Topic: REVIEWS: Super Swing Golf PANGYA

[ShyGuy]

Was the staff really surprised at this reaction? Seriously?  

[Terranigma Freak]

Whoever said Albatross 18 is a grind game is out of his mind. The game is all about skill and having fun. People can easily kick ass in this game without grinding if you have the skills. This IS a freaking RPG. All RPGs are grind fests, but Alba requires skills. Seriously, you think you can do well if you grind 100 hours and yeah you don't learn a thing about golf?

Oh and one more thing. It is my opinion that the earth is flat and you can't tell me I'm wrong.

[Karl Castaneda #2]

Quote
Originally posted by: ShyGuy
Was the staff really surprised at this reaction? Seriously?

When I heard about the score, I knew Stan was going to get some hate, because I know the game has some fans on this board. But I honestly thought there would just be a civilized disagreement, not a condemnation of his skills as a reviewer and insults hurled at the website for "going downhill." I don't have any problems with people asking for an explanation on his review points - that's part of the gig. But if you really think there's bias or malice or any sort of foul play involved here, I don't know what to tell you - and it's stuff like this that I take extremely personally.

To be frank, I expected more from some of you.

EDIT: This isn't aimed at all of you - some of you are offering constructive and totally understandable debates, and that's not at all what's bothering me.

[Ceric]

Personally the score, yet again, I might not agree with but I don't think the review itself gives the game a fair shake or any real information.  It looked like a rant, sounded like a rant so I'll treat it as a rant with a score attached.  If I read this review knowing nothing about the game the review would NOT help me decide wether I wanted this game are not unless I knew that I had the Exact Same opinions as Stan all the time.  The fact of the matter is that while I found the last review done like this somewhat funny I really didn't like the style for a review.  I mean even the review for the game that is sited as THE example of a 1 game is better written and thought out.

Not to mention that salt in the wound is how long it took for this review to come out to find out that it seems the game was not played that much.

[Artimus]

All opinions are not equally valid. If that were true they would be equally invalid as well. Some opinions (i.e. better researched, considered and qualified ones) are superior to others. A person who hates golf games, for instance, does not hold an equal opinion to someone who likes some golf games. Someone who hates Nintendo does not give an equal opinion when reviewing a game to someone who judges games individual, not by company. I don't meant to imply this review holds a lesser opinion (never played the game, never intend to) but please don't say "all opinions are equally valid" because that's very elementary school.

[NWR_pap64]

Quote
Originally posted by: Artimus
All opinions are not equally valid. If that were true they would be equally invalid as well. Some opinions (i.e. better researched, considered and qualified ones) are superior to others. A person who hates golf games, for instance, does not hold an equal opinion to someone who likes some golf games. Someone who hates Nintendo does not give an equal opinion when reviewing a game to someone who judges games individual, not by company. I don't meant to imply this review holds a lesser opinion (never played the game, never intend to) but please don't say "all opinions are equally valid" because that's very elementary school.

QFT

Frankly, it feels like the NWR staff doesn't want ANY type of opinion or negative feedback. The minute it happens they put up a shield saying "Its our opinion! This review was written under the NWR rules! Deal with it!", shunning even the valid opinions.

Its ALMOST getting to the point where discussion of reviews isn't allowed at the site in fear that everyone will bring up discussions like this.

[GoldenPhoenix]

Quote
Originally posted by: pap64

Quote
Originally posted by: Artimus
All opinions are not equally valid. If that were true they would be equally invalid as well. Some opinions (i.e. better researched, considered and qualified ones) are superior to others. A person who hates golf games, for instance, does not hold an equal opinion to someone who likes some golf games. Someone who hates Nintendo does not give an equal opinion when reviewing a game to someone who judges games individual, not by company. I don't meant to imply this review holds a lesser opinion (never played the game, never intend to) but please don't say "all opinions are equally valid" because that's very elementary school.

QFT

Frankly, it feels like the NWR staff doesn't want ANY type of opinion or negative feedback. The minute it happens they put up a shield saying "Its our opinion! This review was written under the NWR rules! Deal with it!", shunning even the valid opinions.

Its ALMOST getting to the point where discussion of reviews isn't allowed at the site in fear that everyone will bring up discussions like this.

Then again there are times where people complain about a negative review when they haven't even played the game. Wish I could recall which individuals do that though

[NWR_pap64]

Quote
Originally posted by: GoldenPhoenix

Quote
Originally posted by: pap64

Quote
Originally posted by: Artimus
All opinions are not equally valid. If that were true they would be equally invalid as well. Some opinions (i.e. better researched, considered and qualified ones) are superior to others. A person who hates golf games, for instance, does not hold an equal opinion to someone who likes some golf games. Someone who hates Nintendo does not give an equal opinion when reviewing a game to someone who judges games individual, not by company. I don't meant to imply this review holds a lesser opinion (never played the game, never intend to) but please don't say "all opinions are equally valid" because that's very elementary school.

QFT

Frankly, it feels like the NWR staff doesn't want ANY type of opinion or negative feedback. The minute it happens they put up a shield saying "Its our opinion! This review was written under the NWR rules! Deal with it!", shunning even the valid opinions.

Its ALMOST getting to the point where discussion of reviews isn't allowed at the site in fear that everyone will bring up discussions like this.

Then again there are times where people complain about a negative review when they haven't even played the game. Wish I could recall which individuals do that though

Golden, cut the sarcastic crap out, OK?

I know I haven't played the games myself, but I highly trust the gamers and friend that have played the game and believe them when they say they didn't encounter any issues.

Also, I end up agreeing with them nearly 80% of the time. For example, I thought Chibi Robo was cute, but nothing else. But SB and another friend kept praising it. It wasn't till I played it that I discovered they were right.

Like SB stated, I don't care if Stan hated the game or not, I simply didn't like how overly harsh and negative it was since the general opinion is that the game is solid and fun.

[Karl Castaneda #2]

Pap, read my last post. I don't have a single problem with people constructively disagreeing with Stan's review, or even wanting clarification. That's not what any of us are challenging here. It's the idea that the website or Stan has some sort of vendetta agains this game / Wii games, and that this article isn't valid because Stan "can't understand golf."

(Oh, and for the record, we gave Chibi Robo high marks.)

[GoldenPhoenix]

I'm sorry but it still is pretty silly to get in a fit over a review score on a game you haven't even played, regardless of what your friends think. There are different opinions, and not everyone is going to think Super Swing Golf Pangya or Sonic is the next coming of gaming's golden age (Then again popular opinion is that both games are flawed, both hovering within the 70% range). It just seems silly to me to defend games based on what your friends say, I don't care how much you may agree, there is still a chance you may NOT and 2nd hand opinions based on what you hear, are not to be taken as seriously compared to someone who actually has experience something, whether it be a game, movie or other entertainment related thing.

[NWR_pap64]

Quote
Originally posted by: ViewtifulGamer
Pap, read my last post. I don't have a single problem with people constructively disagreeing with Stan's review, or even wanting clarification. That's not what any of us are challenging here. It's the idea that the website or Stan has some sort of vendetta agains this game / Wii games, and that this article isn't valid because Stan "can't understand golf."

(Oh, and for the record, we gave Chibi Robo high marks.)

I read the post (and yeah, I appreciate that you guys gave Chibi Robo credit).

But still, what irks me is that whenever someone from the NWR staff tries to defend one of their reviews it sounds like no comment of it is valid.

Also, the way Unclebob suggested how the scores should be eliminated so that people read the review makes it sounds like nearly all review discussion should be forbidden or controlled.

[NWR_pap64]

Quote
Originally posted by: GoldenPhoenix
I'm sorry but it still is pretty silly to get in a fit over a review score on a game you haven't even played, regardless of what your friends think. There are different opinions, and not everyone is going to think Super Swing Golf Pangya or Sonic is the next coming of gaming's golden age (Then again popular opinion is that both games are flawed, both hovering within the 70% range). It just seems silly to me to defend games based on what your friends say, I don't care how much you may agree, there is still a chance you may NOT and 2nd hand opinions based on what you hear, are not to be taken as seriously compared to someone who actually has experience something, whether it be a game, movie or other entertainment related thing.

Golden, I am NOT an idiot. Yes, I KNOW that simply because my friends liked a game it doesn't mean I will like it too. In fact, I really wanted to play Twilight Princess and before I played it my friends were hyping it. I decided to shun their opinion and wait till I played it in order to play it myself. It wasn't till a finally got it that I loved it and agreed/disagreed with what they said.

But still, if I feel someone is being overly harsh on a game that the general agreement is that its good or decent at least I can AT LEAST say "aren't you being a little harsh?".

Like I said, nearly 80% of the time my opinion of the game is very similar to those of my friends. Hell, I honestly thought that one of my friends loved Excite Truck a little too much, but once I played it I could see why he thought the game was really good and ended up loving it.

Going further back, at one point I thought SB was being WAY too hard on Elebits till I played it myself. My issues with the game were different from SB's (mainly that the game goes for far too long and gets tedious after a while), but we both agreed that the game wasn't all that good.

And finally, I know that you and I have argued this many a time. But what annoys me is the mean intention behind your comments.

I'm sorry, but when you post stuff like "Pap should be banned from comment on reviews" and such not only screams immaturity but that you have an issue with me that you are trying to vent through these NWR discussions.

I'm sorry if I am mistaken, but this is the impression I get. I have my reason of thinking, you have yours. LET IT BE.

[Karl Castaneda #2]

Pap, if any of us made it seem like your opinion isn't valid, or that you're now allowed to disagree with our reviews, then I can assure you that this wasn't our intent. We only take issue when it's presented in an insulting manner, or when people resort to personal attacks or condemnations.

[GoldenPhoenix]

Quote
Originally posted by: pap64

Quote
Originally posted by: GoldenPhoenix
I'm sorry but it still is pretty silly to get in a fit over a review score on a game you haven't even played, regardless of what your friends think. There are different opinions, and not everyone is going to think Super Swing Golf Pangya or Sonic is the next coming of gaming's golden age (Then again popular opinion is that both games are flawed, both hovering within the 70% range). It just seems silly to me to defend games based on what your friends say, I don't care how much you may agree, there is still a chance you may NOT and 2nd hand opinions based on what you hear, are not to be taken as seriously compared to someone who actually has experience something, whether it be a game, movie or other entertainment related thing.

Golden, I am NOT an idiot. Yes, I KNOW that simply because my friends liked a game it doesn't mean I will like it too. In fact, I really wanted to play Twilight Princess and before I played it my friends were hyping it. I decided to shun their opinion and wait till I played it in order to play it myself. It wasn't till a finally got it that I loved it and agreed/disagreed with what they said.

But still, if I feel someone is being overly harsh on a game that the general agreement is that its good or decent at least I can AT LEAST say "aren't you being a little harsh?".

Like I said, nearly 80% of the time my opinion of the game is very similar to those of my friends. Hell, I honestly thought that one of my friends loved Excite Truck a little too much, but once I played it I could see why he thought the game was really good and ended up loving it.

Going further back, at one point I thought SB was being WAY too hard on Elebits till I played it myself. My issues with the game were different from SB's (mainly that the game goes for far too long and gets tedious after a while), but we both agreed that the game wasn't all that good.

And finally, I know that you and I have argued this many a time. But what annoys me is the mean intention behind your comments.

I'm sorry, but when you post stuff like "Pap should be banned from comment on reviews" and such not only screams immaturity but that you have an issue with me that you are trying to vent through these NWR discussions.

I'm sorry if I am mistaken, but this is the impression I get. I have my reason of thinking, you have yours. LET IT BE.

Let's face you were being more than stating the reviewer was harsh, you accused them of playing the victim card and fearing the wrath of people who disagree. Personally I know little to nothing about this particular game, so I'm not going to state whether the review is justified or not (perhaps it is a bit harsh compared to the general reviewer consensus, but then again I've always been of the opinion  that some bad or average games are getting more credit than they deserve. So it is nice to see a stricter perspective, even if I may not agree).

In regards to yourself, I don't have a problem with you, nor have I ever had a problem with you until perhas now. I'm always teasing people here and in real life, it is not a way of me "venting" it is what I do with people I like and respect (Just look at Kairon, I really love the guy and it shows because I tease him all the time. I even tease Smash). Heck I am always taking shots at Pittbboi and even him I don't have a big problem with him as a person, just his opinions (and even then I hold respect for him). Personally I just get fed up with people attacking others for something they haven't experienced, that is all. Whether it be yourself, accusing the reviewers here of hating on games you haven't played and not wanting to defend opinions, or Ian (probably the worse) bashing the Wii constantly when he himself most likely has 0 experience with the Wii.  

[Artimus]

Quote
Originally posted by: GoldenPhoenix
Let's face you were being more than stating the reviewer was harsh, you accused them of playing the victim card and fearing the wrath of people who disagree.

That really has nothing to do with whether or not he played the game. If anything that's actually something he can judge, seeing as it only requires one to read this thread.

[GoldenPhoenix]

Quote
Originally posted by: Artimus

Quote
Originally posted by: GoldenPhoenix
Let's face you were being more than stating the reviewer was harsh, you accused them of playing the victim card and fearing the wrath of people who disagree.

That really has nothing to do with whether or not he played the game. If anything that's actually something he can judge, seeing as it only requires one to read this thread.

Well he did defend the game as well, but really that comment was more directed at why I thought he (and others) stepped over the line in regards to the reviewer. That is an insult, playing and simple, which I don't think the reviewers here deserve. As was mentioned previously in this thread, these kinds of insults and such seem to always be directed at those reviewers that give a game a lower score than the NWR community thinks it deserves. It turns into something more than disagreement, but questioning the integrity of the reviewer to accept criticism or that they have some agenda.

[Artimus]

Quote
Originally posted by: GoldenPhoenix

Quote
Originally posted by: Artimus

Quote
Originally posted by: GoldenPhoenix
Let's face you were being more than stating the reviewer was harsh, you accused them of playing the victim card and fearing the wrath of people who disagree.

That really has nothing to do with whether or not he played the game. If anything that's actually something he can judge, seeing as it only requires one to read this thread.

Well he did defend the game as well, but really that comment was more directed at why I thought he (and others) stepped over the line in regards to the reviewer. That is an insult, playing and simple, which I don't think the reviewers here deserve. As was mentioned previously in this thread, these kinds of insults and such seem to always be directed at those reviewers that give a game a lower score than the NWR community thinks it deserves. It turns into something more than disagreement, but questioning the integrity of the reviewer to accept criticism or that they have some agenda.

Well, that's really a risk you accept. I think some comments have been made that really raise questions about the review. Some were, indeed, way too harsh. But, as a reviewer, that's always the consequence of a negative review. If he wanted to avoid comments he could've written a really apologetic review and probably avoided them. Or he could've just written a straight forward review, which would've gotten flak for the scores but not a ton. Instead he wrote a very sarcastic, very snide review. I personally think if you're going to give a game a 3, you might as well be snide and amusing (I don't think the review actually is amusing, but the attempt is made). However, you need to know that the nastier you are to a game then anyone who likes that game is going to be just as nasty back.

[Jonnyboy117]

Quote
Originally posted by: vudu
Sorry to beat a dead horse, but I just want to point out that according to RFN episodes 45 and 46 Stan hasn't even touched his Wii in months.  He stated that he's been addicted to WoW and doesn't even have his Wii hooked up.  Episode 46 was recoded on Sunday, April 1st.  This review was posted on Tuesday, April 10.  I'm assuming that there's probably a day or two for Jonny to approve the review.  So that means that Stan had a little over a week to play the game and write the review.  Last I checked, Stan had a full time job, which would probably prevent him from spending dozens of hours over this week to play the game.  That doesn't exactly give the man a lot of time to become accustomed to the controls, especially if he hasn't played any other Wii games enough to even become familiar with the remote in the first place.

I haven't played SSG, so I can't personally say whether the controls are borked or not.  But I can say that this time line (assuming I'm right) doesn't give Stan adequate time to fully form an opinion on the game.

Cut the Phoenix Wright music.  There is no conspiracy here.  Stan got the game months ago, played it for a while, then had some family problems which kept him totally away from the site for a long time.  When he finally came back, I told him that finishing this review should be a priority.  His total useful time with the game is at least two weeks, not that it means anything.  TYP reviewed Super Paper Mario in four or five days...does that make his review less valid?  If I read a review and feel that the author didn't spend enough time with the game, I will say so, and I have done exactly that to many of our reviewers over the years.  I expect games to be played thoroughly before they are reviewed.

Also, I think Pale's point about Jeff's reviews is very well made.  We publish this kind of sarcastic, ranting review all the time...it's just that it's usually about games nobody cares about.

Smash_Bro has some valid criticisms of the way the review is written.  I'm talking with Stan about revisiting one or two things in the game to make sure we have everything right.  I am also considering having a second review written just to see what happens.  I wonder, if the second person hates it too, will capamerica explode into a million tiny pieces?

[Kairon]

Cool! Can the second reviewer be someone with a background in Korean MMOs?

*sits back with some popcorn*

~Carmine "Cai" M. Red
Kairon@aol.com

[GoldenPhoenix]

Quote
Originally posted by: Kairon
Cool! Can the second reviewer be someone with a background in Korean MMOs?

*sits back with some popcorn*

~Carmine "Cai" M. Red
Kairon@aol.com

Speak of the devil, I mention Kairon in my one of my posts in this thread and here he is! So I better poke fun at him. Let's see:

"Kairon is a Halo lover"

[Kairon]

Quote
Originally posted by: GoldenPhoenix
(Just look at Kairon, I really love the guy and it shows because I tease him all the time.)

Awwww... Golden! You DO care! *sniff*

Quote
Originally posted by: GoldenPhoenix
Speak of the devil, I mention Kairon in my one of my posts in this thread and here he is! So I better poke fun at him. Let's see:

"Kairon is a Halo lover"

*unsniff*

GoldenPhoenix is a Crackdown lover.

~Carmine "Cai" M. Red
Kairon@aol.com

[GoldenPhoenix]

Quote
Originally posted by: Kairon

Quote
Originally posted by: GoldenPhoenix
(Just look at Kairon, I really love the guy and it shows because I tease him all the time.)

Awwww... Golden! You DO care! *sniff*

Quote
Originally posted by: GoldenPhoenix
Speak of the devil, I mention Kairon in my one of my posts in this thread and here he is! So I better poke fun at him. Let's see:

"Kairon is a Halo lover"

*unsniff*

GoldenPhoenix is a Crackdown lover.

~Carmine "Cai" M. Red
Kairon@aol.com

I feel so violated and offended! Take that back, NOW.

[Kairon]

Not so dark NOW are you my queen?

~Carmine "Cai" M. Red
Kairon@aol.com

[capamerica]

Can the second reviewer be by someone who actually knows how to use the Wii-mote.

Even if there is a second review I'm all ready skeptic if its going to be a fair one.
It wouldn't at all surprise me if you guys go out of your way to have another bad review just so they can say the first wasn't wrong.

I have a hard time trusting NWR now for accurate and fair reviews.
Lately it seems like I get fairer and less biased reviews from the fanboys of GameFAQs, Sadly its looking like if I want a decent review from someone who is fair and gives the game a decent chance and actually outlines the pros and cons then I might have to go back to IGN and GameSpot...

[Jonnyboy117]

Oh hey, thanks for posting all those comments yet again in this thread.  I didn't catch them the first three times.  So let's see, you think I'm terrible at my job, and so is Stan, and that one of the major sections of our website is utterly without ethics or merit?  Thanks.  I'm really glad to have you as a reader.