-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Good god, what did IGN do to this review?
- Thread starter Darklord
- Start date
- Status
MrPing1000
Member
If he just didn't like the genre that would be fine. But he's comparing it to Fifa 09 and PES 2009, why is he not comparing it to Fifa Manager or Championship Manager etc?
It's like complaining that mario kart isn't a platformer, it is that dumb.
It's like complaining that mario kart isn't a platformer, it is that dumb.
Ok, first I'll agree with the consensus that the review had some content that renders much of what Mr. Burk was trying to say moot.
"I couldnt imagine why anybody would prefer Worldwide Soccer Manager to FIFA 09 or Pro Evolution Soccer 2009."
Having said that, a lot of what he tried to say read like it had merit. The lack of sound, bad interface, and poor simulation of actual soccer seemed like valid points. He said that the menus were difficult to navigate, and that's not good for a stat manager. He didn't mention anything about menu customization, which leads me to assume that there isn't any, or not much of any. Again, that's a bummer, especially when you're going to want to constantly want to go to stats that are probably buried under several menus.
I understand its a manager simulator, not a footy player sim. But when he says stuff like:
"There is no audio commentary to accompany the action in the simulated game's you watch/coach. In fact, the only sound we found in the entire game was the tones of fans cheering as each simulated game played out which only detracts from the game's feel of authenticity seeing as there are no fans rendered in the stands. "
The game DOES sound rather uninteresting. Did any of you actually READ the review, or better yet, play any of the previous versions? As someone who hasn't played Worldwide Soccer Manager, and would be starting from ground zero, I found it rather informative.
I'm now going to go to the UK review, to compare. Be back later.
"I couldnt imagine why anybody would prefer Worldwide Soccer Manager to FIFA 09 or Pro Evolution Soccer 2009."
Having said that, a lot of what he tried to say read like it had merit. The lack of sound, bad interface, and poor simulation of actual soccer seemed like valid points. He said that the menus were difficult to navigate, and that's not good for a stat manager. He didn't mention anything about menu customization, which leads me to assume that there isn't any, or not much of any. Again, that's a bummer, especially when you're going to want to constantly want to go to stats that are probably buried under several menus.
I understand its a manager simulator, not a footy player sim. But when he says stuff like:
"There is no audio commentary to accompany the action in the simulated game's you watch/coach. In fact, the only sound we found in the entire game was the tones of fans cheering as each simulated game played out which only detracts from the game's feel of authenticity seeing as there are no fans rendered in the stands. "
The game DOES sound rather uninteresting. Did any of you actually READ the review, or better yet, play any of the previous versions? As someone who hasn't played Worldwide Soccer Manager, and would be starting from ground zero, I found it rather informative.
I'm now going to go to the UK review, to compare. Be back later.
Cobra84 said:
Absolutely tons, you can even look at the gaf football thread in OT.
People will sneer at this review as just ignorant Americans not getting football, its not that at all its just a really dreadful awful review.
Tempy said:
Fans will ignore it and disregard it easy enough, they know its a joke. But this review is classed as IGN's main review on Game Rankings and Metacritic.
industrian
will gently cradle you as time slowly ticks away.
Stop It said:
The only time I've ever watched American sports was when I fell asleep during an all-nighter at university and woke up at 4am with Channel Five playing. All I know about the NFL is that it's rugby played by big guys who don't want to break their nails hence the reason for all that armour.
Final review score for Madden 2009: 2/10.
OuterWorldVoice said:
Anyone who knows 20 is higher than 1 would get the basic principles.
itsinmyveins
Gets to pilot the crappy patrol labors
OuterWorldVoice said:
Then again, knowing players and teams right from the start -- from watching games and etc -- is probably a big part of the entertainment. Although I'm sure you learn a lot of new names while playing it too.
Psychotext
Member
Superb. Gave me a good chuckle. :lol
No soundtrack!
Here's the thread at the official FM site:
http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php?t=77019
A guy from Sega commented in the thread, from Market:
tfg9000 said:
We need an IGN Reviewer Manger game.
Gaborn said:
Wii Music is not criticized for not playing like GH or RB. Wii Music is criticized because it has no goal, and there's zero gameplay evolution. It's a glorified music sandbox with no overall purpose. Even the simplest of casual games have goals/objectives...Wii Music is the exception.
MWS Natural
Member
Americans appreciate real football.
Like someone pointed out with Halo, it is exactly like comparing a RTS game with a FPS game.
IGN probably should have let someone with some (or any) experience in manager games review this one.
This game is like crack in Europe (probably other regions as well) btw. People spend insane amount of hours playing it.
Edit. Oh and btw, nobody ever chooses between FM and FIFA/PES, they buy it in addition.
IGN probably should have let someone with some (or any) experience in manager games review this one.
This game is like crack in Europe (probably other regions as well) btw. People spend insane amount of hours playing it.
Edit. Oh and btw, nobody ever chooses between FM and FIFA/PES, they buy it in addition.
SapientWolf
Trucker Sexologist
Reviews don't necessarily have to be by fans for fans. The more perspectives there are on a game the more informed the consumer will be. This can help with the stinky dog syndrome, where people put up with a game or genre's faults simply because they're so used to them. The meta-review sites' algorithm should toss out the extremes anyway.wmat said:
Hmm.
Having read the other review, I sort of feel sorry for Mr. Burk. It seems like he just didn't really get it, and his one comment comparing WSM to a soccer sim destroyed any merit his review had. Had he not said that, this thread probably wouldn't have been made.
Mr. Parfitt (the UK reviewer) said a lot of the same things that Mr. Burk did - no sound really to speak of, and poor graphics when the 3D sim kicks in. He even said the charts look like they're made in Flash! But he still overall enjoyed WSMs gameplay and stat tracking, which influenced his score.
One person it clicked with - the other it didn't. I honestly think that both of their opinions were valid. Avi Burk should just recall the comment about comparing the game to another that is in a different genre, and he'd be fine.
Having read the other review, I sort of feel sorry for Mr. Burk. It seems like he just didn't really get it, and his one comment comparing WSM to a soccer sim destroyed any merit his review had. Had he not said that, this thread probably wouldn't have been made.
Mr. Parfitt (the UK reviewer) said a lot of the same things that Mr. Burk did - no sound really to speak of, and poor graphics when the 3D sim kicks in. He even said the charts look like they're made in Flash! But he still overall enjoyed WSMs gameplay and stat tracking, which influenced his score.
One person it clicked with - the other it didn't. I honestly think that both of their opinions were valid. Avi Burk should just recall the comment about comparing the game to another that is in a different genre, and he'd be fine.
Regulus Tera
Romanes Eunt Domus
MWS Natural said:
You might wanna check into that.
Kibbles said:
I wouldn't even say that he's a casual player (which almost sounds like an insult). He found the menus overwhelming, the graphics poor, and the audio almost non-existant. Orlando Parfitt made the game sound ALMOST palatable; Avi Burk hammered it home that I probably won't like it.
cultofweaver
Member
At some point the reviewer should have just said that he can't with any journalistic integrity review the game and had himself taken off the assignment. I can think of no game that would be more terrifying to play than Football Manager if you didn't have a clue about Football. It is page after page of jargon, players, stats and tactical systems that only make sense to someone who understands the sport in some depth. Even a casual football fan would be quickly overwhelmed by the detail in FM.
It's clearly the fault of whoever assigned the review at IGN. By allowing this to go online they've damaged their credibilty as a review source, showing that they are willing to let people review games on the site that simply have no idea what the game they are playing even is.
It's clearly the fault of whoever assigned the review at IGN. By allowing this to go online they've damaged their credibilty as a review source, showing that they are willing to let people review games on the site that simply have no idea what the game they are playing even is.
Diablohead
Member
I'm waiting until IGN pull the review for some lame reason.
mr jones said:
I've played FM minimum 200 hours a year since 1998 and I've spent a lot of times on the FM forums, the fact is:
- No one cares about the sound. I personally turn it off 100%. Even if there were 20 songs in there, who says I would want to listen to them (and what genres?)? Why not just start Winamp and listen to your own music? Most people play it in window mode. I surf and chat with friends while playing it.
What would they play when you browse menus (90% of game time)? Elevator music? This is not Burnout Paradise, you can't turn on Avril Lavigne and rock music when you're passing the speed limits.
- The 3D sim is a bonus, nothing more. You can still play the game in 2D, which still has given the game an average of like 97% in reviews for the last years. It's a very advanced engine and people aren't stressing them. They could have made an half-ass attempt five years ago if they wanted to, but they wanted to wait until they could make it right. Next year will of course be better.
- The charts? A chart is a chart, not a 3D world simulation. A chart is a line and letters. What would you want from it, dancing teletubbies and dynamic weather effects?
Yes, sure, maybe the average football-hater won't like the game. But what to do? Should Halo 3 get a 7.0 because 50% of the gaming mainstream don't like FPS? Should Dead or Alive get the same just because the mainstream don't like fighting?
The reason people like it is because it's not a half-ass mainstream attempt, it's deep as hell. That's the reason Fifa Manager is flopping, because they are trying to make it easier and more simple - people aren't ready to pay much money for that. They did it right when they added the manager mode as a bonus in Fifa, because by that people can try the easier manager mode and see if they like it - plus playing football in Fifa. If they are ready to take the next step, they buy and play FM.
Maybe it's not accessible to the mainstream, but that's not the point. If you want it as a beginner, you can either suck it up and just read the manual in FM, or play Fifa manager.
(Plus, the game has tutorials and every button has a text explanation. You also have tons of assistants telling you what to do)
mr jones said:
The transfer list menu is overwhelming because there are so many players in the game. The tactics menu is so overwhelming because you have so many tactical options. The stats menus are so overwhelming because there are so many attributs. These are called *features*, it's what makes the game good and it's what the game is all about. These things can't be stripped down without loosing depth!
Plus, with just some normal internet/computer skills you can make it easy. You can filter the transfer/player lists by setting minimum attributs, for example. You can filter out tactical options from the screen, to make it an easier experience. It's all about understanding how checking a box works.
Chairman Yang
if he talks about books, you better damn well listen
I hate you all because you went to IGN and gave them site traffic.
SapientWolf
Trucker Sexologist
The review is going to be useless to fans of the genre, but it could be useful if someone wanted to gauge the title's appeal to a broader, more mainstream audience (someone like a retailer, for example).wmat said:
But the real underlying problem here is the heavily reliance on an aggregate of review scores without any context given to them. We can do better than that.
This review is so poor and so inaccurate that I can't imagine it'll actually stay up. It would be an admission of guilt if IGN took it down or modified it, but how the fuck can they let something like that stand? It's quite possibly the worst gaming review I've ever read, both poorly written and completely missing the point of the game it is attempting to criticize.
I cant belive some people are defending the review :lol
Its like if i gave Gears of War 2, a 3.0, just because it has nice graphics. But you know, i dont like TPS, i dont know how can anyone like TPS games, i dont like it, i didnt even get past first chapter, screw this game, giving it a 3.0 HA! First person shooters are the real deal!
Its like if i gave Gears of War 2, a 3.0, just because it has nice graphics. But you know, i dont like TPS, i dont know how can anyone like TPS games, i dont like it, i didnt even get past first chapter, screw this game, giving it a 3.0 HA! First person shooters are the real deal!
industrian
will gently cradle you as time slowly ticks away.
Manager said:
Give this man a round of applause. I've been playing since my buddy gave me Championship Manager 2 in 1999, and before that I played Premier Manager 98 and 99 on the PSX, and I agree with everything you said - especially the part about how Sports Interactive don't compromise to make it friendlier to mainstream audiences. These games reward effort and days worth of grinding away making your team as strong as it can be, compared to pretty much every game released nowadays that gives the ADD generation their five minute fix.
The problem isn't that he doesn't like the genre. A review can be made by an outsider that remains informative and useful. The problem is that he doesn't understand the purpose of the game that he's playing.
There's nothing wrong with knocking the game for having badly designed menus, or even a lackluster soundtrack. But when your main complaint about the gameplay is that you can't play soccer, in a genre that has NEVER been about playing soccer, your review simply cannot be used as an accurate guide by anyone. To reference the frequently-used example, it'd be like penalizing Halo Wars because you can't shoot enemies in first-person.
If he had said, "This is a soccer management sim, I'm not well-acquainted with the genre, and these are my complaints with how it handles managing a soccer team," that'd have been fine. People who are fans of the game could see his issues, understand how those issues related to their experience, and perhaps gain something from the review. But since he attacks the game for not being something it had no intention of being, any critiques he makes of it are unreliable.
There's nothing wrong with knocking the game for having badly designed menus, or even a lackluster soundtrack. But when your main complaint about the gameplay is that you can't play soccer, in a genre that has NEVER been about playing soccer, your review simply cannot be used as an accurate guide by anyone. To reference the frequently-used example, it'd be like penalizing Halo Wars because you can't shoot enemies in first-person.
If he had said, "This is a soccer management sim, I'm not well-acquainted with the genre, and these are my complaints with how it handles managing a soccer team," that'd have been fine. People who are fans of the game could see his issues, understand how those issues related to their experience, and perhaps gain something from the review. But since he attacks the game for not being something it had no intention of being, any critiques he makes of it are unreliable.
SapientWolf
Trucker Sexologist
I'm not defending the review as much as I'm fighting elitism. If someone wants to voice their opinion on something that they did not enjoy for any reason then they should be able to. 99% of people who read it may disregard and mock the review but there is always someone out there who would agree. The websites who aggregate reviews should know their audience well enough to know how much weight a review should have in the aggregation (if any).Kandrick said:
I guess this is touching on reviewing what you have instead of what you want it to be, which is a different can of worms than the insider vs outsider argument.
Affeinvasion
Member
Chalk another one up to GAF overreaction.
A 2.0 is exceedingly low, however, why should a game receive a high mark if it is such a niche game? If 9/10 people randomly selected wouldn't like playing this game how can it receive such a high score?
A 2.0 is exceedingly low, however, why should a game receive a high mark if it is such a niche game? If 9/10 people randomly selected wouldn't like playing this game how can it receive such a high score?
Manager said:
Ok, I can agree with that.
Again, I don't consider the US reviewer's opinion any less valid. You just made the point more true that the game is definitely not for someone like me, who probably would not like the game. Lets say that you couldn't get into Panzer General, but LOVE Command and Conquer. You give decent reasons for disliking Panzer General, mentioning that unless you're a fan, you probably won't get into it. Should I discredit your opinion, because you say the game "doesn't compare to C&C"?
The review is useless to everyone, because the reviewer did not play the game properly. I don't care that, as a FM fan, if the review does nothing for me, what I am more concerned is that any person reading the review with no knowledge of FM will think that the game is nothing more than a basic 3D match view with no control over it!SapientWolf said:
FM is a management sim, yet the review doesn't even scratch the surface of the management aspects of the game, no mention is made over the transfer systems, the training systems, tactics, player and media handling etc. NOTHING in the review actually tells you anything about the depth of the game, merely calling the stats "overwhelming", it is a bad review, no matter how you spin it.
I am all for reviews not being sycophantic arse licking created solely to appease fans of a certain genre, but at least play a fucking game properly before you slam it, this isn't a case of a reviewer not liking a genre, but one where he has totally failed to understand the game he is playing.
So no, if anything, this review is MORE damaging to the "casual" public, at least FM fans know this is bollocks, anyone with a passing interest in this game could be put off by this travesty, which frankly, is quite the injustice.
A game shouldn't be scored proportionally to its audience, that is pure bullshit, oh, and IGN UK saw fit to give it 9.1/10.Affeinvasion said:
Affeinvasion said:
Who decides if it's a niche game? Because it lacks boobs and guns?
The game sells *incredibly* well in Europe, probably one of the most sold games each year. Strategy games has management in them (gold resourcing). Maybe it's overwhelming to this guy, but obviously all those buying it don't. This is not a game where the mainstream FPS shooter walks in and say "Hmm, I think I'll try a football management sim...".
No-one expects them too. Should the developers also include a guide of how football works? What offside is? (Thought I bet they have a guide in there, the in-game manual is huge)
If you see it as niche in the US, it's because soccer is not as big there. Management games aren't exactly new, and the way I see it many *MANY* board games are built around management.
Could someone explain why a game like Flight Simulator is less niche, as it still got 8-9/10 over the years?
mr jones said:
Sorry for being lazy, but once again I'll just direct to sonicmj1's post.
sonicmj1 said:
Actually, this is a brilliant point. I see what you mean.
I had already said that his review should be slightly modified, but having read your post, I agree that Mr. Burk's opinion does seem far less reliable, when he obviously wasn't well versed with the genre to start with.
Anyone somewhat defending this review is just embarassing themself. If you have never played or have any idea what WSM is, it's better to stay quiet. There's absolutely no way to defend this review.
It's completely inaccurate. Unless you agree that it's fair to criticise Halo Wars because you don't play shooting things in first person view.
It's completely inaccurate. Unless you agree that it's fair to criticise Halo Wars because you don't play shooting things in first person view.
- Status