Gamereactor International reacts to the controversy of their sister site Gamereactor Sweden's review of Uncharted 2.
after none of the review sites gives this game below 9, possibly.
doesnt mean anything just ask anyone who bought odst on the hype (outside the diehard halo fans that is) and we all know that ps3 games are given the same treatment has ms games right.... lol
"we all know that ps3 games are given the same treatment has ms games right" Exactly. For Microsoft exclusives Gamereactor has their hardcore Xbox fan review the game. For Sony exclusives Gamereactor has their hardcore Xbox fan review the game.
There are no controversies. These are just recurrences----One or two sites spoiling the greatness of a game to garner hits and pull the attention of everyone, all sorts of fanboys included, towards them. And I just couldn't believe how effin' good they are at it.
They try to justify it by pointing out that ODST got the same score as Uncharted 2. THIS IS EXACTLY THE PROBLEM. Now honestly, I don't really care that much about one review score and if this guy thinks the game is an 8 that is fine but it is absolutely ridiculous to say that ODST and Uncharted 2 are on level ground when it comes to quality. Uncharted 2 features a campaign which I'm guessing (and I've heard) will be better than the first one. That should be enough. Throw in the cherry on top of well done multiplayer and co-op (I've been in both betas and am very impressed), and there is just no comparison. I'm not going to describe ODST because people will get angry but suffice it to say it should not be seeing the same score as Uncharted 2.
I mean come on, 6 hours great side story of Halo 3, but that`s it. And it get what, same score as GOTY - Uncharted 2? Some expansion pack is having SAME value for a Gamer as Uncharted 2. Come on! More over, when the second opinion is 10/10, which means a PERFECT game. How can you justify an 8? You just can`t.
"Uncharted 2 score controversy Angry fans calling us names Published 2009-09-23 Text: Petter Mårtensson Yesterday our Swedish sister site published their review of Uncharted 2: Among Thieves and the final score that it was given (8/10) by Editor-in-chief Petter Hegevall caused quite a controversy among fans. Instead of taking it for what it is - the opinon of one reviewer - there's been quite a bit of name calling directed towards Gamereactor, with some commenters calling Petter Hegevall everything from a liar to a Xbox fanboy (completely missing that the same reviewer gave Killzone 2 the top score, 10/10, and that Gamereactor Sweden gave Halo 3: ODST the same score as they gave Uncharted 2). Game reviewing is serious business, just like the rest of the Internet. We at Gamereactor International are saddened by how some people treat game journalists, which is hardly isolated to this particular case, and hope that at some point people will start to realise what a review is - the opinion of one person. Hopefully some commenters will also stop to pass judgement on reviews of games they haven't even played themselves. A review of Uncharted 2: Among Thieves, in English, will be published here on Gamereactor International next week. Until then, be excellent to each other." What a steaming pile of...well, you know what. Stop yourselves clicking the link and giving these turds hits. That's all they're after and they don't deserve any if this is the caliber of their content.
These are a few what people really look into IGN Gamespot Gametrailers Gamesradar PSM 1UP Gamespy ... and maybe 3 - 5 more and that's it !!!! Blogs mlogs noob websites don't count
If you're really serious about journalism, consider this: When your reporter puts up his review, or article, YOUR site endorses that piece. He is not a lone wolf posting, he is YOUR reporter posting stuff YOUR site agrees with. It's how all the respectable newspapers and news-magazines work. If YOUR reporter wants to say something YOUR site may not necessarily agree with, there usually is a disclaimer saying that his views are his own, not shared by the rest of the staff etc. Have you guys never watched a DVD with commentary and seen that disclaimer? If YOUR site refuses to endorse his material, refuses to stick behind his score, then don't post his stuff. Otherwise, there's no difference between YOUR reporter and any random dude who posts stuff on the net.
is that the review didn't match up with the score...That is the problem people had with the review from this site...The other thing is that if you compare the other review scores to theirs...GR gave negative aspects as the other sites gave praises...such as the sound...
very good point.....couldn't say it better myself
"people really dont care about small websites... These are a few what people really look into IGN Gamespot Gametrailers Gamesradar PSM 1UP Gamespy" Thats how I feel too, except I'd probably replace PSM with Game Informer... and thats why I felt even more confident that ODST was going to be a great game because all those sites scored it 9 or higher.
In that case they should employ people who know what they are talking about..
If you don't want controversy with regard to your reviews, then have someone review a game that's primarily a shooter and has platforming and puzzle solving elements that doesn't want the game to be something other than it is (meaning 50% hard puzzles). Look, it's great that the guy knows what he likes, but how about reviewing the game that's there rather than the game he'd prefer to have played? I mean, I'd understand if the game had drastically changed directions from the first to the second, but it hasn't. You knew what it was going in. How about reviewing it for what it is? Oh, and how about getting someone in there with an actual ear for music. Naughty Dog went all out with their music and everyone else has graded it high alongside the graphics. Oh, and how about for replayability you don't ignore all of the multiplayer that was added on, which for a TPS with roots in a single player experience brings a ton to the table, including co-op.
I think that's part of the problem... A glorified DLC scoring the same as a full fledged game with amazing graphics, multiplayer, story, gameplay, everything.
I honestly can't think of a site I trust. I could care less what any site "scores" a game. I read the review for their interpretation / description of what the game(s) have to offer. Other than getting information from sites I don't give any weight or credibility to the gaming media(s) opinion. Those sites you mentioned are some of the biggest sites on the net which garner them the most advertising dollars/revenue. So if anything there are a few smaller sites that give more reliable credible reviews than most of the bigger sites. Anyone that knows a thing about business knows that you don't piss off those that pay your bills (yes I am pointing a finger at you Gamespot). I will pick a multiplatform title to make my point to try and not ruffle the feathers of either side (because I lack a backbone, AKA am a coward ;). Just look at GTA IV. Anyone that can look me in the eye and tell me that game deserved it's score and keep a straight face? Man all I want to say is I will stake you in Vegas to go play poker and win me some money! Sorry but my honest opinion is the gaming media is, and has been for ages, sh!t. The gaming media has been in the toilet before this generation even started. Now it's just complete garbage that feeds off the negativity of fanatics. Some of which are not even gamers but just people that like to argue.
this is a great game and it is GOTY 100% even MW2 don't have a chance why ? simple both games got almost the same thing i mean SP well good on both MP looks good on both and addictive on both (PPL that are playing uncharted2's beta are LOVING it and MW2 well have almost the same as the old one) along with the other stuff BUT ... uncharted got 2 more things - longer single player ( MW got a very short SP ) - graphics that makes MW2 looks like an NES game add to that the upgrades from each game i mean MW2 got minor upgrades while uncharted2 got a crap loads of upgrades
LostDjinn That response is indicative of the sorry state of the review industry. Instead of bashing the same fans that drive their crappy sites, they should just get off their high horse and call it for what it is. I can't stand it when sites or gamers who say that reviews are just the opinion of one person. THEY ARE NOT just opinions. If they were they would be call OPINIONS! Sure they are written by people, but those same people call themselves professionals so they should be held to a professional standard. I don't, but alot of people depend on these "opinions" to make a decision whether to buy a game so they owe it to the consumers to make an objective review, not some BS opinion. If I wanted opinion all I have to do is start an N4g thread and I'll get loads of it! Besides If you read that review they just straight up gushed about the game and had nothing in the review that indicated that it would only be 8, and yet there it is an 8. IMHO "opinion" they only added the second opinion as a 10 in the hopes to even out the backlash of the 8 that they new would come when they assigned it. And now they are bashing the fans who drive these crap sites by saying they should play it first? We HAVE been playing it for some time now!!! EPIC FAIL by a useless site whom doesn't have the respect of the industry to begin with (Not on Meta or Game Rankings).
It kills me a how a reviewer can criticize and nitpick a developer's work but when someone criticizes their own work they get offended. What hypocrites.
Did anyone here play ODST yet? How was it? I won't get the chance until I actually go to the store (and if I have enough money after food shopping and rent). I just want to know if it is either a 9.5 or an 8 or below. I'm serious; if Reach is an xbox 720 game, ODST may be the peak of my 360 gaming. (okay, back on topic) FIrst of all, let me say that although I do believe to a certain point that a review is just an opinion, it is equally an opinion that is constricted by a standard, and most reviewers don't follow that standard. I guess at the heart of what I'm saying is can anyone see by reading these two reviews from GR how they can both score the game with the same score? Although (from what I've seen) I think UC2 is on a whole other level in terms of quality, both games look great to me, obviously just not equally great (just my own opinion). But to be fair (and I said this before) since even the reviewers that gave ODST a 9.5 said that it didn't do anything new and the game looks a little dated, and people who gave UC2 an 8 said that it was the best thing since sliced bread and it does everything well I wonder if the reason why sites like games reactor are giving both games the same score because they are both coming out close to each other and are both exclusives. Furthermore, I don't like the tone of the response: They say themselves that games reviewing is a serious business, but they must not take it seriously. A review is a systematic study, and if they are systematic, truly systematic, then when they call one game having "dated" graphics, it should reflect in the score. Gamers aren't idiots, they can see inconsistencies in a review, and therefore can voice their disdain for such inequalities. But I only wish people would be this passionate about politics, or religion. Then again, that's my "opinion" ;)
What the heck is that suppose to mean?. PS3 fans should be happy that they gave Halo 3 ODST the same score?. WTF does Halo 3 ODST score got to do with Uncharted 2?. Is GameReactor reviewing games based on hype and how big the frsnchise are?. Again games should be reviwed and scored purely on merit.
He tries to call out the people criticizing hie website, but refuses to take responsibility for the sites decisions. Like velcry said, your site is endorsing his review when you put it on your page. People are pissed because it is abundantly obvious that the reviews started with a score and worked from there. He literally picked two of the worst aspects of the game to give a 7. The soundtrack was recorded at skywalker studios, and the game is PACKED with replay value. That immediately made people second guess the legitimacy of the score. Remember this guy is an Editor-in-chief. When the review in question was posted here on N4G, I made sure I did not click the link so that I could give them hits. It is obvious that they were looking for attention, and they got it. However, it's the kind of attention that calls their credibility in question. That is not the kind of attention you want in regards to reviews. These issues above are one reason I love reading GameInformer reviews. Even though I don't always agree (kilzone 2 8.75, wtf?) they always present the game for what they see it as. If they like a game they say so, if they don't they say so. You never get the feeling that some one is lying, if anything you just feel like the reviewer is being too sensitive or loves the game too much. Maybe Gamereactor should take some cues from some of the bigger names and try to make a name for themselves through quality reporting/reviewing instead of the 'ol GameDaily/EDGE/Eurogamer b.s. rout.
The problem is that reviewers can review how they want but they HAVE to have VALID POINTS why the score is what they gave to a game. Remember Gamespot with their "too much variety"? Yeah the big problem is humans; as long as humans review games, there will always be biased BS.
I hate when websites makes an editorial to respond to fanboys!. Why bother
If you have a problem with my opinion of your review, remember this; It is just the opinion of one person. Review opinioning is not a serious business, just like the rest of the internet. I, at Datruth commenting, am saddened at the way some sites treat commenters! Hopefully, some reviewers will stop to pass judgment on games we have seen ten videos, played betas, demos and the first iteration of ourselves. A comment of the review of Uncharted 2: Among Thieves, in English, will be published here on News for Gamers next week. Until then, be excellent to each other."
"I hate when websites makes an editorial to respond to fanboys!. Why bother " You notice this only happens with ps3 games =\ And I thought 360 fanboys were the immature ones.
the 360 fanboys aren't complaining about their reviews because they're immature like you trying to start sh*t in PS3 stories. Immaturity winner? You.
To be honest with you i didn't have a problem with them until they tried to pass Halo 3: ODST in the same league as Uncharted 2. Yes games review is serious business and reviewers have the responsibility of being truthful and giving accurate scores to games that deserve high numbers. Not to expansion packs of a 2 year old game. Until they fix the score, these scum won't be respected or taken seriously.
I love how this idiot responding in the article indicts himself. "HALO ODST recieved the same score"...Hello! Anyone home?
I didn't think that was as bad as "Instead of taking it for what it is - the opinon of one reviewer" Um, actually it was the opinion of the website. Last I checked, the site wasn't called "Petter Hegevall's video game blog". I'm sure someone read through the review and gave it the stamp of approval, meaning gamereactor believed it was worth an 8, not just Petter.
but then again, while Uncharted 2 has been getting stellar reviews as of now, you can't expect everyone to like it as much. The same actually applies to every single games in history. People have different tastes, if you ask me what I think about Zelda:OoT, I'll tell you it's garbage, actually, I'll tell you the same thing for every single Zelda game since I haven't liked any one of them. But I also know they are seen as being some of the best games ever, but that doesn't mean I actually have to like it does it? A game review is partly objective (one cannot deny the fact that Uncharted 2 looks amazing or that InFamous was filled with jaggies) and a subjective part (like story, artistic design and the overall feeling that the game left on the person playing it). If the guy who reviewed it didn't like it as much as the other reviewers, how does that make his review less appropriate? The same applies to ODST, some people will just have a blast playing it while others won't. Most people see StarCraft as being the greatest RTS of all time, to me however, both RA2 and Wc3:TFT are better games, and if I had to review these 3 games, you can be sure I'd rate SC much lower than the average person, but that's just my taste. I wouldn't lie about it just to have my score be closer to the other scores. Maybe the guy just ain't that much into TPS, maybe he overhyped the game, maybe he expected something else, maybe he just didn'T liek the game as much as other people have and that's perfectly normal, no game is made for everyone. Even Mario, a game often stated as being for everyone, I can't stand mario games, I like the Golf/Tennis/Party series though, but I hate Mario games (the main series).
Exactly dreamcast. Its about time these reviewers realised they are representing an organisation and its going to be judged on their performance. No one going to remember Peter Whoever gave an *, theyre going to remember Gamesreactor.
What's funny is it would've gotten a 10 had the other guy reviewed it. If one reviewer from your site believes a game is PERFECT, and another thinks it's an EIGHT, you probably need to reevaluate a few things. Maybe they should just fire all the reviewers and throw darts at a dartboard to determine scores from now on.
=O. I cant actually believe this... someone is not looking at Uncharted 2 through fanboy glasses! Kudos. And i agree with your sentiments. I dont see why anyone would think goldeneye was the best FPS ever though lots of people do. To most people Uncharted 2 will be one of the best games theyve ever played. Its just a shame that the reviewers who dont like it will be accused of being on the MS payroll and that Sony fanboys refuse to believe there might be one person in the whole world that this game might not appeal to. Edit: And why is it when any site/magazine gives a game like UC2 below a 9 does everyone say "well its a no name site/magazine anyway" even though when the site/magazine was giving inFamous or KZ2 a 9 or whatever everyone loved it.
a $60 expansion pack that should be priced at $40 is exactly equal to a $60 sequel that should be priced at $90 (I'm basing this on my personal opinion of the value of the content included. The actual number doesn't matter; just the fact that it's EASILY worth the $60). That's garbage in my opinion. I don't give a flying **** if Peter over there didn't enjoy Uncharted 2. It's not his blog or something. He's supposed to give us an ACCURATE assessment of the quality and value of a game. ODST DOES NOT EQUAL UNCHARTED 2. If it was Reach, I'd shut up because that would make some actual sense.
Who knows but I think everyone is scared of the Ps3 catching up to the 360. I have been viewing reviews for a while now & it always seems like the Ps3 games get their scores reduced for the most obnoxious things or are not always inconsistent. If you reduce a games scrore, that is fine, just give a good reason as to why though. Just look at that Ign score they gave Sigma 2, why was the Ps3 version reduced in graphics department? Are they not the same looking? I think that in all seriousness nobody wants the Ps3 to take over the 360 this generation.
"People have different tastes, if you ask me what I think about Zelda:OoT, I'll tell you it's garbage, actually, I'll tell you the same thing for every single Zelda game since I haven't liked any one of them" "I dont see why anyone would think goldeneye was the best FPS ever though lots of people do." That's why you guys aren't game reviewers. Nobody buys Game Informer, Gamepro, etc.. to get Joe Blow's opinion. They're called 'reviews', not 'opinions'. There's a very clear distinction... a review breaks down everything that is quantifiable and gives the reader enough information to allow them to make an educated purchase. The reviewer's taste should have no influence. You guys seem to think a reviewer is thinking "does this appeal to me?" when they should really be thinking "does this appeal to the readers?" And therein lies the problem. How is a reviewer supposed to decide if a story like MGS4's will appeal to the reader? They can't. There will never be a game story that everyone will like, as you guys proved. I don't want to read that a game has a generic premise or game x is more fun than game y (yes, this actually happens)... I'll make those decisions for myself. Tell me the premise and how well it's executed. No matter your tastes, you can tell how well a game's story is executed, or how the pacing is, or how good the controls are. Did I personally like Bioshock? Not really. Is Bioshock immersive? Yes. Anyone who says otherwise most likely has mental problems and shouldn't be reviewing games. If a professional reviewer is unable to recognize that a game is good when said game is getting unanimous praise, then they failed at their job.. simple as that. They can't inform their readers that they should get a great game, they can't do their job.
well then Dreamcast, assuming you are right(and it could very well be the case), tell me one pro reviewer who has never, in one of his or her reviews, let his or her personnal taste influence the rating. I know for sure IGN and Gamespot are filled with reviews influenced by the reviewers personnal taste, expectations and his past experiences with the series. How can one judge the art style while art in itself is totally subjective. How can a soundtrack be rated objectively. I know most reviews have objectives points (technical graphics, bugs/glitches, frame rate, lenght etc) but some elements are purely subjective. Also, if we take art style, if a game is aimed at the Japanese audience (and those who love animes), should the reviewer judge it based on it's target audience, his own taste or the general public which usually doesn't exactly love this kind of art style. Also, if the reviewer happerns to be a huge fan of a certain series (let's say Final Fantasy), even when trying his best, chances are that he will be unable to completely make abstraction of his feelings for the series while reviewing a FF game, reviewers are humans, not robots who can isolate their feelings at will.
I was just about to make that point, but you made it beautifully, bubble for you sir. But yes, I wish people would stop thinking it's ok for the reviewer to have their own personal tastes influence the score. It absolutely astounds me people think that's acceptable. A game should be reviewed against a clear set of standards and criteria, NOT a personal opinion. That is how is should be, but we all know most reviewers don't do this. It's very sad to see the state the game media is in, very unprofessional indeed. This is why we see such a huge gap in scores between reviewers, because they are not reviewing games the correct way.
The score was an 8. Second opinion was a 10. From review... "Plus:Fantastic storytelling, lovable characters, brilliant presentation, beautiful graphics, good environmental variation, decent multiplayer mode" "Minus:Somewhat repetitive shoot-outs, too few puzzle elements, semi-stupid enemies" Lool. The quality of the review wasn't too high. When your second opinion is a 10 and you go through the positive and negatives in said review, the score doesn't add up. And it's GR sweden... pfft. There's also an issue of deducting points off for sound and replayability and not explaining why in the actual review... I'm not one to defend a games before it comes out, fyi
I wonder if they felt the enemies in Uncharted 1 were too tough. After all that was one of the complaints some people had. Not sure why, but some people obviously wanted a pushover.
OF COURSE SPICILY WHEN YOU RECEIVE YOUR CHECK FROM M$.
And not the 10 out of 10 one. They obviously knew there would be a backlash but they were probably desperate for hits. Getting the same Score as Halo? LOL LOL LOL, how flattering for Naughty Dog it must be for their game to be compared to a generic, rehashed $60 dollar add-on.
Grow up droids .... you're pathetic.
WHOA! whats that strong stench of urine? Oh wait! its the droids tears. you guys might wanna get that looked at, cause something in your messed up genes is wrong.
No Badfinger, it's just coming from your buttcrack. B-But teh bots never troll PS3 news!
Someone needs to come up with a better system of reviewing games.
Or maybe gamers themselves need to grow up and stop taking reviews so bloody seriously. The fanaticism this generation has reached an embarrassing level, I personally would hate to be a reviewer in these times, deviate from the status quo even by 1 point and you get crucified. As for all those bulling it over the ODST and Uncharted 2 comparisons...eh none of us have played either game?! I think I actually preferred this place when the Xbox trolls were in greater numbers, at least I could just roll my eyes and feel good about being a Sony gamer. Now some of the PS3 hardcore in here are the most ridiculous, fundamentalist embarrassments to gaming to be found online.
Buy the game, and review it by YOUR standards! Don't expect others to evaluate the game for you! I'm not a fan of FPS, most people think HALO is a 10/10 game! but even if it was 20/10, i don't even want to play it, couldn't care less about the score. My opinion is that every game above 5 deserve a try! So an 8 is still a awesome score. It's true that reviews are flawed, but it seems that people care too much about scores, almost as the game success depends on it! The game isn't even out, so how can people cry about reviews scores when most of us didn't even play the game?
Dipso Uhmmm odst is out. Where have you been. Lots have played it. And also there was a beta and a demo for UC2 already. Again what are you talking about? BTW if you liked it before when xbox fans ran the site then sorry for you cause it will never be like that again. MS is running out of steam...
No 'real gamer' should take reviews as gospel, but unfortunately there are plenty of people ("unreal gamers"??)), especially here, who live by them, latch onto the first 'low' score for a game they want to personally demolish and go "Nyah, nyah, that proves it!". They're the gits that annoy me, not the 'low' reviews in themselves.
"Hopefully some commenters will also stop to pass judgement on reviews of games they haven't even played themselves." Right... but something like Uncharted 2 is one of those rare games that you don't need to play to know it's good.
wait until you get the game. Then come back to bash us and give us more hits. Yea don't come and bash us before you play the game, but we definitely expect you come and listen to why you shouldn't bash us to begin with (more hits) Doesn't make any sense? Yea I'm confused too. If they truly stand by their score and not trying to be different to get hits, then they shouldn't write another article to justify it.
Exactly. Once people get the game, more people will know how much less credible that review is.
you're my hero, can i hang out with you?
Lol @ all the Sony fans complaining and making up conspiracy theory's. Just face it will you Uncharted 2 is not as good as Halo 3 ODST but I'm sure you'll get at least one good game on your system at some point......in it's remaining life cycle LOL!!!!!
I like how you don't even believe what you're saying. What "AAA" games have you dipsh1ts gotten this year anyway? PS3 already has Killzone 2, Infamous, NGS2, MLB09, and Demon's Soul, as far as exclusive games go; Halo Wars was a critical flop by Halo standards (by Halo's usually overinflated scores, not quality because halo stopped being all about quality in the 360 era). Your last chance is Flopza 3, which seems like a great racing game for rednecks as you can customize each of the cars. Considering USA is full of rednecks, press outlets will be coming when Forza comes out (especially because of the duffel bags). PS3 owners have Ratchet, U2 and GT5 left. Take your dumb ass elsewhere, dipshít.
I don't need to post what games we got this year as you Sony droids know what we got seeing as you all troll every single 360 article that gets posted on this site.
haha another delusional bot. Uncharted 2 murdered ODST in reviews so far. Don't even compare ODST to UC2 when it lost to Infamous.
Hold on, not even my fingers is needed to count the "AAA" exclusives on xbox360.
Games like: Stoked Race Pro Section 8 Halo Wars Velvet Assassin Ninja Blade And probably a few more I'm missing That's more 360 flops in one year than the PS3 has ever had since it launched LOL. "I don't need to post what games we got this year as you Sony droids know what we got seeing as you all troll every single 360 article that gets posted on this site." - How did you manage to type all that correctly with the tears welling up in your eyes?
Sad no 360 AAA game this year. After ODST failed to be AAA, is there any hope for the bots?
Liquid Ocelot got pawned like a little fa99ot...
"I don't need to post what games we got this year " Translation: I don't know. Way to pwn yourself, moron.
Isnt the issue how they did it? Praise it up and diwn, not mention issues of any kind, and then give it a 8 for some reason?
Everyone is entitles to their own opinion... as long as it matches mine ;)
mine is better than yours!