Darkfall NERDRAGE against Eurogamer.

[elmuerte]

I realise that this is completely irrelevant to your point, and I'm a pedantic dick for bring it up, but that's not how that works.

You clearly missed the reference to podcast #18.

[kuddles]

That Eurogamer are giving it a second review because of the angry reponses makes them better than most games sites.

If you mean because the reviewer didn't really spend an adequate amount of time with the game, then sure.

But if you mean game sites should give a game a second review just because a bunch of whiney internet gamers don't agree with it, then that would be a horrible precedent to set.

[brkl]

You really think 10% of the people would love a 1/10 game? They're usually totally unplayable.

[SignorSuperdouche]

You clearly missed the reference to podcast #18.

God damn it, I knew I should've kept my stupid mouth shut

[OssK]

If you mean because the reviewer didn't really spend an adequate amount of time with the game, then sure.

Hmmm... I'd have to say that giving it a second review does not make them any better if you consider that in the first place they didn't spend enough time, which could pretty well be what they do with every game.

[DanJW]

You really think 10% of the people would love a 1/10 game? They're usually totally unplayable.

Yes, I do, strangely enough. People end up liking all sorts of stuff, often stuff that is rubbish.

[ThunderPeel2001]

They're not speaking their mind. And I'm sorry, there are such things as wrong "opinions." It's my opinion that the sun isn't hot......mm-hm.

It's their opinion that Sonic: Unleashed is inferior to about 60% of all games that are currently available. ......mm-hm.

(Am I walking into a trap here...? )

Obviously it's not an opinion to argue against something that can be scientifically provable... So, no, there is no such thing as a "wrong opinion" and equally, there no such thing as a "right opinion".

Of course I completely agree that a journalist can be a completely lazy twat and not bother to review games properly.

(Carefully steps away...)

[SignorSuperdouche]

Yes, I do, strangely enough. People end up liking all sorts of stuff, often stuff that is rubbish.

I think you might be on to something there actually, especially if you look at something like metacritic rather than individual reviews.

[OssK]

(Am I walking into a trap here...? )

Obviously it's not an opinion to argue against something that can be scientifically provable... So, no, there is no such thing as a "wrong opinion" and equally, there no such thing as a "right opinion".

Of course I completely agree that a journalist can be a completely lazy twat and not bother to review games properly.

(Carefully steps away...)

You clearly missed the reference to podcast #18.

[elmuerte]

(Am I walking into a trap here...? )

For all the people that can't link it to episode #18.

Original post: http://www.psxextreme.com/ps3-news/4586.html#usercomment_parent_49928

Edited May 14, 2009 by elmuerte

[syntheticgerbil]

I think you might be on to something there actually, especially if you look at something like metacritic rather than individual reviews.

Haha, I've noticed that. Every once and a while I'll look up something I know is terrible on metacritic just for fun, and there are usually user reviews at the bottom with a few guys saying, "Don't listen to what the critics say, this thing was great! 8/10."

[ThunderPeel2001]

You clearly missed the reference to podcast #18.

Doh!

[ThunderPeel2001]

For all the people that can't like it to episode #18.

Original post: http://www.psxextreme.com/ps3-news/4586.html#usercomment_parent_49928

Damn, and that an administrator, too. Guess I should really listen to episode #18!

[DanJW]

For all the people that can't like it to episode #18.

Original post: http://www.psxextreme.com/ps3-news/4586.html#usercomment_parent_49928

That little humming sound that he types at the end of his paragraphs... that might actually be the most annoying thing ever. It makes me want to punch my monitor in the face. I've noticed quite a few authors of fiction give their insane villains little verbal ticks just like that.

[MrHoatzin]

These days, when I consider review scores at all (review scores LOL) I consider them to be "the fraction of people who will love this game". So 4 out of 10 people may love the game to bits, and it will still be a 4 out of 10. You will find people who love any game, no matter how bad you think it is. That 1/10 game? 10% of players still love it.

Admittedly this doesn't work at the top end. Not everyone loves the Halo games, despite their 10/10 scores. Which just goes to show that they are overrated.

One outta 20 gamers will enjoy something esoteric like The Path, the rest will be confused. Does this mean the game should get half a point?

[twmac]

Being one of the people who loved Sonic: Unleashed, I agree!

Not sure what with yet.

However, the re-review from Eurogamer is a good idea simply because they have observed that, maybe, just maybe the person who reviewed it originally didn't click with the game.

For example, I love shooting people in the face, especially in Co-Op, I also love zombie stuff. Under those circumstances you'd think I'd be perfect to review L4D. The thing is I really didn't like it (for reasons I don't want to go into because all I'll do is invoke someone's wrath over that), yet the game regularly has 30 000 gamers on it on steam.

So Eurogamer are (possibly) worried that the guy they hired to do the review was one of those people who normally likes that sort of thing but didn't get what this one did.

[DanJW]

One outta 20 gamers will enjoy something esoteric like The Path, the rest will be confused. Does this mean the game should get half a point?

Doh, you got me. It does break down a bit with indie and niche games. Although I'd hope that more than 5% of gamers would like The Path. Remember that most players do not post what they think on the internet, and are effectively silent.

[n0wak]

However, the re-review from Eurogamer is a good idea simply because they have observed that, maybe, just maybe the person who reviewed it originally didn't click with the game.

For example, I love shooting people in the face, especially in Co-Op, I also love zombie stuff. Under those circumstances you'd think I'd be perfect to review L4D. The thing is I really didn't like it (for reasons I don't want to go into because all I'll do is invoke someone's wrath over that), yet the game regularly has 30 000 gamers on it on steam.

I still think it's a bad idea precisely for the reasons you cite. It basically boils down to the tired old question of what you expect from a review? Are you looking for a personal opinion, a consumer's guide, a critical analysis, or just a measure of game's popularity? Whether a game is constantly played by 3 people or 300,000 people shouldn't affect your opinion if you thought it was complete ass. You should not be intimidated by nerdmobs for voicing it. Even more so, you should not have to face invalidation from the fucking developers themselves.

[Spaff]

pre-patch FIREKICKS baby

pre-patch

[Salka]

FUUUUUUUUU!!!!!

[twmac]

I still think it's a bad idea precisely for the reasons you cite. It basically boils down to the tired old question of what you expect from a review? Are you looking for a personal opinion, a consumer's guide, a critical analysis, or just a measure of game's popularity? Whether a game is constantly played by 3 people or 300,000 people shouldn't affect your opinion if you thought it was complete ass. You should not be intimidated by nerdmobs for voicing it. Even more so, you should not have to face invalidation from the fucking developers themselves.

Okay I didn't realise it was developers that were striking out. That sucks if that is the reason Eurogamer are re-reviewing it.

All the same I'm a big fan of second oppinions. I remember the ever so controversial (?) review someone posted about Farenheit (AKA Indigo Prophecy) on Idle Thumbs back when they still did editorials. The second oppinions expressed then were a good way of counter balancing the largely negative review.

[Commodore75]

All the same I'm a big fan of second oppinions. [...]

Same here.

I would like to see more reviews with two people aproaching the game from different angles.

One who played the first game of the serie back when they couldn't go outside because of bullies/hay-fever/agoraphobia and games were their best friend, and they've read all the fan-fiction, and subscribe to the developers pic-feed for pictures of their pets;

and another one who like games, but doesn't know the background, and will, like a lot of other potential customers, only have this game, and not the wall-posters or the official encyclopedea of the game's universe.

I know this is hard enough with the time-constraints and limited financial capabilities of most review-sources, to be able to do this for the major releases ... and virtually impossible for the mid-/small-size games.

It's just that I haven't forgotten the scores reviewers gave KotOR2.

(But I guess that problem could have been solved if readers of reviews of those kinds of games demanded that the reviewer specified if they had "beaten" the game (once).)

That said,

I like EuroGamer

[Nevsky]

Time for a resurrection. The second, Gillen-birthed review is up now.

Not read through it all yet (it's 4 pages!)... [snip]

OK, read it now. Good piece.

Edited July 17, 2009 by Nevsky

[elmuerte]

1 point per page?

[gdf]

So we can agree that this all ended with a wet fart?