plagiarize
Banned
and to me. but i don't think anyone who claims to disagree must have some ulterior motive. that's all. that's the crap that bothers me, and if anyone reading this isn't doing that, then guess what, i'm not talking about you.
-
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.
Mario Kart 7 Review Thread: First Reviews In
- Thread starter pramath
- Start date
plagiarize
Banned
i'm not sure you know the Edge response to these claims. people have said the same to them and they explained that this mathematically isn't a valid comparison. what you need to do is look at a sample of games that they have reviewed, not at the overall average of the website.
a small blog will review less games than a print magazine. as a result the small blog will review less shovelware and a larger percentage of big releases. you have to compare their review scores for the games they review to the average scores of those games... not the average score of all their reviews to the average scores of other publications.
i know it's more work, but i'd be interested to see the results of something like that. that'd tell us if they use the whole scale or not.
UncleSporky
Member
This sort of evidence is not measurable. You treat it as if there was some objective measure for judgement that is above reproach, when there isn't. We are all entitled to subjective judgement based on the way we see it.
You don't think his comments about Vanquish or MK are proof of anything. Others do. Get over it.
plagiarize
Banned
his review of Mario Kart 7 is based on playing the actual game. any opinion suggesting that his review of Mario Kart 7 isn't his honest opinion is based on speculation. using the score he gave a relatively obscure game as evidence that he's trying to drive hits to his website is laughable.
both are valid opinions but one is clearly better sourced. arguing that they are as well sourced is something that i can objectively disagree with.
not all opinions are equally informed. i can't get over that because it's true.
if Reviewer A had only played SP and Reviewer B had played SP, online MP and offline MP would you say their opinions were equally valid? of course you wouldn't.
Critiquing is hard.
Siskel said he didn't like Predator because it's a clone of Rambo. But hell, it IS and for every intent wanted to represent that genre.
If Mario Kart comes out, do you ask the avid Mario Kart lover to review it, or do you get some FPS-loving console-only gamer to give it a fresh look. How can you be perfectly objective when reviewing art?
It is hard where being a fan comes into play. How did all of the new star wars films get 'fresh' on rotten tomatoes? People are star wars fans. In video games there are more fans than ever, so it becomes difficult when you have to look at the reviewer and their tastes.
I won't lose any sleep over a 5/10, he is entitled to his opinion, but he clearly is not a fan or Mario Kart (or perhaps Nintendo at all). Was he the right one for the review?
I don't think art critique will ever be solidified. It's based far too much on personal experience. Had that 5/10 reviewer had 3-4 friends who loved Mario Kart and avidly played every entry in the series with him, his experience would have been better.
Hell, I've played Smash Bros. with people who hate it, won't play it, don't get it. Likewise, I've sunk hours into it with people who consider it a classic. My experience differed greatly with both entry. I hated pokemon up until all my friends started playing and we all became competetive.
....I've written too much here. There is simply no right answer.
I'm an old-school gamer that thinks every MK after the SNES one suffered from what I like to call "NBA Jam syndrome". In NBA Jam you could have the lead and suddenly be unable to make any shots until the other team caught up. Since the N64 version of MK it seems like anyone that was winning had to be the victim of multiple lightning/blue shells until the others caught up. Does it really make the game exciting when you know it's rigged like that?
Despite what you describe -and I can relate to it- there still are Mario Kart gods on recent versions. Mario Kart 7 is better balanced than the wii opus apparently.
UncleSporky
Member
You cannot prove that his review is based on a full playthrough of everything the game has to offer. In fact there is little evidence that he experienced all of it.
He calls the game slow, but we don't know whether he ever got out of 50cc.
He says that online lets you play with random people without needing friend codes as if this is a new novelty, but this system has been in place since Mario Kart DS. It shows that he is misinformed of the way the games in this series have operated online since 2005. We have no evidence at all that he used the much-vaunted community features. In fact there is evidence to the contrary, since he specifically says "there is nothing new here."
While his review may be his honest opinion, we lack the evidence to conclude it is a thorough review and indeed have evidence to the contrary. This is enough of a basis to call his opinions into question.
Dude! It's all about staying comfortably in 2nd and 3rd until the final lap.
.....I'm also the guy that falls into 8th on purpose, grabs a lightning, and waits for the other racers to hit the jump in Wario Stadium.
SMK is the worst one in this department.
Eggplant Wizard
Member
Oh, I've certainly seen enough of his editorial/video work that I don't have much respect for him as a professional website editor. But I don't know how he is when it comes to gaming criticism.
Really I think too many people base their opinions of a critic based on whether or not they agree with them rather than on the content of their reviews (for the record I didn't think Sterling's review was very strong beyond one or two aspects). Not everybody here is guilty of this (and it's not nearly as bad on GAF as it is other places), but there's an awful lot of discussion about numbers around here.
I guess I'm contributing to the problem by talking about people's reactions to reviews instead of the actual reviews or the game itself. I'm really liking what I've heard so far: I skipped MKWii so this will be my first Mario Kart with a proper online mode, so the glowing impressions of the online functionality have me especially optimistic.
dr3upmushroom
Banned
Have we ever actually seen him play a video game? I'm not seeing any definitive evidence that he ever has.
Personally I won't even read a review if I wasnt sitting beside the author the entire time they played, keeping meticulous notes on exactly what parts of the game they played and for how long. It's the only way to be sure, and until more people demand this level of accountability we're just going to have to live in a world where people are allowed to say publically that the new Mario Kart isn't amazing, simple as that.
I'd have to disagree, the SNES version did have lightning but no blue shells, etc.
I'm talking specifically about the ai and how it ruberbands to high heaven. Have you played smk in the last 15 years?
Plinko
Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
Rubberbanding and the fact that the CPU racers took the EXACT same line every time around the track. Awful.
Yep.
It did have arranged winning characters depending on which racer you selected. That's somewhat understandable, but in comparison to the N64 version and up it had a lot less of a cheese-factor to it.
Cheese-factor?
Right, the original seemed more skill-based for the most part.
plagiarize
Banned
don't i know it. i did it for a while and i do not miss it.
i want some fans to review it and some none fans to review it too. the bigger the game's supposed appeal the more i'm interested in hearing from the people that aren't necessarily fans of the franchise.
you seem to think i'm saying his opinion is as well informed as other reviews of the game. i never made such claims. my claim was simply that his review is better informed than the claim that it's not a genuine opinion.
it might be a poorly informed opinion... but that's a very different claim than 'he's done this just for hits' and it's only that second claim that i've raised any issues with. you've provided evidence here for the former, but none for the latter.
Magicpaint
Member
I don't know where this argument comes from but if it is indeed more "skill based", it is as a result of bad design and not a good one.
I agree with this. As much as I dislike Jim Sterling, he can have his own opinions.
Honestly, I could see where he was coming from until the end.
Where I get annoyed with him is when he cries about how Mario Kart gets a free pass for being recycled while other series don't. Then he says he would argue that it deserves less leniency than other sequels.
So to recap: whined about media giving MK a free pass after becoming media that gave a different game a free pass.
If he isn't sick of Modern Warfare, why is it so hard to believe that other journalists aren't sick of Mario Kart?
So yeah, my issue with him has absolutely nothing to do with his review or score, but some bizarre paragraph he threw in there where he complains about other press.
...people are calling SNES Mario Kart awful? :/
Admittedly it does have a few weird quirks (mostly AI related), but I still think the racing is absolutely fantastic. I'm a huge fan of the drifting and how it increases your top speed over time, incredibly satisfying if you're able to powerslide every corner
Admittedly it does have a few weird quirks (mostly AI related), but I still think the racing is absolutely fantastic. I'm a huge fan of the drifting and how it increases your top speed over time, incredibly satisfying if you're able to powerslide every corner
dr3upmushroom
Banned
Wait, don't many people find that series dull?
diffusionx
Gold Member
... which was totally justified and IMO one of the few accurate scores given to that heap.
While I did find it dull, the worst I would have given it would give it personally would be a 7/10. A 4.5 is just ridiculous. The game itself is extremely well made, it just gets repetitive a bit too quickly for my tastes.
ShockingAlberto
Member
Jim Sterling is an avowed misogynist.
Not that it has anything to do with his review scores, but as long as we're piling on, we might as well throw that in there.
Not that it has anything to do with his review scores, but as long as we're piling on, we might as well throw that in there.
dr3upmushroom
Banned
So, even though you don't think it's fun, it gets a 7 because it has good graphics?
Mmmmkay...
AbsoluteZero
Banned
I played the first game and Bloodlines and saw all I needed to to pass judgement on that series.
ShockingAlberto
Member
You played the two worst games in the series.
As someone that absolutely despised AC1, and I liken it to being assaulted, take my advice and give 2 a chance.
UncleSporky
Member
That's an easy claim to make.
By saying so, you have given everyone in this thread exactly what they want!
Where in my post did you read that?
The game gave me around 5-10 hours of enjoyable gameplay. It wasn't the best thing ever, but still worth the price of admission. The "dullness" of the series comes from creating a games so padded with the same repetitive filler quests that it hurts the overall experience. Beyond 10 hours I didn't necessarily hate the game, but I had no real drive to continue playing.
...people are calling SNES Mario Kart awful? :/
Admittedly it does have a few weird quirks (mostly AI related), but I still think the racing is absolutely fantastic. I'm a huge fan of the drifting and how it increases your top speed over time, incredibly satisfying if you're able to powerslide every corner
I need to correct you here and say that drifting gives you a temporary boost. Collecting COINS increases your overall top speed.
Speaking of which do coins serve the same purpose in MK7? what purpose do they serve besides being shiny shiny collect me!
Managed to play the demo today (and it ran as smooth as buttery silk) and they seem to increase your top speed and acceleration up to 10. Getting hit with anything makes you drop a few, Lakitu rescues cost you two coins.
chickdigger802
Banned
Ahhh. Makes more sense now. Hard to think in a beanbag earlier in the day
Still, the conclusion imo, fuck review scores.
Actually fuck review threads as well...
EmCeeGramr
Member
Lol gb.
AceBandage
Banned
So, another site that lowers the score of a game simply because it's part of a franchise, despite still rating other franchise games highly.
Never change, gaming "journalism".
Never change, gaming "journalism".
Its classic Giant Bomb. They constantly go on about franchise fatigue with stuff like CoD, but every year still rate them highly. Yet when a new Zelda or Mario come out they become twice as harsh, despite the fact that those franchises have more changes than any of the CoD's in the last few years.
Care to elaborate on that post? The actual review was pretty well written, and despite the score, he seemed comfortable recommending it to people what have friends to play with. Complaints regarding limited single player options and the silliness of some of the new features (turning the 3DS to steer) seem valid as well.
I mean, I'm in love with Ultimate Marvel vs. Capcom 3, but I can see plenty of similar complaints (really weak single player content, modes like "Play as Galactus" being bad) being levied against it.
What are you talking about? "They" (Jeff) gave MW3 a 4/5 rating and "they" (Patrick) gave Skyward Sword a 4/5, so how would that be twice as harsh?
Different reviewers. Also the same reviewer did MW2 and MW3, and he did rate MW3 lower, so not sure what you're getting at there really.
Only thing weird about the MK review is that it reads much more like a 4 than a 3.
What? They gave Mario Galaxy 2 a 5/5, and Zelda "only" a 4/5 but justified that well in the text of the review. At this point people attempting to point out supposed flaws and crying "lol game journalism" are making the problem worse.
AceBandage
Banned
Gametrailers review.
They call it the best MK yet (including the best track selection in the series).
8.8
They call it the best MK yet (including the best track selection in the series).
8.8
That's pretty much spot on. Sterling redeemed.
Its more of a criticism on how they speak of the games on the podcasts and stuff, and not really the scores.. Whenever they've talked about Zelda or MK this year, they constantly drone on about how "Oh that's a Zelda game, I bet it'll play like a Zelda game." For them, these Nintendo franchises get brushed aside because of the fact that they've been part of very long running franchises. It seems crazy to me that they have that view even when said franchises get releases like every 3 years.
Btw I have no problems with GB, in fact i'm a subscriber. Its just a view of theirs that i've been getting annoyed with.