Author Topic: IGN reviews (Read 33186 times)

xanrastafari · « **Reply #25 on:** November 14, 2006, 05:35:02 AM »

My personal take on voice acting is that any game that has it should have an option to TURN IT OFF. I would've liked say... Final Fantasy X's storyline if I didn't feel like shooting every character that opened their mouth.

couchmonkey · « **Reply #26 on:** November 14, 2006, 05:48:51 AM »

I like voice acting, I don't even care if it's bad most of the time but I agree the option to turn it off should always be there.

nitsu niflheim · « **Reply #27 on:** November 14, 2006, 05:53:14 AM »

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion
Quote
Originally posted by: Myxtika1 Azn
I want to chime in with Dragon Quest VIII. That has some extremely awesome voice acting.

Ahahaha, I just started playing DQVIII a few days ago and I have to STRONGLY disagree...*shudder*

stop playing now, if you don't like the voice work then you just won't appreciate the entire game. ;_;

<3

I think DQ8 has some of the best voice work ever in a game.

zakkiel · « **Reply #28 on:** November 14, 2006, 06:52:25 AM »

Has anyone seen the "deep waters" Zelda video? How spoilery is it?

Ian Sane · « **Reply #29 on:** November 14, 2006, 07:40:53 AM »

To me judging voice acting should be based on what is expected. If it's a brand new game then it's up in the air. Who knows what the developer feels is appropriate? If the Japanese version had voice acting and the NA release didn't then you can criticize. If previous games in the series had voice acting and now suddenly this new sequel doesn't and the hardware is capable of it then you can criticize. With something like Zelda it makes no sense because Zelda has never had voice acting COULD have had voice acting on the Cube but didn't. Thus you can assume that it's an intentional design for the series.

The only time you should really grade what isn't there is if previous games in the series had a feature or something was removed during localization or porting from one platform to another. If you can say "hey this WAS here and you removed it" then you criticize. But "I would have made the game differently" isn't what a review should focus on (unless it's "I wouldn't have made this game hurt my hand to control.")

ShyGuy · « **Reply #30 on:** November 14, 2006, 08:21:30 AM »

Cassamassina is an activist judge.

King of Twitch · « **Reply #31 on:** November 14, 2006, 08:51:01 AM »

Here's a mini wii recap (wiicap lol) from the OC Register in a small section titled PS3 or Wii?:

...

the bad: no hard drive; not high-definition capable; moving the controller could get tiring
Best for: Casual and nontraditional gamers and those looking for simpler fun.
impressions: This machine is technologically inferior to its competitors but is just as-if not more-fun to play. The interactivity of the remote is brilliant and is a welcome change that will surely attract people who don't think they like or can play video games.

I loled at one of the PS3 pros: "capable of 1.8 trillion calculations a second"

It's odd that I haven't really heard any phrases involving polygon numbers, "fill rates," or "compression/texturing techniques" thrown around this gen. What's with that?

KnowsNothing · « **Reply #32 on:** November 14, 2006, 09:19:44 AM »

ps3 can do your math homework for you

decoyman · « **Reply #33 on:** November 14, 2006, 11:00:57 AM »

For me, voice acting can make a great game even better, but lousy voice acting can make a decent game downright unplayable. Evidence: Tales of Symphonia VS. Baten Kaitos. Yeah, yeah, "turn it off then," you say. But if you do that after halfway through the game, the horrible voice actors will haunt you as you read the text for THE REST OF THE GAME. Gah, I quit playing Baten Kaitos about halfway through in part because I HATED the voice acting. I kept telling myself, Tales of Symphonia's was pretty good, actually, how could Namco screw this one up so badly? Well, they did. It's horrid.

Wow, I just said "horrid."

Ian, responding to your comment that games that don't historically have something shouldn't be criticized for not adding it, I would disagree. With Twilight Princess putting such an emphasis on story (as many people are saying), more emphasis should be put on HOW that story is told. Done well, voice acting is a great way to add emotion and depth to a story. If they don't want Link to talk, that's fine, but why not the NPCs?. It's strange seeing such polish put on virtually every aspect of the game, and this part being ignored. The technology is there; I don't understand their excuses.

DISCLAIMER: I will still buy TP at launch and freaking love it. I'm just confused about their reasoning for excluding this potentially impressive feature this time.

zakkiel · « **Reply #34 on:** November 14, 2006, 11:15:32 AM »

Quote
Ian, responding to your comment that games that don't historically have something shouldn't be criticized for not adding it, I would disagree. With Twilight Princess putting such an emphasis on story (as many people are saying), more emphasis should be put on HOW that story is told. Done well, voice acting is a great way to add emotion and depth to a story. If they don't want Link to talk, that's fine, but why not the NPCs?. It's strange seeing such polish put on virtually every aspect of the game, and this part being ignored. The technology is there; I don't understand their excuses.

Because an army of Zelda fans would march on Tokyo and raze Nintendo to the ground. And I would be at their head.

The lack of voice acting in Zelda is either something you understand to be necessary to the core of your being, or you don't. If you don't, you're prone to babble about how voice acting is more "polished" a mode of presentation than text, and similar foolishness.

decoyman · « **Reply #35 on:** November 14, 2006, 11:25:37 AM »

Whatev, dude. I keep hearing there's some sort of reason for it. Up till now, I could understand that it's technical. Not enough disc space. Not enough time. IT'S AN 8-BIT GAME. There are many reasons that I understand. The reasons nowadays just sound a bit flimsy. "It's an artistic choice – you just have to accept it!" You know what? I was an art major in school, and you could tell when someone was BSing in a critique. They would say stuff like that without backing up why.

Besides, I'd accept it if Link didn't talk, because "you're the player! how can someone else be talking for youLOL!!" But why not everyone else? YOUR ARGUMENT FAILS, ZAKKIEL.

But go ahead. Try again. I'm a reasonable, open-minded fellow. If you give me a valid reason, I'll agree with you.

Your move.

Hostile Creation · « **Reply #36 on:** November 14, 2006, 11:29:15 AM »

Voice acting is not necessarily superior to writing. Are you saying that every book you ever read should be read aloud by an actor, rather than something you read yourself? That's stupid. The same applies with Zelda. The text allows for multiple interpretations regarding the way things are said, and it gives free range of imagination to give the character your own voice. Voice acting is highly over-rated, it's usually terribly done anyway (even high budget games like GTA had stilted, crappy voice acting), and it does not necessarily improve a game in any way.

Edit:
I posted that before seeing decoyman's post, but it basically applies to what he said. Well, decoyman, I'm an English and Communications double major, so maybe I know a thing or two about communication and interpretation. I can give you more evidence to support my claim if you want. I'll drive you into the ground with reasons for Zelda to not have voice acting.

Ian Sane · « **Reply #37 on:** November 14, 2006, 11:34:11 AM »

"Ian, responding to your comment that games that don't historically have something shouldn't be criticized for not adding it, I would disagree. With Twilight Princess putting such an emphasis on story (as many people are saying), more emphasis should be put on HOW that story is told. Done well, voice acting is a great way to add emotion and depth to a story. If they don't want Link to talk, that's fine, but why not the NPCs?. It's strange seeing such polish put on virtually every aspect of the game, and this part being ignored. The technology is there; I don't understand their excuses."

It's clear that Nintendo doesn't want it to have voices and I'd wager the majority of Zelda fans want the game to remain voiceless. So what is a reviewer like Matt to do? Lower the score each time? I can understand pointing it out once but after that he should either live with it or have someone else review Zelda games if this small thing so greatly affects his enjoyment of the game. The purpose of a review is to let people know if the game is worth buying or not. At some point endless ranting about no voice acting is going to prohibit the review from being useful. Fans will get no indication of whether or not a Zelda game is worth their time if the reviewer is too busy addressing something that either was never an issue to them or something they've come to deal with.

To me it's like complaining in Final Fantasy reviews about random battles or in Madden reviews about how it's the same game every year. Obviously for those that buy those games that doesn't matter to them so for the review to be useful someone that has more similar tastes to them should write the review.

Plus Matt complains about the lack of voice acting in every Nintendo game. Is he an unbiased reviewer or just some wannabe developer dictating how everything would be done if he was in charge? Some people would probably accuse me of the same thing but I'm just writing on a forum for fun. I'm not getting paid.

Edit: I'll give my reason why I personally don't want voice acting in Zelda: Mario's voice. The second I heard that horrible goofy clown voice I wanted to vomit and my interest in Mario has never been the same. When I play a Mario game today I sometimes feel I have to force myself to stomach little kid bullsh!t to get to the precious gameplay. The last thing I want is for Link to open his mouth and have this unbelievably horrible voice come out and totally ruin the Zelda feeling for me. I still like Mario and most Mario games are really good but there isn't a tight relationship anymore if you get what I mean. I'm in tune with Zelda. It's like a part of my life. I fear that lousy voice acting could ruin that because once Mario talked the series went in a direction that I couldn't really identify with.

Kairon · « **Reply #38 on:** November 14, 2006, 11:51:27 AM »

I didn't find the scores too bad, IGN is probably trying to find a baseline and this time they decided they'd err on the side of caution and lower scores instead of hype and higher ones.

Nevertheless, I can see myself turned into a raving lunatic when they review Zelda:TP.

The real weird thing is that reading the Trauma Center review, I couldn't find any points to justify the 8.0 overall score. The review was almost entirely positive throughout, with not enough emphasis given to any flaws that would've justified the lower score. By the time I finished reading it, I was almost certain it would've gotten a high 8.7 or something.

Oh, and ... *projects negative feelings in Decoyman's general direction*

~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com

NinGurl69 *huggles · « **Reply #39 on:** November 14, 2006, 12:04:41 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: Professional 666
The numbers and the text don't match up.

IS THIS SOME SORT OF TRIKC?

DID EGM WRITE THIS?

What a load of phayle. We're increasing their traffic with absolutely no benefit to us, the readers.

Good argument.

decoyman · « **Reply #40 on:** November 14, 2006, 12:10:26 PM »

THERE'S a reason I can accept a little easier, Hostile. HOWEVER, I still contend that there are very large differences between a book and a video game.

In a book, the written word is your whole universe. I mean, it's all you have to go by. A good book will allow your imagination to craft a scene without distraction on its own, using the words as building blocks. Text, with the aid of your imagination, serves a very distinct purpose in a book: create the world, listing everything that is important or pertinent, and let your readers' minds fill in the gaps.

It's a bit different in a video game world, because they're already giving you two different inputs (or more). In other words, there's a very distinct disconnect when going from text to audiovisual cues and vice versa. Imagine you're romping through a hillside, hearing birds chirping, hacking away the grass, watching the sun go down in the distance and nighttime set in, all with realistic physics and a timeframe outside of your own actions. They're recreating life in front of you. You walk up to a man on the outside of town, and a text box appears out of thin air. Immediately, the immersion is broken. You look down to the bottom of the screen (thus unable to take in any of his nonverbal cues he may be using to complement his speech, the tone of his voice, etc.), read his dialogue, the bubble disappears, and you're back in the "real world" chasing chickens and jumping from rooftop to rooftop.

I haven't even touched on the fact that the only text you read in a video game is meant to be dialogue (whether spoken by a person or a tablet or a sign – perhaps "communication" is a better word), because all the other text that a book would have is replaced by references the game's graphics and sound give you. Book/Video game = not a fair comparison.

Why not remove the last block to total immersion, since that's what they're going for anyways?

P.S. - Hostile, I was an English minor in school, so consider your challenge accepted

EDIT: Deflects Kairon's negative energy into a nearby tree, which explodes into a splintered mass of tree matter. "Whoa, watch where you're aiming that thing."

Donutt007 · « **Reply #41 on:** November 14, 2006, 12:25:02 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: decoyman
Ian, responding to your comment that games that don't historically have something shouldn't be criticized for not adding it, I would disagree. With Twilight Princess putting such an emphasis on story (as many people are saying), more emphasis should be put on HOW that story is told. Done well, voice acting is a great way to add emotion and depth to a story. If they don't want Link to talk, that's fine, but why not the NPCs?. It's strange seeing such polish put on virtually every aspect of the game, and this part being ignored. The technology is there; I don't understand their excuses.

DISCLAIMER: I will still buy TP at launch and freaking love it. I'm just confused about their reasoning for excluding this potentially impressive feature this time.

All I have to say is that you saw the uproar when Link was not a lefty....think what would happen if there were people talking in the game.

Rhoq · « **Reply #42 on:** November 14, 2006, 01:23:10 PM »

IGN has reviewed Super Monkey Ball: Banana Blitz. After a very positive review, it received an overall score of 8.4 (though the way the review was going I kind of expected a 9 or higher)

The thing that really irks me is in the "Graphics" portion of the score box. Matt felt it necessary to write "Crisp, clean, colorful cel-shaded visuals are a natural fit for the franchise. Runs at 60 frames in pro-scan and 16:9 widescreen. Still, the graphics are very simple."

In the review he praised the new cell-shaded stylized look, WTF?

Besides that - the review was a pretty decent read. Read it HERE.

Luigi Dude · « **Reply #43 on:** November 14, 2006, 01:29:10 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: Donutt007

All I have to say is that you saw the uproar when Link was not a lefty....think what would happen if there were people talking in the game.

This is what would happen.

zakkiel · « **Reply #44 on:** November 14, 2006, 01:55:15 PM »

Quote
YOUR ARGUMENT FAILS, ZAKKIEL.

This would have more punch if I'd made an argument.

Kairon · « **Reply #45 on:** November 14, 2006, 01:56:50 PM »

Nothing is more immersion breaking than bad voice acting.

Think of how much bad acting makes otherwise decent movies unwatchable, then imagine having that sense of repulsion while made to actively play a game and be an agent of subjecting yourself to what makes you want to walk out the theatre.

Since videogames are interactive, and since they require our agency to move forward, you'd have intense cognitive dissonance when you yourself are are causing your own the torment.

In other words, NO VOICE ACTING IN ZELDA.

... Unless the voice acting is perfect and overseen by Pixar.

~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com

decoyman · « **Reply #46 on:** November 14, 2006, 02:43:40 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: zakkiel
Quote
YOUR ARGUMENT FAILS, ZAKKIEL.
This would have more punch if I'd made an argument.

Blast!

Quote
Originally posted by: Kairon
... Unless the voice acting is perfect and overseen by Pixar.

~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com

Well, I don't know about Pixar, but I... I'll agree to this little compromise. You've got yourself a deal, Kairon!

Back on topic, yay Zelda!

Oops, back on topic, IGN reviews games?

Kairon · « **Reply #47 on:** November 14, 2006, 03:06:08 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: decoyman
Oops, back on topic, IGN reviews games?

Ouch, low blow!

Yeah, these IGN reviews are exciting to read, but... maybe they're just making sure they've got ceiling room for Zelda?

Who knows, Matt says he's re-examining the way his sectionr reviews games, so maybe he'll break from IGN tradition and Wii review scores will actually start to mean something?

... or maybe it'll be a noble experiment that'll be shot down in 2 months.

~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com

The Traveller · « **Reply #48 on:** November 14, 2006, 03:32:10 PM »

I think review scores should be gotten rid of.. Just have the review with no "Score".

Hostile Creation · « **Reply #49 on:** November 14, 2006, 03:48:04 PM »

I concede that voice acting is techincally feasible nowadays. However, very few games have good voice acting (and like Kairon said, bad voice acting is the worst of all). Even those that do tend to distract me; Eternal Darkness and Killer 7 both had fine voice acting, but it's still feels unnatural even then. Until I see games implimenting voice acting as well as animated movies have done it, I won't approve of its inclusion in Zelda.
If Nintendo does pull off good voice acting, I'd like to see how it affected Zelda. It could be really good. . . so long as Link doesn't talk

News:

Author Topic: IGN reviews (Read 33186 times)