Eat Sleep Play’s has issued a statement regarding G4TV’s Twisted Metal review and the reviewer’s response (which has since been deleted) towards the negative fan criticisms of the article.
After reading the article I don't trust the g4 reviewer or respect his score. He basically thinks the game is crap before reviewing because its an old ip from years ago. I wonder how he would review Mario, zelda ,or final fantasy, or metal gear 5
He's clearly not very competent. I can imagine that he would end up savaging those titles you mentioned. "First off, 3 was my optimistic score. If you're happy playing a game that's nearly 20 years old" When I read that all I could think was that the guy is clearly not a gamer, as long as a game is fun who cares if the concept has been around for ages.
This is nothing new. We should have all learned the grand lesson of not trusting G4 reviews years and years ago. I give G4 tv a spanking 2............................. ............................... out 0f 5
He at least doesn't understand why they made some of the choices they made for the gameplay. The way he describes the ability to turn in place as "lame" and "lazy development" is way off. That ability has been in previous games, and it's there because it's a multiplayer combat game first, and a driving game second. If you couldn't turn quickly in place, how would you hit back at someone coming at you from an angle? If these cars behaved like actual cars, the game would be much less playable. It's a choice made to improve the game, not a lazy oversight.
Jaffe's reply was perfect!
"The graphics are completely lackluster and there's just bits of laziness throughout. The handbrake is a perfect example--go ahead and hold it down without pressing any button, then steer. The car magically goes in a circle. Lame" Because realism = good game, right? Worst reviewer ever.
I havent seen the G4 review (but i will after posting this) and so it makes me wonder if the score was clearly based on the single player aspect? I have read other reviews that say this games is obviously a multiplayer focused title with a weaker single player part. Perhaps that is what the reviewer meant by "20 years old"? Now in some cases I do believe in the old saying of: if it aint broke, why fix it. The style of the game may be old but it has a mechanic that has worked for these 20 years. The right way to gauge a review on a game like this would be to look at it from the perspective of the elements that made the series stand out and then add to that with anything that has changed. Clearly this reviewer must not have enjoyed what made twisted metal such a PS favorite so long ago.
@afreelunch... exactly...Anyone remember what happened when a different studio tried to make TM more realistic?...TM 3 and 4 were the result, and they were embarrassingly awful compared to the 2 games before... the founders of Eat Sleep Play made EVERY good TM game, and none of the bad ones...this PS3 reboot is perfect for fans of the franchise...and I couldn't give half a shat about what the non-fans think of it... It's also amusing how the reviewer claims he 'loves' car combat games...and acts as if there is ANY competition in the genre? TM as a franchise dominated the genre entirely, only until SingleTrac broke apart...and 989 took over (which resulted in the unmentionables)...leaving room for Vigilante 8 to fill the gap at the time (which is long gone now)... so what is he saying is so much better than TM for the PS3?...Full Auto 2? I can't think of any other car combat games that came out this generation...and that was simply a launch joke... but...get the facking online working...this is starting to look like Warhawk all over again...
I guess the reviewer wanted a pac man type of evolution from the eating balls to full out 3d.He wanted tm to go from car combat to .... car combat with gt5 driving physics ...yeaa .umm no. I loved the old TM and playing it with this gen graphics and being able to play it online is the only evolution it needed. And the dude who reviewed is a total dick.You tell people to accept your opinion while arguing at the people for having opinions. If you have to further explain your review in the comment section then that means you gave a shitty review
Dave's cool; the demo was rough around the edges, but it was fun to play (liked being talon myself).
Was that "First off, 3 was my optimistic score. If you're happy playing a game that's nearly 20 years old?" the only comment he made? Was anyone around to see what else the guy said?
Someone just lost his job... crappy review..l epic reply by jaffe
@pixelsword hmm demo was rough, but fun, usually translates to mediocre game. problably a day 365! buy for me.
On the one hand, I think "G4? Hah, they haven't been credible since they gave Fable II Game of the Year." So, I couldn't care less about this review. But on the other hand, SHUT UP, JAFFE! Please, stop being such a crybaby. There are going to be biased, immature idiots in the game industry all the time. But you're making yourself out to be one of them when you respond to every freakin' thing. First it was Cliffy B and everything he said was broadcast from the highest mountain. Then, it was Peter Molyneux and it seemed like he had a new interview every single day. Now, it's Jaffe.
Jaffe had no problem with the review. His problem was the reviewer was attacking the fans of Twisted Metal. Where as Cliffy B and Molyneux complained about reviews.... Jaffe does not mind the review.. Even said "it helps him learn how to improve" But, Jaffe got pissed because the reviewer was insulting the community acting like a total ass... which is why he said he would rather have a 1/5 from a guy who knows his shit, rather than a 3.5/5 from a complete dick
What's wrong with Fable 2? And I wouldn't call Jaffe a crybaby, he's just someone who speaks his mind. If he has an issue with this reviews attitude then he has a right to talk about it and you can be damn sure than he will.
Did you bother to read...at all? He said he wouldn't care about the score if it came from someone who treated the folks in the comments with a little more respect. He said he had a problem with the guy being such a dick!
3 disagrees? Can I get clarification of which comment deserved them? Is it that people don't like Fable 2, my opinion on Jaffe being allowed to speak his mind, or the fact that I accidentally wrote reviews instead of reviewers? I'm curious.
Cliffy: Hate out of 10?! Jaffe: Don't attack the fans! I like G4, but stop being such a ^#$#^%$ing $#@%%$%^ mother of @#^%#%$#^&%^&$#&%# &^^&^.
"He said he wouldn't care about the score if it came from someone who treated the folks in the comments with a little more respect. He said he had a problem with the guy being such a dick!" Jaffe telling someone else to be more respectful? That's some good irony. The funny thing is, reading the reviewers response, I don't really see how he's being a dick. It's not a response to the fans either, but rather, it's a response to the fanboys that can't handle an opinion different to their own. His frustration/anger crept through at times though.
@ above, I too don't really see what the reviewer wrote in his comment that got Jaffe so mad. Beside the part about the "living in the mom's basement and girls not liking you" part at the end, the was really nothing that came out as offensive or bad from the reviewer. Maybe its because I read Jaffe's comment first before reading the reviewers comments (but that is how it was presented in the article). But reviewer's comment it does not seem to warrant the response that Jaffe gave, since he himself said he was alright with the written review itself.
I absolutely agree. The review may be a joke. But Jaffe is a loudmouthed idiot that thinks he needs to stay in the news or something. I detest Jaffe.
Jaffe is obviously just pissed that the game got that score. Doesn't matter what he said in his tweet or whatever it was. I too didn't really see anything in the review that made him seem like a dick. Oh and dedicatedtogamers. Those biased immature crybabies that you are talking about, make up probably 90% of the people that comment on n4g, thats why you get disagrees. I completely agree tho, Jaffe just needs to shut his mouth and make games, it just makes him seem just as bad when he does things like this. O and sorry to the Jaffe drones in advance for offending you.
You need to learn to read and comprehend better. Jaffe stuck up for punks like you.
"living in the mom's basement and girls not liking you" THAT is RUDE from every possible angle! not enough bashing the game, now fans of the game also insulted? WTF is wrong with him?!
The only people that the reviewer attacked were the loud mouthed, irrational, childish, puerile fanboys who made wild allegations of conspiracy and bribery, people who well deserve being put down. But I guess Jaffe had to stand up for his own kind by being offensive towards the reviewer and calling him names. Or maybe he just couldn't accept the review score but guised his retort as standing up for the fans.
Damn right . I dont see any other dev crying around cuz he thinks the reviewer is not fair towards the community ??? wtf . And everyone should respect the reviewers decision ,the guy got balls,nobody tells it like it is today . Plus,didnt Jaffe ran out on his team after the game was done? Got an issue? Heres a tissue !
@Colwyn The difference between the games that you mentioned and Twisted Metal is that they have evolved quite significantly over the years, for better or worse. I spent about five hours with Twisted Metal last night. It's fun. It's chaotic. It's well done for what it does. But at the end of the day, it's basically the same game that it was in the PSX and PS2 days. Which isn't a bad thing, but it isn't a huge step forward to the franchise that the power of the PS3 was capable of. To me, they could have taken out the single player and cutscenes and made this a downloadable title.
So by your standards RE4 wasn't a huge step forward either? Nothing really changed but its still praised as the best entry in the franchise that also revitalized it. I think the same thing could be said about the newest TM.
Are we talking about the RE4 re-releases, because RE4 was pretty innovative when it came out. It's touted as one of the best because of it's innovation. For one, it was a huge graphical accomplishment for the GC, and then they broke their whole scheme of "turn, turn, turn, run..." in third person and were the first ones to give us OTS shooting controls that were later adopted by games like Gears of War and Army of two. I'm not a RE fan in the slightest, but the original (RE4) game was something to be proud of, for sure. It was innovation in the purest sense (gameplay wise....not so much story)and that's why it is always brought into "Best gamez EVAR" lists. On topic though, this reviewer was a douche. Dude started his review by saying it wasn't going to get higher than a three BEFORE he reviewed it. That's just bad taste. Edited for a spelling error :)
@antz1104 you literally picked the worst possible example. RE4 was a genre-defining game that had evolved in gameplay, graphics, mechanics, and scope. Twisted Metal PS3 is a facelifted Twisted Metal PSX/2. Its still fun, enjoyable, and purchase-worthy. You just can't expect 10's across the board for a rehash
@Creachtree, actually I didnt. mstoner gave a good arguement which I agreed. TM and RE4 mirror each other very well. RE4 was a good story on a new system for the franchise at the time and better handling. So is TM. To turn your own argument against you TM graphics are drastically improved since the last iteration, the handling is good once you get used to it and you have the option to change them if you desire, and the scope is titanic when you look at the single and multi components. To say its a rehash is just ignorant when the basic premise may be the same, while the content and quality is a great improvement over previous iterations with customization, single/multi match modes, and a story(while not Shakespeare) the fans want to see.
@ antz I am surpirsed that you mention as RE4 as not being a huge step forward. I really don't want to come off as mean (since this is the internet and not verbal) but dude, RE4 was probably the most innovative game in the past two generations of consoles (Gamecube gen and Wii gen). It revolutionized everything that was RE in everyway. And as Mstoner81 said, it affected games such as GEARS of War. Cliffy B said that he wanted to follow the same concept of having the "A" button be a prominant feature as it was in RE4 and the gamecube controller (the HUGE "A" button on the controller). I can't even describe how wonderful a game like RE4 is and how risky it must have been for the developers to make. It was basically changing the rules of a RE game and if it wasn't well received by the consumers it could have been disastrous. So kudos for that RE team for taking a chance at something new and different instead of rehashing old and safe concepts. I know its smart business to not rock the boat. As mentioned earlier if it ain't broke, don't fix it. So in that sense I agree with what you said Antz. But if you were looking for a example to justify why Twisted Metal didn't need to innovate (granted I have not play TM) you really as Mstoner82 said picked the worst possible example. *stepping off meager soap box*
re4 did not invent ots shooting anyway the review is off. I'm tired of people expecting every game to be real
"RE4 was a genre-defining game that had evolved in gameplay, graphics, mechanics, and scope." I thought RE4 blew. I played it for free (borrowed) and couldn't make myself play for very long. The RE series peaked with RE2 and took a step sideways with RE3, before falling off my gaming radar completely with RE4 and RE5, which both sucked in my opinion. As for Jaffe, his comment was clearly not about the review itself, and he was right. That reviewer is a symptom of what's wrong with gaming journalism. Very unprofessional. I'm not surprised to see certain people here defending him and attacking Jaffe though. Typical N4G. That reviewer does fit in here, I'll say that much.
This is ridiculous! Don't tell the truth about another mediocre PS3 game or you'll face the wrath of gaming sites filled with PS3 fans. Then the reviewer must denounce "Halo" in efforts to appease PS3 fans. Ridiculous. Everyone could see Twisted Metal was going to be average at best; it received an average score. However, this kind of idiocy will never change. Reviewers need to "MAN-UP"! Reviewers need to say what they have to say: Then stick to their friggin assessment! That's why I dont trust reviewers: They Get Punked all the time!
how about you read the article next time kid
Keep at it...maybe you'll actually get better at trolling.
All I want to say about the reviewer's response is that if someone made a RPG like Planescape: Torment or the old Baldur's Gate games today, I would play it if the story and similar elements were good. Just because it's old gameplay, doesn't make it a bad game. I mean, seriously, I've been doing crosswords since I was 12. I haven't asked for some big turn on crosswords or advancement on the concept, just a puzzle that forces me to use my memory (which sucks, by the way) in a manner that I enjoy. Why is there this need for constant evolution of gameplay and mechanics? The games I played in the 90s are still fun and, hell, there's a huge community of people who make emulators to run them on almost every electronic device as well. Just don't get that logic.
Call me safe, but I'd be apprehensive if gameplay was radically different. Basically I want Twisted Metal Black (all I know) with bigger maps.
He gave it three out of 5 which is essentially a 7/10...a "good" game. So why are there more cons than pros?... This review makes no sense
Is it me or does it seem like IGN is the benchmark review that alot of other reviewers go off of to make their score seem around the same. Now since IGN waited to do their review all the scores are all over the place haha Mabye I'm just thinking too hard.
This reviewer is a joke and very unprofessional.
Well, I gotta give Jaffe points for giving credit to Adam Sessler. He's the* reason G4 is worth anything and Jaffe knows it. This reviewer seem to have forgot that it's supposed to be an arcade-y game and Jaffe called him out on it though. Opinions are ok but I think people use it as a crutch to basically say anything they want with no valid arguments to back it up nowadays. Which is annoying. Jaffe is an odd man. But you gotta give him credit for speaking his mind thoroughly.
The reviewer not only admits to hating series that started in the 90s or games that get pumped out year after year but he also insulted the readers with his mommies basement and no girlfriend stereotypical BS comments. I'm surprised he didn't tell people to go and see what outside is like too. Anyway I bet this dude throws Mario parties when ever a new Mario comes out. Gets all of his friends of for the night, see who can beat SMB3 the fastest and gives those games 10/10 yet he hates 90s games. Fool.
Jaffe was totally right in what he said about the jerk that wrote the review. He shouldnt even be working for G4 with that attitude toward games and Gamers.
i wonder how these old IP's and sequels keep getting 4s and 5s yet a game that actually took a decade off and than make a come back is being blamed i never had any trust on g4, i watch their coverage of e3 sony and ms conferences other than that 363 days out of the year i don't even know the exist
And like the reviewer even said obviously everyone is going to have different opinions on a game, and stuff like that shouldn't be argued about But when you go into reviewing a game and your already thinking "Man, this sucks just because it's an old franchise" or the gameplay isn't realistic (the handbreak comment) you should not be reviewing games period. I hope G4 sends him back to the blog he probably "worked" for in the first place, and give me ANYONE who's unbiased and WANTS to review games the right way
The best thing for Jaffe to do would be to ignore it. Complaining about such comments is sometimes just as bad.
Geezzz fans cry so much.. I don't think their opinions are gonna count for much now because no matter how much you don't like something, you DON'T send idiot coments for G4, this just proves that their brains are still in the age of the cavemen.. sigh -__-
When calling people out for creating "idiot coments", you may want to ensure your own comment is grammatically correct, its kind of contradicting. Just saying.
You have contributed nothing
ignored for calling everyone here idiots
@Kingdom Come, Welcome to Internet forms. You're going to find people like ritsuka666, people complaining about idiotic comments, and people speaking their minds. Get over it and move on! Oh, and there's no need to be a Grammar Nazi about his comment. I've seen worse and still don't make belittling comments about them. @CarlitoBrigante, You ignored him for that?!? Overreact much? Seriously... I'd hate to cross your path. You scare me. @ritsuka666, Well... er... meant? I think...?
So, what you're saying is, he is allowed a free pass to belittle others, but for doing so, we aren't allowed to do so to him...? I'll ask for your permission next time I intend to point out somebody's contradiction... Also, this isn't a forum, it's a comment section on a site, separate from the forums, and, please refrain from lecturing me on what to expect from this site in regards to petty, immature comments, I've been a member of this site for two years. Oh, and overreact much?!
LOL... You picked that one to pieces. "This isn't a forum", "I'll ask for your permission", "he is allowed a free pass" and so on and so forth. Now since you're obviously done, after all you only have 3 bubbles, I'll do two more things. EDIT: Alright. Done. Have a nice day!
I only respect adam sessler there..
For those curious, this is where the reviewer shot himself in the foot: "Much as we all like to jump aboard the nostalgic retro train the simple fact is this: games are better now. Technology and design have come a long way, and I'm sick to death of developers (particularly those from the 90's) who feel content to just shove out the same old crap they always did. It's a particular issue I have with most of the AAA-shooter houses from the 90's. And they don't like me much either." That reveals he has, as Jaffe put it "an agenda". He was predisposed to dislike this game, yet reviewed it anyway. That's a problem.
I don't think he was predisposed to dislike the game. If the game feels old, I can see why he would be disapointed, and it sounds like it does feel a bit old (according to him anyway, with the driving or handbrake for example). That's the same reason why Duke Nukem forever was bashed by reviewers, or why some gamers heavily criticised The Old Republic. Now Obviously in this case it's not anywhere near as bad as Duke Nukem, but I can still see why someone would be disapointed that the game feels "old" and they expected something a bit fresher. Don't tell me that you've never been disapointed when a franchise didn't evolve as much as you'd like. Also, I don't think the reviewer's answer in the comment sounded any worse than Jaffe's answer on twitter. If he didn't have any problkeme with the review, I don't see why he has any problem with the comment.
Aloren, You are absolutely correct. You have to remember this site is dominated by Sony fanatics that they will not acknowledge reason once one of their precious exclusives are up in debate. If anyone actually read what was written in the comment section, they would have see that nothing inappropriate was said. He only critisezed developers that use nostalgia as their selling point rather than evolution then they need to be prepared for criticism.
He had a problem because the guy was unprofessional. He gave the review, and theres no reason for it to further spill into the comments section. People are going to criticize your work whether your a dev or a reviewer, and while Jaffe jumped in it wasnt until the reviewer continued to criticize his work to defend it. Plus, he's right. The guy was a d#ck. @ Above, it has nothing to do with what system preference. Your name could infer you're a "xbox fanatic". But I wouldn't make that assumption until you drop trollish comments like the one above.
If the reviewer was a dick and then Jaffe was a dick to the dick reviewer, who here is right? Let's set our expectations reallistically here, Jaffe himself said the game is a rental unless you are all about the multiplayer. When Twisted Metal first came out it was new and cool. The series hasn't really evolved from that point. The formula isn't necessarily broken, but it's definately dated and doesn't have the impact it once held. If that isn't "lazy", what is it? -Death
So every game that comes out ever has to be revolutionary? Did this guy review any call of duty's? i'm sure those got 9s.
@Feldman9000 chill Asking for an old franchise to evolve, or wondering if it did evolve sufficiently does not equal "every game that comes out ever has to be revolutionary" + anything COD you can think of. A lot of franchises have had to deal with this at some point. Tomb Raider, FIFA, Splinter Cell... and they managed to deal with it (with various results).
If they EVOLVED this franchise, I would not of purchased it!!! I would of also been very upset they they ruined this game. I smiled when I played the demo, because its exactly what I wanted. (ebrake spin, maybe slighly too much), but I can adapt anyway. Lets look at another EVOLVING franchise... FINAL FANTASY.... (And guess who now does not buy them...(ding!))
Fair enough. It's perfectly fine with me that you want the game to remain exactly the same. But others are disapointed when it does, and you should be fine with it too.
That makes absolutely no sense. Thanks for quoting yea. Yes, that reviewer definitely deserves all the rage he's getting lol.
Both Jaffe and the Reviewer express understandable and insightful opinions. Excluding Greg Miller from IGN, it doesn't matter what consoles reviewers devide their personal time between, they are gamers at heart, and that is what fuels their opinion of the game provided for them to review. Nor, should reviewers demean their sites community, it only succeeds in enfeebling the sites identity in the eyes of their fans and visitors. Regardless of their status within the video games industry, the reviewers opinion is no more correct than the one of those situated within the comment section. However, commenter's also need to respect the reviewers right to their opinion, does the Metacritic score of your favourite game REALLY mean that much to you? Does it effect the joy and pleasure inwhich you receive from playing the game? Does it change your opinion or the opinion of others? It shouldn't.
Reviews drive someway the sales. We "long time gamers" buy the game with the infos and videos we see, we pick with our guts not basing our purchases on the reviews...we somehow smell the quality of a game the first time it's shown. But the average Joe and the average kid buys checking the reviews, that's why Metacritic is important, because the better is the score the highest the chances of that game to sell well (not a perfect equation though) And if the game sell well the director might have the chance to work on more risky ideas or to work on a sequel. So reviews count for the future of gaming.