outer-edge

OK, I need to rant. I struggled with whether I should post or not and in the end, I decided, "what the hell?"

Disclaimer: I am a journalist/public relations person by career, so I am very critical of writing, specifically magazines and newspapers. I've always thought the majority of game journalism was shit.

Disclaimer 2: I have no plans to ever play Golden Axe: Beast Rider, positive or negative reviews.

So, I came across Joystiq's recent Metareview on Golden Axe:
http://www.joystiq.com/2008/10/20/me...rider-360-ps3/

And, as they pointed out, one review seems glaringly different from the others:
http://www.playmagazine.com/index.ph..._ID=884&page=2

I had only needed to see the score to know what magazine and what writer this review came from: Dave Halverson at Play. I bought the first issues of Play and quickly became a hater, especially of Dave. The whole magazine reeks of a pompous, egotistical attitude and this review supports that ... oh, and of course, boobs. Because that seems to be the editorial staff's single criteria for a good game there. Even as a man I was often offended by some of their writers.

Of course, this isn't the first time I've seen Dave or Play's scores vary widely from the rest of the gaming world. Now, it is possible to like a game when others didn't, or dislike one when others did. But is it enough to just admit that on this game your tastes differ? No. Dave blames it on everyone else:
http://www.playmagazine.com/index.ph...ge&Game_ID=887

Now, I did say earlier I thought most game journalism was shit. But this type of attitude that Dave puts out has always been worse to me than any 12-year-old reviewer writing crappy, half-assed rants and raves on another gaming site.

He tries to play it off as if this is reflective of the state of game journalism. But game journalism has always sucked, despite what he says. The best you can do is find those rays of hope, those few writers you like and agree with and therefore can use as a resource.

But, his editorial reads more like a defense to his score than an intelligent critque of the industry. I've read whole reviews of his that came off as nothing more than an "I'm better because I like this game and everyone who says differently sucks." This man seems to be trying to justify himself at this point. And his writing is just not good. He tries way too hard.

So, I guess my questions are:

1.) Has anyone else played Beast Rider (is it even out?)? Is Dave right and the rest of the gaming world wrong?

2.) Does anyone hear read and like Play? I will not respond negatively. This is not a chance for me to call you out. I'm honestly curious if anyone reads this asshat's magazine and likes it, and WHY?

Other than that, I just needed to rant, because it's one of those days.

foxdvd

I have not played the game, but I think it is obvious there is something fishy going on here. For some reason though IGN’s 10 score for GTA4 bothers me more. Either you are saying the game is perfect, or the best game made so far. That game was amazing, but come on a 10?

This dude at Play is just a tool, that is all. He got caught with his pants down, probably paid off, or did a speculative review. He may have thought many of the reviews were going to be 7's and 8's, and thus his 9 would not seem out of place....and he was WRONG...

foxdvd

IGN’s review gave Beast Rider a 4 out of 10 on Graphics which seems sort of harsh the other way though. Once again I have not played it, but in-game footage, and a few other reviews, all seem to point to a game with good looking, if not great, graphics. The 4 seems to be their way of bringing the "overall" score down, which is “fixing” the score just the same as Play to me.

Even reviews on their own site seem to argue. The UK and US reviews of Fable 2 are a good example. While game play and overall fun can be up to the person playing, you would think a score on Graphics would be close. The US review gave it an 8.0 and the UK on graphics a 9.5. Huh?

fumanstan

A score of 10 does not necessarily mean a game is perfect or the best game ever. I have no problem with review sites handing that out, and I think there should be more. The 9.5 is a cop out.

As for this, I never really heard of Play magazine. Complaining about everyone else's review is pretty silly.

FatTony

I'm the complete opposite. Game reviews have gotten overly generous to the point that I don't even bother reading them anymore. I stick to aggregate sites, and even then, I don't bother renting anything below an 80% and I rarely buy anything below a 90%.

A perfect score should be reserved for a game that is just that: perfect. Don't give it the maximum score unless it's literally the best game you've played in the last 12 months and if it's not, don't fucking waste my time and money.

Needless to say, I won't be spending any time on either Beast Rider or Play Magazine.

fumanstan

Except no game is perfect, and I rarely see reviewers hand out a 10 despite them feeling it was the best game out there and having insignificant complaints. I think reviewers are overly generous as much as they are harsh, with some sites quick to throw out a score under a 50% to attract attention as well as far too many 80-90%. Like I said, I think a 9.5 is a cop out because reviewers are afraid to give a game they enjoyed the hell out of a 10 because people automatically assume that mean's its perfect and there's absolutely zero flaws with the game. See the responses about GTA4 here where people played it, hated an aspect of it, and automatically went to attack the reviews and claim that the game shouldn't have gotten a 10 because it wasn't perfect.

I stick to aggregates as well since I don't buy a lot of games, but I don't think reserving some ultimate tier of scoring makes sense. It just makes reviewers continue to hold back since they'll always go back and say "well I didn't give this game a 10 earlier, so there's no way I can give it to this one."

chuckd21

As a former movie critic, I've never understood the rationale that if all game critics don't agree then "something's up". I mean, I love the movie Grease 2. No one else on the planet does. But I'd give it high marks while everyone else would be giving it one star or less. Doesn't make me wrong.

Michael Corvin

I was one such person. The game still had all the same flaws as its predecessors and same boring missions, why then does it deserve the highest score possible? Because it looks pretty? We're six months out, do you still think it is a 10? Did you at launch?

Gerry P.

That's why it's important to go beyond the score and read the review. Every "10" review for GTAIV mentions numerous flaws, but explains that the overwhelming positive aspects made the negative aspects easy to overlook.

I still consider it a 10.

buckee1

I have the game and admit that it's clearly mediocre at best. Simply put, it's a poor man's Conan without the challenge and without the fun.

Michael Corvin

I agree that you have to read and not judge based on score, my point is that the game's flaws are hold overs from every other GTA game. Flaws that should have been fixed. Flaws that should render the scores lower than 10. A game can't be a 10 if you are still getting things wrong that they got wrong 4 releases ago in 2001. People hold the franchise on a pedestal and I'd say a full point of every review is essentially added because of the title of the game. Another way of looking at is is that or they give the game a lot more padding than other no-name releases. Overlooking the flaws, because this is GTA, man!

As for myself, I don't think there is a game this generation that deserves a 10. I'd say Bioshock(dragged on a couple hours too long and had a weak ending) comes closest for me, as well as Halo 3(too short, and we still didn't get to fight anywhere notable on Earth). Also, maybe Pac-Man: Championship Edition, but lacking an unlimited mode still brings it down.

*edit - Looking back at my two Report Card threads 2007 & 2008, it looks like I gave an A+ to a few games (Super Mario Galaxy, Bioshock & Viva Pinata from this gen, then also to Rez HD & TLoZ: Phantom Hourglass).

fumanstan

I agree. Nothing wrong with one guy simply just enjoying the game even if other people disliked it. Crying about it like this dude is silly, especially by criticizing every other review that all didn't like it except his own.

fujishig

Aren't those two different things? Something that's the best game that's come out in the last 12 months still won't be perfect... no game will be perfect. Anyone blind buying a game that got a 10 score from some random magazine (or 5 stars, or 5 thumbs up, ore whatever) is bound to be disappointed.

Play magazine does have some unusual biases, though. Aren't they the ones that really hype up pretty much any JRPG that comes out? I remember they did a huge feature article on Magna Carta (admittedly, a KRPG)... what a load of crap that game was.

DeanoBKN

I subscribed to PLAY for about 2 years. It seemed like they gave every game a great review.

Goldberg74

Supermallet

It seems easier to filter out the crap with movie reviews. There are several high profile critics who voice their opinion, regardless of what the studio throws at them to make them play nice. And then there are the quote whores, who have sold their credibility to see their name printed in an ad, so their comments become meaningless to a lot of people.

In the world of video game journalism, on the other hand, there is a lot of evidence that points to pressure from publishers and sometimes outright payola to give certain games better reviews. A good example is the whole Gamespot fracas that happened a few months back. So if a game is getting universally panned, and someone gives it an 8 or 9 out of 10, then it may very well be that something's up.

FatTony

That was kinda my point, I just didn't articulate it very well. I realize that no game will ever be perfect, especially when you consider that something better will eventually come along. I was trying to say that the "perfect" score should be reserved for something that is truly special/amazing/unique for its time. Hopefully that makes more sense.

foxdvd

I agree that a game does not have to be “Perfect” to get a 10 if the person doing the review is clear on how he came to that score. Hell I bet I can even find a flaw on Jessica Alba’s ass if she would let me get close enough, and I would give that a 10. My point is IGN’s GTA4 “10" review just felt wrong. The game is amazing, but come on a 10? Would you not agree that the only game that has ever gotten a 10 in the short life of the 360 should be their number one game so far for the 360? (edit, the uk review was 10 and us review 9.8, and PS3 review 10...still highest ever)

http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/916/916362p1.html

It comes in five, behind 4 games that scored 9.5's or lower.

Best Rider getting a 9 is ridiculous, no doubt, but I was just trying to point out that reviews for the most part are a joke.

Michael Corvin

Lies. All lies.