the most fun, polished and visually and aurally impressive games ever made. I love it, don't care what others think about my feelings towards it, and I think it deserves high scores it got. It's story may be melodramatic and overdone (however, it's obvious that the game is not taking itself seriously most of the time), but nothing ever made has been perfect.

Halo, GTA3, and GTA:VC are also extremly playable and fun games. They deserve all the 9.5s and 10s they got (again, in my opinon). Why would you not give a high score to a game that you are having a lot of fun with, to a game that 'talks to you' and makes you feel good?

 

[Ozymandis]

Metroid Prime 9.7 -> 9.2 (control problems were easily avoidable)

Totally

 

[Blade]

Johnny: SMS had control issues? MP = 9.2?

Okay, whatever you say. Heh, I'm glad that you're not a professional game journalist..

If MP is a 9.2, Halo is definitely under 9.

 

[Geeforcer]

Ohh, you did not...<covers mouth in shock>

Yeah, I mean, God-firbid a video game act as a vehicle to instill questions of morality and our own future. I mean, the nerve of that Japanese son-of-a-bitch for making a two part series that tackled questions like, "How much of life is derived from my Genes" and then follow it up asking "How much of life is derived from Information". Not like we're facing that same philisophical question in contemporary society or anything - so where does he get off?

Doesn't that ass know that all gamers want to do is mindlessly shoot other moving targets? I mean, you don't even have to shoot a single person in this game.. please!

So, next time Kojima, don't follow the MG tradition [way before the MG-Solids came out] of Codec and intense story telling that has philisopical and moral overtones because people don't want that. Just give then a 1st person camera, an M-60 with infinate ammo, and tell then that an alien race is overtaking this world. It'll be HUGE


Now, excuse me why I go ponder my own philisophical questions like - Perhaps the leftist media is right, all these people can comprehend is killing and simplistsic ideals. Or, Perhaps trend this ties into the undereducation of the average American that I previously said was BS... hmm


EDIT:

JohnnyAwesome: You know I have a HALO fetish, but common. HALO deserves a 9.5 for being a strait-up, blast the aliens, FPS; but MGS2 doesn't for being a game thats not a FPS, maybe a game that makes you think about the world around you, not just how to kill the next guy in GTA or HALO or Max Payne?

If anything, MGSx deserves a higher score because unlike the other strait-up FPS games, it veers from the path and uses the fact that it's an interactive media to teach you something.

[not personal as you should know GeeForcer, just the principle]

O...k...

Vince, my favorite games are RPGs, that are made or broken by the story/plot. I can't stand the games without them, and greatly enjoy graphics inferior game if the story is compelling. However, there is line between rich, complex and fascinating, and overblown, melodramatic and convoluted. IMO, MGS2 crossed that line.

 

[Johnny Awesome]

Vince you seem easily impressed by MGS2, but we've had this argument before. Complex does not = good. The issues were raised at a grade six level. I'm fine with discussing these issues in games. It's the execution in MGS2 that bother me. I spent 8 years in university so I'm no stranger to rigorous thinking. You think MGS2 tackled these issues well and I think they were handled horribly. Let's just agree to disagree on the matter.

 

[Ozymandis]

If MP is a 9.2, Halo is definitely under 9.

That's a bold statement Blade.

Hmmm. I do feel that Metroid Prime owns Halo (single-player), bad controls or no.

On the other hand, I agree with Johnny somewhat. Metroid is obviously getting the benefit of some serious nostalgia. The game is no 99 or even a 97 in my book. It's the best game of the year, but it's got a few elements that I perceive to be flaws.

 

[CaptainHowdy]

Metroid Prime 9.7 -> 9.2 (control problems were easily avoidable)

Totally

when you find another shooter where platform jumping is as smooth
as it is in Metroid Prime, come back and I'll let you call it a problem, until then, we can just consider it YOUR problem, because I certainly am having no problems with it.. its hands down the smoothest control scheme Ive seen... do you use Cstick to strafe in Rachet and Clank? does it suck because you cant? because Metroid Prime plays like that, just because you are seeing from Samus' eyes instead of behind her back doesnt mean the controls should change with that.

 

[BoddoZerg]

You forget, the problem is much worse with PC games than console:

Warcraft III = 95% --> 85-90%, its a great game but not as good as Starcraft was.
Unreal Tournament 2003 = 90%+ --> 80-85%, again a good game but not as good as its predecessors.
NOLF2 = 92% --> 80-85%, NOLF was much better.
Black & White = 95% --> Turd in a Box, 60%
The Thing = 90% --> Turd in a Box that Vomits on You, 50%

Its definitely true that a lot of games get hyped up as the second coming, and then all the reviewers rush to give it the best review they can write. Usually, as with Black & White, there's a backlash in the second wave of reviews, the reviewers who actually played the game before reviewing it, and give it a drastically lower score.

IMHO, the problem is that reviewers are afraid of giving a poor review of a much-hyped game, especially in the PC field where the number of big budget games is few. After all, why take the chance of giving a bad review to a UT2003 or Warcraft 3, losing thousands of sales (since most gaming mags are tied in with videogame stores) and potentially pissing off the game company and losing advertisements? On the other hand, with an unhyped "Strifeshadow" or other small independent game, reviewers don't dare to place a 90%+ on a game that might turn into an embarassing flop, selling single-digit thousands of copies.

Unfortunately, its gotten to the point where I dont even bother with reviews. When it comes down to it, 75% of the time I find myself disagreeing with everything said in reviews, so I dont trust a single word reviewers say.

 

[Rodéric]

I agree hype helps *a lot* unfortunately.

But even so, people have different taste, almost no reviewer have my taste which is really a problem to me, because I've a hard time figuring out what will please me or not.

Eternal Darkness is fun, but too dark to me, and there's something missing (the changing view exists in legacy of kain series, the sanity level exists in Kult, a RPG I played).

Star Fox Adventure, although a bit too easy, I enjoy playing it a lot !

Super Mario Sunshine, nice really, some interesting new stuff, find the all style 3D platformer a bit too hard (all my current levels are stopped at one of them ;( )

NeverWinter Nights : Single player is lame (IMO). Multiplayer have potential, but it's hard to find a good party and a good DM....

Rogue Leader : it's star wars, it's fun, but it's too hard IMO.

Luigi's mansion : one of my first NGC game, really funny, I enjoyed it.

Resident Evil : it looks gorgeous... but that's about all about it

Pikmin : it's just too cool, I love pikmin.

I believe pikmin didn't got too many good reviews even if I found it really nice, it wasn't hyped either...

 

[Teasy]

On the other hand, I agree with Johnny somewhat. Metroid is obviously getting the benefit of some serious nostalgia. The game is no 99 or even a 97 in my book. It's the best game of the year, but it's got a few elements that I perceive to be flaws.

Its got nothing to do with nostalgia. You just said MP is the game of the year, yet how many other games this year have gotten 99's and 97's quite a few. It just comes down to what review system your using. Reviewers tend to have a different system to normal people. Allot of sites will give a slightly flawed game a 5 out of 5 or 10 out ot 10 as long as they loved the game. A 100% at most sites doesn't even seem to mean a perfect game (what game could be perfect?), it just means a great game. Once you start judging review scores by the sites usual scores I think you can see that MP deserves most of the scores it gets.

Some of MP's review scores are rediculous, but not for being too high, for being far to low. A site just reviewed MP and gave it 60%.. what where they thinking?

 

[Blade]

Ozy: Well, since we're throwing around "crazy" opinions here (like Metroid Prime's scheme being bad) then I think I'll state my opinion on Halo. I'm a FPS enthusiast, and after playing through Halo.. I can say that it's not as good as I expected after the reviews.

In fact, I'd argue that there are only 2-3 "good" levels in Halo. Maybe 4 or 5. The other half of 'em are utterly repetitive.

BTW, I wouldn't talk about MP's controls Ozy. Everybody kept trying to tell you that the game isn't a straight FPS, more of a first-person adventure.. but you didn't listen. Now you think that they should drop the review score a whole notch because "it's a console FPS and requires dual-analog". I agree that I think that there's a small fault with the MP controls (in certain spots) but I'm not exaggerating like you are. (i.e. posting a little sad face and a comment about the controls every f'ing time a Metroid Prime thread comes up.. )

Oh, and what Teasy said. Besides that, most sites rate according to console. If MP is one of the best games that GCN ever sees (or GOTY, or whatever) there is no reason not to give it 9.5+ reviews. (which it has gotten, 97.6% average on GR)

 

[CaptainHowdy]

On the other hand, I agree with Johnny somewhat. Metroid is obviously getting the benefit of some serious nostalgia. The game is no 99 or even a 97 in my book. It's the best game of the year, but it's got a few elements that I perceive to be flaws.

Its got nothing to do with nostalgia. You just said MP is the game of the year, yet how many other games this year have gotten 99's and 97's quite a few. It just comes down to what review system your using. Reviewers tend to have a different system to normal people. Allot of sites will give a slightly flawed game a 5 out of 5 or 10 out ot 10 as long as they loved the game. A 100% at most sites doesn't even seem to mean a perfect game (what game could be perfect?), it just means a great game. Once you start judging review scores by the sites usual scores I think you can see that MP deserves most of the scores it gets.

Some of MP's review scores are rediculous, but not for being too high, for being far to low. A site just reviewed MP and gave it 60%.. what where they thinking?

speaking of which, one guy said he loved MP, it was one of the best games he ever played, but knocked 20 points off its score because he said he did not like to read.

 

[Geeforcer]

Do note that I didn't cite MP or any other recently released games for a reason: some time has to pass until things die down a little and we can see whether the game lived up to the hype and the reviews. In a coupe of month, when everything settled down and is distilled, we will be able to judge what role hype, nostalgia, Nintendo factor did or did not play in the MPs reviews, but right now its far too really to make such calls.

BTW, the last relatively recent major game that came out of nowhere with minimum hype and was great was Half-Life. I read some positive comments about it early on, then nothing for a year. A couple of months prior to its release, it was mentioned in PCGamers 100 upcoming games feature, and the comments were rather lukewarm. Then, all of the sudden, BAM: I go to Sharky Extreme and see an extremely positive review. LOL, at that time I was shacking with anticipation for Daikatana and have given up on half-life.