Gaming Forums => General Gaming => Topic started by: Stratos on April 08, 2009, 08:32:02 PM
Title: Should you play a poorly rated game before condemning it on the interwebs?
Post by: Stratos on April 08, 2009, 08:32:02 PM
Mop it up and I were talking about this and we are curious to what people think about this matter.
Should you try games before you flat out condemn them? I know some people have standards that if Metacritic -or their preferred review site- rates a game less than an 8 they will not give it the light of day. But I have also taken a chance with some less favorably rated games and found them to be quite enjoyable.
Also there are games that have a notorious hate bandwagon but I question how many people have actually played some of them. I know on WiiWare World games like Spogs Racing, Pong Toss and Plaatchen Paint N Twist seem to be almost universally hated and are almost meme jokes in relation to the question of a game's quality yet few of the people criticizing these games have actually tried them.
Should people try certain games for themselves or can we just trust reviews all the time?
Also, in the case of awfully rated games like Superman 64, E.T.or the more recent Sonic games, should we experience the bad so we can better appreciate the good? The Wii gets a lot of bad rap for being buried in shovelware. But are most of these games truly as bad as some say when we look at other poorly viewed games throughout gaming history?
Is this over thinking the situation? Are there merits to this line of thought? Have you ever gotten a game despite mediocre reviews and found it surprisingly enjoyable? Has playing a terrible game given you a better appreciation for what makes a good game fun?
Title: Re: Should you play a poorly rated game before condemning it on the interwebs?
Post by: Dirk Temporo on April 08, 2009, 11:06:19 PM
Should? Yes. Will? Nope.
Title: Re: Should you play a poorly rated game before condemning it on the interwebs?
Post by: Mop it up on April 09, 2009, 12:04:12 AM
I’m not a choosy gamer. I’m probably one of the most happy-go-lucky gamers in the world. When I play a game, I focus on what I like about it and try to ignore what I don’t like. If a game has flaws I try not to think about them and enjoy what the game got right, to extract the fun out of it, I guess you could say. I also have a wide variety of tastes; the only two categories I don’t like much are fighting and sports. It’s pretty easy for me to enjoy a game. In fact, other than some sports and fighting games, I’ve probably never played a game I didn’t like on some level.
When it comes to review scores, I don't take them into consideration as a whole. Instead, I will search for a reviewer who's tastes are similar to my own and will read a review written by them. Whenever I read any review, what I take away from it is what are presented as the facts; any opinionated parts I weigh against my own tastes and see if it matches up. With Wii games it has gotten a bit more difficult, due to the varying degree of success (and apathy) people have with the Wiimote and its motions.
A while back I received Thrillville: Off The Rails as a gift. Since I'd never even heard of it, I considered returning it to the store, but first I wanted to read some reviews. The one here on NWR gave it score of five because that's old you'd have to be in order to be entertained by the game, or so it claimed. Of course, I've always been a fan of simple games, so that actually made it sound tempting, enough so that I finally played it. The management factors are pretty simple and the park pretty much runs itself, but the game is really about the minigames which are far more fleshed out than I thought they would be. The more fastidious amongst us wouldn't be satisfied with this game, but that's not a word which could be used to describe me.
An older example would be Mission: Impossible for the Nintendo 64. This game got some pretty mixed reviews, and I guess it is understandable because the game is kind of inconsistent. Still, some of the stealth levels worked pretty well, and there was a good amount of variety to it. It has its rough patches such as any level with jumping parts because of how finicky the jump was, but overall I think it is a good game.
If I could I'd try out every game out there, but because I can't I do tend to gravitate toward the more highly regarded ones. Even so, if a game sounds interesting enough but didn't receive good scores, I'll likely try it out anyway. Of course, I can't shake the feeling I could be missing out on some good games, but it's a risk I'm not willing to take.
Title: Re: Should you play a poorly rated game before condemning it on the interwebs?
Post by: Ian Sane on April 09, 2009, 12:59:33 PM
Trying games costs money. In WiiWare's case the ONLY way to try it, unless your friend has it, is to buy the damn thing. So I don't see any obligation to try out games that I'm not really that interested in to begin with that get average to bad review scores. Of course if it is a game I'm interested in a high score is enough to get me to buy it and if it gets a low score I'll read the reviews to find out why and make my decision based on that.
Now if the opportunity to try the game out comes up I won't not give it a try. I've played DK Bongo Blast and can say quite confidently that that game absolutely blows. My friend bought it so I tried it at his house. I didn't turn down the opportunity to give it a try even though I heard it was bad. In a way I was curious to see how bad it was. But am I going to rent a game I'm not that interested in that's getting poor review scores? No. Why should I spend my money on that? Odds are most of the time it will be a waste of money and the occasional time it won't be is infrequent enough that it doesn't bother me. Underrated games are supposed to be rare. If every game is underrated to you then you probably just have really low standards.
Title: Re: Should you play a poorly rated game before condemning it on the interwebs?
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on April 09, 2009, 01:24:54 PM
"Underrated games are supposed to be rare."
Says who? Based on what? And how will underrated games be identified without people spending their money to try it against the recommendation of the press?
On the flip side, it also works when consumers pay for games to find out they're bad (despite the press recommendation) -- they publically come out and say what went borked all they want: that is consumer info/reaction, that is a good thing since the press isn't the only voice worth listening to (provided the reader can think critically... lol internets).
~~~~~
I played the kiosk demo of Banjo Kazooie after I had spent ample time with Mario 64. My gawd, BK was slow awful nonsense with nothing to do and weird button placement. Never looked at the series again.
Title: Re: Should you play a poorly rated game before condemning it on the interwebs?
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on April 09, 2009, 03:46:28 PM
I don't think it is necessary to be honest. You can usually gather from various sources and impressions what a game is like, not to mention with Youtube and other sites that host gaming footage you can easily tell what a game is like to play.
Title: Re: Should you play a poorly rated game before condemning it on the interwebs?
Post by: Dirk Temporo on April 09, 2009, 05:32:41 PM
A lot of people tell me that you can't properly judge a game based on gameplay videos, which I partially agree with. Obviously gameplay videos won't provide you with the WHOLE picture, but I can usually tell if I'll enjoy a game based on gameplay videos. I've only ever purchased two games I didn't enjoy. Robot Arena was bought on a whim at Wal-Mart with no previous information about it. Deus Ex: Invisible War was purchased after I played the demo, which I honestly didn't much care for, but being a huge DX fanboy I bought it anyway. It sat unopened for like two months while I decided whether I was actually going to keep it, and I ended up returning it.
Title: Re: Should you play a poorly rated game before condemning it on the interwebs?
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on April 09, 2009, 05:36:51 PM
I dare someone to watch a Superman 64 video and not come away with the same impression everyone else has. ;)
Title: Re: Should you play a poorly rated game before condemning it on the interwebs?
Post by: Stratos on April 09, 2009, 05:38:37 PM
I dare someone to watch a Superman 64 video and not come away with the same impression everyone else has. ;)
I dare everyone to vote for Superman 64 in the RetroActive poll. :)
Title: Re: Should you play a poorly rated game before condemning it on the interwebs?
Post by: BeautifulShy on April 09, 2009, 10:05:17 PM
Stratos you make some interesting points.With reviews I look for professionalisim.If someone writes like they have a bias and uses childish words than I am probably not going to listen to them. I'll read the review but I'll take most of what they say not seriously.
I don't have that much money for games so I try and pick up ones that I know I will like and sometimes a under the radar title.
Title: Re: Should you play a poorly rated game before condemning it on the interwebs?
Post by: Kairon on April 10, 2009, 01:32:55 AM
I think the strength of your condemnation should not exceed a magnitude in direct proportion to the amount of experience you have with it.
I mean, it's perfectly fine to never play a game and make an informed decision to not even try to play it, citing reasons for that decision. But if that's the case, you have to admit that the opinions of those who have played the game are a little more decisive, even if they may never sway you to buy it. You're still allowed to think that you won't have fun with the game at all, but I don't think you could do anything as drastic as 'condemnation."
Title: Re: Should you play a poorly rated game before condemning it on the interwebs?
Post by: Mop it up on April 10, 2009, 02:45:40 AM
When it comes to download games, I think people may be less willing to give them a shot if they don't review favourably because they can't be returned or sold off if the person doesn't like them. It's a bit more of a risk since you'll be stuck with the game.
Title: Re: Should you play a poorly rated game before condemning it on the interwebs?
Post by: Stratos on April 10, 2009, 04:43:45 AM
I think the strength of your condemnation should not exceed a magnitude in direct proportion to the amount of experience you have with it.
I mean, it's perfectly fine to never play a game and make an informed decision to not even try to play it, citing reasons for that decision. But if that's the case, you have to admit that the opinions of those who have played the game are a little more decisive, even if they may never sway you to buy it. You're still allowed to think that you won't have fun with the game at all, but I don't think you could do anything as drastic as 'condemnation."
That's one of the things I was thinking. People seem to quickly hop on hate bandwagons over games that they have never played when they may not be as terrible as some would say. Conversely games that people love greatly do not stand the test of time and people do not look back on them with as much favor as they once did.
Title: Re: Should you play a poorly rated game before condemning it on the interwebs?
Post by: DAaaMan64 on April 10, 2009, 06:40:57 AM
If 10 scores say it's meh, It probably is. If 5 scores say it's terrible, it probably is. If the first 10, and the second 5 were wrong, oh well it's just a video game. If there is something fundamentally wrong with the game as stated in reviews and proven in gameplay videos I do unintentionally or otherwise sometimes make that my opinion. Flaw of mine? Who knows, some people say so.
The worst rated game I've ever liked was probably Ayden Chronics and Mega Man 64.
Title: Re: Should you play a poorly rated game before condemning it on the interwebs?
Post by: Stratos on April 10, 2009, 07:01:04 AM
Interesting because I know several people who love Mega Man 64.
How bad was Ayden Chronicles? I got the impression it was bland but it's niche-ness on the N64 has made me tempted to check it out.
Title: Re: Should you play a poorly rated game before condemning it on the interwebs?
Post by: NWR_insanolord on April 10, 2009, 09:01:47 AM
All I know is you should definitely play Alien Syndrome before you condemn it.
Title: Re: Should you play a poorly rated game before condemning it on the interwebs?
Post by: SirSniffy on April 10, 2009, 01:24:41 PM
I am the WRONG person to answer this question...I'm so cynical, I condemn almost any game before playing it, then later when I play it, I usually end up changing my tune.
Title: Re: Should you play a poorly rated game before condemning it on the interwebs?
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on April 10, 2009, 01:35:48 PM
All I know is you should definitely play Alien Syndrome before you condemn it.
Beat-em ups always sounds good to me.
Title: Re: Should you play a poorly rated game before condemning it on the interwebs?
Post by: KnowsNothing on April 10, 2009, 02:06:36 PM
Yeah, you should give it a go before you condemn it. Similarly, everyone should try a highly-rated game before praising it...with the amount of bullshit reviews out there you can't trust anything anymore. Gaming media is dead, etc.
EGM gave Paper Mario TYD a poor review because that's what they felt their fans would want to see, and conversely games like GTA4 are getting 10s left and right from publications while most normal people admit it probably hovers somewhere around an 8. Of course, who really gives a ****...the number system sucks anyway, and anyone who will or will not buy a game based on a metacritic ranking is a complete tool that deserves to live with the other drones in that sad, pathetic, albeit well-populated world where GTA4 is the pinnacle of all things gaming.
The problem is, of course, that games are expensive and demos extremely rare, especially on consoles. The best someone can do is read reviews and watch gameplay videos, neither of which can give anyone an accurate idea of what it's really like to play the game. When we buy a game we're essentially going in blind, and the only idea we have of what's in front of us is based on a thousand screaming zealots trying to describe in their limited vocabulary just what it is we're getting into. Also the loudest of these people are wearing fashionable hats made out of cash.
That's why sequels are so prevalent; if I'm going to drop $60 on a game, I want to be damned sure I'm going to like it. What better way to know for sure than if I have literally played the damn thing before? CoD4 was good, so CoD5 must be EVEN BETTER; I'll buy that instead of taking a risk with Madworld, etc. It's tough even for those enough who know better; would I rather buy a sequel that I know I'll like (but that I've essentially seen before), or take a risk with a game that I might love but also might hate? Which is worth my money?
This leads inevitably to piracy, where people can play these games without the financial risk..."Games are too expensive" or "I can't trust reviews" or "I wouldn't have actually bought the game, so they aren't losing a customer" etc. Why even take the chance that you will waste $60 on a game that publishers paid to be given a good score? All this piracy of course leads to devs losing money, and which makes them want to take less risk with their games to ensure profit, which leads to more sequels and generic FPS games with bald space marines, which leads to more piracy; the spiral continues. Soon companies are going out of business and selling their strongest IPs to other devs, which rape them and kill all their value. The industry goes stagnant. There are a few islands of hope in this steaming cesspool of mediocrity, but the market shrinks and they can no longer support themselves. Gaming is dying. Gaming is dead. This same thing is of course happening to Hollywood, and to the Record Labels, and soon the entire entertainment industry has collapsed. The economy crumbles.
We go back to being satisfied with hoop-and-stick.
Title: Re: Should you play a poorly rated game before condemning it on the interwebs?
Post by: NWR_insanolord on April 10, 2009, 02:11:23 PM
All I know is you should definitely play Alien Syndrome before you condemn it.
No.
That's it, you've insulted Alien Syndrome's honor, I challenge you to a duel!
Title: Re: Should you play a poorly rated game before condemning it on the interwebs?
Post by: Stratos on April 10, 2009, 04:15:25 PM
I really dislike piracy. The "I wouldn't have bought it anyway" argument is terribly pathetic. The problem with it is that you are still enjoying a service you didn't pay for. If you wouldn't have bought it you should not be playing it. You D/Ling and playing a pirated game shows that you are getting some entertainment and value out of it. You playing it without paying is them losing the money they could have made on your curiosity. If I follow that logic I could go to the store and say that I wouldn't have bought this candy bar anyway so I should just take it without paying.
I really dislike piracy.
You bring up some good points, KnowsNothing. I don't think it will end with the game market collapsing, though. Companies are evolving their system and adapting to these things. Digital distribution is one of the ways piracy is being hampered.
Title: Re: Should you play a poorly rated game before condemning it on the interwebs?
Post by: Mop it up on April 10, 2009, 11:33:28 PM
I really dislike piracy. The "I wouldn't have bought it anyway" argument is terribly pathetic.
I somewhat agree, though in some cases it really is true. I can say this from would-be experience, as I myself have before seriously considered going the route of the PC emulator and ROMs. Though this would have been for NES, Super NES, and N64 games, all of which are no longer being manufactured. Some of them are being offered as downloads, but that's not a form I'm willing to pay for.
Though I never have (nor will I ever) dabble in ROMs, and I haven't downloaded a single VC game. This proves that I'm really not going to buy the legit versions, and I'm not even going to obtain the ill-gotten ones either. Instead, I buy the originals used, which is essentially no different than using ROMs as the companies involved still aren't seeing a cent of the money. Does that mean that buying used is just as bad as piracy?
Of course, you were probably talking about current retail games, in which case going the route of piracy is pretty low. It is my belief that nobody has the right to a product without offering some kind of compensation, and if anyone thinks they are entitled to play a game without paying for it, they are rather selfish indeed.
The only illegitimate game I possess and have played is an NES reproduction cartridge of Earthbound. It was never released in the US, and by the looks of things it never will be. Therefore I don't think it really harmed any company, and if it were available in some legit form I would have got that instead. In fact, if it were on the VC I'd have downloaded it, and not just because it is cheaper (though this happened before there was even a mention of the "Nintendo Revolution").
Title: Re: Should you play a poorly rated game before condemning it on the interwebs?
Post by: Flames_of_chaos on April 11, 2009, 01:06:16 PM
Knowsnothing has an excellent example why reviews sometimes doesn't work and I still remember that whole Paper Mario fiasco, my philosophy is that the best reviewer is yourself since everybody has different tastes. Alien Syndrome is a excellent example of a polarizing game, some like it and some don't.
I disagree with the market collapsing, while Activision is the new "sequelitus" company especially with the Guitar Hero series, people will eventually get sick of the same series that companies are shoving down their throat yearly or in the case of the GH series quarterly. Thanks to that and well Harmonix creating Rock Band, I dislike Guitar Hero ever since Neversoft and Activision took over.
Also this is thread has an interesting discussion, please curb the piracy talk before it spirals out of control since talking about piracy is against the rules.
Title: Re: Should you play a poorly rated game before condemning it on the interwebs?
Post by: Mop it up on April 11, 2009, 06:37:19 PM
please curb the piracy talk before it spirals out of control since talking about piracy is against the rules.
I didn't know that, but I just checked the rules again and it looks like you are right. That's weird. I thought it was just against the rules to ask for or provide pirated software, I didn't know it was taboo to even mention it, especially since I've talked about it before and nobody said anything. Oh well, I'm sorry for bringing it up I guess.
Title: Re: Should you play a poorly rated game before condemning it on the interwebs?
Post by: UncleBob on April 11, 2009, 07:51:27 PM
Quote
"Instead, I buy the originals used, which is essentially no different than using ROMs as the companies involved still aren't seeing a cent of the money."
Nope. Because when you go to the store and buy that used copy of Mario RPG, then when I go to the store and buy it, it's no longer there... so then I have to buy it via VC and the company gets piz-aid.
Title: Re: Should you play a poorly rated game before condemning it on the interwebs?
Post by: Peachylala on April 11, 2009, 08:47:41 PM
Um... I'm a bit confused, wasn't GI the one that started the Paper Mario TYD fiasco? I wouldn't be surprised if EGM bullshat their way around reviewing the game (this isn't surprising), but if I remember correctly, GI became a huge laughing stock within the Nin-community.
I'm sure Pro Daisy had a ball with that review. (after all, Pro Daisy's amusment is our entertaiment)
Title: Re: Should you play a poorly rated game before condemning it on the interwebs?
Post by: Flames_of_chaos on April 11, 2009, 10:08:32 PM
EGM gave Paper Mario Thousand Year door a 90/100 and EGM gave it a 68/100. Here's the scores from Metacritic
68 Game Informer The art and combat are killed in their tracks by the game's downright shameful dialogue. [Nov 2004, p.158]
90 Electronic Gaming Monthly Seriously, random villagers in this game have more character than major players in other RPGs, and certain moments are literally laugh-out-loud funny. [Dec 2004, p.168]
Title: Re: Should you play a poorly rated game before condemning it on the interwebs?
Post by: Mop it up on April 11, 2009, 10:27:49 PM
I think Game Informer are the ones who said that they score games based on what the gaming public will think of them. How does that make sense? Who are they to decide what the gaming public like and dislike? Idiots.
Because when you go to the store and buy that used copy of Mario RPG, then when I go to the store and buy it, it's no longer there... so then I have to buy it via VC and the company gets piz-aid.
You wouldn't check at another store or on eBay? If you're looking for the original cartridge to begin with then you probably wouldn't settle for an imitation version like on the VC. Though you kind of make me want to buy every copy of Super Mario RPG in existence so that everyone is forced to buy the download.
Title: Re: Should you play a poorly rated game before condemning it on the interwebs?
Post by: NWR_pap64 on April 12, 2009, 12:33:08 AM
I think if you should try a game out if it peaks your interest but the word on it has been mixed.
Videogame experiences can be very personal and vary from person to person. What to me might be solid and even amazing could be boring and horrendous for someone else. This means that if you don't have any idea of how a game might be like you will never find out until you try it for yourself.
This is why I always suggest renting before buying, especially if people have mixed thoughts on the game. I know for some of you renting a game would be admitting that you are weak or something but for the sake of saving money you should swallow that pride and rent so you can see what the game is all about. Then and ONLY then will you know if the game fits your overall preferences and style.
Title: Re: Should you play a poorly rated game before condemning it on the interwebs?
Post by: oohhboy on April 12, 2009, 01:03:45 AM
I believe for a majority for us here, it is ok to slam a game before we play it because most of the time when we do it, it is for games that are terrible. It is ok to follow your gut, turn on that BS detector. Most of us have played enough games to know a bad game (shoot) on sight. I mean who in their right mind would defend games Like HorseZ and Universal park adventure(Which I have shamefully played for 5 minutes in a failed attempt to find redeeming value).
Most of the time your not arguing over things like Saints Row, a highly flawed game, with strong comedy value here. Or Wii fit and it's practical non-game benefits.
I read reviews mostly for entertainment value. I already know what I want.
Title: Re: Should you play a poorly rated game before condemning it on the interwebs?
Post by: KnowsNothing on April 12, 2009, 02:01:02 AM
I apologize for my reckless slander! It is in fact GI that we should hate more
Also for the benefit of those who misunderstood, towards the end of my post I may have been a bit hyperbolic. no one can ever really enjoy hoop-and-stick
Title: Re: Should you play a poorly rated game before condemning it on the interwebs?
Post by: S-U-P-E-R on April 12, 2009, 12:53:13 PM
So to answer the thread title question; yeah. There's already been a few anecdotes in this thread and I definitely have a few of my own. Just because the mags/sites universally pan a game doesn't mean you should not check out a game (it usually does, but not always). If you have played enough video games and know who's developing it, intuition can often tell you if a game is good. Playing is best, though!
Final Fight: Streetwise owns
Title: Re: Should you play a poorly rated game before condemning it on the interwebs?
Post by: Flames_of_chaos on April 12, 2009, 01:25:36 PM
So to answer the thread title question; yeah. There's already been a few anecdotes in this thread and I definitely have a few of my own. Just because the mags/sites universally pan a game doesn't mean you should not check out a game (it usually does, but not always). If you have played enough video games and know who's developing it, intuition can often tell you if a game is good. Playing is best, though!
Final Fight: Streetwise owns
Haha I want to see someone say that with a straight face while playing and enjoying it. I think after that game which was made by Capcom's US development house, they shut that dev house down.
Title: Re: Should you play a poorly rated game before condemning it on the interwebs?
Post by: Mop it up on April 12, 2009, 08:54:11 PM
I believe for a majority for us here, it is okay to slam a game before we play it because most of the time when we do it, it is for games that are terrible.
The problem I have with this is, how do you know it is terrible? If you've never actually played it, how can you be sure? Do you really have the right to pass judgment on a game you haven't played?
This is a two-way street too. I never claimed that Super Mario Galaxy was a good game until after I played it.
Title: Re: Should you play a poorly rated game before condemning it on the interwebs?
Post by: Stogi on April 12, 2009, 09:43:45 PM
I know other people's poo smells like poo because people have told me there poo smells like poo; does that mean I have to smell their poo in order to say the truth about their poo, which is, it smells like ****?
Title: Re: Should you play a poorly rated game before condemning it on the interwebs?
Post by: Mop it up on April 12, 2009, 10:15:54 PM
That disgusting analogy doesn't really make sense. Everyone's excrement is essentially the same so it is all going to have the same scent. That would be like if someone owned the same game as you and you asked them if it were any different.
Title: Re: Should you play a poorly rated game before condemning it on the interwebs?
Post by: Stratos on April 12, 2009, 10:18:34 PM
Poop is a product of a natural bodily function. Making a game takes work and can turn out good or bad. It is not something that just happens like poop happens.
Title: Re: Should you play a poorly rated game before condemning it on the interwebs?
Post by: Mop it up on April 12, 2009, 10:20:10 PM
This is turning into a Fun House thread. I really need to stop eating whilst I'm here...
Title: Re: Should you play a poorly rated game before condemning it on the interwebs?
Post by: Stratos on April 12, 2009, 10:21:50 PM
Sorry, I could have phrased that better I suppose. I was more arguing that he is comparing apples to oranges.
Title: Re: Should you play a poorly rated game before condemning it on the interwebs?
Post by: Stogi on April 13, 2009, 07:09:51 AM
You two obviously missed the point.
Title: Re: Should you play a poorly rated game before condemning it on the interwebs?
Post by: KDR_11k on April 13, 2009, 12:40:56 PM
Define condemn. Put it on my "don't buy at any price" list? Hell yeah am I going to put games there without playing them. Constantly insult on the internet? I usually do that more with games I played that got rated highly and turned out to suck so much feces it's no wonder the graphics are all brown.
I usually go by word of mouth first (if many people on a forum liked it it's likely that the game is fun), then reviews (often using the text to determine whether a game is one I'd like or not while the score is more of an overall quality judgement, many reviewers fail to properly express the level of like/dislike they have for a game in writing). Some games get bought on a random chance if they're cheap enough. Demos apply for 360 games (which have never convinced me to buy a game, so far all demos I played on the system ended up with the game being put on the "definitely not worth 70€" list) but on the Wii or DS there are none.
I do think I should listen to Yahtzee's reviews, he does seem to exhibit a similarily critical viewpoint as I do. It's what kept me away from buying GTACW recently (got Prof Layton instead).
I also do recommend games to people based on scores even when I didn't enjoy them but felt it was an issue limited to me or at least count them in a list of good games (stuff like GTA and God of War goes here, I didn't think of them highly when I played them but I know many millions loved the games).
Title: Re: Should you play a poorly rated game before condemning it on the interwebs?
Post by: vudu on April 16, 2009, 05:50:00 PM
What happened to that video you posted a few years back? I think it was you playing through one of the levels and the bad guy got stuck running in circles for a couple minutes.
Title: Re: Should you play a poorly rated game before condemning it on the interwebs?
Post by: S-U-P-E-R on April 16, 2009, 07:51:45 PM
Not the creator of the vid, but here it is: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-b-kJ9T9HaU
This is the ever-popular article I wrote about the game: http://superty.livejournal.com/288401.html
Title: Re: Should you play a poorly rated game before condemning it on the interwebs?
Post by: Mikintosh on April 20, 2009, 12:38:44 AM
I'd be wiling to play more badly-reviewed games if they all had demos that I could try out; sure, XBLA's great for that, but the demos for the 360 games take up almost half of my remaining disk space each, and take an hour to load. And the Wii doesn't have any at all; what happened to demo discs?
This may be a slight tangent, but I don't see why all of these classic game companies don't just dump their entire backlog onto the VC/XBLA/PSN channels; this staggered release business is ridiculous, because the years of lost sales for releasing something 3 years after the service began has to outweigh any benefits to releasing them one at a time. I was planning on getting Super Mario Kart & Star Fox on the VC, but instead I got them and an SNES system used (which I don't consider wrong since the company already got paid for them, and the previous owner doesn't get to keep a copy.
Title: Re: Should you play a poorly rated game before condemning it on the interwebs?
Post by: KDR_11k on April 20, 2009, 03:24:50 AM
You only have 2GB left on your HDD? What did you throw on there?
The staggered releases are to keep the service alive, if they did massive dumps every 6 months or so noone would bother checking for updates anymore. Plus the games would get drowned in the flood with people only focussing on the games they know already instead of each getting its own exposure, potentially making people check what those games are and maybe buy some.
Title: Re: Should you play a poorly rated game before condemning it on the interwebs?
Post by: Mop it up on April 20, 2009, 07:18:46 PM
This may be a slight tangent, but I don't see why all of these classic game companies don't just dump their entire backlog onto the VC/XBLA/PSN channels; this staggered release business is ridiculous, because the years of lost sales for releasing something 3 years after the service began has to outweigh any benefits to releasing them one at a time.
I'm sure that they've done market research to determine that it's best not to release everything at one time. They're not the only one who does this sort of thing either; companies don't release every season of an old television show on DVD all at the same time. Though I do think that they should go back to releasing three VC games every week, regardless of what's coinciding on WiiWare. With the amount of systems supported by the VC and the possibility of more, I'm sure they could find three worthwhile games every week for many years to come.
Title: Re: Should you play a poorly rated game before condemning it on the interwebs?
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on April 20, 2009, 07:41:06 PM
Um... I'm a bit confused, wasn't GI the one that started the Paper Mario TYD fiasco? I wouldn't be surprised if EGM bullshat their way around reviewing the game (this isn't surprising), but if I remember correctly, GI became a huge laughing stock within the Nin-community.
I'm sure Pro Daisy had a ball with that review. (after all, Pro Daisy's amusment is our entertaiment)
Actually, Game Informer reviewed Eternal Darkness a year before it came out (5 months before GAMECUBE launched in the USA), complete with a final [low] score and a 3-paragraph write-up -- based on the E3 2001 build that debuted only a month before this issue came out. This is my ground beef with them, and they've done a remarkable job of covering up/erasing any evidence of this catastrophe. I thought "how the **** did they review it? I only played this demo at E3 a month ago like they did! Did they get a GAMECUBE? I WANT MY GAMECUBE!"
On a side note, I did sign up for GameStop Edge Card whatever a long time ago, handy for in-store credit. I keep getting issues of that terrible GI magazine in my mail, and they won't stop. "This" is how GI appears to stiill be "in business", cuz the stupid retail chain won't stop CUTTING DOWN RAINFORESTS TO GIVE THIS AWFUL MAGAZINE AWAY.
Title: Re: Should you play a poorly rated game before condemning it on the interwebs?
Post by: Mikintosh on April 20, 2009, 07:45:48 PM
You only have 2GB left on your HDD? What did you throw on there?
Music from CDs; they finally got the user soundtrack thing down right with the 360, so I like to have things to listen to in Burnout and such. Plus, I have a bunch of XBLA games.
This may be a slight tangent, but I don't see why all of these classic game companies don't just dump their entire backlog onto the VC/XBLA/PSN channels; this staggered release business is ridiculous, because the years of lost sales for releasing something 3 years after the service began has to outweigh any benefits to releasing them one at a time.
I'm sure that they've done market research to determine that it's best not to release everything at one time. They're not the only one who does this sort of thing either; companies don't release every season of an old television show on DVD all at the same time. Though I do think that they should go back to releasing three VC games every week, regardless of what's coinciding on WiiWare. With the amount of systems supported by the VC and the possibility of more, I'm sure they could find three worthwhile games every week for many years to come.
Yeah, but that's usually because they don't want to crowd the market by releasing multiple seasons of Frasier at the same time, for example. I don't think it's the same for video games since they're more evergreen and you don't have to experience them in any particular order (unless they're sequels). At the very least the process is too slow.
Title: Re: Should you play a poorly rated game before condemning it on the interwebs?
Post by: KDR_11k on April 21, 2009, 04:00:09 AM
Well, the process got slowed down to make room for WiiWare.
Title: Re: Should you play a poorly rated game before condemning it on the interwebs?
Post by: S-U-P-E-R on April 21, 2009, 09:49:44 AM
Actually, Game Informer reviewed Eternal Darkness a year before it came out (5 months before GAMECUBE launched in the USA), complete with a final [low] score and a 3-paragraph write-up -- based on the E3 2001 build that debuted only a month before this issue came out. This is my ground beef with them, and they've done a remarkable job of covering up/erasing any evidence of this catastrophe. I thought "how the **** did they review it? I only played this demo at E3 a month ago like they did! Did they get a GAMECUBE? I WANT MY GAMECUBE!"
This is incredibly hilarious to me and I am interested in any relevant links to this. Also in who wrote it.
Title: Re: Should you play a poorly rated game before condemning it on the interwebs?
Post by: Mikintosh on April 21, 2009, 03:49:30 PM
Well, the process got slowed down to make room for WiiWare.
Which also hasn't really shown its promise, especially from Nintendo's own 1st-party development teams. There should already be a slew of games like Dr. Mario RX Online, and there aren't. I mean, My Pokemon Ranch?
Title: Re: Should you play a poorly rated game before condemning it on the interwebs?
Post by: KDR_11k on April 22, 2009, 04:27:17 PM
There's a steady stream of third party games for WiiWare, Nintendo doesn't interfere much and seems to be focussed mostly on really niche titles (Art Style, MaBoShi, Bonsai Barber), giving third parties no excuse like "only Nintendo games sell!".
Title: Re: Should you play a poorly rated game before condemning it on the interwebs?
Post by: Stratos on April 22, 2009, 04:57:16 PM
Well, the process got slowed down to make room for WiiWare.
Which also hasn't really shown its promise, especially from Nintendo's own 1st-party development teams. There should already be a slew of games like Dr. Mario RX Online, and there aren't. I mean, My Pokemon Ranch?
There's a steady stream of third party games for WiiWare, Nintendo doesn't interfere much and seems to be focussed mostly on really niche titles (Art Style, MaBoShi, Bonsai Barber), giving third parties no excuse like "only Nintendo games sell!".
Nintendo's goal with WW is very different from Microsoft's goal for XBLA. Nintendo specifically created WW to give new and indie devs a chance to flourish and shine. That is why they tend to not put a lot of big name 1st party stuff on the service. Look at how Mario and Link dominate the VC sales chart. The same thing would happen on WW. They put one Mario game up to garner interest and in fact none of the 'Nintendo' made WW games were not made by 1st party devs. I believe all of them have been confirmed to be made by 2nd or 3rd party studios on commission from Big N.
Title: Re: Should you play a poorly rated game before condemning it on the interwebs?
Post by: Rize on April 23, 2009, 02:27:24 PM
If a score is low enough, a game is probably junk. However, some games deliberately feature old designs that are still of interest to certain gamers (Etrian Odyssey and the recently released Dark Spire). Sometimes get major deductions for being short (which might not bother some consumers). Point is, you ultimately need to look out for your own tastes. If there is a game that interests you, carefully read the reviews to see why the scores are what they are. If a game is getting an average of 80% because it's kinda short and has no multiplayer (but is otherwise good), you might like it just fine if you don't care about length and don't use multiplayer modes.
