it's a 2 sorry
-
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.
Yooka-Laylee- Review Thread
- Thread starter FireSol
- Start date
it's a 2 sorry
That's not what objectivity means in this context, like it's not objective facts or anything like that. It's simply using common sense.
I'm not against the notion of scoring a game like this 2/10, I would give the same if not lower score to GTA V purely based on fun factor, but that review isn't meaningful to potential buyers. When I make game recommendations to people I try to assess a game based on how I think fans of the series will perceive it. Reviews are exactly that, recommendations. People click on them hoping to answer the question "is this game for me?" not to see what some other guy thought of it.
Gravy Boat
Member
I think that's a bad way of doing reviews though. If you're trying to guess how fans of the series (of a new IP?) will perceive it then you're already going in with a bias. Just play it and tell people what you liked and what you didn't like.
Like if I want info on a game, I go to reveiwers who I know from past experience have tastes that are similar to mine. I do care what other people think of it, if they have a history of liking the same things as me. That's why I don't get why people get so annoyed when someone gives something they like a bad review. It just means they have different tastes from you. Don't go to them for recommendations.
I'm not sure why you're telling me this. I was simply answering his question.
And Skyward Sword isn't a 10/10 like many said it was, and belongs in the bargain bin with Battleborn and Big Rigs: Over the Road Racing. And I say that as a massive Zelda fan. 2/10
But hey, opinions.
Kinda does and doesn't. Society's views on what is good and bad in taste changes periodically, so it's hard for something to be objective in art when in 10 years from now, general opinions change and pieces are viewed under a different cultural view.
This is why you read multiple reviews, not just one. You take all their opinions to see if this game is for you.
Agree with this completely. Well put.
^I dunno, I think reviews from big sites should consider more what the target audience will think of it.
But for individual reviewers, I don't think that should be necessary.
Maybe he just absolutely loathes the game. We'll be able to see if our opinions line up with his or the general consensus of it being a good game (7/10) almost soon enough.
Can't wait to play it. Going to be doing this over remote play (from PC with moonlight streaming) for in-bed platforming, same as Snake Pass - hopefully. PS4 controller and phone mount coming tomorrow!
But for individual reviewers, I don't think that should be necessary.
Maybe he just absolutely loathes the game. We'll be able to see if our opinions line up with his or the general consensus of it being a good game (7/10) almost soon enough.
Can't wait to play it. Going to be doing this over remote play (from PC with moonlight streaming) for in-bed platforming, same as Snake Pass - hopefully. PS4 controller and phone mount coming tomorrow!
I am aware that you didn't take a stance on the matter, your post is only a clarification. I'm not responding to you specifically, but to the general argument that was in your post.
The only thing art about Skyward Sword is this:
If it was only this, I would give it a 9/10.
Which I say that's impossible. Which target audience? The target audience of the game? Because while major reviewers praised Skyward Sword to high heavens, fans of the series are polarized by it, more so than Wind Waker and Twilight Princess before it. Their audience? The one that they built by their opinions of the games? What if that audience doesn't exist yet, what if it's a new game no one ever played before? Who's should we consider who to think about then?
SomedayTheFire
Member
But 👏 it 👏 is 👏 to 👏 Jim 👏 Sterling 👏 and 👏 probably 👏 others 👏
What's the point of reviews then? If this was the case there would be only one review and one score.
It would have made more sense to quote his post, then, since that's what you're actually responding to.
Sure but I needed your clarification, I read that post and it just didn't register, so for me it makes sense to reply your post since that was what actually sparked my comment.
Gravy Boat
Member
What is there to imagine? What difference would it have made to your enjoyment of the game if someone did? If the answer is 'none', then why would you have cared?
SomedayTheFire
Member
good for them? what's the problem with that?
Spehornoob
Member
I don't know if "objectivity" is the word, but I do think a review should just be more than "Did I like it or not?"
Of course, that should be part of it, but I think analysis should be a part of it too. What were the developers attempting to accomplish? To what extent did they accomplish it? I may not enjoy this for X reasons, but is it possible that a fan of this style of game could enjoy it, or is it just so poorly done that I don't think anyone could?
There's no such thing as an objective review. But I also think a reviewer should be able to think outside their own personal likes and dislikes to analyze the subject a bit. I don't think that's asking so much.
(Note that I'm not referring to Sterling's review here, even though I know that's part of what set this conversation off. I haven't read Sterling's review yet, so I can't speak on it.)
Of course, that should be part of it, but I think analysis should be a part of it too. What were the developers attempting to accomplish? To what extent did they accomplish it? I may not enjoy this for X reasons, but is it possible that a fan of this style of game could enjoy it, or is it just so poorly done that I don't think anyone could?
There's no such thing as an objective review. But I also think a reviewer should be able to think outside their own personal likes and dislikes to analyze the subject a bit. I don't think that's asking so much.
(Note that I'm not referring to Sterling's review here, even though I know that's part of what set this conversation off. I haven't read Sterling's review yet, so I can't speak on it.)
Ah, right. When in this situation, I'd recommended deeper contextualisation in the quote, like so:
It's a little fiddly, granted, but it does clarify the intent. That being said, I can certainly understand not wanting to jumble quote tags around when using a mobile phone, haha.
What does this even mean? In no way, shape or form is Yooka-Laylee's situation comparable to Resident Evil 2. For one, RE2 was an amazing game.
And? You mean like my brother? Because he hated RE2, just like he hated RE1, while I thought it was the best game ever when it came out. He said he can't believe that people thought this was a 5 star game, he even said it was worse than the first one.
He likes to have full 3D control of his character like in Mario 64 and Zelda, never saw the appeal of tank controlled, pre rendered games.
Fuck, he actually hates Super Mario Galaxy over Mario 64 and Sunshine because running around on a sphere and other 3D shapes, plus the gravity things, disorientates him. He rather play Mario Land over it.
Maintenance
Member
JayWood2010
Member
Reviews should be grounded and objective. I dont like God of War, but i recognize it is a good game so I wouldnt give it a 1/5 stars.
I use to review games for fun, and I reviewed games on occasion i didnt like. I however recognized that it wasnt my taste, rather than it being a bad game.
When you are doing reviews you need to realize that you are influencing others with what you say. That is why it is important to be objective. You can find a balance for being objective and opinionated.
Ill say this again though. For those who follow metacritic, or opencritic, dont focus on it so much. Focus on reviewers you trust rather than a whole score.
I use to review games for fun, and I reviewed games on occasion i didnt like. I however recognized that it wasnt my taste, rather than it being a bad game.
When you are doing reviews you need to realize that you are influencing others with what you say. That is why it is important to be objective. You can find a balance for being objective and opinionated.
Ill say this again though. For those who follow metacritic, or opencritic, dont focus on it so much. Focus on reviewers you trust rather than a whole score.
Gravy Boat
Member
Junior indeed.
SomedayTheFire
Member
I mean that's incorrect, others have played it and not reviewed it. but you know what I mean either way.
smh ridiculous.
again, what good comes of that? literally every review would be the same and the scores would be homogenised. a press release is objective, should all reviews just simply be press releases stating the facts about the game?
Because some people dont have the time or motivation to search out what reviewer has similar tastes as yours. Especially a new gamer who never reads reviews normally.
So when such a person sees a 2... he must think that the game is broken and doesnt work.
Only here, son.
That's the reader's fault, not the reviewers'. Either take the time to read multiple reviews or just look up the general consensus on Metacritic, which also allows you to see individual scores and links to multiple reviews.
SomedayTheFire
Member
that's 100% on the reader and not something the writer should have to contend with. if they can't work out the scale while reading the review, it's worthless to them.
JayWood2010
Member
Read what i said clearly
"it is important to be objective. You can find a balance for being objective and opinionated."
Gravy Boat
Member
If a person sees a 2 they should read the actual review and not base their judgments off a number.
You have a very juvenille point of view on opinions and how they work, so I doubt it's just here.
Fallout 3 was one of the most medicore to bad games of all time ever made. Anyone who loves it is damn wrong and shouldn't be getting paid to review videogames.
This is your logic, and it's dumb.
March of the Crabs
Member
I do have to agree that scores are meaningless. I think the fact that a game can score a 2 from one outlet and a 9/10 from another outlet easily proves that.
There is no universally agreed-upon scale, so the number has no merit except in comparison to that reviewer's previous reviews.
Also, when sites start giving games like 6.7 or something, that is just weird and obnoxious. Why not 6.5? Why not 7?
There is no universally agreed-upon scale, so the number has no merit except in comparison to that reviewer's previous reviews.
Also, when sites start giving games like 6.7 or something, that is just weird and obnoxious. Why not 6.5? Why not 7?
Juvenile.
But let's not get personal. I understand opinions just fine, but they are not equal when professional criticism is concerned. That is my point, I think I've laboured it enough.
I never liked in-between scores honestly. What the hell is the difference between an 7.5 and 8, like what constitutes it to be an in-between of 7 and 8?
Gravy Boat
Member
Oh no I made a spelling mistake on the internet which nullified the point of my post.
You don't understand opinions though. You literally said that anyone who disliked Resi 2 was wrong. That's a fundamental misunderstanding of what an opinion is.
SomedayTheFire
Member
Yeah, but what good comes of it? like if you absolutely hate a game, would you pull punches when it comes to objectivity? essentially not giving a true and fair review?
What even is objectivity when it comes to reviews? Is it the standard of programming? the level design? the performance, or issues thereof?
"professional criticism" is still subjective thoughts, mate.
Define professional criticism, because your definition and my definition of what that entails are clearly two different things, so it's subjective... like reviews.
March of the Crabs
Member
Good point. More proof that scoring should be done away with altogether. I don't read many reviews but there are some extremely well-written reviews out there, but it's the extreme scoring that will get attention and clicks (such as Jim's 2 or a website giving Yooka Laylee 100% - I'm sure it's not a broken game and I'm very sure it's not perfect).
Solid SOAP
Member
Haven't played, but no fucking way am I willing to believe this game is a 2/10 by my standards. Shadow the Hedgehog is a 2/10, this ain't matching that. Maybe I'll be eating my foot, but whenever I get this I highly doubt it's gonna be THAT bad
TheVoidDragon
Member
The complaints about the 2/10 score Jim game it don't make that much sense to me. It seems people are just saying it doesn't deserve a 2/10 based on the usual 5 - 10 scale other sites use and not actually looking at what Jim says about the game and how he scores games.
He says he got pretty much no enjoyment out of it at all due to the poor camera, repetitive gameplay, bad jokes etc and he can't really see how anyone other than people who really, really like the genre and all the negative aspects of the original games could like it; it doesn't do anything to improve on previous games and keeps the negative aspects of them. To him that is a bad game, not average or just below average (which would be a 6 - 7 on the usual scale), he found it almost unplayable and based on his score system that is a 2/10.
He explains why he gave it a 2/10 and what he said in the review lines up with his criteria for a 2/10 game. It doesn't seem like it's a case of him playing a game in a genre he never liked either, he mentions quite a few other similar games and then says that this decided to basically ignore the improvements those made to the genre. On the usual scale i don't think it would be a 2/10 but on the scale Jim uses it lines up with what he said in his review.
He says he got pretty much no enjoyment out of it at all due to the poor camera, repetitive gameplay, bad jokes etc and he can't really see how anyone other than people who really, really like the genre and all the negative aspects of the original games could like it; it doesn't do anything to improve on previous games and keeps the negative aspects of them. To him that is a bad game, not average or just below average (which would be a 6 - 7 on the usual scale), he found it almost unplayable and based on his score system that is a 2/10.
He explains why he gave it a 2/10 and what he said in the review lines up with his criteria for a 2/10 game. It doesn't seem like it's a case of him playing a game in a genre he never liked either, he mentions quite a few other similar games and then says that this decided to basically ignore the improvements those made to the genre. On the usual scale i don't think it would be a 2/10 but on the scale Jim uses it lines up with what he said in his review.
ClosingADoor
Member
Reviews are an opinion. By definition, an opinion is always subjective. The objective review does not exist and neither should it.
SomedayTheFire
Member
This is kind of a problem too, a lot of people think they're being objective, or think their opinions are objective and true.
it's most people's logic apparently
MosquitoSmasher
Member
A friend of mine said he saw Switch footage and the people in the video claimed the game runs absolutely fine on it. I told him as far as I know there is not a single video or screenshot of the Switch version. Any truth to this? It would surprise me since the X1 version isn't exactly fantastic performance wise according to several sources.
March of the Crabs
Member
The only thing I've seen is the Switch trailer which was most likely PC footage.
I don't think so, because people act like a 6/10 is a 1/5 - its trash and not worth their time.
Reviews, by pure definition, are subjective opinions. They are based on objective facts combined with personal experience and tastes.
Are tacos amazing? To some this new taco joint could be a 10/10. To others who prefer it differently and like different spices? It's a 6/10.
Reviews are, by nature, opinions. Not checklists of facts. You get those on the back of the box.
Are tacos amazing? To some this new taco joint could be a 10/10. To others who prefer it differently and like different spices? It's a 6/10.
Reviews are, by nature, opinions. Not checklists of facts. You get those on the back of the box.