The Wii's capabilities and controls have more to do with the gameplay than you think!
You have to keep in mind that this wasn't in a gaming magazine or website soooo it's obviously not just targeting gamers. Using an identifier for R&C isn't a sales pitch at all. It's just a reference so people who aren't as knowledgeable as you know what the article is talking about.
I said they can go on about the control scheme all they want. The mistake was when they bashed an entire genre with it. That's bad form. Some platformers can have good controls, some can have shitty controls on the same console. You have missed the point.
If it isn't targeting gamers and is going for the uninformed, then let me ask this: Which is a more "Oh, video games right?" brand: Mario, or Ratchet and Clank? A reference? No, it was a sales pitch.
Edit - I was beaten on that last point.
Yeah, people don't know R&C. That's why you need to say that it's a similar platforming game on the PS3. I don't see why that's hard for people to wrap their minds around.
because it isn't related to the review!
Sure it is. When I don't like a game I will recommend a better game to someone. And I guess you could call that a sales pitch but I mean come on.
I already responded elsewhere on this point so I guess some people are just going to disagree. I don't feel that it belongs in a review of game x on console y to say that game a on console b is better anyway. a game isn't worse because another game is better... this is a review, not a holiday reccomendation guide or some shit.
The Wii's capabilities and controls have more to do with the gameplay than you think!
You have to keep in mind that this wasn't in a gaming magazine or website soooo it's obviously not just targeting gamers. Using an identifier for R&C isn't a sales pitch at all. It's just a reference so people who aren't as knowledgeable as you know what the article is talking about.
I said they can go on about the control scheme all they want. The mistake was when they bashed an entire genre with it. That's bad form. Some platformers can have good controls, some can have shitty controls on the same console. You have missed the point.
If it isn't targeting gamers and is going for the uninformed, then let me ask this: Which is a more "Oh, video games right?" brand: Mario, or Ratchet and Clank? A reference? No, it was a sales pitch.
Edit - I was beaten on that last point.
Yeah, people don't know R&C. That's why you need to say that it's a similar platforming game on the PS3. I don't see why that's hard for people to wrap their minds around.
because it isn't related to the review!
Sure it is. When I don't like a game I will recommend a better game to someone. And I guess you could call that a sales pitch but I mean come on.
I already responded elsewhere on this point so I guess some people are just going to disagree. I don't feel that it belongs in a review of game x on console y to say that game a on console b is better anyway. a game isn't worse because another game is better... this is a review, not a holiday reccomendation guide or some shit.
I guess that's a good opinion to have. It happens a lot but it is most infuriating when two games of differing genres are compared as such. In fact I have a problem with the PA reviews because of this.
Phonehand on
0
Options
VariableMouth CongressStroke Me Lady FameRegistered Userregular
edited November 2007
agreed. I can totally understand that it's hard not to do it, and as I've said I'm sure this was someone being forced to review something they didn't really want to, and being as it's variety he may not be all that into games anyway, but that doesn't mean the quality can't be criticized.
cool, I feel somewhat settled on that, just in time to go to bed.
goodnight
Oh damn. Is it already time for people to be pulling out sales charts and talking about demographics? I thought we were talking about some shitty review from a non-gaming website.
No fucking kidding. Take it to the Video Game Sales thread guys. :x
I don't know if it was the article specifically being sponsored by Sony (I'm actually about to read it for the first time and note what I see wrong in it below). It may have been meant for the site being Sponsored by Sony, maybe it was specifically put there, maybe it was randomly generated, maybe it was bad luck that it came up, who knows.
"... no longer have the best platform on which to work." - This is not necessary to the review. The review is about Galaxy, not the Wii or its competition.
"... the graphics simply aren't up to par with what players can now find on the Playstation 3 or Xbox 360." - Not relevant to the review. Is it true? Yeah, sure, but there are better ways to express this opinion than going on about the competition.
"... evil dragon Bowser..." - Somebody doesn't play Mario games at all. Also, the entire line following this is super condescending to the gameplay. It can be better written. You don't have to like it, but you don't have to be a dick.
"... they may feel motion sickness." - Aside from not giving gamers some credit, it seems like this is a far grasp to find negativity in the game. Motion sickness can develop from many other games. This doesn't have to be included; this is a clear attack.
"As good as the game is, though, it's evidence of how bad the Wii is for third person action games..." - Please keep your review about the game and not condescending the console's capability. You can bash the control scheme all you want, but to shut out an entire genre using this article is fucking stupid.
"... but given the vastly superior quality of the graphics in a game like "Ratchet and Clank: Tools of Destruction," currently available for the PS3, "Galaxy" looks old fashioned and lifeless." - This line alone screams 'sale pitch,' and convinces me that they were selling the Playstation 3 to people and trying to keep people away from doing business with Nintendo.
So, here's what I know now:
The article bashes a game that has received plenty of praise elsewhere. To note on that, 'elsewhere' would be sites and news groups that actually handle video games all the time. I don't know what the hell Variety is, I've only heard of it just now. I don't think they really understand what they're talking about, and having read the article I am convinced that this article had Sony money thrown at it. This is terrible form, and if this sort of thing happens again, a lot of people are going to be extremely pissed.
I'll still say, "Okay, maybe they're just fucking stupid on their own and Sony didn't have to intervene," to be fair. But I think we should all be on our toes, so to speak, to see if something like this happens again. I would like to think that it wouldn't, but if it does, Sony is going to have a lot of shame on their hands.
This post is pretty much all the thread needs. Now if only we could delete everything else inbetween this and the OP.
You have to keep in mind that this wasn't in a gaming magazine or website soooo it's obviously not just targeting gamers. Using an identifier for R&C isn't a sales pitch at all. It's just a reference so people who aren't as knowledgeable as you know what the article is talking about.
Then maybe he should correctly inform his readers on, god forbid if he decide to go this route in a review, both consoles and their respective games instead of just blasting one and praising the other.
Just saying "It's Variety!" doesn't just give it immunity on criticism. Maaaaybeeee it should get some good writers and try to become the best magazine there is, or at least half respectable on gaming journalism. But I guess it's just Variety, and dey soooooo crazy!
Oh damn. Is it already time for people to be pulling out sales charts and talking about demographics? I thought we were talking about some shitty review from a non-gaming website.
No fucking kidding. Take it to the Video Game Sales thread guys. :x
I don't know if it was the article specifically being sponsored by Sony (I'm actually about to read it for the first time and note what I see wrong in it below). It may have been meant for the site being Sponsored by Sony, maybe it was specifically put there, maybe it was randomly generated, maybe it was bad luck that it came up, who knows.
"... no longer have the best platform on which to work." - This is not necessary to the review. The review is about Galaxy, not the Wii or its competition.
"... the graphics simply aren't up to par with what players can now find on the Playstation 3 or Xbox 360." - Not relevant to the review. Is it true? Yeah, sure, but there are better ways to express this opinion than going on about the competition.
"... evil dragon Bowser..." - Somebody doesn't play Mario games at all. Also, the entire line following this is super condescending to the gameplay. It can be better written. You don't have to like it, but you don't have to be a dick.
"... they may feel motion sickness." - Aside from not giving gamers some credit, it seems like this is a far grasp to find negativity in the game. Motion sickness can develop from many other games. This doesn't have to be included; this is a clear attack.
"As good as the game is, though, it's evidence of how bad the Wii is for third person action games..." - Please keep your review about the game and not condescending the console's capability. You can bash the control scheme all you want, but to shut out an entire genre using this article is fucking stupid.
"... but given the vastly superior quality of the graphics in a game like "Ratchet and Clank: Tools of Destruction," currently available for the PS3, "Galaxy" looks old fashioned and lifeless." - This line alone screams 'sale pitch,' and convinces me that they were selling the Playstation 3 to people and trying to keep people away from doing business with Nintendo.
So, here's what I know now:
The article bashes a game that has received plenty of praise elsewhere. To note on that, 'elsewhere' would be sites and news groups that actually handle video games all the time. I don't know what the hell Variety is, I've only heard of it just now. I don't think they really understand what they're talking about, and having read the article I am convinced that this article had Sony money thrown at it. This is terrible form, and if this sort of thing happens again, a lot of people are going to be extremely pissed.
I'll still say, "Okay, maybe they're just fucking stupid on their own and Sony didn't have to intervene," to be fair. But I think we should all be on our toes, so to speak, to see if something like this happens again. I would like to think that it wouldn't, but if it does, Sony is going to have a lot of shame on their hands.
This post is pretty much all the thread needs. Now if only we could delete everything else inbetween this and the OP.
IT'S AN ATTACK
Zombiemambo on
0
Options
Mr_Rose83 Blue Ridge Protects the HolyRegistered Userregular
I guess that's a good opinion to have. It happens a lot but it is most infuriating when two games of differing genres are compared as such. In fact I have a problem with the PA reviews because of this.
Wait, PA does reviews? Since when?
Do you mean those words on the front page? Because I am absolutely certain that two paragraphs of "I like Mass Effect so we're going to make a bunch of comics about Mass Effect" is less of a review and more of a two paragraph section of a larger editorial opinion piece. As usual.
And Gabe's piece on Assassin's creed is less of a review and more of an explanation of why he thinks certain other reviewers might not have gotten the full story behind the game. In essence a more polite version of this thread. Unusual to say the least and not just because Gabe is talking about an actual videogame for once instead of Pokémon or something, but still opinion and clearly so.
If you meant something else then please link it because I don't read anything else on the PA main site than the editorials and the comic.
I was willing to accept that the 'Sponsored by Sony' ad was just a coincidence, and that the guy just didn't like Galaxy, but the phrasing of "..."Ratchet and Clank: Tools of Destruction," currently available for the PS3..." just reeks of marketing. There's no reason for that 'currently available on the PS3', and even if there were, it's phrased in exactly the same way as it would be in a commercial for the game.
That coupled with all of the misinformation in the article makes me think this guy didn't even play the game. Opinions are one thing, but to say that the mechanic of POINTING AT THE SCREEN to collect star bits that give you extra lives, opens up new levels, and is nearly neccessary on some of the enemies you come across is 'not integral to the game, and a chore' is just plain idiocy.
It's like Sony handed him a sheet with some talking points, and asked if maybe he could plug their new game in the review, somewhere. The entire review is just phrased in such a way that it seems like an attempt at mud-slinging by a marketing department, as opposed to a video game review. It reminds me of the 'SEGA does what NINTENDON'T' campaign, or the series of commericals featuring Crash Bandicoot outside of Nintendo HQ with a megaphone. Which would be fine, if it didn't pass itself off as a third party, neutral review.
The fact that it goes after the Wii console more than the game itself also lends creedence to this. To me, it's pretty blatant, and I'm not one who is prone to conspiracy theories.
(snip) I don't know what the hell Variety is, I've only heard of it just now. I don't think they really understand what they're talking about, and having read the article I am convinced that this article had Sony money thrown at it. (snip)
Just responding to the bold: Variety is an "entertainment industry" trade magazine. It used to be insider gossip about the movie industry and then it was insider gossip about TV and music also. They're largely known for being judgemental pricks and for writing headlines that they think are witty but everybody else thinks are retarded.
(There's plenty of times simpsons referenced Variety's stupid headlines, and it's really because of the Simpsons that anybody outside of the movie/TV/music industry knows what the hell Variety is.)
The long and short of it is that even though they're an "entertainment industry" magazine, their bag is really TV and Film (not even Music really 'cause Billboard's got them beat there) and they really have no business reviewing video games.
I guess that's a good opinion to have. It happens a lot but it is most infuriating when two games of differing genres are compared as such. In fact I have a problem with the PA reviews because of this.
If you meant something else then please link it because I don't read anything else on the PA main site than the editorials and the comic.
That's great that you want to argue semantics but just because it doesn't say "Review" across the top with a shiny 9.5 doesn't mean it's any less of a review than something you find in EGM.
The only reason I'd be upset is if this review actually sways some ill-informed consumer to stear clear of buying it. That would be a crime. The last couple days playing Mario Galaxy has been the most fun I've had with a video game in a long time.
If you can't find a game like Mario Galaxy fun, I'm affraid you might not have a soul. It's probably been crushed by a bald guy with a machine gun, and tatoos.
I gotta say, the mention of Ratchet and Clank sounded like a textbook plug to me. Like when a talk show host asks a guest a question and his answer goes something like "Actually, like I stated in my new book Pluggity Plug, Available December 1st, ...."
The difference being that talk shows are all about celebs plugging their recent projects, while game reviews aren't. It looks especially bad when you consider how a lot of critics have panned both R&C and the PS3 while singing the praises of Galaxy and the Wii. Opinions do differ, but the fact that this plug appeared in a so-called review for a competing product on a competing system? I'd venture to guess that they're either trying to have a radical opinion, or they're trying on a new moneyhat.
If the 3rd person controls were any more complicated than they already are, I couldn't play the game. I'm getting to old to worry about one button to swing my left hand, one to swing my right hand and one to hump a dead goomba's face.
I will admit, even with my relatively strong stomach, I got a little woozy when I first started playing it, I got over it though. My wife, on the other hand, couldn't get over it
badfish on
"What you had there is what we refer to as a focused non-terminal repeating phantasm or a Class 5 full-roaming vapor."
The comment that really puzzles (and convinces me it's a shill) most is "having different pieces of the controller in each hand is awkward." So holding your hands in a spread out (I daresay, more natural) position is awkward?
Does this guy think you have to keep your hands together, or perhaps he forgot to take the little wire that rolled up the cord off when he plugged in his Wii remote for the first time five minutes before playing Super Mario Galaxy.
I've nothing against reviews that are nitpicky so long as they're nitpicky for the right reasons. It's comments like that that prevent me from taking this review seriously.
what is this, the wii and galaxy bashing thread? i've participated in way too many of these for my liking. so i'll just say it was a dumb review and be done with it. I personally think that galaxy is the best thing since sliced bread, but me liking the game probably gives plenty of people what they feel to be legitimate credit to label me as a fanboy. whatevs.
No, and I see this alot on this board. You are not a fanboy for liking your games... you are a fanboy if you bash someone for not liking the games you like. No game is perfect and you can tell a fanboy a million miles away when you see them flaming someone for having a gripe about their favorite game.
Non Fanboy: "I love galaxy but there are some parts of the game that annoy me... not a big deal though."
Fanboy: "What do you mean annoy you? Are you stupid? Galaxy is perfect and anyone that doesnt love everything about it has no soul and hates families/puppies."
I havent really seen alot of real fanboys on this board... which is why I stick around. This is like the 3rd stop on my video game forum tour and I think ive found a home.
(Well there is one perfect game... Portal. I am a portal fanboy and nothing is going to change that... ;-) )
Edit: This isnt a Wii/Galaxy bashing thread... its a lolsony conspiracy thread involving the Wii and a magazine that doesnt know video games from its own ass.
MistaCreepy on
PS3: MistaCreepy::Steam: MistaCreepy::360: Dead and I don't feel like paying to fix it.
That's great that you want to argue semantics but just because it doesn't say "Review" across the top with a shiny 9.5 doesn't mean it's any less of a review than something you find in EGM.
So reviews aren't different from editorials now? I wonder why they still put them on different pages in the newspaper then....
The comment that really puzzles (and convinces me it's a shill) most is "having different pieces of the controller in each hand is awkward." So holding your hands in a spread out (I daresay, more natural) position is awkward?
Does this guy think you have to keep your hands together, or perhaps he forgot to take the little wire that rolled up the cord off when he plugged in his Wii remote for the first time five minutes before playing Super Mario Galaxy.
I've nothing against reviews that are nitpicky so long as they're nitpicky for the right reasons. It's comments like that that prevent me from taking this review seriously.
It's not even just the fact that it's a "nitpicky" review. It's compounded by the fact that the "nitpicks" make up the bulk of the review, whereas the wonderful and crazy things that Galaxy does get little side-mentions in between the bitching.
The two-player experience isn't amazing? Well, it's an opinion, but whatever. It's a core Mario game, and the fact that it has 2-player simultaneous play at all is a bonus.
The graphics aren't "up to par"... Wow, we still haven't progressed past this point yet? We all get it, the Wii doesn't make my games look all pretty like the PS3 or 360. But they look better than my PS2 and Gamecube, and guess what? Both those systems have some of my favorite games of all time. Just because we can have super pretty games doesn't mean I can't get enjoyment out of games that aren't on the cutting edge of technology.
Anyway, the complaints in the review might have been defensible, but when they're the focus of the review instead of the other 99% of the game that is completely fun and amazing, it's a little suspect.
GnomeTankWhat the what?Portland, OregonRegistered Userregular
edited November 2007
I wouldn't worry too much about it. Galaxy is selling like hotcakes, and the Wii can't be produced fast enough. No shill review from Sony is going to change that. As much as Sony would like it to, because I am sure it's embarrassing for them to watch their mighty PS3 get lambasted by the little Wii that could (that has about 30% of the processing power).
The comment that really puzzles (and convinces me it's a shill) most is "having different pieces of the controller in each hand is awkward." So holding your hands in a spread out (I daresay, more natural) position is awkward?
Does this guy think you have to keep your hands together, or perhaps he forgot to take the little wire that rolled up the cord off when he plugged in his Wii remote for the first time five minutes before playing Super Mario Galaxy.
I've nothing against reviews that are nitpicky so long as they're nitpicky for the right reasons. It's comments like that that prevent me from taking this review seriously.
It's not even just the fact that it's a "nitpicky" review. It's compounded by the fact that the "nitpicks" make up the bulk of the review, whereas the wonderful and crazy things that Galaxy does get little side-mentions in between the bitching.
The two-player experience isn't amazing? Well, it's an opinion, but whatever. It's a core Mario game, and the fact that it has 2-player simultaneous play at all is a bonus.
The graphics aren't "up to par"... Wow, we still haven't progressed past this point yet? We all get it, the Wii doesn't make my games look all pretty like the PS3 or 360. But they look better than my PS2 and Gamecube, and guess what? Both those systems have some of my favorite games of all time. Just because we can have super pretty games doesn't mean I can't get enjoyment out of games that aren't on the cutting edge of technology.
Anyway, the complaints in the review might have been defensible, but when they're the focus of the review instead of the other 99% of the game that is completely fun and amazing, it's a little suspect.
I agree, I'm suprised the graphic argument is still even coming into play. I hate the PS2/Wii ports but other than that I think it's a capable enough system. Galaxies is a beautiful game, even running 480p on my HDtv is looks fantastic - it's no Ratchet and Clank but did anyone expect it to be? The art direction is what really does it, you can also lump Metroid Prime 3 into that category. The graphics is MP3 weren't on par technically with what I have for my 360/PS3 but the art direction was fantastic and more than made up for it.
.la1n on
0
Options
Mr_Rose83 Blue Ridge Protects the HolyRegistered Userregular
Halo3/MoH4/Bioshock is a great game, but given the vastly superior quality of the graphics in a game like Crysis, currently available for the PC, Halo3/MoH4/Bioshock looks old fashioned and lifeles.
Or we could get rid of the fanboy label altogether and just talk with each other without slinging around buzzwords.
A fanboy is a fanboy... we can pretend someone isnt acting like one... if that works for you.
Until the internet is a perfect place for intelligent discussion these "buzzwords" will be valid.
Well if you want we could say that all people who use the term fanboy are "skooziks."
Then every time you mention a fanboy I'll just roll my eyes and say "typical skoozik, ignore him everybody."
EDIT: Basically what I mean is that "fanboy" is usually used deragotorily, to tell people to shut their brains off and ignore the person. And then the person says that they're not a fanboy, and the other person says they are, and then you're way off topic and insulting each other. I'm saying we don't need another derogatory term. Sometimes the so-called "fanboys" have a good point.
Or we could get rid of the fanboy label altogether and just talk with each other without slinging around buzzwords.
A fanboy is a fanboy... we can pretend someone isnt acting like one... if that works for you.
Until the internet is a perfect place for intelligent discussion these "buzzwords" will be valid.
Well if you want we could say that all people who use the term fanboy are "skooziks."
Then every time you mention a fanboy I'll just roll my eyes and say "typical skoozik, ignore him everybody."
EDIT: Basically what I mean is that "fanboy" is usually used deragotorily, to tell people to shut their brains off and ignore the person. And then the person says that they're not a fanboy, and the other person says they are, and then you're way off topic and insulting each other. I'm saying we don't need another derogatory term. Sometimes the so-called "fanboys" have a good point
I can dig that.
Edit: Dude you're preaching to the choir. I will listen to anyones point... but when I dont get the same respect then something has broken down along the way... and what broke it down is fanboyism.
MistaCreepy on
PS3: MistaCreepy::Steam: MistaCreepy::360: Dead and I don't feel like paying to fix it.
Halo3/MoH4/Bioshock is a great game, but given the vastly superior quality of the graphics in a game like Crysis, currently available for the PC, Halo3/MoH4/Bioshock looks old fashioned and lifeles.
meh I didnt hear anyone complain about the first Metal Gear Solid...those were some of the worst textures ever...they were however very varied and coupled with low polygon counts they were able to squeez the shit out of it in special effects and make the series as a whole one of the best looking. Same case with galaxy the textures up close are horrendous but the game still looks fan-freaking-tastic. The lighting and effects put many other games to shame and they are on next gen.
In defense to the review Galaxy is just a revamped Mario 64. Theres no great leap like world to 64. Great game and im enjoying it soo much, best game on Wii right now, so relax guys its just a review in variety. I hope it does help Sony out so they can come up with reasons for me to get my PS3 when im done with Mario. :P
ruiisu on
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
0
Options
GnomeTankWhat the what?Portland, OregonRegistered Userregular
meh I didnt hear anyone complain about the first Metal Gear Solid...those were some of the worst textures ever...they were however very varied and coupled with low polygon counts they were able to squeez the shit out of it in special effects and make the series as a whole one of the best looking. Same case with galaxy the textures up close are horrendous but the game still looks fan-freaking-tastic. The lighting and effects put many other games to shame and they are on next gen.
In defense to the review Galaxy is just a revamped Mario 64. Theres no great leap like world to 64. Great game and im enjoying it soo much, best game on Wii right now, so relax guys its just a review in variety. I hope it does help Sony out so they can come up with reasons for me to get my PS3 when im done with Mario. :P
Completely off topic, is that your RSX in your sig? Is it a Type-S? I drive an '06 Civic Si, which is basically the Type-S with a different body and a limited slip differential.
meh I didnt hear anyone complain about the first Metal Gear Solid...those were some of the worst textures ever...they were however very varied and coupled with low polygon counts they were able to squeez the shit out of it in special effects and make the series as a whole one of the best looking. Same case with galaxy the textures up close are horrendous but the game still looks fan-freaking-tastic. The lighting and effects put many other games to shame and they are on next gen.
In defense to the review Galaxy is just a revamped Mario 64. Theres no great leap like world to 64. Great game and im enjoying it soo much, best game on Wii right now, so relax guys its just a review in variety. I hope it does help Sony out so they can come up with reasons for me to get my PS3 when im done with Mario. :P
Yes! Those are good criticisms! (Though personally I'd disagree.) Unfortunately the main criticism of the game in the review in question is "this game is on the Wii, therefore it sucks."
meh I didnt hear anyone complain about the first Metal Gear Solid...those were some of the worst textures ever...they were however very varied and coupled with low polygon counts they were able to squeez the shit out of it in special effects and make the series as a whole one of the best looking. Same case with galaxy the textures up close are horrendous but the game still looks fan-freaking-tastic. The lighting and effects put many other games to shame and they are on next gen.
In defense to the review Galaxy is just a revamped Mario 64. Theres no great leap like world to 64. Great game and im enjoying it soo much, best game on Wii right now, so relax guys its just a review in variety. I hope it does help Sony out so they can come up with reasons for me to get my PS3 when im done with Mario. :P
The number of games this applies to better than it applies to Galaxy is, however, very high indeed.
meh I didnt hear anyone complain about the first Metal Gear Solid...those were some of the worst textures ever...they were however very varied and coupled with low polygon counts they were able to squeez the shit out of it in special effects and make the series as a whole one of the best looking. Same case with galaxy the textures up close are horrendous but the game still looks fan-freaking-tastic. The lighting and effects put many other games to shame and they are on next gen.
In defense to the review Galaxy is just a revamped Mario 64. Theres no great leap like world to 64. Great game and im enjoying it soo much, best game on Wii right now, so relax guys its just a review in variety. I hope it does help Sony out so they can come up with reasons for me to get my PS3 when im done with Mario. :P
Yes! Those are good criticisms! (Though personally I'd disagree.) Unfortunately the main criticism of the game in the review in question is "this game is on the Wii, therefore it sucks."
Hence the complaints.
Yeah no one is saying the review isnt bullshit. The guy obviously doesnt dig the Wii and therefore shouldnt be reviewing a Wii game (Thats like asking the grand dragon of the KKK to review the latest 50 Cent CD) but the issue here is did Sony have anything to do with it... I think its a bit of a stretch.
MistaCreepy on
PS3: MistaCreepy::Steam: MistaCreepy::360: Dead and I don't feel like paying to fix it.
meh I didnt hear anyone complain about the first Metal Gear Solid...those were some of the worst textures ever...they were however very varied and coupled with low polygon counts they were able to squeez the shit out of it in special effects and make the series as a whole one of the best looking. Same case with galaxy the textures up close are horrendous but the game still looks fan-freaking-tastic. The lighting and effects put many other games to shame and they are on next gen.
In defense to the review Galaxy is just a revamped Mario 64. Theres no great leap like world to 64. Great game and im enjoying it soo much, best game on Wii right now, so relax guys its just a review in variety. I hope it does help Sony out so they can come up with reasons for me to get my PS3 when im done with Mario. :P
Yes! Those are good criticisms! (Though personally I'd disagree.) Unfortunately the main criticism of the game in the review in question is "this game is on the Wii, therefore it sucks."
Hence the complaints.
Yeah no one is saying the review isnt bullshit. The guy obviously doesnt dig the Wii and therefore shouldnt be reviewing a Wii game (Thats like asking the grand dragon of the KKK to review the latest 50 Cent CD) but the issue here is did Sony have anything to do with it... I think its a bit of a stretch.
Agreed on both parts. It's really, really unlikely Sony paid for this; Variety just likely hired a doofus to do the review. I work in the industry; this happens a lot.
cloudeagle on
Switch: 3947-4890-9293
0
Options
VariableMouth CongressStroke Me Lady FameRegistered Userregular
Halo3/MoH4/Bioshock is a great game, but given the vastly superior quality of the graphics in a game like Crysis, currently available for the PC, Halo3/MoH4/Bioshock looks old fashioned and lifeles.
Look! I can be completely ridiculous too!
people have been doing this since the first page. can we stop?
Posts
I already responded elsewhere on this point so I guess some people are just going to disagree. I don't feel that it belongs in a review of game x on console y to say that game a on console b is better anyway. a game isn't worse because another game is better... this is a review, not a holiday reccomendation guide or some shit.
But yeah, I guess we aren't all going to agree. Oh well. Who wants some pie?
I guess that's a good opinion to have. It happens a lot but it is most infuriating when two games of differing genres are compared as such. In fact I have a problem with the PA reviews because of this.
cool, I feel somewhat settled on that, just in time to go to bed.
goodnight
This post is pretty much all the thread needs. Now if only we could delete everything else inbetween this and the OP.
Then maybe he should correctly inform his readers on, god forbid if he decide to go this route in a review, both consoles and their respective games instead of just blasting one and praising the other.
Just saying "It's Variety!" doesn't just give it immunity on criticism. Maaaaybeeee it should get some good writers and try to become the best magazine there is, or at least half respectable on gaming journalism. But I guess it's just Variety, and dey soooooo crazy!
IT'S AN ATTACK
Do you mean those words on the front page? Because I am absolutely certain that two paragraphs of "I like Mass Effect so we're going to make a bunch of comics about Mass Effect" is less of a review and more of a two paragraph section of a larger editorial opinion piece. As usual.
And Gabe's piece on Assassin's creed is less of a review and more of an explanation of why he thinks certain other reviewers might not have gotten the full story behind the game. In essence a more polite version of this thread. Unusual to say the least and not just because Gabe is talking about an actual videogame for once instead of Pokémon or something, but still opinion and clearly so.
If you meant something else then please link it because I don't read anything else on the PA main site than the editorials and the comic.
Nintendo Network ID: AzraelRose
DropBox invite link - get 500MB extra free.
That coupled with all of the misinformation in the article makes me think this guy didn't even play the game. Opinions are one thing, but to say that the mechanic of POINTING AT THE SCREEN to collect star bits that give you extra lives, opens up new levels, and is nearly neccessary on some of the enemies you come across is 'not integral to the game, and a chore' is just plain idiocy.
It's like Sony handed him a sheet with some talking points, and asked if maybe he could plug their new game in the review, somewhere. The entire review is just phrased in such a way that it seems like an attempt at mud-slinging by a marketing department, as opposed to a video game review. It reminds me of the 'SEGA does what NINTENDON'T' campaign, or the series of commericals featuring Crash Bandicoot outside of Nintendo HQ with a megaphone. Which would be fine, if it didn't pass itself off as a third party, neutral review.
The fact that it goes after the Wii console more than the game itself also lends creedence to this. To me, it's pretty blatant, and I'm not one who is prone to conspiracy theories.
Just responding to the bold: Variety is an "entertainment industry" trade magazine. It used to be insider gossip about the movie industry and then it was insider gossip about TV and music also. They're largely known for being judgemental pricks and for writing headlines that they think are witty but everybody else thinks are retarded.
(There's plenty of times simpsons referenced Variety's stupid headlines, and it's really because of the Simpsons that anybody outside of the movie/TV/music industry knows what the hell Variety is.)
The long and short of it is that even though they're an "entertainment industry" magazine, their bag is really TV and Film (not even Music really 'cause Billboard's got them beat there) and they really have no business reviewing video games.
That's great that you want to argue semantics but just because it doesn't say "Review" across the top with a shiny 9.5 doesn't mean it's any less of a review than something you find in EGM.
Enough with the knee-jerk reactions. Yeah, not everyone is going to like Galaxy. It's not immune to criticism. And neither is the Wii.
However, this review sucks, because it bitches more about the Wii than the game. That's not how you do a game review.
Let me put it to you this way. It's as if someone did a review of the latest Ratchet and Clank, and said it sucks because the PS3 is too expensive.
"Some shit"? :P
Actually, that is pretty fitting...
If you can't find a game like Mario Galaxy fun, I'm affraid you might not have a soul. It's probably been crushed by a bald guy with a machine gun, and tatoos.
The difference being that talk shows are all about celebs plugging their recent projects, while game reviews aren't. It looks especially bad when you consider how a lot of critics have panned both R&C and the PS3 while singing the praises of Galaxy and the Wii. Opinions do differ, but the fact that this plug appeared in a so-called review for a competing product on a competing system? I'd venture to guess that they're either trying to have a radical opinion, or they're trying on a new moneyhat.
I will admit, even with my relatively strong stomach, I got a little woozy when I first started playing it, I got over it though. My wife, on the other hand, couldn't get over it
Does this guy think you have to keep your hands together, or perhaps he forgot to take the little wire that rolled up the cord off when he plugged in his Wii remote for the first time five minutes before playing Super Mario Galaxy.
I've nothing against reviews that are nitpicky so long as they're nitpicky for the right reasons. It's comments like that that prevent me from taking this review seriously.
or Brawl. 4854.6102.3895 Name: NU..
No, and I see this alot on this board. You are not a fanboy for liking your games... you are a fanboy if you bash someone for not liking the games you like. No game is perfect and you can tell a fanboy a million miles away when you see them flaming someone for having a gripe about their favorite game.
Non Fanboy: "I love galaxy but there are some parts of the game that annoy me... not a big deal though."
Fanboy: "What do you mean annoy you? Are you stupid? Galaxy is perfect and anyone that doesnt love everything about it has no soul and hates families/puppies."
I havent really seen alot of real fanboys on this board... which is why I stick around. This is like the 3rd stop on my video game forum tour and I think ive found a home.
(Well there is one perfect game... Portal. I am a portal fanboy and nothing is going to change that... ;-) )
Edit: This isnt a Wii/Galaxy bashing thread... its a lolsony conspiracy thread involving the Wii and a magazine that doesnt know video games from its own ass.
Nintendo Network ID: AzraelRose
DropBox invite link - get 500MB extra free.
A fanboy is a fanboy... we can pretend someone isnt acting like one... if that works for you.
Until the internet is a perfect place for intelligent discussion these "buzzwords" will be valid.
It's not even just the fact that it's a "nitpicky" review. It's compounded by the fact that the "nitpicks" make up the bulk of the review, whereas the wonderful and crazy things that Galaxy does get little side-mentions in between the bitching.
The two-player experience isn't amazing? Well, it's an opinion, but whatever. It's a core Mario game, and the fact that it has 2-player simultaneous play at all is a bonus.
The graphics aren't "up to par"... Wow, we still haven't progressed past this point yet? We all get it, the Wii doesn't make my games look all pretty like the PS3 or 360. But they look better than my PS2 and Gamecube, and guess what? Both those systems have some of my favorite games of all time. Just because we can have super pretty games doesn't mean I can't get enjoyment out of games that aren't on the cutting edge of technology.
Anyway, the complaints in the review might have been defensible, but when they're the focus of the review instead of the other 99% of the game that is completely fun and amazing, it's a little suspect.
sketchyblargh / Steam! / Tumblr Prime
I agree, I'm suprised the graphic argument is still even coming into play. I hate the PS2/Wii ports but other than that I think it's a capable enough system. Galaxies is a beautiful game, even running 480p on my HDtv is looks fantastic - it's no Ratchet and Clank but did anyone expect it to be? The art direction is what really does it, you can also lump Metroid Prime 3 into that category. The graphics is MP3 weren't on par technically with what I have for my 360/PS3 but the art direction was fantastic and more than made up for it.
Somewhat ironically, as long as these "buzzwords" exist, the internet will never be the perfect place for intelligent discussion.
Nintendo Network ID: AzraelRose
DropBox invite link - get 500MB extra free.
Look! I can be completely ridiculous too!
Its a vicious cycle indeed.
Well if you want we could say that all people who use the term fanboy are "skooziks."
Then every time you mention a fanboy I'll just roll my eyes and say "typical skoozik, ignore him everybody."
EDIT: Basically what I mean is that "fanboy" is usually used deragotorily, to tell people to shut their brains off and ignore the person. And then the person says that they're not a fanboy, and the other person says they are, and then you're way off topic and insulting each other. I'm saying we don't need another derogatory term. Sometimes the so-called "fanboys" have a good point.
I can dig that.
Edit: Dude you're preaching to the choir. I will listen to anyones point... but when I dont get the same respect then something has broken down along the way... and what broke it down is fanboyism.
It's not that ridiculous 8-)
hahaha, and your avatar totally looks like a skoozik should
In defense to the review Galaxy is just a revamped Mario 64. Theres no great leap like world to 64. Great game and im enjoying it soo much, best game on Wii right now, so relax guys its just a review in variety. I hope it does help Sony out so they can come up with reasons for me to get my PS3 when im done with Mario. :P
Completely off topic, is that your RSX in your sig? Is it a Type-S? I drive an '06 Civic Si, which is basically the Type-S with a different body and a limited slip differential.
Yes! Those are good criticisms! (Though personally I'd disagree.) Unfortunately the main criticism of the game in the review in question is "this game is on the Wii, therefore it sucks."
Hence the complaints.
Hell, Ratchet and Clank is just a revamped MDK.
Yeah no one is saying the review isnt bullshit. The guy obviously doesnt dig the Wii and therefore shouldnt be reviewing a Wii game (Thats like asking the grand dragon of the KKK to review the latest 50 Cent CD) but the issue here is did Sony have anything to do with it... I think its a bit of a stretch.
Agreed on both parts. It's really, really unlikely Sony paid for this; Variety just likely hired a doofus to do the review. I work in the industry; this happens a lot.
people have been doing this since the first page. can we stop?