The All Things Video Games Thread!

[yellowlightman]

Reviews are really just opinions, the best you can do is find a reviewer with whom you often agree or just try and figure out an overall impression from multiple reviews. That said, videogame journalism is mostly a joke and a lot of games are reviewed after minimal play time. There isn't much point in putting weight to them.

For me nowadays I don't even read reviews that much. It isn't too hard to tell how much a game sucks by looking at it and general impressions of people you know. Only time I've been burned was recently with GTA4 which my friends loved and reviews loved but turned out to be an awful game, so...

[JsARCLIGHT]

I tend to discount most "professional" game reviews. I feel the hand of the game developers on their shoulders more often than not. It could just be my own personal "reading too deeply" but when you hear things like "well the game has this, this and this wrong with it and it crashed twice and corrupted my saves once and lags a lot... but I still LOVE it!" it always raises my eyebrow.

[eugimon]

You said you didn't have an XBox 1. I was saying it wasn't really relevant to JRPGs anyways.

oh sorry. misunderstood your post. And yeah.

[eugimon]

Which is a fairly average score. Good games routinely get around 9+, 8 and under are generally average to poor.

One site\'s reviewer can be genre biased, though, its best to cross reference.

Uhm, no... it's been a while since I took a math class, but 8 out of 10, is not Average. It\'s a B, still above average.

Who here has any thoughts on Too Human? I felt it was an ambitious game that tried something new, mainly the control scheme. From what I've seen, many aren\'t willing to forgive this originality and proclaim that it\'s such a terrible game. I\'ll admit, it isn't the greatest out there, but there are many that are far worse. I also felt that its setting (Norse Sci-Fi, gotta love it ) and occasional trope-subverting more than made up for any difficulties I may have had with the new system.

Your thoughts?

It depends, the technical glitches are not nearly as pronounced as some reviewers made them out to be. It\'s a solid dungeon crawler. The main problem with it is that the levels are linear and scripted and unchanging so if you do the 4~5 runs per class to get all the loot, it gets boring very quickly. The game really needed a dynamic level engine like the one in diablo or other modern dungeon crawl games.

The voice acting and animation are pretty horrible though, Which just makes it all the more difficult to go through and grind.

Some of the gameplay mechanics seems kinda arbitrary. Some of the smash attacks affect you when you're in the air and because the hit detection is weak, you can be heat even though you look like you're beyond the range of the smash graphics. And since there's no way to heal or dispel DOTs, being affected by one is pretty much a death sentence but even that's meaningless since the game doesn't penalize you for dying, other than making you watch that canned valkyrie animation.

Some reviewers complained that the game is always the same since the enemy scales to your level, but they're only half right. If you start a new campaign with your old character, then yes, it's the EXACT same experience. But if you use the replay function in the game like you're supposed to, the game puts in new enemy types and configurations so the actual encounters are different and you don't have to sit through those horrid cutscenes.

But i actually enjoy the actual gameplay. When you know what you're doing, wading into a horde of robot goblins and throwing them into air with some big ass hammer and then burning them down with your big ass plasma cannon can be very fun.

Edited September 15, 2008 by eugimon

[JsARCLIGHT]

I think he meant average as in across the board the lion's share of game releases rate a 7 or an 8 on a 10 scale. It's kind of rare that you see a sub 7 or a above 9 rating. In a sense that exposes the flaw of using a numerical ratings system. If your system is based on 1 to 10 and you mainly hand out 7's then that makes "7" the "norm", or the "average", which in turn makes anything below that "bad" and everything above that "exemplary".

Personally I think numerical ratings systems are dumb. I'd rather read what someone has to say then see their numerical guesstimate of what they felt their experience entailed. I mean, how do you get a number out of a game play experience? Isn't it more "human" to simply write and read "it sucked and here's why" or "it's great because". Giving something a number really doesn't fill you in on how the game actually plays. What is the real difference between a 7 and an 8? It's all kind of a sham, a thing to emblazon on packaging to justify something's worth.

[eugimon]

I think he meant average as in across the board the lion's share of game releases rate a 7 or an 8 on a 10 scale. It's kind of rare that you see a sub 7 or a above 9 rating. In a sense that exposes the flaw of using a numerical ratings system. If your system is based on 1 to 10 and you mainly hand out 7's then that makes "7" the "norm", or the "average", which in turn makes anything below that "bad" and everything above that "exemplary".

Personally I think numerical ratings systems are dumb. I'd rather read what someone has to say then see their numerical guesstimate of what they felt their experience entailed. I mean, how do you get a number out of a game play experience? Isn't it more "human" to simply write and read "it sucked and here's why" or "it's great because". Giving something a number really doesn't fill you in on how the game actually plays. What is the real difference between a 7 and an 8? It's all kind of a sham, a thing to emblazon on packaging to justify something's worth.

Gotcha... but going back to the origin of this, I said that tales and lost received good marks, Duke said they did not. Just because most games get good marks, making them "average" doesn't mean that those games are not good games, or even average games.

There's a pretty clear distinction here between the actual game and where the game places in comparison to all the other games.

And yeah, I agree that relying on the the numerical score isn't the best way to go.

[Duke Togo]

I generally don't buy games on reviews. Actually, I don't think I've bought a game based off of a good review. I tend to stick with genres and development teams I like. The only games I generally buy outside of this is because of word of mouth or seeing someone else play it (like Grand Theft Auto III or Jedi Outcast).

[JsARCLIGHT]

Well, using Duke's standpoint they did not receive "good marks". If you view the 1 to 10 system as flawed then a game receiving a "7" or an "8" being average gives the jaded reader the impression the game is "bland" or even bad. People are pre-programmed these days to look for the 9.5's and the 10's. In a market that is becoming saturated with clones and product rushed to market there is a lot of crap out there, and a lot of it is both overrated and underrated.

I mean, if you showed me ten new game numerical reviews (only the numbers) and out of those one was a 10, one was a 9, six where 7's and '8s and two were sub 6 I'd instantly gravitate towards the 10 and the 9, dismissing the rest as "average" and the lowest scores as total crap. And if you then have already taken that dismissive attitude, it's easy to see it one step further and think that the lone 10 is the only one true "good" game, then the 9 becomes the "ok" game and the rest become sub par. Once you see a "10" everything else starts to look bad and the numerical system supports this trend, bolsters it even. It's human nature. Fill a room with 8 average people, one really beautiful one and one really ugly one and the ugly one makes the average people look much better and all the average people make the lone beautiful person look even more stunning.

It's all in how you look at it. Are you focusing on the top mount Olympus or are you trying to see the beauty in the everyday? If you stand among gods then the mortals look terrible by comparison. In the end it's all personal opinion. Someone who loves something can't be "wrong" in their opinion just as someone who hate something also can't be wrong... it's the folks who take it personally when their pet game gets bad reviews or has a naysayer that irks me. It can become mob mentality... say something good about a bad game and people question your taste, call you an idiot and denounce you. Say something bad about a "good" game and they do the same.

[transfan52]

Well with all this talk about reviews I think the reason why many games get average or below average scores is this. While some games are downright awful to most ppl there are always some games that capture a niche audience. The koei games are an example of this. Even though they always get a 7 or less ppl still buy them because it caters to a niche in the gaming market that no one else has touched.

One game that I always liked and never seems to get a rating beyond a 7 is the armored core series... Many reviewers just aren't used to the tediousness of the game and all its technicalities. But I still buy every single armored core game that is released and I still thorougly enjoy it despite what the reviewers say. This is the very reason why games that get an average or below average score still make enough money for the companies that make them to continue the series.

[eugimon]

Which is fine, if all the games were in the same genre. I mean, if I'm choosing which FPS to play, of course I'll play the 9~10 games.

But as far as JRPG's go... Lost and tales received good marks, for the genre. Duke disagreed with that, which is why I asked him to point me towards better JRPGs.

I mean, i can understand if we're just talking about games in general...yeah, why waste time with Mercenaries (or whatever) when you can play COD4. But if you want to play a specific genre, it doesn't matter that COD4 got a "10" because it's not the type of game you want to play.

[JsARCLIGHT]

That then begs the question are games rated by their own merits, based on some nebulous "general level of quality" or are they unconsciously compared to other games resulting in their benchmarking? To a degree everything is cross-compared, mostly because the "general level of quality" varies from person to person. I myself find it impossible to not play a game and think about other games while playing it, especially when games frustrate me. It's so common to hear me say stuff like "well game X did this RIGHT and this game does it WRONG"... that is not so much true as it is our perceptions of what should and shouldn't be. To that degree everyone will respond differently to everything, and your response will only be genuine if we go in NOT reading all the reviews and hearing all the hype. The hype colors our opinions just as much as the actual game does... if you see a "10" you expect things.

[eugimon]

That then begs the question are games rated by their own merits, based on some nebulous "general level of quality" or are they unconsciously compared to other games resulting in their benchmarking? To a degree everything is cross-compared, mostly because the "general level of quality" varies from person to person. I myself find it impossible to not play a game and think about other games while playing it, especially when games frustrate me. It's so common to hear me say stuff like "well game X did this RIGHT and this game does it WRONG"... that is not so much true as it is our perceptions of what should and shouldn't be. To that degree everyone will respond differently to everything, and your response will only be genuine if we go in NOT reading all the reviews and hearing all the hype. The hype colors our opinions just as much as the actual game does... if you see a "10" you expect things.

Well, it's never so simple right? I mean, some things are cross genre and fall into "general level of quality". The basic mechanics and presentation are like that, imo. It shouldn't really matter what genre the game is, sound and visuals should be good. We can debate style but we can all agree a game shouldn't have clipping, or poorly recorded audio, for instance.

But some stuff is genre specific. I mean, I read a review for mass effect where the reviewer complained there was too much dialog...WTF?

I also have different expectations from japanese or european developers from north american developers. Different design and play philosophies.

[mikeszekely]

It's kind of amusing to see discussion about game reviews when I recently started a blog where I review stuff, games included.

Maybe my method is different than the "professionals," but I don't take genre into account at all. In fact, I don't take any other game into consideration at all, unless it's to describe the basic gameplay elements. So, if I were to review, say, F.E.A.R, I wouldn't use Call of Duty as some kind of shooter benchmark to compare F.E.A.R to. My reviews are based totally on how entertaining I felt the game to be. If I loved playing it, regardless of a game's perceived innovation or lack thereof, I'm going to give it a positive review that might not jive with the mainstream. For example, I generally enjoy the Dynasty Warriors series, which is lucky to muster a 6 from most publications. Likewise, I sometimes don't care for games that the mainstream seems to love (Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess).

I don't believe that my reviews, or anyone else's, should sell you a game or not. I don't think they're useless, though. If you're on the fence, knowing what different people liked and disliked about a game might provide you with enough information to push your interest in one direction or the other. I can't say I've ever bought a game just because of a good review, but I know that mostly good reviews have helped me to make that final decision to shell out money for a game I was thinking about, or vice versa. But it's equally important to know your own gaming habits, and to know what kind of games you like (if you can't stand JRPGs, all the 10's in the world won't make you like the next Final Fantasy). And when it comes to reviews, it helps to know who you tend to agree with. I stopped reading EGM more or less because they only seemed to really like the games that are trendy to like, which meant that I loved a lot of games they didn't, while they were giving Halo 10's, and I've yet to enjoy a Halo game.

Finally, for reasons already discussed here, I do think using a number scale is fundamentally broken (especially ridiculous ones where they have decimals to a 100th place... what's the difference between an 8.26 and an 8.27?). So, I've been using the tried-and-true letter grade scale. A is great, B is good, C is average, but maybe worth playing/watching, D is bad, and F is an insult to humanity.

[Duke Togo]

And let's be honest here, there is a glut of mediocre games out there.

[JsARCLIGHT]

And let's be honest here, there is a glut of mediocre games out there.

I'll drink to that.

And I'll take it one further that nowadays there are a lot of mediocre games being trumped up as big hub-bub first level titles. Every other week they are pimping the new "best thing ever" game with massive print and television marketing blitzes. Games have become just like Hollywood... they deluge you with ads to try to get you to buy their "crap game of the week" game before you can figure out it's crap.

Does anyone in the video game market know if it's still like the old ET days? If a big push title sells for crap can the retailers charge back all the unsold games? You'd think if that was still in place all the crap game makers would be closing their doors eventually... or maybee it IS just like Hollywood and the one or two really big games end up subsidizing all the crap games.

[TheLoneWolf]

Does anyone in the video game market know if it's still like the old ET days? If a big push title sells for crap can the retailers charge back all the unsold games?

I wish. At the video game store I used to work at, if a big name game ends up being a shelf warmer, we're stuck with the overstock. But we're a small local chain, I don't know the policy is with Best Buy, Walmart, et al.

[JB0]

I wish. At the video game store I used to work at, if a big name game ends up being a shelf warmer, we're stuck with the overstock. But we're a small local chain, I don't know the policy is with Best Buy, Walmart, et al.

Given I saw Best Buy giving Casltevania 64 away for free at one point, and I've got a WalMart near me with a copy of Tony Hawk for the N64...

Things have changed.

[mikeszekely]

It might depend on the publisher. When I worked at Gamestop, there were a couple of times we were directed to box up all but maybe one copy of a game and send it back. What the warehouse did with them after that is up to speculation, but I'd guess that they went back to the publisher. But I also know for a fact that maybe twice in the four years I was there, we were instructed to take brand new games, open them, and move them from new inventory to used inventory.

In any case, Gamestop and some of the game publishers have a more complicated relationship than you might imagine. That's why Gamestop will occasionally push a game you know is crap. In fact, if things haven't really changed since I left, Gamestop and Activision are practically dating.

[Black Valkyrie]

Nintendo’s ‘worst’ console wins some new admirers.

[David Hingtgen]

How awesome?

Only 200 to be made though.

[JB0]

I still can't believe they're inflicting that art on people.

The CD case is awesome, though.

Nintendo's 'worst' console wins some new admirers.

That warms my heart so much. Even WITH the lead-in bashing the VB(and being technically inaccurate about it too!)

Edited September 17, 2008 by JB0

[Dangard Ace]

For all of you with iPhones or iPod touch ..... Flight Sim! X-Plane 9! I've been dying for any good type of sim lately (Mechwarrior, X-Wing, Falcon, ANYTHING) and this will hit the spot.

http://toucharcade.com/2008/09/15/flight-s...minar-research/

[Black Valkyrie]

How awesome?

Only 200 to be made though.

Is it for which console ? because we all know its only download.

[JB0]

The disk says "asset CD", so I assume it's all media and not the actual game.

Music, images, etc.

[David Hingtgen]

I think the plan is to include a code to download the game for free, for whatever one you buy the set for.

[QuinJester]

How awesome?

<snips>

Only 200 to be made though.

Want, oh so very much. The pricetag is a nice touch; I wonder if it's an actual sticker or a physical part of the box art...

[TheLoneWolf]

How awesome?

Very awesome! Capcom's marketing department get an A+ for that one, the CD "jewel case" is fantastic!

[mikeszekely]

Only 200 to be made though.

That's why I bookmarked John D's blog. Soon as that thing goes on sale, I'm buying. Hell, I'd buy it even if it doesn't come with a voucher for the download.

[David Hingtgen]

The problem is, there's WAY more than 200 people who'd buy this. Heck, NeoGaf alone would account for 200... I'd love one, but have low expectations of actually getting one.

[Max Jenius]

I actually liked the Virtual Boy. The games were a bit simplistic, but the depth effect was neat to me. It never left me feeling sore or whatever, but probably now that I'm older these days it would lol.

[Wes]

A few goodies on the Virtual Console side - Super Mario RPG was released as it's 250th game, and Strong Bad's Cool Game for Attractive People Part 2 is out. I'm playing thru that right now. Hopefully they'll release Earthbound soon...

[JB0]

I actually liked the Virtual Boy. The games were a bit simplistic, but the depth effect was neat to me. It never left me feeling sore or whatever, but probably now that I'm older these days it would lol.

Same here. I consider the VB to be one of gaming's greatest losses. Especially since it "poisoned the well" for future attempts at 3D gaming.

There's 2 big problems I see with the VB.

One is pure marketing.

The only place they could show off the 3D was in-store kiosks. And good luck convincing someone to adjust the IPD and focus for a kiosk run. Talk about bad first impressions.

All the ads in all the 2D media available showcased a "red Gameboy."

Then you add the big warning on the box about it not being for children under 7, which was read WAY beyond the intended "little kids haven't finished developing their depth perception" intent and into "OH MY GOD IT MELTS EYEBALLS" realm... That big "7-Up" warning scared a lot of parents away from buying it for ANYONE.

And Red Alarm was a lousy demo title. The wire-frame graphics just didn't do it once you got past the "WOW! 3D!" angle. , especially given there weren't any occlusion effects. Wario Land should've been the demo from the start, if you ask me.

The other issue, and an actual technical failing, is the 50 Hz flicker. It's bad enough on a CRT(Yes, Europe, I'm making fun of your crappy flickery televisions again) with phosphor decay to cushion it, but the VB didn't even get THAT. Each pixel was illuminated ONLY for it's tiny fraction of a second.

Personally, I've found turning the brightness down does wonders for the flicker problem. But it's still a real issue with the hardware.

I've probably said some variant of the above a few other times in this thread, but I will continue to preach the Gospel of the Red Gameboy until all the non-believers are converted!

[VT 1010]

I am a hardcore Virtual Boy supporter too. I loved the Virtual Boy so much, I have three of them (Of course, only one of them works properly!

There were some good games on it. I even think the launch line up was better than that of the PS2 or PS3. I still believe Virtual Boy Warioland is one of the best 2D (or could it be considered 3D ) platformers of all time. I loved the controller as well. It is easily the most underrated console/handheld of all time.

BTW, am I the only one that didn't experience a lot of headaches and eye strain?

[Apollo Leader]

I still can't believe they're inflicting that art on people.

The CD case is awesome, though.

Since it's a tribute to the cheesy and horrendously bad Mega Man box art from nearly 20 years ago (yikes!), that's what makes this so tremendously awesome.

[JB0]

Since it's a tribute to the cheesy and horrendously bad Mega Man box art from nearly 20 years ago (yikes!), that's what makes this so tremendously awesome.

Actually, it looks like a tribute to EVERY game's art bungles. The US and european Megaman 2 boxes have the most visible influence after the grid background and title logo from the original US box of legend, since they defined the shape of Megaman.