The Nature of Reviews (ME, GTA4, TH etc)

[scooby_dooby]

No I'm the purpose of a review is pretty obvious.

How can a review say whether you want to buy a game? Too many intangibles for that. It can only say whether the reviewers consider the game to be good, bad or average.

The purpose of a review two-fold, to give a somewhat subjective ranking of the game, and at the same time, provide the readers with enough details so they can make their own decision about whether or not they'll like the game more/less than the reviewer.

You would think that was obvious, but apparently not... when it doesn't fit some people's agenda.

 

[Arwin]

Hey, cool! Another review discussion ...

Maybe we should make a general review thread that contains all the possible generic arguments that you can make about reviews and delete any post that references anything already mentioned in that thread. Then people can stick to discussing the actual game features, and discussing actually playing the game.

 

[AlNom]

Mod Note: All relevant review discussion from Too Human has been merged into the previously spawned Review Discussion Thread.

 

[upnorthsox]

Interesting thread revival esp. going back and reading the first page, I'd like to hear if scificube or Shootmymonkey have anything to add now of their exchanges back then with the knowledge that almost 10 months later and there's still no x360 patch for ME.

 

[Scott_Arm]

If a game has a bad or mediocre review, I won't even try it. What if I actually liked it? I'd be wrong and people would laugh at me. The experts know what games I should like and I need to make sure I like the right games. Even if there is a free demo available, I won't try it for myself.

 

[Vic]

The purpose of a review two-fold, to give a somewhat subjective ranking of the game, and at the same time, provide the readers with enough details so they can make their own decision about whether or not they'll like the game more/less than the reviewer.

You would think that was obvious, but apparently not... when it doesn't fit some people's agenda.

Uh...the two are interlinked. The review will tell the reader whether its worth purchasing from its review score.

Not sure about your 'agenda' point. Sounds like more paranoia to me. I havent even played the demo, people are just saying what the purpose of the review is.

For the record, Heavenly Sword was written off as a 'flop' and a shitty game on these very forums, yet it has a metacritic rating of 79. Just goes to show how extreme people can be against a game when it is hyped.

 

[Kittonwy]

If a game has a bad or mediocre review, I won't even try it. What if I actually liked it? I'd be wrong and people would laugh at me. The experts know what games I should like and I need to make sure I like the right games. Even if there is a free demo available, I won't try it for myself.

You might like it but then you might not, just because the game is crap doesn't mean you won't enjoy it, take the last few sonic games for example, those were just complete and utter garbage, but people bought them anyway and I'm sure they had fun playing them to an extent, and you know what? As long as people buy these garbage sonic games, they'll keep making them. But just because you enjoy a game, doesn't mean it's a quality game, different people have different taste in games I guess.

A lot of times when most of the major sites critically pan a game, not just one, but multiple well-known media outlets, you can kind of tell the game just isn't all that good, but if you feel compelled to pony up 60 bucks for the game just to maybe prove them wrong, that's entirely up to you.

They're basically trying to warn you from spending money on something that clearly isn't very good and maybe you can spend it on a game that will be much more enjoyable but what do they know, right?

Gametrailers gave it a 6.5. Video review:

http://www.gametrailers.com/player/38913.html

 

[RobertR1]

That's the one thing I love about demo's. I can play and decide for myself. It certainly beats reviews and biased trolls (for or against) on various sites. I wish demo's, esp for those games where it's easily possible, were downright mandatory.

Personally, I can't imagine Too Human being more boring than Assassin's Creed. Hopefully, my copy from Gamefly will arrive next week and I can decide for myself. The demo was enough for me to rent and it's easy for me to justify the rental costs on a "ok" game than some of the shit I've spent $60 on in the past.

However, good sales of Too Human would undoubtedly provide much more entertainment come NPD day than most games released this year.

 

[Brad Grenz]

The Assassin's Creed comparison is an interesting one. It had some similar review schizophrenia with some people giving it glowing scores while others harped, rightfully so, on the fairly obvious flaws in the game's design. It went on to sell really damn well, though. It'll be interesting to see how Too Human sells given the reviews out there. I'm not sure it can replicate AC's review-proof sales success. Despite its problems, Assassin's Creed had an amazing look and delivered impressive vistas and a truly innovative style of play. I think Too Human will too easily fall to the wayside. The reviews are suspect and the technofantasy setting just doesn't intrigue enough to overcome that handicap.

 

[Scott_Arm]

You might like it but then you might not, just because the game is crap doesn't mean you won't enjoy it, take the last few sonic games for example, those were just complete and utter garbage, but people bought them anyway and I'm sure they had fun playing them to an extent, and you know what? As long as people buy these garbage sonic games, they'll keep making them. But just because you enjoy a game, doesn't mean it's a quality game, different people have different taste in games I guess.

A lot of times when most of the major sites critically pan a game, not just one, but multiple well-known media outlets, you can kind of tell the game just isn't all that good, but if you feel compelled to pony up 60 bucks for the game just to maybe prove them wrong, that's entirely up to you.

They're basically trying to warn you from spending money on something that clearly isn't very good and maybe you can spend it on a game that will be much more enjoyable but what do they know, right?

Gametrailers gave it a 6.5. Video review:

http://www.gametrailers.com/player/38913.html

I'm not saying reading reviews is bad, and I'm not saying people should drop money on games they know nothing about. But with free demos, store demos and friends owning games, it should be pretty easy to get your hands on a game that you want to try for free. Don't take reviews at face value. You might enjoy something even if it's a 5 or 6/10.

 

[Kittonwy]

I'm not saying reading reviews is bad, and I'm not saying people should drop money on games they know nothing about. But with free demos, store demos and friends owning games, it should be pretty easy to get your hands on a game that you want to try for free. Don't take reviews at face value. You might enjoy something even if it's a 5 or 6/10.

I played through the demo actually, long demo even though the demo was really easy but frankly it tried to do a lot of things but it did none of them adequately, kind of disappointing, it was functional but somehow just felt really unpolished and half-assed.

 

[DrJay24]

However, good sales of Too Human would undoubtedly provide much more entertainment come NPD day than most games released this year.

Agreed. I think MS saw what was coming, hence the timing of the demo (day before E3) and the August release date (like Lair). They kind of sent it to die, but I would guess it will still pull off 250k for August.

 

[obonicus]

Gametrailers gave it a 6.5. Video review:

http://www.gametrailers.com/player/38913.html

See, this is why I have trouble with gaming publications. The gametrailers text wasn't bad, but it came off as 'it sucks, it sucks, it sucks'. (Honestly, it's like: 1 positive, 9 negatives. 1 positive, 9 negatives). But despite this, they gave the game a 6.5. They're just so gutless.

It's like the Eurogamer review of Eden. The reviewer said a bunch of stuff I don't agree with, and it was pretty bad all around, but they start off with 'I hate PJE', and still they give it a 7?! If you hated the game, give it a bad score!

 

[DrJay24]

Gametrailers also likes to talk about how good a game is then give it a 7.5, they seems to have one guy for the numerical score and a different guy for the script, I can't stand them. I like the videos though.

 

[scooby_dooby]

For the record, Heavenly Sword was written off as a 'flop' and a shitty game on these very forums, yet it has a metacritic rating of 79.

No. It wasn't. It was well recieved around here and certainly noone was calling it shitty. Short maybe, but not shitty.

People referring to it as a flop, would be using that word in context, in response to the many posters who predicted time and time again how great this game would sell (much as you are now predicting the major mas appeal of LBP).

Relative to most games released it sold very well, and was certainly no flop.

Not sure about your 'agenda' point. Sounds like more paranoia to me. I havent even played the demo, people are just saying what the purpose of the review is.

Oh I dunno..maybe I'm wondering what you're doing ina thread about a game, you've never played, will never play, and generally have no interest in...backing up a guy who has pretty much crapped all over this game for the last year on numerous forums. And maybe I'm thinking how it's a strange conincidence that this a a major Xbox 360 exclsuive title... bah, you got me, paranoid indeed!

 

[Subtlesnake]

See, this is why I have trouble with gaming publications. The gametrailers text wasn't bad, but it came off as 'it sucks, it sucks, it sucks'. (Honestly, it's like: 1 positive, 9 negatives. 1 positive, 9 negatives). But despite this, they gave the game a 6.5. They're just so gutless.

It's like the Eurogamer review of Eden. The reviewer said a bunch of stuff I don't agree with, and it was pretty bad all around, but they start off with 'I hate PJE', and still they give it a 7?! If you hated the game, give it a bad score!

And Ellie finishes the review with "SO WHY CAN'T I LEAVE IT ALONE? Because it's good". She 'hates' the game, but is still strangely addicted to it, which is why the score and review come off as schizophrenic - because her experience with the game was like that.

If the game didn't want to make her continue playing in spite of its problems, then I'm sure she'd have given it a much lower score, as she's done with games many times in the past (being saddled with a ton of terrible Wii games).

And in general, anything below 70% is a bad score for game. I think the rating scale goes something like this: 90% = Excellent, 80% = Good, 70% = Mediocre, 60% = Poor, 50% = Awful.

 

[obonicus]

And Ellie finishes the review with "SO WHY CAN'T I LEAVE IT ALONE? Because it's good". She 'hates' the game, but is still strangely addicted to it, which is why the score and review come off as schizophrenic - because her experience with the game was like that.[

If the game didn't want to make her continue playing in spite of its problems, then I'm sure she'd have given it a much lower score, as she's done with games many times in the past (being saddled with a ton of terrible Wii games).

That's nonsense. All she has for the game is criticism. Just a 'I like it' to justify the score is horrendous reviewing. Why not cut out all this wordy crap, go with 5 word max reviews? 'Mostly okay - 7/10'. 'I love it! - 9/10'. Save us all the trouble.

I mean, it's obvious she just padded out her review, probably to meet some arbitrary word count, so she had come up with ridiculous excuses ('pretentious'? we're judging games on that now?) and some that are just stupid, like the complaints about controls being imprecise -- they're anything but.

And here's my inner cynic speaking: the reason these 'publications' throw curve balls like that, go against the trend just enough to appear as an outlier is to draw in hits. The same reason Kotaku will take innocuous headlines and blow them into tabloid proportions.

Of course, there's the opposite side of the equation. When a publication buys into a game's ridiculous hype and just proves to be completely useless for its primary purpose: giving consumers a basis from which to make informed decisions. Look at GTA4. Not Edge, not Eurogamer properly touched on the game's myriad problems -- and these are the premier 'publications' in the gaming industry, held as superior to everything else. How many complained about repetitive story missions? In fact, how many pointed out the cookie-cutter GTA story once you get past the beginning of the game? What I seem to recall is that everyone praised GTA4's story!

And in general, anything below 70% is a bad score for game. I think the rating scale goes something like this: 90% = Excellent, 80% = Good, 70% = Mediocre, 60% = Poor, 50% = Awful.

Nonsense again. Eurogamer has given poorer scores. They're all just gutless; they want to make a stir, but they don't want to really upset the boat.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

That's nonsense. All she has for the game is criticism. Just a 'I like it' to justify the score is horrendous reviewing. Why not cut out all this wordy crap, go with 5 word max reviews? 'Mostly okay - 7/10'. 'I love it! - 9/10'. Save us all the trouble...

I wholeheartedly disagree. The text exaplins the score. It's no different to plenty of Top Gear reviews. I recently saw Jeremy Clarkson's review of the Renault Clio and for 1- minutes he complained about the build quality, handling, and all sorts, then summed it up saying it'ss a great little car because it was fun and cheap. It was a review of contradictions, but honest and coherent. It listed pro's and con's, lots of con's and a few but significant pro's, and ended with an overall impression. He would recommend the car on the strength of the drive and price, but would recommend against it on the rest of the package.

Ellie would recommend Eden as an addictive experience, but be prepared you'll have to put up with a lot of frustrations and annoyances in addition to the fun elements - if you have a short fuse for tricky controls, Eden is probably one to miss (in her opinion)

 

[Scott_Arm]

I wholeheartedly disagree. The text exaplins the score. It's no different to plenty of Top Gear reviews. I recently saw Jeremy Clarkson's review of the Renault Clio and for 1- minutes he complained about the build quality, handling, and all sorts, then summed it up saying it'ss a great little car because it was fun and cheap. It was a review of contradictions, but honest and coherent. It listed pro's and con's, lots of con's and a few but significant pro's, and ended with an overall impression. He would recommend the car on the strength of the drive and price, but would recommend against it on the rest of the package.

Ellie would recommend Eden as an addictive experience, but be prepared you'll have to put up with a lot of frustrations and annoyances in addition to the fun elements - if you have a short fuse for tricky controls, Eden is probably one to miss (in her opinion)

That pretty much sums up how I feel about Dead Rising. I like it despite recognizing a lot of obvious flaws.

 

[obonicus]

Ellie would recommend Eden as an addictive experience, but be prepared you'll have to put up with a lot of frustrations and annoyances in addition to the fun elements - if you have a short fuse for tricky controls, Eden is probably one to miss (in her opinion)

Check the review again, please. Why exactly does she like it? There's a brief blurb if you take the first and last bit about not being able to put it down 'because it's good'. What does that explain? I know why it's bad, I appreciate that. (I don't watch Top Gear, so I can't really opine, but if they pulled that sort of nonsense I'd say they're terrible too, so I don't know how that works for a basis of comparison.)

If you're going to pad out your word count with inane, yet inflammatory comments, then give it a positive score because of a certain je ne sais quois, then don't bother. Just give us the score. It's not like gaming 'prose' is light on the wankery to begin with.