Also: The Wii does have 3rd rate graphics in comparison to the other two consoles.
I don't think anyone is arguing that, fool. It's just incredibly intellectually bankrupt to knock a Wii game because it doesn't look as good as a 360 game. They aren't the same type of machines. They should start deducting points from 360 games because they don't look as good as Crysis.
It doesn't really look that biased. And the sponsors are usually randomly generated on the page.
Those all seem to be quite valid points.
Also: The Wii does have 3rd rate graphics in comparison to the other two consoles.
Fuck I'm sick of this. The PSP has shitty fucking graphics in comparison the the PS3. Do you know why? One costs more than a third less than the other one (I'm not sure of the exact price but I'm sure it's pretty accurate).
Saying that the controls are bad is the wrong thing to say, if he said "personally I find the controls bad and as such I don't like the Wii" that would be fair enough, but I know plenty of people that find the controls fantastic. If he finds the controls for the Wii that bad maybe he shouldn't play the console. There is a metric assfuck load of people who do find the controls for it good if you look at the damm sales numbers.
For full disclosure I don't actually own a Wii either.
It doesn't really look that biased. And the sponsors are usually randomly generated on the page.
Those all seem to be quite valid points.
Also: The Wii does have 3rd rate graphics in comparison to the other two consoles.
Fuck I'm sick of this. The PSP has shitty fucking graphics in comparison the the PS3. Do you know why? One costs more than a third less than the other one (I'm not sure of the exact price but I'm sure it's pretty accurate).
Saying that the controls are bad is the wrong thing to say, if he said "personally I find the controls bad and as such I don't like the Wii" that would be fair enough, but I know plenty of people that find the controls fantastic. If he finds the controls for the Wii that bad maybe he shouldn't play the console. There is a metric assfuck load of people who do find the controls for it good if you look at the damm sales numbers.
For full disclosure I don't actually own a Wii either.
No-one bothered saying "I find the controls bad" for Lair. They simply declared them shit and game ruining.
Also: YodaTuna:
I just checked the review, the ad is gone. Then I went to another review, and the other ads changed!
Then guess what happened!
I went back to the first one, and it had different ads again!
Another thing, some of the ads show up more than others.
I also read some of his other reviews and they are all very negatively orientated, reviewed the majority on the 360, and kept everything to a very flat standard, there was very little variation to what he held the games up to., so maybe he just happened to find alot more issues in Galaxy.
The Black Hunter on
0
Options
Blake TDo you have enemies then?Good. That means you’ve stood up for something, sometime in your life.Registered Userregular
It doesn't really look that biased. And the sponsors are usually randomly generated on the page.
Those all seem to be quite valid points.
Also: The Wii does have 3rd rate graphics in comparison to the other two consoles.
Fuck I'm sick of this. The PSP has shitty fucking graphics in comparison the the PS3. Do you know why? One costs more than a third less than the other one (I'm not sure of the exact price but I'm sure it's pretty accurate).
Saying that the controls are bad is the wrong thing to say, if he said "personally I find the controls bad and as such I don't like the Wii" that would be fair enough, but I know plenty of people that find the controls fantastic. If he finds the controls for the Wii that bad maybe he shouldn't play the console. There is a metric assfuck load of people who do find the controls for it good if you look at the damm sales numbers.
For full disclosure I don't actually own a Wii either.
No-one bothered saying "I find the controls bad" for Lair. They simply declared them shit and game ruining.
Also: YodaTuna:
I just checked the review, the ad is gone. Then I went to another review, and the other ads changed!
Then guess what happened!
I went back to the first one, and it had different ads again!
Another thing, some of the ads show up more than others.
I also read some of his other reviews and they are all very negatively orientated, reviewed the majority on the 360, and kept everything to a very flat standard, there was very little variation to what he held the games up to., so maybe he just happened to find alot more issues in Galaxy.
Jesus you are the worst shill I've ever seen.
Plenty of people said the controls of Lair were bad, none of them said it was the SIXASIX's fault, they said it was the fault of Julian Egghead for his insistence of sticking motion controls in there (who then had the nerve to say other people were sticking motion controls into their game for the hell of it). The guy came out and flat out said. "I DON'T LIKE PLAYING THIRD PERSON ADVENTURES ON THE WII".
By the sheer amount of sales Zelda has done (5mil plus), I would say alot of people do. He went into this game with a definite bias that he made clear. He obviously shouldn't be reviewing the game if he wants to imediatly slam the controls.
AthenorBattle Hardened OptimistThe Skies of HiigaraRegistered Userregular
edited November 2007
Black Hunter, go read my OP again, and my posts in page 2.
The Sony ad itself is tied to a specific page format, the DVD / Home Entertainment review section. When it goes into "Home Ent" format, the ad disappears along with the rest of Entertainment. In fact, I can make the Sony ad appear on any page I want.
We are past that. But if you want to ignore that, I doubt nsider took the time to doctor the page like I did in my experiments, and I furthermore have outside confirmation that people had seen the Galaxy page with Sony's ad on it.
It is obvious Sony is advertising on the entire home entertainment section, considering they also have a stake in Blu-Ray and HDTV's. Also, someone in this thread professes to know the reviewer, and is credible to rule out biases.
This leaves 2 things: Said credible poster said the reviewer is weird in his reviews, and the review itself.
And plenty of people said they found the controls bad for Lair, and badmouthed the Sixaxis while at it. I've also heard plenty of people who said they enjoyed it. Go read Gabe's post on the front page about game reviewing, it is enlightening.
Its utterly pointless to even discuss review scores because
A: They are always high anyways
B: Even if they got 6s they would sell 2 million day one.
Pokemon tends to get 6-7s because "it's all the same".
This has always been a point of aggravation for me because honestly good games like Devil May Cry 3 are "all the same" and they get honest review scores. But that's neither here nor there.
He is being emplyed by Sony who kills and eats children while taking all the aid from poor countries and using it to make puppy killing factories.
It's really hard to be middle of the road when the only other side of the argument between "Sony is shit" and "Sony is AWESUMSAUS LOLZ WORD MOFUGGA" is this.
The Muffin Man on
0
Options
The Black HunterThe key is a minimum of compromise, and a simple,unimpeachable reason to existRegistered Userregular
Its utterly pointless to even discuss review scores because
A: They are always high anyways
B: Even if they got 6s they would sell 2 million day one.
Pokemon tends to get 6-7s because "it's all the same".
This has always been a point of aggravation for me because honestly good games like Devil May Cry 3 are "all the same" and they get honest review scores. But that's neither here nor there.
He is being emplyed by Sony who kills and eats children while taking all the aid from poor countries and using it to make puppy killing factories.
It's really hard to be middle of the road when the only other side of the argument between "Sony is shit" and "Sony is AWESUMSAUS LOLZ WORD MOFUGGA" is this.
I hardly think Sony is the greatest thing in history, I just don't think they deserve all the shit they have been getting.
Its utterly pointless to even discuss review scores because
A: They are always high anyways
B: Even if they got 6s they would sell 2 million day one.
Pokemon tends to get 6-7s because "it's all the same".
This has always been a point of aggravation for me because honestly good games like Devil May Cry 3 are "all the same" and they get honest review scores. But that's neither here nor there.
He is being emplyed by Sony who kills and eats children while taking all the aid from poor countries and using it to make puppy killing factories.
It's really hard to be middle of the road when the only other side of the argument between "Sony is shit" and "Sony is AWESUMSAUS LOLZ WORD MOFUGGA" is this.
I hardly think Sony is the greatest thing in history, I just don't think they deserve all the shit they have been getting.
And stop calling me a fool or a shill.
I haven't said anything utterly drastic.
So you're not gonna read my post?
Like the part where I said it's hard to be middle of the road when between the "SONY IS GOD" and "SONY IS EVIL" camps theres your view(Anyone who hates Sony MUST be a mindless sheep/idiot)
I don't care if it was written by Sony or not, it's just a half-assed review full of hyperbole. One of the worst two-player experiences ever? Seriously?
It could just be coincidence that one of the best reviewed games gets it's harshest reviews on a page sponsored by an opposing company, but it's Variety, it's not like they have a lot of journalistic integrity to begin with.
Or it could just be a guy who really really really hates Mario.
whitey9 on
0
Options
The Black HunterThe key is a minimum of compromise, and a simple,unimpeachable reason to existRegistered Userregular
Its utterly pointless to even discuss review scores because
A: They are always high anyways
B: Even if they got 6s they would sell 2 million day one.
Pokemon tends to get 6-7s because "it's all the same".
This has always been a point of aggravation for me because honestly good games like Devil May Cry 3 are "all the same" and they get honest review scores. But that's neither here nor there.
He is being emplyed by Sony who kills and eats children while taking all the aid from poor countries and using it to make puppy killing factories.
It's really hard to be middle of the road when the only other side of the argument between "Sony is shit" and "Sony is AWESUMSAUS LOLZ WORD MOFUGGA" is this.
I hardly think Sony is the greatest thing in history, I just don't think they deserve all the shit they have been getting.
And stop calling me a fool or a shill.
I haven't said anything utterly drastic.
So you're not gonna read my post?
Like the part where I said it's hard to be middle of the road when between the "SONY IS GOD" and "SONY IS EVIL" camps theres your view(Anyone who hates Sony MUST be a mindless sheep/idiot)
I never stated that.
But it extremely easy to see that a very large amount of people seem to be unable to just get over the PS3/Sony and it/their fault and to stop bitching about it or cooking up shitty theories at every oppurtunity.
The Black Hunter on
0
Options
Blake TDo you have enemies then?Good. That means you’ve stood up for something, sometime in your life.Registered Userregular
edited November 2007
The entire entertainment section is sponsered by Sony.
The article mentions the PS3 "superiority" twice and actually said "given the vastly superior quality of graphics in R&C TD available now for the PS3"
It takes an admitedly minor and tacked on feature and calls it the "Worst two player experience ever". Personally my ex-girlfriend loved shit like that where she can join in and help but didn't have to worry about dying because she wasn't that good but it allowed her to join in. Halo 3 co-op may be more fleshed out but she sure as hell wont play that.
He's trying to make the storyline a critical point for a Mario game. It's a fucking Mario game, it's like being interested in the plot for Tetirs.
The entire article is taking complaints about the game and makes them sound like major deal breakers the entire article reeks of fishyness to me.
The article mentions the PS3 "superiority" twice and actually said "given the vastly superior quality of graphics in R&C TD available now for the PS3"
If graphics are what matters, then the reviewer never saw Crysis, well aware that it is'nt a platformer, but why the hell not. Might as well pull out the bigger guns and compare.
The Graphics in MG do the job, it does'nt need to be better.
The entire entertainment section is sponsered by Sony.
The article mentions the PS3 "superiority" twice and actually said "given the vastly superior quality of graphics in R&C TD available now for the PS3"
It takes an admitedly minor and tacked on feature and calls it the "Worst two player experience ever". Personally my ex-girlfriend loved shit like that where she can join in and help but didn't have to worry about dying because she wasn't that good but it allowed her to join in. Halo 3 co-op may be more fleshed out but she sure as hell wont play that.
He's trying to make the storyline a critical point for a Mario game. It's a fucking Mario game, it's like being interested in the plot for Tetirs.
The entire article is taking complaints about the game and makes them sound like major deal breakers the entire article reeks of fishyness to me.
He also shared his views on story in the timeshift and CoD4 reviews.
All he's doing wrong is sticking to a single formulae for all games.
The Black Hunter on
0
Options
Blake TDo you have enemies then?Good. That means you’ve stood up for something, sometime in your life.Registered Userregular
edited November 2007
Really did he point out that X game is better and currently available on the PS3 in those reviews as well?
Black Hunter, go read my OP again, and my posts in page 2.
The Sony ad itself is tied to a specific page format, the DVD / Home Entertainment review section. When it goes into "Home Ent" format, the ad disappears along with the rest of Entertainment. In fact, I can make the Sony ad appear on any page I want.
We are past that. But if you want to ignore that, I doubt nsider took the time to doctor the page like I did in my experiments, and I furthermore have outside confirmation that people had seen the Galaxy page with Sony's ad on it.
It is obvious Sony is advertising on the entire home entertainment section, considering they also have a stake in Blu-Ray and HDTV's. Also, someone in this thread professes to know the reviewer, and is credible to rule out biases.
This leaves 2 things: Said credible poster said the reviewer is weird in his reviews, and the review itself.
And plenty of people said they found the controls bad for Lair, and badmouthed the Sixaxis while at it. I've also heard plenty of people who said they enjoyed it. Go read Gabe's post on the front page about game reviewing, it is enlightening.
Wow, it almost seems like a bunch of people will ignore your posts on the 2nd page inorder to keep on flaming sony or wii or the magazine in general. Oh well one persons coincidince is anothers conspiracy. Let them run with it, later.
The article mentions the PS3 "superiority" twice and actually said "given the vastly superior quality of graphics in R&C TD available now for the PS3"
If graphics are what matters, then the reviewer never saw Crysis, well aware that it is'nt a platformer, but why the hell not. Might as well pull out the bigger guns and compare.
The Graphics in MG do the job, it does'nt need to be better.
I find it unfortunate that you think that way.
Zombiemambo on
0
Options
Blake TDo you have enemies then?Good. That means you’ve stood up for something, sometime in your life.Registered Userregular
The article mentions the PS3 "superiority" twice and actually said "given the vastly superior quality of graphics in R&C TD available now for the PS3"
If graphics are what matters, then the reviewer never saw Crysis, well aware that it is'nt a platformer, but why the hell not. Might as well pull out the bigger guns and compare.
The Graphics in MG do the job, it does'nt need to be better.
I find it unfortunate that you think that way.
The graphics certainly could be better if they were on a more powerful machine, but they than definatly do their job and the lack of graphical prowress does not detract from the gameplay at all.
I am playing through psyconaughts for the first time and I've yet to think it should of been developed on a newer system. I mean sure prettier pictures would be nice but the game works fine as is.
The article mentions the PS3 "superiority" twice and actually said "given the vastly superior quality of graphics in R&C TD available now for the PS3"
If graphics are what matters, then the reviewer never saw Crysis, well aware that it is'nt a platformer, but why the hell not. Might as well pull out the bigger guns and compare.
The Graphics in MG do the job, it does'nt need to be better.
I find it unfortunate that you think that way.
The graphics certainly could be better if they were on a more powerful machine, but they than definatly do their job and the lack of graphical prowress does not detract from the gameplay at all.
I am playing through psyconaughts for the first time and I've yet to think it should of been developed on a newer system. I mean sure prettier pictures would be nice but the game works fine as is.
To me, "the graphics do the job" is a poor defense against the Wii being an inferior system from a hardware standpoint. You shouldn't care if it's a supercomputer or an Apple II. You like the system, you shouldn't care about whether I do or not, because what I think shouldn't have any effect on you and what you like.
Do you get what I'm saying? The PS3 has better graphics. Ratchet & Clank looks better than Mario Galaxy. I realize this might hurt your fragile Wii-ego, but it's the way things are.
Zombiemambo on
0
Options
VariableMouth CongressStroke Me Lady FameRegistered Userregular
edited November 2007
once again, it doesn't bother anyone that the ps3 looks better. it bothers people that this fact was mentioned in a review for Mario Galaxy.
Because it's unrelated to the quality of Mario Galaxy. "conspiracy" 100% aside.
It doesn't really look that biased. And the sponsors are usually randomly generated on the page.
Those all seem to be quite valid points.
Also: The Wii does have 3rd rate graphics in comparison to the other two consoles.
Fuck I'm sick of this. The PSP has shitty fucking graphics in comparison the the PS3. Do you know why? One costs more than a third less than the other one (I'm not sure of the exact price but I'm sure it's pretty accurate).
Saying that the controls are bad is the wrong thing to say, if he said "personally I find the controls bad and as such I don't like the Wii" that would be fair enough, but I know plenty of people that find the controls fantastic. If he finds the controls for the Wii that bad maybe he shouldn't play the console. There is a metric assfuck load of people who do find the controls for it good if you look at the damm sales numbers.
For full disclosure I don't actually own a Wii either.
No-one bothered saying "I find the controls bad" for Lair. They simply declared them shit and game ruining.
Also: YodaTuna:
I just checked the review, the ad is gone. Then I went to another review, and the other ads changed!
Then guess what happened!
I went back to the first one, and it had different ads again!
Another thing, some of the ads show up more than others.
I also read some of his other reviews and they are all very negatively orientated, reviewed the majority on the 360, and kept everything to a very flat standard, there was very little variation to what he held the games up to., so maybe he just happened to find alot more issues in Galaxy.
Jesus you are the worst shill I've ever seen.
Plenty of people said the controls of Lair were bad, none of them said it was the SIXASIX's fault, they said it was the fault of Julian Egghead for his insistence of sticking motion controls in there (who then had the nerve to say other people were sticking motion controls into their game for the hell of it). The guy came out and flat out said. "I DON'T LIKE PLAYING THIRD PERSON ADVENTURES ON THE WII".
By the sheer amount of sales Zelda has done (5mil plus), I would say alot of people do. He went into this game with a definite bias that he made clear. He obviously shouldn't be reviewing the game if he wants to imediatly slam the controls.
He says the controls in Mario Galaxy are awkward, and then he said he felt the same way about Zelda, which makes sense, because they have similar controls. That doesn't necessarily mean that he is biased against every third person game that has and will ever be released on the Wii. When he mentions R&C, he is comparing the game to similar games in the genre, which happens all the time in game reviews. That doesn't mean Sony gave him a big bag of cash. Some of the posts in this thread are coming off as alarmist.
Not to say that he made a great review. If I had to review his review, I'd give it a 5/10. He doesn't really do a great job of detailing his gripes. And maybe someone with a more open mind would have more positive things to say, but he's still entitled to his opinion.
once again, it doesn't bother anyone that the ps3 looks better. it bothers people that this fact was mentioned in a review for Mario Galaxy.
Because it's unrelated to the quality of Mario Galaxy. "conspiracy" 100% aside.
Oh, it is? Because I'm pretty sure this article is from a site for people who aren't hardcore gamers. The kind of people who would like to know the alternatives. Hey, I want to know the alternatives. It's pretty friggin' obvious to us which system is more powerful, but it isn't to everyone. Not everyone in the world knows as much about videogames as we do. I consider G&T to represent the people who like games the most, play games the most, and know the most about videogames and everything about them. This review? It isn't for us.
Zombiemambo on
0
Options
Blake TDo you have enemies then?Good. That means you’ve stood up for something, sometime in your life.Registered Userregular
The article mentions the PS3 "superiority" twice and actually said "given the vastly superior quality of graphics in R&C TD available now for the PS3"
If graphics are what matters, then the reviewer never saw Crysis, well aware that it is'nt a platformer, but why the hell not. Might as well pull out the bigger guns and compare.
The Graphics in MG do the job, it does'nt need to be better.
I find it unfortunate that you think that way.
The graphics certainly could be better if they were on a more powerful machine, but they than definatly do their job and the lack of graphical prowress does not detract from the gameplay at all.
I am playing through psyconaughts for the first time and I've yet to think it should of been developed on a newer system. I mean sure prettier pictures would be nice but the game works fine as is.
To me, "the graphics do the job" is a poor defense against the Wii being an inferior system from a hardware standpoint. You shouldn't care if it's a supercomputer or an Apple II. You like the system, you shouldn't care about whether I do or not, because what I think shouldn't have any effect on you and what you like.
Do you get what I'm saying? The PS3 has better graphics. Ratchet & Clank looks better than Mario Galaxy. I realize this might hurt your fragile Wii-ego, but it's the way things are.
Dude I don't even own a Wii.
Saying the PS3 has better graphics than the Wii is like saying the PS3 has better graphics than the PSP. Of course it's fucking true but people harp on to it do they?
Do you also like to wander into the maternity ward at hospitals and laugh at all the new born guys because they have smaller wangs than you?
The shear sale of the Wii compared to the PS3 is a pretty strong testament to the fact that the public don't consider graphics the number one deciding factor when it comes to buying games.
once again, it doesn't bother anyone that the ps3 looks better. it bothers people that this fact was mentioned in a review for Mario Galaxy.
Because it's unrelated to the quality of Mario Galaxy. "conspiracy" 100% aside.
Oh, it is? Because I'm pretty sure this article is from a site for people who aren't hardcore gamers. The kind of people who would like to know the alternatives. Hey, I want to know the alternatives. It's pretty friggin' obvious to us which system is more powerful, but it isn't to everyone. Not everyone in the world knows as much about videogames as we do. I consider G&T to represent the people who like games the most, play games the most, and know the most about videogames and everything about them. This review? It isn't for us.
I totally get that, 100%. I still don't know why you'd mention it in your review. If your goal is to inform about different systems strengths, then an article or editorial on that would be great... ideas for gifts with the holidays coming up, or just an explanation of the facts and opinions surrounding the various systems.
but in a review for a new mario game? why are they worried about informing about ONE fact of ONE of the competing systems? it doesn't make sense and is pointless as far as the review goes. this is why people here are bothered.
Oh, it is? Because I'm pretty sure this article is from a site for people who aren't hardcore gamers. The kind of people who would like to know the alternatives. Hey, I want to know the alternatives. It's pretty friggin' obvious to us which system is more powerful, but it isn't to everyone.
Zombie, I would say that you're wrong, but I'm sure Variable can put it more eloquently than I can.
You're right, but pointing out a flaw and talking about a game/system that is superior in that field seems to have hit a soft spot in you, when it really shouldn't. This review is dumb, not because of who wrote it or what they said, but because everyone here seems to care so much about it, like it's a review about themselves. It's a stupid console, made of plastic, metal, silicon and some other shit. Do you guys feel so insecure about yourselves that when the Wii is criticized in the slightest, you're all up in arms?
Not to say that he made a great review. If I had to review his review, I'd give it a 5/10. He doesn't really do a great job of detailing his gripes. And maybe someone with a more open mind would have more positive things to say, but he's still entitled to his opinion.
well of course he's entitled to his opinion. the question is, is he entitled to be writing "professional" reviews for a magazine?
this is the same sort of problem people point to in gaming journalism, the lack of professionalism that sometimes rears its ugly head. this Variety article passes as a half-assed blog post, but as a review it certainly misses the mark.
i'd really like to know if other "mainstream" magazines have done reviews of SMG yet. you occasionally see reviews of games like Halo 3 and Bioshock at CNN or Newsweek...
Nobody is being insecure (except perhaps the conspiracy theorists). It's just a horrible review that's not really reviewing the game like it should be.
Nobody is being insecure (except perhaps the conspiracy theorists). It's just a horrible review that's not really reviewing the game like it should be.
But it's really not. So far, the only reasons I've gathered for it to be a poor review is:
- It's negative
- It mentions the PS3 being superior in terms of hardware
Whenever I read a review for a movie I don't see "hey, this competing movie is much better" in the review.
When I read a review for a book I don't see "hey, this book by a different author is much better".
When I read a review for a CD I don't see "hey, this CD by a different band is much better".
So why the fuck would it be ok to see 'hey, this game on another console is much better" in a game review?
Game journalism needs to grow the fuck up. If you're reading a review about a game it should be about that game. Is the game good? Does it look good? Does it play good? Not, does it play good compared to it's competition, but instead is it an enjoyable experience.
You're right, but pointing out a flaw and talking about a game/system that is superior in that field seems to have hit a soft spot in you, when it really shouldn't. This review is dumb, not because of who wrote it or what they said, but because everyone here seems to care so much about it, like it's a review about themselves. It's a stupid console, made of plastic, metal, silicon and some other shit. Do you guys feel so insecure about yourselves that when the Wii is criticized in the slightest, you're all up in arms?
You're right, but pointing out a flaw and talking about a game/system that is superior in that field seems to have hit a soft spot in you, when it really shouldn't. This review is dumb, not because of who wrote it or what they said, but because everyone here seems to care so much about it, like it's a review about themselves. It's a stupid console, made of plastic, metal, silicon and some other shit. Do you guys feel so insecure about yourselves that when the Wii is criticized in the slightest, you're all up in arms?
This is hardly game journalism, it means just as much as a review from Maxim.
So you'd agree that it's a poor review? That it's more of an opinion piece than an objective look at a piece of entertainment? Because that seems to be the problem people have with it. It's a blog post disguised as a review.
Death of Rats on
No I don't.
0
Options
Blake TDo you have enemies then?Good. That means you’ve stood up for something, sometime in your life.Registered Userregular
You're right, but pointing out a flaw and talking about a game/system that is superior in that field seems to have hit a soft spot in you, when it really shouldn't. This review is dumb, not because of who wrote it or what they said, but because everyone here seems to care so much about it, like it's a review about themselves. It's a stupid console, made of plastic, metal, silicon and some other shit. Do you guys feel so insecure about yourselves that when the Wii is criticized in the slightest, you're all up in arms?
Like I said I don't own one and have only played one twice at a friends place I'd like to sit down and nut out Zelda and Metroid but I really have no drive to purchase one at the moment.
Really by the phrasing, "As compared to Ratchet and Clark: Total destruction, currently available on the PS3" it seems to scream to me corportate marketing. "The new Ratchet and Clark on the PS3 however, looks better" would be a more level way to compare the games graphically. The fact that the graphics power was mentioned twice really just sounds like he's making mountains out of mole hills.
Posts
Nonono
He is being emplyed by Sony who kills and eats children while taking all the aid from poor countries and using it to make puppy killing factories.
ALSO: How internet ads work.
If something is mentioned on the website, the advertising program loads up relevant images.
The fact that the Sony logo came up is just shitty luck.
If they really organised this, then even Sony PR would be smart enough to distance themselves.
ALSO ALSO:
Maybe Ratchet and Clank really is a good game?
I don't think anyone is arguing that, fool. It's just incredibly intellectually bankrupt to knock a Wii game because it doesn't look as good as a 360 game. They aren't the same type of machines. They should start deducting points from 360 games because they don't look as good as Crysis.
That would be true if that image was a randomly generated ad. It's not.
Fuck I'm sick of this. The PSP has shitty fucking graphics in comparison the the PS3. Do you know why? One costs more than a third less than the other one (I'm not sure of the exact price but I'm sure it's pretty accurate).
Saying that the controls are bad is the wrong thing to say, if he said "personally I find the controls bad and as such I don't like the Wii" that would be fair enough, but I know plenty of people that find the controls fantastic. If he finds the controls for the Wii that bad maybe he shouldn't play the console. There is a metric assfuck load of people who do find the controls for it good if you look at the damm sales numbers.
For full disclosure I don't actually own a Wii either.
Satans..... hints.....
You have forgotten the "All I want for Christmas is a PSP" fiasco already, haven't you? Or the decapitated goat for God of War II?
There is nothing that an informed gamer should put past Sony and their marketing department.
Nothing.
Satans..... hints.....
No-one bothered saying "I find the controls bad" for Lair. They simply declared them shit and game ruining.
Also: YodaTuna:
I just checked the review, the ad is gone. Then I went to another review, and the other ads changed!
Then guess what happened!
I went back to the first one, and it had different ads again!
Another thing, some of the ads show up more than others.
I also read some of his other reviews and they are all very negatively orientated, reviewed the majority on the 360, and kept everything to a very flat standard, there was very little variation to what he held the games up to., so maybe he just happened to find alot more issues in Galaxy.
Jesus you are the worst shill I've ever seen.
Plenty of people said the controls of Lair were bad, none of them said it was the SIXASIX's fault, they said it was the fault of Julian Egghead for his insistence of sticking motion controls in there (who then had the nerve to say other people were sticking motion controls into their game for the hell of it). The guy came out and flat out said. "I DON'T LIKE PLAYING THIRD PERSON ADVENTURES ON THE WII".
By the sheer amount of sales Zelda has done (5mil plus), I would say alot of people do. He went into this game with a definite bias that he made clear. He obviously shouldn't be reviewing the game if he wants to imediatly slam the controls.
Satans..... hints.....
The Sony ad itself is tied to a specific page format, the DVD / Home Entertainment review section. When it goes into "Home Ent" format, the ad disappears along with the rest of Entertainment. In fact, I can make the Sony ad appear on any page I want.
We are past that. But if you want to ignore that, I doubt nsider took the time to doctor the page like I did in my experiments, and I furthermore have outside confirmation that people had seen the Galaxy page with Sony's ad on it.
It is obvious Sony is advertising on the entire home entertainment section, considering they also have a stake in Blu-Ray and HDTV's. Also, someone in this thread professes to know the reviewer, and is credible to rule out biases.
This leaves 2 things: Said credible poster said the reviewer is weird in his reviews, and the review itself.
And plenty of people said they found the controls bad for Lair, and badmouthed the Sixaxis while at it. I've also heard plenty of people who said they enjoyed it. Go read Gabe's post on the front page about game reviewing, it is enlightening.
Pokemon tends to get 6-7s because "it's all the same".
This has always been a point of aggravation for me because honestly good games like Devil May Cry 3 are "all the same" and they get honest review scores. But that's neither here nor there.
It's really hard to be middle of the road when the only other side of the argument between "Sony is shit" and "Sony is AWESUMSAUS LOLZ WORD MOFUGGA" is this.
I hardly think Sony is the greatest thing in history, I just don't think they deserve all the shit they have been getting.
And stop calling me a fool or a shill.
I haven't said anything utterly drastic.
So you're not gonna read my post?
Like the part where I said it's hard to be middle of the road when between the "SONY IS GOD" and "SONY IS EVIL" camps theres your view(Anyone who hates Sony MUST be a mindless sheep/idiot)
It could just be coincidence that one of the best reviewed games gets it's harshest reviews on a page sponsored by an opposing company, but it's Variety, it's not like they have a lot of journalistic integrity to begin with.
Or it could just be a guy who really really really hates Mario.
I never stated that.
But it extremely easy to see that a very large amount of people seem to be unable to just get over the PS3/Sony and it/their fault and to stop bitching about it or cooking up shitty theories at every oppurtunity.
The article mentions the PS3 "superiority" twice and actually said "given the vastly superior quality of graphics in R&C TD available now for the PS3"
It takes an admitedly minor and tacked on feature and calls it the "Worst two player experience ever". Personally my ex-girlfriend loved shit like that where she can join in and help but didn't have to worry about dying because she wasn't that good but it allowed her to join in. Halo 3 co-op may be more fleshed out but she sure as hell wont play that.
He's trying to make the storyline a critical point for a Mario game. It's a fucking Mario game, it's like being interested in the plot for Tetirs.
The entire article is taking complaints about the game and makes them sound like major deal breakers the entire article reeks of fishyness to me.
Satans..... hints.....
If graphics are what matters, then the reviewer never saw Crysis, well aware that it is'nt a platformer, but why the hell not. Might as well pull out the bigger guns and compare.
The Graphics in MG do the job, it does'nt need to be better.
Tumblr
He also shared his views on story in the timeshift and CoD4 reviews.
All he's doing wrong is sticking to a single formulae for all games.
Satans..... hints.....
Which makes for a shitty review(s). fin.
Nintendo Friend Code: SW-0689-9921-0006
Wow, it almost seems like a bunch of people will ignore your posts on the 2nd page inorder to keep on flaming sony or wii or the magazine in general. Oh well one persons coincidince is anothers conspiracy. Let them run with it, later.
I find it unfortunate that you think that way.
The graphics certainly could be better if they were on a more powerful machine, but they than definatly do their job and the lack of graphical prowress does not detract from the gameplay at all.
I am playing through psyconaughts for the first time and I've yet to think it should of been developed on a newer system. I mean sure prettier pictures would be nice but the game works fine as is.
Satans..... hints.....
To me, "the graphics do the job" is a poor defense against the Wii being an inferior system from a hardware standpoint. You shouldn't care if it's a supercomputer or an Apple II. You like the system, you shouldn't care about whether I do or not, because what I think shouldn't have any effect on you and what you like.
Do you get what I'm saying? The PS3 has better graphics. Ratchet & Clank looks better than Mario Galaxy. I realize this might hurt your fragile Wii-ego, but it's the way things are.
Because it's unrelated to the quality of Mario Galaxy. "conspiracy" 100% aside.
Not to say that he made a great review. If I had to review his review, I'd give it a 5/10. He doesn't really do a great job of detailing his gripes. And maybe someone with a more open mind would have more positive things to say, but he's still entitled to his opinion.
Oh, it is? Because I'm pretty sure this article is from a site for people who aren't hardcore gamers. The kind of people who would like to know the alternatives. Hey, I want to know the alternatives. It's pretty friggin' obvious to us which system is more powerful, but it isn't to everyone. Not everyone in the world knows as much about videogames as we do. I consider G&T to represent the people who like games the most, play games the most, and know the most about videogames and everything about them. This review? It isn't for us.
Dude I don't even own a Wii.
Saying the PS3 has better graphics than the Wii is like saying the PS3 has better graphics than the PSP. Of course it's fucking true but people harp on to it do they?
Do you also like to wander into the maternity ward at hospitals and laugh at all the new born guys because they have smaller wangs than you?
The shear sale of the Wii compared to the PS3 is a pretty strong testament to the fact that the public don't consider graphics the number one deciding factor when it comes to buying games.
Satans..... hints.....
I totally get that, 100%. I still don't know why you'd mention it in your review. If your goal is to inform about different systems strengths, then an article or editorial on that would be great... ideas for gifts with the holidays coming up, or just an explanation of the facts and opinions surrounding the various systems.
but in a review for a new mario game? why are they worried about informing about ONE fact of ONE of the competing systems? it doesn't make sense and is pointless as far as the review goes. this is why people here are bothered.
Zombie, I would say that you're wrong, but I'm sure Variable can put it more eloquently than I can.
edit: and that he can beat me to the punch. Damn.
well of course he's entitled to his opinion. the question is, is he entitled to be writing "professional" reviews for a magazine?
this is the same sort of problem people point to in gaming journalism, the lack of professionalism that sometimes rears its ugly head. this Variety article passes as a half-assed blog post, but as a review it certainly misses the mark.
i'd really like to know if other "mainstream" magazines have done reviews of SMG yet. you occasionally see reviews of games like Halo 3 and Bioshock at CNN or Newsweek...
steam | Dokkan: 868846562
But it's really not. So far, the only reasons I've gathered for it to be a poor review is:
- It's negative
- It mentions the PS3 being superior in terms of hardware
This is real petty shit, guys.
When I read a review for a book I don't see "hey, this book by a different author is much better".
When I read a review for a CD I don't see "hey, this CD by a different band is much better".
So why the fuck would it be ok to see 'hey, this game on another console is much better" in a game review?
Game journalism needs to grow the fuck up. If you're reading a review about a game it should be about that game. Is the game good? Does it look good? Does it play good? Not, does it play good compared to it's competition, but instead is it an enjoyable experience.
Wow that's pretty fucking ironic.
Origin: Galedrid - Nintendo: Galedrid/3222-6858-1045
Blizzard: Galedrid#1367 - FFXIV: Galedrid Kingshand
I'd like to know why.
So you'd agree that it's a poor review? That it's more of an opinion piece than an objective look at a piece of entertainment? Because that seems to be the problem people have with it. It's a blog post disguised as a review.
Like I said I don't own one and have only played one twice at a friends place I'd like to sit down and nut out Zelda and Metroid but I really have no drive to purchase one at the moment.
Really by the phrasing, "As compared to Ratchet and Clark: Total destruction, currently available on the PS3" it seems to scream to me corportate marketing. "The new Ratchet and Clark on the PS3 however, looks better" would be a more level way to compare the games graphically. The fact that the graphics power was mentioned twice really just sounds like he's making mountains out of mole hills.
Satans..... hints.....