Black Friday Deals

[Nappi]

The Witcher 2 seems tempting, is it really that unforgiving?

They added a tutorial section to the Witcher 2 and possibly tweaked the difficulty of the first part (or did they?). I did a bunch of side quests in chapter 1 before continuing with the main story and had no troubles with the difficulty after that.

Highly recommended! Might still be my game of the year (so far).

[JonCole]

For what it's worth (and I don't know if this is even available to anyone outside the US), The Witcher 2 is actually much cheaper on Amazon ($16) and comes with a promo code for $5 to use on games in January.

[Erkki]

The Witcher 2 seems tempting, is it really that unforgiving?

You can always play on Easy, which really is easy, even to the point where simply spamming a button can win battles.

I played on Normal if I remember correctly, and there were a couple of boss fights that I had to switch to Easy, otherwise it wasn't bad at all.

Definitely recommended, three thumbs up! Game of the year candidate etc.

[Erkki]

Hmm... Overlord pack, then. 5€ seems cheap enough but it's not that appealing to me and I probably wouldn't find the time for playing it among all the other games.

[Roderick]

Overlord (1) was really fun. Tough bosses, but it had a lot of good vibes in it and it's Dutch to boot. What's not to like?

[ThunderPeel2001]

I still think it's presumptuous to assume that the reviewers were affected by anything but their own experiences. I think the difference between you and me, TP, is that I go into a review expecting only to read about the time that specific person had with the game. You seem to be going into the review expecting an opinion that's "objective", which is quite ridiculous considering criticism must be at least partially subjective. Whether or not that subjectivity is steeped in personal experience or outside factors, it's the readers job to ascertain whether or not the review is valuable to them. I'm fine with you saying that the reviews failed you in your particular buying decision, but I'm not fine with you saying that they didn't do their job because they couldn't look in a crystal ball to see the popular opinion in the future.

I knew you were going to say this To me, what you've described is just scenario #1. I still say that, if we're in scenario #2, they dropped the ball. They didn't look past the slickness of the game to see what was really there.

I don't really want to get sidetracked into a whole "what is criticism?" discussion, though. As I already said, the job of a reviewer is to have a fully developed sense of appreciation and understanding for the area they review. Getting dazzled by technical achievements when you're reviewing a game is not doing your job properly, IMO.

Also, to Nappi: Yes, I completely agree that I'm possibly extrapolating too much from this thread with regards to how the general populace now feel about LA Noire. JonCole, however, has only taken issue with what I said about reviewers, and not about how the public feel, so that's what I'm addressing.

Edited November 27, 2011 by ThunderPeel2001

[ThunderPeel2001]

Obvious answer - there's no money in it. All you need to do to become a "game journalism blog" is sign up for a bunch of press release lists and blindly repost their text; your advertisers are more than likely going to be the very companies whose games you are writing about, so there's no impetus to be brutally honest.

The impetus is that you might end up with a very large readership because you're offering something different, like: Decent and dependable game criticism. This is something David Simon talked about when I saw him. He was talking about the general decline in good journalism due to the internet, and used HBO as a good example as to why there might be another business model around the corner: People have lots of free content available on TV, but a small audience is prepared to pay for higher quality/different content. I prefer to remain optimistic, like him, that we might see a return of quality journalism once people realise what they're missing.

I'm sorry, TP ... you can't resurrect AP

Well, not with that attitude, certainly

Edited November 27, 2011 by ThunderPeel2001

[ThunderPeel2001]

I don't agree with you at all.

You don't agree with me at all? So you don't agree that "A professional game reviewer's job is to look past hype, technical achievements, general graphical slickness, and focus on the important thing: Gameplay"?

You seem to be speaking for Old Game Journalism (as opposed to the New one) where the pretense is that the person reviewing is mostly irrelevant and the review is objective -- which is actually nigh impossible, in my opinion. I'm much more fond of the other kind of games journalism.

I guess that's a matter of taste. I prefer my reviewers to try to look past their own personal biases as much as they can.

Don't agree with your extrapolation that vast majority of people found it to be a let down, either. And if it's a let down, does that even equal some specific score range -- depends on individual expectations, does it not?

It sounds like you're trying to say that all criticism is pointless, as everyone has a different point of view. That's a huge discussion in itself.

And also, how can a single site give unanimous praise?

Yep, my bad. I chose my words poorly. I've gone back and changed that word.

[edit]Furthermore, if you look at Metacritic, aggregate review scores and user review scores are not vastly different -- about 1.5 points, which is not exceptional in any way.

True, but it stands to reason that a lot of those reviews were probably by people who were in the "honeymoon" period of the game, does it not? I know if you look at the LA Noire thread here that we were all talking about it while we were playing it... but then there seemed to be a general sense of disappointment and disillusionment once we'd completed it.

[Tanukitsune]

I just know the backlog monster is going to grow to gargantuan size once this sale and the Xmas sale is over...

(I'm kinda praying Skyrim DOESN'T go on sale, the last thing I need know is another 50+ hour RPG)

Does it sound stupid to buy a game on PC that you already own on console that's ridiculously cheap (5€ or less), just for the convenience on having easier access to it?

[elmuerte]

It's too early for a Skyrim sale right now. But there's a change you need to empty your xmas agenda

[Erkki]

You don't agree with me at all? So you don't agree that "A professional game reviewer's job is to look past hype, technical achievements, general graphical slickness, and focus on the important thing: Gameplay"?

Well, I might agree with half of that, but then I'd be ok with if a particular reviewer valued something else over gameplay (as long as it is clear).

[Tanukitsune]

It's too early for a Skyrim sale right now. But there's a change you need to empty your xmas agenda

A part of me wants it, the other is dreading it.

[JonCole]

I knew you were going to say this To me, what you've described is just scenario #1. I still say that, if we're in scenario #2, they dropped the ball. They didn't look past the slickness of the game to see what was really there.

I don't really want to get sidetracked into a whole "what is criticism?" discussion, though. As I already said, the job of a reviewer is to have a fully developed sense of appreciation and understanding for the area they review. Getting dazzled by technical achievements when you're reviewing a game is not doing your job properly, IMO.

Also, to Nappi: Yes, I completely agree that I'm possibly extrapolating too much from this thread with regards to how the general populace now feel about LA Noire. JonCole, however, has only taken issue with what I said about reviewers, and not about how the public feel, so that's what I'm addressing.

There are no two scenarios because game reviewers are subject to the same cycle of hype that we are. You can't expect them to be removed from the culture, because it's simply not possible to do so without being a hermit. I still think you're completely missing my point.

A reviewer can only judge a game through their own lens. Whether that lens is affected by previous experience (or lack thereof) with a franchise/genre, contemporary hype, or simply personal taste, it doesn't matter. It's up to the reader to be discerning about the experiences he or she respects; if your interests and experiences tend to align with a more grassroots/fan-based site like RPS, by all means regard that site much more than something like IGN. That doesn't make the other sites/reviews any less valuable to the community as a whole. I'll say it again, reviewers have absolutely no responsibility to side with "the public". All they can do is offer their opinion and let the public consume that in whatever way they choose.

Your expectations for a review with as little personal bias as possible are simply unrealistic. That's not the critical culture we live in. I completely concur with Erkki in saying that your preferences align with "old game journalism" or even "old journalism". This discussion reminds me of one that Armond White had with the guys who operate the /Film blog. White argued that an educated, experienced critic had infinitely more ground to stand on than a simple blogger. What he didn't understand is that people don't give a crap what diploma is hanging from their office wall, rather they care whether or not that person's experience speaks to them or not.

[Roderick]

This is a horrible discussion

Please don't forget that there are many different skill trees in the 'games journalism' class. A blogger doesn't need a diploma, but other pieces might not be meant to convey an experience but rather instruct or teach, or place the reviewed game in a broader context. Academic skill is useful for some parts of journalism, though not all.

In that vein, I write for Dutch Nintendo mag [N]Gamer. Of course we write personal opinions on something, but at the same time -don't underestimate this- we do come across as an 'authority' on the subject matter. As such, our words carry weight with our audience and they expect our verdicts to be accurate and informed. As journalists, we must arm us against publisher hype, something the reader has no impetus to do.

[JonCole]

This is a horrible discussion

Please don't forget that there are many different skill trees in the 'games journalism' class. A blogger doesn't need a diploma, but other pieces might not be meant to convey an experience but rather instruct or teach, or place the reviewed game in a broader context. Academic skill is useful for some parts of journalism, though not all.

In that vein, I write for Dutch Nintendo mag [N]Gamer. Of course we write personal opinions on something, but at the same time -don't underestimate this- we do come across as an 'authority' on the subject matter. As such, our words carry weight with our audience and they expect our verdicts to be accurate and informed. As journalists, we must arm us against publisher hype, something the reader has no impetus to do.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that there's no value in deflecting hype as a writer. I just think it's presumptuous to think that every person that doesn't agree with your opinion has given into such things. I also think it's silly to expect anybody to be completely immune, especially since the preview/review cycle is so attuned to marketing. For example, in order to get attention, a publication must play a game in early forms to report the status of the game to readers. However, these early builds are often designed in such a way to stoke the hype. Ideally, a publication would have a different person review the game than the one who previewed it, but that's clearly in a perfect world (and one where those people might not ever share their experiences, as not to homogenize their viewpoints in any way).

[Tanukitsune]

Aw dammit, I somehow knew Divinity II would be on sale...

Just how bad is SecuROM? I don't think the 360 version will ever be this cheap.

[JonCole]

Aw dammit, I somehow knew Divinity II would be on sale...

Just how bad is SecuROM? I don't think the 360 version will ever be this cheap.

I'm not a big fan of SecuROM, but practically it's not a glaring problem. Coupled with the 5 device activation limit (as opposed to much more detestable 1/2/3 limits), I would say that this is an inoffensive enough implementation that you should go for it if you're on a budget.

[Tanukitsune]

Seeing how most PC gamers would rather jump into an active volcano than buy a game with SecuROM, I can't help but to have second thoughts before buying this game.

Then again, I'm not sure DRM is as terrible as it used to be, as in "this DRM will MURDER your PC because it can" bad. I say that because that's what happened to the last game I bought with DRM, but that was almost 6 years ago.

[elmuerte]

It really depends on what SecuROM version and modules they use. For example, the SecuROM as used by Arkham City isn't the shitty version, they use both the simple DVD Check (haven't seen that in a long while) and SecuROM PA in it's most basic form (release date check). The latter is also on the Steam release.

Alice: Madness Returns doesn't use SecuROM, but EA's own DRM thingy (it's not Origin) and that thing is much more of a hell.

There have been games however that used much worse version of SecuROM, those versions usually don't like it when certain legitimate system tools are running. These often have a negative impact on the game itself (stability and performance issues).

[Tanukitsune]

Damn, I own Alice Madness Returns on PC.

So, how do I find out if the game has the "good" SecuROM? The only games I know that have that are on sale are Divinity II: DKS and Arcania: Gothic 4 (despite all the bad news I've heard about it) although the Steam page no longer even mentions DRM for Gothic 4.

EDIT: The internet says it's SecuROM 7 for both and that it's horrid, they won't say why though.

Edited November 27, 2011 by Tanukitsune

[elmuerte]

Divinity 2 also has "FADE", which means that for whatever reason part of the game might break if the DRM decides the game is no longer legal enough.

The only way to find out if the SecuROM version used sucks is to check the internet for issues people have

[Erkki]

I bought Divinity II. I liked the first one, and so far was avoiding it mainly due to lack of time. But now there's room for another RPG, as I might wait with getting Skyrim even when it finally becomes available for me either locally or digitally -- got enough other games to play from this sale. Dead Island is rather good so far, except the zombies leveling up with the player bit.

Also, anyone who doesn't have Thief: Deadly Shadows yet should definitely buy it: only 2.50€

[Tanukitsune]

Divinity 2 also has "FADE", which means that for whatever reason part of the game might break if the DRM decides the game is no longer legal enough.

The only way to find out if the SecuROM version used sucks is to check the internet for issues people have

That's the thing, people just say they refuse to buy a game with DRM, people say it's nigh impossible to remove, but the people who own the games with DRM aren't complaining, but their voices are drowned by all the people who refuse to buy games due to DRM.

For every person who says they own the game and they have no issues with it, there are 100 who DIDN'T buy it who are using very colorful language on the previous person.

[miffy495]

I bought Driver San Francisco today. I've been wanting to check this game out for forever. Played the first chunk of it today, and yeah, it's pretty awesome. While it's still $25, I'd say think about it.

[Kolzig]

Limbought! I got it when it was on sale on Saturday.

Such a great game. I waited a long time for the PC version, tried the demo and loved it and now I got the game. This goes high on my list, it will not be buried in the forever growing pile of backlog games.