Topic: REVIEWS: Wii Play

[Smash_Brother]

Quote
Originally posted by: Jonnyboy117
Again, our scores aren't for everyone.  They're for the person who wrote the review.  That's the only reasonable, consistent, practical way it can be done at all.  Just ask Game Informer.

I can't entirely agree with that, mostly because GI is run by monkeys.

Much in the same way most reviewers give 5-6 different scores for different categories (graphics, gameplay, etc.), why wouldn't it be possible to give the game 3-4 different scores for the gamer categories it encompasses?

For example, you could have the hardcore, normal, party, fan and non-gamers.

The "hardcore" score would be for those who are genetically incapable of parting ways with a game unless they've unlocked absolutely everything, the one who "caught them all". The more complex and detailed a game becomes, the more these gamers adore it. They love depth and challenge and they demand it in spades. These are the ones likely to own every next gen system no matter what the cost.

The "normal" gamer is the kind who enjoys games, but doesn't feel the need to spill their cash on every last semi-worthy release. In fact, they have varied tastes depending on the genre of the game and likely will only spend money on releases which truly warrant a purchase. This is the category which would be considered "average".

The "party" gamer wants games for one reason: to play them with other people. This is actually not an optional score because, although many games don't have multiplayer, there are some games which are drastically more enjoyable to watch than others. A game like TP, for example, would actually have a very high party score because I've had five people in the room with me while I was playing TP and they were all trying to figure out the puzzle in the room I just walked into before I did. Turn-based RPGs, on the other hand, likely don't have much party value as much time is spent fighting the same random monster attacks over and over again. The real purpose of this score, however, is to divine the entertainment value of multiplayer games.

The "fan" gamer IS an optional score, as it only applies when games are based on or around existing franchises. Even games like SSB and MGS need this score because the gamer who is a fan of these and other franchises no doubt would like to know how they hold up or have changed from previous iterations. The basic premise of this score is that people will like games connected to their favorite franchises better because of the inclusion of the franchise.

The "non" gamer is just that: the amount of enjoyability the game will offer to a person who just doesn't play games. The best example is Wii Sports, which would easily earn a 9.5 in the non-gamer category because of its ability to coerce people who don't play games into playing it.

I'm not seriously suggesting you use this system or anything like it, I'm just spitting out ideas since I see gaming as more diversified these days, especially when you factor in Nintendo's "blue ocean" efforts.

For example, a brief Twilight Princess review using this system:

Hardcore: 9.5 - Plenty of unlockables, scavenger hunts and the dungeon of ordeals (it was in WW, not a spoiler) to ensure that you can spend upwards of 50 hours working on the game.

Normal: 9.5 - Still one of the most enjoyable and satisfying franchises you can find on the market today, LoZ:TP will engross those who love story, action and puzzles all at the same time.

Party: 8.0 - If you have friends who can't help but try to solve puzzles when they're presented, it can actually make dungeon crawling quite enjoyable, especially when people pool their collective intellect to figure out a particularly tricky puzzle.

Fan: 10.0 - A beautiful work of art of a Zelda game: at times whimsical, at times haunting, at times enchanting. Link has never looked so real and never been so alive through a multitude of expressions and emotions, from shock, to joy, to horror. Fans of the series will no doubt love the game as the masterpiece that it is.

Non-Gamer: 3.0 - If you're hoping to push a non-gamer into gaming, look elsewhere. TP may be a cinematic and gameplay masterpiece, but it is not a rope-in for those who consider gaming beyond them. Your mom won't be saving Hyrule any time soon.

I'll be employing this system in my own gaming podcast, actually. I really think it's necessary to give a broader picture about what you can expect from a game these days.

[Jonnyboy117]

Smash, I was referring to the time Game Informer reviewed Paper Mario: Thousand Year Door and scored it quite low because they thought their hardcore audience would not like it, even though the reviewers themselves did.

A much better solution to the one you suggest is to simply have multiple reviewers from different backgrounds all review the same game.  Famitsu and EGM have done it for years, but they are severely limited by space.  We try to do multiple reviews for the major games, but it's tough to do it even then, and our staff is mostly hardcore gamers.

My point is that if you're a casual gamer, read Maxim or Newsweek for your game reviews.

[ShyGuy]

You heard it here first folks, If you're not hardcore, don't come to NWR!

The Paper Mario review was the first thing I thought of when you mentioned Game Informer.

[Smash_Brother]

Ah, so THAT'S what you meant...

In other news, I picked up WiiPlay and I'm quite pleased with it. True, the games aren't ultra deep, but the 9-Ball game is practically worth the $10 alone, as well as the laser hockey.