Welcome to Coffee Talk! Let’s start off the day by discussing whatever is on your (nerd chic) mind. Every morning I’ll kick off a discussion and I’m counting on you to participate in it. If you’re not feelin’ my topic, feel free to start a chat with your fellow readers and see where it takes you. Whether you’re talking about videogames, the Barry Bonds trial, Chris Brown vs. windows, or Christina Aguilera getting a Twitter account, Coffee Talk is the place to do it.
My video review of Dragon Age II finally posted. As expected, there were tons of negative comments from people that can’t see past their own perspective. Additionally, there were a lot of people that complained about the score being posted in the title of the review (not my decision, btw). For some reason, this was a big spoiler. Really?!?
Several of you know that I have all sorts of problems with the review process and score is a biggie. Considering how random and undefined most scoring systems are, it’s disappointing that so many gamers are fixated on an arbitrary number. If you’re interested in a game then don’t you owe it to yourself to find out why a game received the score that it did? Isn’t the reasoning behind the score more important than the score itself?
Am I expecting too much from the average gamer? (You guys and gals are all way above average, for the record.) Are most gamers too lazy or indifferent to learn the reasoning behind the score? Or do they just want to see a number and argue about it (without knowing whether a 5/10 or a 7/10 is average based on the outlet’s criteria)? Will gamers be able to get past scores? Or will they always be fixated on the number? Kindly share your thoughts in the comments section.
(And if you have extra time, please give my review a “thumbs up” on YouTube and leave a comment.)
First off… The term "scorally fixated" is pretty hilarious.
I started reading the post thinking something different, like the scores you get in games. Like how Pac-Man and Space Invaders were score based games. Therefore the question asked in the headline would be more like "Do gamers still care about high scores"… But, of course we do.
Upon cometion of reading the thread, I realized my original thoughts were off track… But then I saw how it was relative.
Gamers care about a higher number score because it's simply a higher number and we are trained as gamers to recognize that a higher number next to a name (or initials) grants more bragging rights then any other monicker with a lesser number beside it.
Nobody asks how SEX got 50 more points than ASS in Pole Position, we just recognize that SEX pwns ASS.
*That last paragraph can be taken completely out of context.
Kind of a Team America moment lol.
Meh. Reviews are so relative. On the 1-10 scale I wouldn't rank it above a 5 on a good day. Price plays a part in my analysis of games as well. I judge a title less harshly if they aren't $60
The YouTube comments are getting hilarious. Some of them are worse than anything I saw at G4.
Ahhhhh, the internet at work…….
You Tube is pretty bad. Whenever we post a trailer to our site, we upload it to YouTube as our own "Archive." We posted one Halo: Reach trailer and some "Ass Hat" (since it's the word of the day) went on a diatribe about how it was "already posted on YouTube andwhy does everyone feel like they have to post the same shit and how we were wasting bandwith, blah, blah blah….." I wanted to post something to the effect of "If you're just going to bitch I'll be glad to smack you across the nose with a newspaper." Sometimes it's best just to not look at the comments.
Honestly, I hate putting a score on a review too. The review proper is much more important than the score. Someone's opinion of specifics matters. If the problem with a game is that it's been "dumbed down" to be more accessible, then perhaps someone else would look at that and say, "Oh, good. The last one looked interesting but was too in depth for my tastes." That's why everyone should read the review and not just bitch about the score.
is ass hat the new insult the kids are using these days???
Seems kind of dated to me.
well this is the first i've ever heard it. maybe cuz i'm kinda closed off when it comes to looking vg reviews and news. i don't see how calling someone an ass hat is insulting.
yeah ass hat is pretty old by now (a few years at least) but is still a staple in the insulting contests online.
I've never understood why ass hat is bad….maybe because I don't get the meaning. idk.
From Urban Dictionary: "From the popular insult "to have your head up your ass". This imagry leads to ones ass being placed on the head like a hat, hence 'asshat'."
Now why didn't I go there and look it up? Still a weird insult to throw.
While I was there I looked up a random word…foulball. Look that one up. It's funny
eww that's gross…..
LOL That be my friend and I's fault. We used to use that one all the time back in CoD4.
@smartguy
good to know that i'm not alone on that one.
My favorite complaint over at Macinima was from the guy who complained that it wasn't an open world game. Since when has any Bioware game been open world? And why does a game have to be open world to be good? There are a ton of crappy "open world" games out there (Prototype comes to mind). A good game is a good game.
Speaking of G4 (since you brought it up), Adam Sessler (who I have a ton of respect for) was absolutely the wrong person to do the Dragon Age II review. He's come out and said numerous times that story isn't a big draw in a game for him and this game's strength is the depth of story. His perspective wouldn't do the game any justice. Seems like having someone who's more into RPG's review the game would have made more sense. Having him do that review makes as much sense as putting Steve Nash at center and Shaq at point guard.
Heading to Tempe Diablo Stadium today for a bit of Spring Training and a hands on with MLB 2K11. Should be a lot of fun!
I think N8's perspective is pretty spot on. We are trained to go for high scores as a way of comparing who is better, therefore we look to a higher number in a review score to tell us what game is better.
Reviews should be more about the content and actual elements of the game though, I do agree on that point, but I don't think it will change anytime in the near future. More is not always better, it is just different. So when we are talking about comparing games based on review scores, a higher score is not always better, just different.
The internet while a wonderful tool is also making the younger and even older people more stupid as the years go on. They don't have time to read, learn how to spell, fact check, arithmetic, etc. That's why there is a number at the bottom.
Same thing for movie reviews. Entertainment is relative. Some things are just bad though….Superman64 for example.
maybe scores should be taken away and just go with pass, rent or buy.
That's the only system I like. Unfortunately, Metacritic and Gamerankings have too much power. I absolutely hate that some developer bonuses are based off of Metacritic scores. For example, a 3/5 is a decent score by most accounts, but it's calculated at 60%, which drags down the aggregate score and can screw a developer out of money they deserve.
I don't mind the number scoring. What I would prefer is that a review have two different or even 3 writers. 2 or 3 contrasting opinions would be great to have. For instance…if I read Ray's review of DA2 or Nightshade's (I haven't since I'm not interested in the title) I could be inclined to buy the game based on their huge loving of the developer and series. Nothing wrong with supporting what you love, but I think a review can't be impartial if you are predisposed to liking a genre/dev/series/etc.
Then again does a review have to be impartial? I'd trust or even lean on that review for purchasing decisions if it had multiple entries by different personalities instead of just one.
Unfortunately, most editorial outlets don't have the manpower for multiple reviewers. I loved the old "Review Crew" style of the old EGM. I don't see that happening again any time soon.
Well it should be noted that reviewer should love the genre they're reviewing. Having me do a review of Shift 2 Unleashed would be a colossal mistake since I can't do the title justice (I suck at racing games). So obviously any one reviewing a game should love the genre, and that will color the review. If you're not into a genre as a reader, than you should go in understanding that the reviewer will likely have a different opinion than you based simply on the fact you don't like that type of game. That doesn't make it a bad game, just not for you.
True. I love RPGs but do not like the western flavor of them for the most part. BioWare is the golden child of western RPG devs but their style isn't for me. Nor was Fallout eventhough I love the Elder Scrolls games.
I'd personally decline the opportunity to review DA (for lack of a better example) since I'm thrown off by their approach. I love the genre, just not their style.
I don't think there is a right or wrong answer though. I just think that someone isn't doing themselves justice by reading only one opinion.
Have fun at spring training.
I stuck it out for 5 innings, but the Brew Crew were clobbering the Halos. I don't have a dog in that fight, so it's hard to for me to stick around and watch a blowout.
I don't always want a reviewer to be impartial. I hate reading reviews of Pokemon games where someone who isn't a fan of the series talks about how 'they are all the same' 'they shouldn't even make these anymore because they are just copies of the original' 'you're all dumb for buying the same game each time they release a new color coded installation' etc. Someone who is a fan of the pokemon games can give a good review though about what has changed from the previous generations with the game mechanics, how the story is intertwined with the older games, and so on and so forth.
You don't necessarily have to be a fan. Understanding the game mechanics and history of a game is more important than "loving" the series or genre.
True, I would prefer the person to be a fan of the series—but it is not a defining requirement. Understanding how it all works and the history is definitely the most important thing in reviewing new games in a franchise, IMO.
@Ray
True. Just stating what I'd prefer if I were relying upon a review.
@nightshade
Of course not.
I'd love to see it happen. Just need a rich media company to drop a ton of dough. Not sure web or print ads could pay for it, but maybe video ads are pricey enough.
I think score matters more when it comes to buying games. The industry as a whole is hurting itself in terms of letting gamers try games before they buy them. Game renting is almost online only at this point and not everyone will go for that kind of thing. There need to be more demos for games because a lot of gamers have to buy their own games and that affects what we use to determine what game to play. Game scores being the least best way.
Wow how bout them views and those comments lol. I am so glad that we can have civil convos here.
Anyone who wants to check out the spring training/MLB 2K11 experience can do so here:
http://www.gameseyeview.com/2011/03/24/mlb-2k11-r…
I had a lot of fun and got a pretty nasty sunburn despite having seats on the shady side of the stadium (but that's Arizona for you).
Tonight's American Idol was pure brilliance. Stevie Wonder. Hulk Hogan. A contestant having a heart attack or seizure before kneeling and putting his head in Ryan Seacrest's crotch.
On a more serious note, yesterday had Bob Babbitt on bass. He was one of the bass players in Motown's studio group, The Funk Brothers. He's a frickin' legend, though he's overshadowed by James Jamerson — also in The Funk Brothers and an incredibly influential bass player.
Scoring does, in fact, make a difference, but not to gamers who actually read the review. In some cases, flame wars can be started over why a game would get a 92/100 versus a 93/100, and little things like that. I find it funny, because all I really need to know is three things:
Should I buy it?
Should I rent it?
Should I avoid it?
Come on. Let's keep it simple here.