The title already alludes to the idea of this being a more critical blog, and rightly so. I just can't help but notice how often we suspend our human ability of comradery for the sake of filling out our own biased agenda. I can certainly recognize it in all facets of life, but for now we'll stick to the realm of gaming. The inevitable disagreement on issues will almost always lead to heated discussions, but here's my viewpoint on why some people just don't deserve to call themselves gamers. Well-informed comments are welcome here :).
1.) Community (ie the majority of gamers)
- Will there ever be a time where everyone will welcome somewhat disagreeable scores for the sake of conversation? Or is the idea of someone having an opinion, rather than following the hivemind, just too much for us to handle? I find it interesting that it seems to be that many posters seem to have "review score schizophrenia". For example, when Gears 3 gets an 8 from a site, the uber-PS3 fanboys on here are magically able to recognize that someone else has an opinion that isn't the norm; at the same time, you can anticipate that same score having a tremendous effect on those same posters IF Uncharted 3 receives that score. I'll even predict right now that one or more n4g users will complain against any disagreeable score by stating "they're just using PSN Pass as an excuse". You can quote me on that prediction.
2.) Reviewers
- I don't think music reviewers can be as under-critical as some of these folks (which is saying something). I can alleviate some of my complaints against reviewers since they're essentially gamers who usually get paid to write reviews through the means of receiving review copies (ie not paying for their copies). Essentially rarely giving them the initial feeling of what paying sixty dollars for a game feels like every time, they rarely grasp the idea of using the 0-10 scale when reviewing the games given to them. Essentially, that means whenever a reviewer for a major site says "Worth the sixty-dollar price point", that reviewer's point is technically moot since they haven't essentially PAID FOR THAT GAME. One could argue that you only need to pay sixty dollars for a game once to know whether or not it's worth the initial price point; however, given the oversaturation of certain genres, I contend that reviewers should be checked under a microscope just to see how often they've paid "the sixty-dollar price point".
- I'd also like to harp on reviewers not having the "cajones" to look after games more empirically while also giving their personal disappointments with the game. For example, if you check out certain reviewers on rottentomatoes, you'll noticed one of the very few reviewers, Richard Maltin, was in a very small group to give Drive (my fav. movie of this year) a rotten rating. That's right, he gave the same rating to a movie in a 95% range and a movie in the 50(-ish)% range, that movie being It's Kind of a Funny Story. I will admit, this could be found as "grasping for straws" by some since I'm playing the comparison game between two different genres; however, I'm trying to aim more towards the point of keeping your personality throughout all of your reviews, regardless of genre. We, as gamers, should understand when a viewer's going to point out great interplay between the Uncharted games and terrible interplay in your average JRPG. Reviewers should NOT be held to saying "Well...it's expected for a JRPG to have terrible dialouge lines, so that's not fair". What's unfair is the demand for a reviewer to arrive into playing a certain genre with expectations beforehand, thereby capriciously alleviating certain cons to give it a higher score. In conclusion, I think more reviewers should have the willingness of Jim Sterling--though not demanding they be exactly like him--when it comes to using the 1-10 scale.
3.) Developers
- What the hell are thinking with the profusion of cheap online DLC tactics? I honestly can't put you guys in the same group of gamers IF you willingly create an atmosphere of ripping off your "fellow gamers/fans" acting under the guise that your hands are tied. You, the developers, have the choice to be a louder voice for the community when speaking to the publishers. If you honestly have the passion of some indie devs, I suggest you start showing it immediately.
- Don't you dare compare--or allow publishers to compare--used game purchasers to pirates. I have seen some of the most deplorable statements made in the past few months revolving around this issue. We know second-hand purchases don't make you any money, but here's the issue: the initial seller NEVER makes money from second-hand purchases. I'm asking developers to handle this issue, if any are reading, by coming out to recognize that second-hand purchases are never going away and should never be compared to pirating.
Hey gang, It’s been a whirlwind few months here at the Larian castle, attending some of the biggest awards ceremonies in our industry, and we are absolutely humbled by the recognition we’ve received from our players and our peers.
Publisher One or EIGHT and developer Team EARTH WARS will release physical standard and Deluxe editions of LOST EPIC for PlayStation 5 and Switch on August 8 in Japan, the companies announced.
Golf With Your Friends gets better again, with the introduction of a Critical Hit DLC pack and the launch of Speed Golf.
The puppy picture alone is enticing enough to read this blog :P.
"For example, when Gears 3 gets an 8 from a site, the uber-PS3 fanboys on here are magically able to recognize that someone else has an opinion that isn't the norm; at the same time, you can anticipate that same score having a tremendous effect on those same posters IF Uncharted 3 receives that score. I'll even predict right now that one or more n4g users will complain against any disagreeable score by stating "they're just using PSN Pass as an excuse". You can quote me on that prediction." You have kind of missed the other side. When Gears gets an 8 the uber 360 fanboys go OMG biased review. Defiantly should be 9.9 at least. Two sides to the stupidity.
OT: The reviewer side is interesting. Most reviews go for overall experience. So we get these 9-9.5 because one aspect of the game is amazing. This is fair enough but this kind of ignores major aspects of games that a lot of people follow to see if they should buy this game. The most recent example is Gametrailers review of BF3. They said the single player is forgettable (overall that story aspect got 7. something) but the game gets 9.2. For me that's bad because its too opinionative. Some people, like me, like single player a lot. Obviously the review looks past short comings if his part of the game he likes is good. The should really look at a game from a broader perspective. A lot say scores are not everything but to get a score of 9.2 suggest nearly everything about it is perfection. But in the reviews' words it isn't. Its a messed up system that hardly any publications want to change. If a part of a game is average at best the score should be effect. Overall experience can, and more often than not does, knock out certain types of gamers