Topic: Episode 217: Pargon Lindy Tier Aretak Pargon

[greybrick]

^yes i know but if you dont like a game that does not mean others are not going to enjoy it specially a metroid title, i know other m was not metroids best, but its a damn good game, and to give it a low score just because you dont like its un professional.

I think to give a game a high score when you don't like it is unprofessional. Why would you waste time stepping into the mindset of every possible user and assign the highest of those scores? Of course, you can't pan a game intended for toddlers because you didn't enjoy it, so there has to be some degree of flexibility in your mindset.

[alegoicoe]

^yes i know but if you dont like a game that does not mean others are not going to enjoy it specially a metroid title, i know other m was not metroids best, but its a damn good game, and to give it a low score just because you dont like its un professional.

It's your review, your opinion.  I would think it's unprofessional to write a review for some phantom audience that you don't actually agree with.  It's your name on the review, not theirs.  I'd rather see writers take a stand and have an opinion (even if I don't agree with it, like I don't agree with the Castlevania: Lords of Shadow reviews) than read "Well, if you're a fan of X, Y, and Z, you might like this" reviews.

You got me, am a fanboy, but i got a question, would you agree that Other M is a 6 quality game?

[broodwars]

It's your review, your opinion.  I would think it's unprofessional to write a review for some phantom audience that you don't actually agree with.  It's your name on the review, not theirs.  I'd rather see writers take a stand and have an opinion (even if I don't agree with it, like I don't agree with the Castlevania: Lords of Shadow reviews) than read "Well, if you're a fan of X, Y, and Z, you might like this" reviews.

You got me, am a fanboy, but i got a question, would you agree that Other M is a 6 quality game?

In my personal opinion, it's a 7.5 or so.  However, given how weak the storytelling is; how rigidly linear the game's structure is; the insistence upon Wiimote-only controls that can (IMO) be painful during extended play; and the damage that game does to Samus' character, I can totally understand why someone would go lower.  Despite its problems, I fairly enjoyed Other M, but that doesn't make my opinion any more "right" than anyone else's.

[alegoicoe]

It's your review, your opinion.  I would think it's unprofessional to write a review for some phantom audience that you don't actually agree with.  It's your name on the review, not theirs.  I'd rather see writers take a stand and have an opinion (even if I don't agree with it, like I don't agree with the Castlevania: Lords of Shadow reviews) than read "Well, if you're a fan of X, Y, and Z, you might like this" reviews.

You got me, am a fanboy, but i got a question, would you agree that Other M is a 6 quality game?

In my personal opinion, it's a 7.5 or so.  However, given how weak the storytelling is; how rigidly linear the game's structure is; the insistence upon Wiimote-only controls that can (IMO) be painful during extended play; and the damage that game does to Samus' character, I can totally understand why someone would go lower.  Despite its problems, I fairly enjoyed Other M, but that doesn't make my opinion any more "right" than anyone else's.

Its true that the story is weak, but gameplay wise the game is a blast once you get a hang of the controls, and the game has some pretty good graphics, i would give it a solid 8.5.

[NWR_Karl]

^yes i know but if you dont like a game that does not mean others are not going to enjoy it specially a metroid title, i know other m was not metroids best, but its a damn good game, and to give it a low score just because you dont like its un professional.

Actually, to do anything but that would be unprofessional. A review is an opinion, so how can you attempt to evaluate something if you don't use your own personal rubric? Game Informer's done this in the past (with Paper Mario 2), factoring in how they perceived the general public would receive it, and it's blown up in their face.

If you only read reviews to see your own thoughts reaffirmed, what's the point in reading any at all?

[NWR_Neal]

Reviews are opinion pieces. Period.

If you don't like a game, review it as such. I know someone hated on the idea of the recommendations ("if you like that game, you'll like this), and I see where you're coming from, but I feel like that's good way to be like "yea, I loved/hated this game, but you might like it if you enjoyed this game."

[alegoicoe]

^yes i know but if you dont like a game that does not mean others are not going to enjoy it specially a metroid title, i know other m was not metroids best, but its a damn good game, and to give it a low score just because you dont like its un professional.

Actually, to do anything but that would be unprofessional. A review is an opinion, so how can you attempt to evaluate something if you don't use your own personal rubric? Game Informer's done this in the past (with Paper Mario 2), factoring in how they perceived the general public would receive it, and it's blown up in their face.

If you only read reviews to see your own thoughts reaffirmed, what's the point in reading any at all?

i actually only read reviews on game informer just to see the crap they talk about nintendo games cause i find it amusing, other than that i get the magazine for free so its ok. the games that i play which i have been playing for nearly twenty years i dont need to see reviews about, new games i do read them, and from various site not only one to gather some info about it.

[TheYoungerPlumber]

I've generally believed that reviews ultimately serve a primary and, optionally, a secondary purpose: to critique the "quality" of the game (its merits and demerits), and then to offer a (possibly nuanced) play/don't play recommendation.

A review can criticize a game and still wind up recommending it to at least some gamers, if the game does have some merit (above 5 on the NWR scale). That's perfectly fine. What ISN'T fine is for reviews to merely provide a recommendation without critiquing the game, or even worse, fail to critique the game and slap on a score. It's fine to say "If you liked X and Y, check out game Z", as long as it's preceded with discussion of the game that would allow those unfamiliar with X and Y to come to their own conclusions about the game and (ideally) whether or not their tastes are aligned with the reviewer's.

[Jonnyboy117]

I personally don't care whether a reviewer explicitly says "I liked/disliked this game." The important part is WHY. If you can properly explain the reasons for your personal evaluation of the game, then you've got something to chew on, and readers can decide for themselves whether they agree or even care about specific criticisms. With Zach's review of Other M, he did a good job of explaining why he was disappointed with the game. I decided that I probably wouldn't be as bothered by those things, and that turned out to be true. My eventual disagreement doesn't mean Zach's review is bad or that he's wrong... we just disagree! Very respectfully, at that.

[Mop it up]

Did Halbred ever post his "raw, uncut" review on Metroid Other M? I'm curious what his unprofessional thoughts are on the game.

[NWR_insanolord]

I've got a suggestion for the live show: If you guys get exhausted and can't go on anymore, but the money's still coming, stick Zach and Nathan on there and let them do the polo podcast they've been threatening. Problem solved.

A more serious suggestion: take listener mail type questions, but then have the listener asking the question  stay on live via Skype and take part in the ensuing discussion.

[TJ Spyke]

I agree that they should give their opinions on games. I don't want the kind of crap certain Game Informer editors admitted that they based their reviews on what they thought their readers would think rather then what they honestly thought about the game (I am specifically talking about the infamous Paper Mario: The Thousand-Year Door review). If you base your score on what you think your readers would give, then you are a bad reviewer. I read a review to see what that person feels about the game, not what they assume I will feel.

As for bad scores being unprofessional, what? If they think the game is bad, then give it a low score. This isn't kids sports where everybody gets a trophy and nobody gets criticized.

[Halbred]

Did Halbred ever post his "raw, uncut" review on Metroid Other M? I'm curious what his unprofessional thoughts are on the game.

Totally forgot about this. I'll have to try and dig it up! I may have accidentally deleted it, though. Which would probably be for the best.

For the live podcast, may I suggest a live trivia show a la "Wait, Wait Don't Tell Me?"

[apdude]

For the live podcast, may I suggest a live trivia show a la "Wait, Wait Don't Tell Me?"

Since Lindy likes making rhymes, he can put together the Limericks.  Get a guest from Nintendo to answer questions about being a plumber, and a lucky NWR forum member can get Greg's voice on there voicemail box.

[Sundoulos]

I've got a suggestion for the live show: If you guys get exhausted and can't go on anymore, but the money's still coming, stick Zach and Nathan on there and let them do the polo podcast they've been threatening. Problem solved.

Or...you could start the show out with it and make people donate in order to make them stop. 

[greybrick]

I've got a suggestion for the live show: If you guys get exhausted and can't go on anymore, but the money's still coming, stick Zach and Nathan on there and let them do the polo podcast they've been threatening. Problem solved.

Or...you could start the show out with it and make people donate in order to make them stop. 

Well then we wouldn't make any money, WOULD WE? 

[KDR_11k]

"It's not fun" is a pretty serious flaw.