• 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.

Game Informer's Excuse for Paper Mario's Score

Code_Link

Code_Link

Member
Sorry if old.

As I'm sure some of you are aware, Game Informer gave this game a really low score. Here's their excuse, taken from the GI Forums:

GI-Jeremy wrote:

Lisa and I both knew that our Paper Mario scores were going to cause controversy. Yes, we know that many people out there will love it. We also know that it is a well-made game. However, it also WILL NOT appeal to many people - I would safely say that more people will dislike it than like it. Why? Like we said in the review, it's a very kiddie game - it's target audience is clearly young gamers - I would say 10 and under. For that reason, we had to score it low. Remember, we aren't scoring games strictly on our personal opinions, we're also scoring them based on how much we think THE GAMING PUBLIC will like them. We've all played games that we personally disliked and scored them well because we've known that most people will like them, and we've also scored games low that we love, because most people won't enjoy them.

FOr example, I really like the bizarre frog golf game Ribbit King, and I gave it a 7, because it's just not for everyone. Paper Mario 2 also scored low because it's just not for everyone. If you think it's a 10 in your book, it's a ten in your book, and that doesn't change if we disagree. We're here to guide you on what games to pick up, but ultimately your personal opinion is what will make you buy a game or not.

I hope this helps.
Click to expand...

Talk about proffesionalism, eh? My favorite part is the one in bold.
 
M

Memles

Member
Wait a second...he scored RIBBIT KING higher than PM? And they both scored "low" (7 is NOT low) for the same reason?

So if you don't think OTHER people will like a game, you score it low so they won't buy it and be disappointed?

That's some warped shit right there.
 
8

8bit

Knows the Score
ahd%20top%20hat.jpeg
 
R

radioheadrule83

Banned
Hmm. Maybe I'm not understanding their reasoning here - but it seems like total bullshit. So we buy mags and read reviews for the projected reception the game will have, not to discern its actual quality?
 
M

Meier

Member
This is the worst excuse I've ever heard. Seriously. And aimed at 10 year olds? Please, one of the puzzles that was in the demo at E3 was giving plenty of gamers a lot of trouble. It wasnt necessarily hard per se, but it took some extra thinking through. There's absolutely no way this game is made with kids that old as the primary audience.

Nintendo makes games that are enjoyable for younger kids, but a title like this isnt necessarily made with them as the primary player in mind. I guess it shouldnt come as much of a surprise due to GI's 2 for Mario Party 5 (can't wait to see how they score 6), but this is a god damn joke. These people are idiots who have no business reviewing games "professionally." This is fact, not opinion.
 
N

Ninja Scooter

Member
So, in a nutshell, they like the game, but don't want to score it high because it wouldn't be "cool" to do so? WTF? Is this mag run by 12 year olds?
 
R

Ristamar

Member
radioheadrule83 said:
Hmm. Maybe I'm not understanding their reasoning here - but it seems like total bullshit. So we buy mags and read reviews for the projected reception the game will have, not to discern its actual quality?
Click to expand...

Yep, sounds like they're pandering...
 
B

BeOnEdge

Banned
what if the game just really sucks? it would be par for the course this gen for nintendo. the only game that has recieved a decent update so far has been fzero and it wasnt even by nintendo. :lol
 
G

GDJustin

stuck my tongue deep inside Atlus' cookies
IT's not pandering. If I were assigned to review Madden 2005 it'd probably get a 2.5 from me because I won't get much enjoyment out of it at all. That's MY personal opinion, and it's not wrong; it's how I feel. Realistically though, I might judge the game on it's merit even though it's not MY thing, because it's my professional duty.

Same goes for Metroid games. I love them TO DEATH so have to force myself to be more critical than I would otherwise.
 
S

seismologist

Banned
Remember, we aren't scoring games strictly on our personal opinions, we're also scoring them based on how much we think THE GAMING PUBLIC will like them
Click to expand...

That's why I hate how alot of recent reviews are all geared towards mainstream.
I never know if I'm going to like a game until I play it for myself.
 
S

Scalemail Ted

Member
If this is truely the case then why don't they drop the number system completely. Obviously its not an effective means of rating a game. Instead they should describe the play expercience....that way each individual person can decide if that type of game is for them or not. (not by obscuring scores)
 
M

Memles

Member
BeOnEdge said:
what if the game just really sucks? it would be par for the course this gen for nintendo. the only game that has recieved a decent update so far has been fzero and it wasnt even by nintendo. :lol
Click to expand...

Your attempt at a troll would be constituted...if it hasn't been basically praised by anyone who's played the import, and if it pretty well wasn't identical to the first game, which was well received.

While it is important to decide what a football fan might think of a football game while you're scoring it, even if you are not yourself a football fan...if 30 year-old reviewers like a game, but think others like them will find it too kiddy, fuck the haters, and give it the score YOU give it.
 
J

jarrod

Banned
BeOnEdge said:
what if the game just really sucks?
Click to expand...
Well, they admitted it doesn't. :/


BeOnEdge said:
it would be par for the course this gen for nintendo. the only game that has recieved a decent update so far has been fzero and it wasnt even by nintendo. :lol
Click to expand...
How about Smash Bros and (according to some) Metroid? Those were inhouse.
 
S

Sriram

Member
GDJustin said:
IT's not pandering. If I were assigned to review Madden 2005 it'd probably get a 2.5 from me because I won't get much enjoyment out of it at all. That's MY personal opinion, and it's not wrong; it's how I feel. Realistically though, I might judge the game on it's merit even though it's not MY thing, because it's my professional duty.

Same goes for Metroid games. I love them TO DEATH so have to force myself to be more critical than I would otherwise.
Click to expand...

No, this is the opposite. In this case you would be writing the review for people who like the genre in mind, whereas GI wrote the PM review for people who would dislike it. I dont think anyones stupid enough to buy a PM game if they dont like 2D games like it, just like I wouldnt buy an FF game if it scored 10/10 everywhere, because I know I dislike the genre.
 
R

RevenantKioku

PEINS PEINS PEINS PEINS PEINS PEINS PEINS PEINS PEINS PEINS PEINS PEINS oh god i am drowning in them
These are the same folk that gave Enter the Matrix a high score, said in the article it wasn't a really good game but "We're totally loving this Matrix thing right now! And the Matrix is in now, so we'll inflate the score because of money hats!"
 
W

WarPig

Member
Sometimes I think I should try to take other people's tastes into account when I'm reviewing something. The rest of the time, I think "what the fuck was I thinking?"

DFS.
 
The Faceless Master

The Faceless Master

Member
i was thihnking of a way to resond... but seriously, i can't even think of a way to describe how bizarre rating a game based on what they perceive the general population's reaction will be...

what score did they give enter the matrix?
 
O

olimario

Banned
The magazine editors are openly admitting stuff like this and the magazine continues to sell?
What a world we live in, folks. Game Informer should be banned from publishing their magazine.

Paper Mario seems to have a broad enough appeal to reflect the reviewers personal score, I think. Much more so than Ribbit King.
 
S

Soul4ger

Member
Apparently, the other 99% of magazine editors who gave the game a 8.0+ aren't included in the "most people" who wouldn't like the game.
 
R

RevenantKioku

PEINS PEINS PEINS PEINS PEINS PEINS PEINS PEINS PEINS PEINS PEINS PEINS oh god i am drowning in them
Soul4ger said:
Apparently, the other 99% of magazine editors who gave the game a 8.0+ aren't included in the "most people" who wouldn't like the game.
Click to expand...

Uh, yeah. Those other editors are under 10 remember.
 
M

MetatronM

Unconfirmed Member
GDJustin said:
IT's not pandering. If I were assigned to review Madden 2005 it'd probably get a 2.5 from me because I won't get much enjoyment out of it at all. That's MY personal opinion, and it's not wrong; it's how I feel. Realistically though, I might judge the game on it's merit even though it's not MY thing, because it's my professional duty.

Same goes for Metroid games. I love them TO DEATH so have to force myself to be more critical than I would otherwise.
Click to expand...
There is a difference between "being objective" (which is basically what you are getting at) and "tilting the score to reflect whether or not you think the game comes across as being cool" (which is basically what GI is saying).

In fact, those two points are almost exactly opposite.
 
B

bjork

Member
I don't understand why they have to issue anything explaining a score. People take reviews way too seriously.
 
U

Ultra Magnanimous

Member
Nearly all print publications for video and computer gaming are corrupt. Corrupt intellectually, certainly for the standard of prose that passes these days. Corrupt trustwise, how many stories in the past few months have hit the forums about staff writers not playing the game (Headhunter), overinflated scores (nearly every high profile release, Driver and Matrix most notable)?
 
R

Ristamar

Member
MetatronM said:
There is a difference between "being objective" (which is basically what you are getting at) and "tilting the score to reflect whether or not you think the game comes across as being cool" (which is basically what GI is saying).

In fact, those two points are almost exactly opposite.
Click to expand...

Took the words right out of my mouth...
 
R

RevenantKioku

PEINS PEINS PEINS PEINS PEINS PEINS PEINS PEINS PEINS PEINS PEINS PEINS oh god i am drowning in them
Game Informer said:
Despite these (admittedly major) shortcomings, I can’t state strongly enough how much of a blast this game is at this very specific point in time. Later, we can gripe; but now we can run for the hard line like a freakin’ madman, and love every second.**-LISA
Click to expand...

*claps*

Unfortunately, the game that Shiny built around these scenes is plagued with most of the frustrations that are common to third-person action games (aggravating boss battles, boring and pointless driving sequences, poor targeting and camera work, and collision issues galore). While the fighting animations are cool, you’ve pretty much done everything after 20 minutes, and*– unfortunately for this game*– you’ve already seen many of these tricks before in Matrix-inspired titles like Max Payne and Shinobi. - MATT
Click to expand...

Hooray!
 
O

olimario

Banned
bjork said:
I don't understand why they have to issue anything explaining a score. People take reviews way too seriously.
Click to expand...

Thousands of people rely on GI for all of their gaming purchases/news/etc...
GI isn't bending their score to reflect the appeal of the title, their low score is causing people who might be interested in the game to second guess their interest.

It's sick.
 
B

bjork

Member
The Faceless Master said:
yeah, they shouldn't take reviews seriously, they should buy the game with the pretty boxart...
Click to expand...

iawtp

Seriously, though... it's like when this site gave Ninja Gaiden a C-. People came out of the woodwork and joined just to say that the reviewer sucked, the site sucked, etc. Who the hell cares if one person doesn't like a game? If they're a reveiwer and they dislike the game they review, that doesn't make it bad... I've never understood why people get all pissed about these things.

A review score someone disagrees with doesn't make the site/reviewer bad, and it doesn't make the game bad. It just means that you have a better life than you think, when the day's crisis revolves around a review score imo.
 
K

Kifimbo

Member
This is as stupid as giving a "violent" game like Halo a low score because you're against any form of violence.
 
The Faceless Master

The Faceless Master

Member
so i was thinking, how did they score ea vs espn, does this mean that a certain game can get a lower game because the public will like it less as it doesn't carry a particular established franchise name?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

[Automaton West] Rise of the Ronin’s overseas critic reviews booed in Japan
Opinion 2
95
7K
Plague Doctor replied
Avatar: Frontiers Of Pandora’s User Scores Are Higher Than Any Recent ‘Far Cry’ Or ‘Assassin’s Creed’
Opinion Analysis 2
60
4K
mckmas8808 replied
Eiyuden Chronicle: Hundred Heroes switch reviews seem biased against "old style" or turn based games
41
3K
March Climber replied
PC gaming's many launchers, reviewed for 2024: Steam still puts the rest to shame
Analysis Review
49
2K
Doctor Hades replied
  • Poll
Steam Score or Metacritic Score? Why?
2
58
3K
Danjin44 replied
Top Bottom