|
Post by MRSKELETON on Sept 7, 2006 22:28:06 GMT -5
www.penny-arcade.com/comicI need to say nothing more, Because i feel the same about review magazines Except for the picture of IGA the terrorist in GI
|
|
|
Post by jameseightbitstar on Sept 7, 2006 23:52:54 GMT -5
Darn straight. Reviews are near-useless.
|
|
|
Post by Discoalucard on Sept 8, 2006 11:59:05 GMT -5
Eh. I kinda agree with it. But the concept I don't agree with is that some genres adhere to certain elements which can be considered, by many, to be plain bad game design. Like, random encounters. We shouldn't be playing RPGs with random encounters anymore (although they only become an annoyance with the battle system or dungeon design is lacking...all of the recent Megaten games except Persona 3 use them, and it's not a big issue in Nocturne or DDS because the battle system is fast and awesome. It's more annoying in Devil Summoner because of all of the back tracking.) In this case, I think it's totally justifiable to mark it down. The idea is, gaming should evolve, and if it's just the same tired old stuff over and over, then yes, it deserves to be panned.
On the other hand, a reviewer shouldn't mark down a 2D fighter just because it's a 2D fighter, even though it happens like that all the time.
The review they were making fun of was pretty poor though.
In any case, today's PA is kind of embarassing - I'm usually not too critical of them, but it's definitely a case of two people who don't know what they're talking about trying to make it seem like they know what they're talking about it. The comic isn't explicitly *wrong*, persay, but the simile is totally, totally off base. Action games and RPGs are two completely different beasts.
|
|
|
Post by Neo Rasa on Sept 8, 2006 12:25:28 GMT -5
A thread was made about this on the PA board itself and I posted a bit in it so I'll do the old cut and paste:
I think his post [Gabe's news box post] misses the larger issue (the strip itself covers it flawlessly though). The problem isn't that the reviewer dislikes Japanese console RPGs so much as that he can't seperate that from his review. He writes from the standpoint of the game being bad due to its genre rather than to how effective it is as an entry in that genre.
On the other hand, a good review could give this exact same score and be a good review not because it speaks highly of the game, but because it makes it crystal clear whether or not you personally would like it. I think Gabe is a little off the mark to say that he would have been affected by the review when, as he mentions earlier, the review resulted in an average score due to characteristics he embraces in a game.
.......
...the problem with video game reviews at large isn't the opinion, it's the delivery. There's an immediate condescending tone taken to towards anything that's not within the chosen narrow genre (and disturbingly, in many cases a chosen SERIES OF GAMES) that the reviewer loves. The majority of movie critics got over this years ago, hopefully game journalism stops being a worthless cesspool in my lifetime.
.......
They'd [Gamepro] always have the earliest reviews. The secret wasn't just that they played the games for about an hour or so, but that they'd base reviews off betas of the game, demos, etc. and write them as if they were for the final retail version of the game.
The system is inherently retarded though.
Let me put it this way by again comparing it to the movie industry, like Virulent said, movies are much shorter so they can often have reviews out quickly thanks to an advance screening held for critics. Even then, a critic hardly has the time or resources to see every upcoming movie.
The standards for games in general now, ugh.
You don't read the Sun Times to see if Ebert did a review of Ass Fuckt 2: 18 and Dripping or Dracula 3000. Yet game "journalists" waste time on Chicago Enforcer, The Guy Game, and other absolute garbage that isn't exactly playing for critical favor to begin with. It's idiotic IMO to make an attempt to cover, say, EVERY officially licensed game released on the XBox/PS2/Gamecube yet that's what these people try for. It's a waste of time. Hell Trigger Man probably got any sales it did BECAUSE it was reviewed in Game Informer, regardless of the number.
|
|
|
Post by YourAverageJoe on Sept 8, 2006 12:55:18 GMT -5
This reminds me of that X8 review I saw on Gamespot, where the whole game was supposedly dragged down by X's inability. Now I don't like to be a smartass, but that series now spans ELEVEN GAMES, ten of which have had more or less the same upgrading system for X; you find a capsule, you get an upgrade. The reviewer somehow ignored that clever series-consistent feature and began bashing the game for his inability to choose Pallet.
|
|
|
Post by Discoalucard on Sept 8, 2006 14:12:28 GMT -5
Pallet?
You mean, like a character? Weren't they X, Zero, and Axel?
Unless they changed the names for Europe.
|
|
|
Post by michiyoyoshiku on Sept 8, 2006 15:56:16 GMT -5
I was so angry at EGM Panning games that aren;t even out yet dissing GNG for being Too Old school I wrote them a letter that said Fuck you 207 times.....1 for every issue.
they haven't wised up yet though.
|
|
|
Post by ReyVGM on Sept 8, 2006 16:15:35 GMT -5
I've never been too much of a GnG fan due to that moronic difficulty but somehow I always end up playing and liking them all. I love the SNES one for the music, too bad the weapons suck big time.
The Master System one is cool mainly for the item screen where you can change the weapons to your liking.
The Wonderswan one is great too, but all the other ones are meh.
|
|
|
Post by Discoalucard on Sept 8, 2006 16:38:15 GMT -5
Toastyfrog caught a lot of shit about that review.
I'm not a GnG fan so I didn't bother grabbing it. I mean, I might give it a shot, but all of the concerns EGM had, I can definitely see where they're coming from, which is why I'm cautious with it.
|
|
|
Post by ReyVGM on Sept 8, 2006 17:06:54 GMT -5
If it's like the old ones, then I might not even touch it. I am not too thrilled when it comes to cheap deaths anymore.
|
|
|
Post by Malroth on Sept 8, 2006 17:47:24 GMT -5
Hm. In some respects I can understand how reviewers have a narrow view on what a series should be. For example, Star Fox Command. I was expecting it to be a return to what Star Fox 64 was; rail levels with lots of enemies and occasional all range levels. But, like the past few Fox games, the new developer took it in a different direction and made it into something like a strategy RPG.
Needless to say, I didn't like it at all.
So I can understand when a reviewer gets annoyed when one of his favorite series gets a drastic facelift and he writes a scathing review.
|
|
|
Post by jameseightbitstar on Sept 8, 2006 17:52:44 GMT -5
Reviews are full of kablooey. Every time I see a review, especially a critical one, for a game I've played, I tend to find the reviewer doesn't know jack.
Look at all the reviews that dismiss Crusader of Centy as "a rip-off of Zelda" even though it plays NOTHING LIKE ZELDA. Or the ones that talk about how it's "too easy to die" in Wizardry, when in truth the reviewer was probably playing like a complete moron.
In fact, any time I see a complaint about difficulty, especially in RPGs, my first response is to play the game in question, and decide if the reviewer: A) Only spent five seconds on the game to get a title screen shot B) Played the game but didn't really attempt to understand it C) Played the game and attempted to understand it but was so much of a whiney crybaby that he didn't like what he understood and ran back to the cradling arms of Final Fantasy 7.
Truth is, I find very, very few games are actually "bad." Games are the antithesis of the "90% of all things are crap" statement... of all 300+ games I must've played in my life, some have had aspects that annoyed the hell out of me (Strategy RPGs, for example) but I've found very few games I honestly couldn't get addicted to.
|
|
|
Post by Drawesome(Dale) on Sept 8, 2006 18:08:22 GMT -5
I hate everything about modern game media,and I think EGM is the worst of all disgraces to are hobby. Journalist's got to first understand the appeal of old school games(which is intensity Uncomplexity and Condensity). The mainstream gaming media sources for the most part all seem to have the same opinion about things and the same old gameplay journalism cliche's over and over again. They see no inovation because honestly theirs very little of in most years of gaming. Another thing people haft to understand, if it ain't broke don't fix it. It's about fun not revolution's,game journalist's look at it in generally the wrong way. EGM can't seem to truly enjoy any game even stuff they gave 10's never get any mention of personal love. EGM is'nt about telling you what game's are good just dissing almost every game so they can to get reaction's out of people to who like the game's then try to seem cool for being dick's. Every page of their mag seems to put down gamer's in general and express disgust toward's nerds. Some of the article's they've had are just plane stupid, namely the two about non-hardcore punk kid's and completly non-gamer adult's, if I wanted to know these people's opinions about games(Which I don't)I'd just talk to them I see them everyday.(60% Percent of the world's fuckin population). So what you have is a gaming mag that goes out of it's way to show a point of view you can read or hear about in almost every other place in general media. FUCK EGM.
|
|
|
Post by MRSKELETON on Sept 8, 2006 18:59:54 GMT -5
Dale check your calender. It's not old school game year, Hardly anyone plays them.
|
|
|
Post by michiyoyoshiku on Sept 8, 2006 19:05:41 GMT -5
THe only magazine I will renew will be OXM BYE BYE Gamepro (run by morons for 12 year olds) , Game Informer (the best of the 3 but still I see no reason to keep getting it) and EGM (just run by morons)
The Only reviews you can trust are the ones here and at Game FAQ (even though GAME FAQS powers are future EGM and Gamepro Employees)
Say what you will about EGM......I'd still plow Jennifer Tsao.
|
|