Topic: Gamespot Zelda Review

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
"I'm never visiting again. They're a business, like a TV station, and site traffic is their money tree (a big healthy tree at that). They don't need ad revenue generated by me. They don't need ad revenue generated by you either. So don't bother visiting them as well."

If I boycotted every game site that pissed me off I would never see a screenshot again and would be totally ignorant of game news... more so.

There's a good handful of sites that pass on 2nd-hand news and screen shots.  They do the surfing for you.

And Jeuxfrance.com is an ok place for screenshots, and since they're in, oh, FRENCH, you're pretty much shielded from their opinions (unless you do understand french).

GameSpy has a good selection of screenshots.  News?  Nah, don't visit them for news, they hardly keep up with anything.

Gameinformer and Gameslop have managed to exceed the 3-strikes rule with regards to writing, media, site layout, etc.  IGN is still riding the fence; difference is IGN is so much better with detailed late-breaking info than the other corporate sites.

Oh yeah, NWR is cool.

[Bill Aurion]

"So yeah... Zelda got penalized for being Zelda?"

The funny thing is, having played 17.5 hours into the game, Twilight Princess actually feels quite a bit different from other Zeldas...I'd even go as far as to say there is more in common between Ocarina of Time and Wind Waker than there is between Ocarina of Time and Twilight Princess...The presentation is just completely new and overpowering...

[MANTI5]

Agreed, I LOVE Link to the Past but never really cared for OOT or MM and only played WW briefly but I'm really liking Twilight Princess.  

[Smadte]

Did the guy even finish the game? It doesn't look like it according to that quote "I haven't gotten too far into it..." ()

He does have a point, though. I think a less linear approach to dungeons would be a neat idea. Think of Hyrule as the one "temple" in the entire game,  introducing new places and objectives as you become familiar with it ... But the heart container argument is totally lame.

I haven't played the game yet, but I kind of have a feeling this review is embarrassingly and stunningly full of sh|t.

[ThePerm]

nevermind the motherfucker never actually finished the game. You need to finish a game in order to write a review, even the guy who gave it a 10 out of 10 and didn't finish the game had no credibility to me.

The guy who didnt finish it and gave it a crappy score may not be at the super kickass hook of the game yet

the guy who gave it a great review may not be at the damned fetch quest from hell yet.

[S-U-P-E-R]

I'd give Gamespot props for actually posting what they think in the face of adversity



except it's a lie and the only reason they rated it less than 9 was for shock value/traffic bait, I'll wager.

4/10

[Requiem]

Yes... 8.8 is suspiciously RIGHT below 9.

I think people are entitled to their opinions, but badgering a game because of repetitiveness when you haven't even finished the game is *&$@ing dumb. And what's worse, your favorite game is the most repetitive of them all (TH). Sure it's loads of fun, but did it drastically change the core system? (No) Then, WTF?!

[hudsonhawk]

I just... some of you people don't even know what you're reacting to.

Jeff Gerstmann wrote the review.  Matt Rorie made the comment that Mr. Jack quoted in the root post, in a blog, and is the one who said that he had not finished it.  His blog post was in reaction to the fanboy outcry against their review.

The reviewer, unlike many of those reacting negatively to the review, finished the game.  

[Gamebasher]

IGN gave Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess a 9.5 score out of 10! In their video review of that game, Matt Cassamassina calls it the best Zelda game ever, stopping short of calling it perfect which in his opinion it just is not. This is thanks to some issues with the graphics in certain places in the game (it was originally a GCN game, and that shows he says), and because of the ingame music which he feels needed to be fully orchestrated, where it is instead mostly in the form of MIDI.  

Still 95% out of 100% is a damn high score and fully deserved I believe allthough I haven´´ t got my Wii yet and so haven´t had a chance to play the game so far. Anyways, OOT got 98% when it came out in 1998, so IGN is placing this new game almost on the same level as it´s spiritual prequel, and I have seen recently just how highly Nintendo values IGN. Now, that is not just because IGN is being nice to Nintendo, but more probably because Nintendo feels that 1) IGN gives games fair and honest reviews (which I have witnessed myself countless times that they indeed do), and 2) because IGN is now the biggest online entertainment website in the world giving Nintendo advertising power here more than anywhere else on the internet. So who cares what GameSpot thinks about the new Zelda game?

Everybody in this world who plays Nintendo games knows how many prizes, and awards, and what not Nintendo has received for excellency in gaming content, and in particular for the Zelda-series games since the first such game. So therefore we know we should ignore that kind of negative exposure of Nintendo´s Hero of Time!

I KNOW their review is dead wrong, and that the guy who reviewed is most probably a hater of Nintendo or something. So that means we don´t have to give a hoot what review score he has now gone and given it, because the very numbers in his review score tells more about him than about the game itself. Period!

[zakkiel]

Quote
There are multitudinous examples of people expressing opinions that they do not believe in, such as playing Devil's Advocate.

Fixed.

There is no example of someone having an opinion they don't believe to be true. Think about what such an opinion would amount to. Let's say I have the opinion that X is Y. That is by definition the same as saying I believe X is Y. However, I also believe that X is not necessarily Y - that when I say X is Y, that's just my personal opinion. Then my real opinion is that X is not necessarily Y, and for me to say otherwise is to lie, if only to myself. I'm not sure how to help you understand this, because it comes from the final basis of logic - that you cannot simultaneously both affirm and deny the same statement. If you do not understand this, then there is unfortunately no way to make you.  

[RickPowers]

You're really splitting hairs.  You know nothing about someone's ACTUAL opinion from reading a review.  You only know their STATED opinion.  And for the record, while you can claim that there are no examples, I can prove that there are, because I DO THIS ALL THE TIME.  What I actually think and what I tell people I think aren't always the same thing, and there's no way you can tell from a review.

[Requiem]

I don't see why Rick can't give a game a good score even though he hates the type of game.

Let's say Rick likes checkers, however he has to review a game called chess. He thinks the game is well crafted, and considerably intelligent, but his personal opinion is that he doesn't like it. That doesn't mean the game is bad, he just doesn't like it.

[zakkiel]

Quote
You're really splitting hairs. You know nothing about someone's ACTUAL opinion from reading a review. You only know their STATED opinion. And for the record, while you can claim that there are no examples, I can prove that there are, because I DO THIS ALL THE TIME. What I actually think and what I tell people I think aren't always the same thing, and there's no way you can tell from a review.

Read my post again. Somehow you've managed to completely confuse expressing someone an opinion you don't have with actually having an opinion while simultaneously believing its "just" your opinion. The second is impossible. The first is lying, and I have no idea why it's relevant to this discussion, though I am disappointed to discover that it is apparently the norm in gaming journalism. It kind of explains a lot, though.

[Ian Sane]

Opinion isn't always what you believe to be true.

Sometimes it is.  If it is my opinion that aliens exists I believe that that is factual.  It's only my opinion because it hasn't been proven scientifically but I think it is factual.  Thus your opinion that aliens don't exists can't be true to me.  We can't both be right.  One of is in reality wrong.

But with a game I'm expressing what I like.  In my opinion Street Fighter II is a good game.  You may think it's a bad game.  Because this is just personal taste we can both be right.  I can think that the game is good and not think you're wrong for thinking it's bad.

There are really two types of opinion.  That where we state our tastes and that where we state what we think is factual but isn't accepted as a universal proven fact.

I believe in ghosts so I believe everyone who doesn't is wrong.  The two opposite opinions contradict each other and in reality one of us IS wrong and could be proven as such if all knowledge of everything was available to us.

I think fish 'n' chips taste good but feel that no one is right or wrong for having a different opinion of how fish 'n' chips taste.  In that case it is a matter of preference so there is no right or wrong.

[RickPowers]

Well, this discussion is officially no longer about a specific review.  It's become about whether or not reviews are opinions, and arguably not even that any more, so I'm closing this down.