SomedayTheFire
Member
I mean they've already said video consumption isn't there at launch which is a huge part of phones and tablets. so maybe eventually but at launch it certainly is not comparable to a phone or tablet.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Edge #303 - Nintendo Switch
- Thread starter GinoFelino
- Start date
I mean they've already said video consumption isn't there at launch which is a huge part of phones and tablets. so maybe eventually but at launch it certainly is not comparable to a phone or tablet.
GinoFelino
Member
Sure, that's completely personal. The indie roster and basically all announced Nintendo first-party games really appeal to me, so it's an easy sell for me. I don't mind the price either. It's just the accessories that are ridiculously priced but the launch SKU is complete enough for me to not need any of them anyway.
Agent Unknown
Member
Well, no need to purchase this issue.
Referring more to mobile (touch) gaming.
Skittzo0413
Member
Yup, I can't agree more. From a first party perspective this for sure rivals the Wii's first year in output. And when you consider that Mario Odyssey at least is basically finished, that bodes very well for 2018 and beyond.
The main issue is the lack of AAA third party support but did anyone in their right mind think that would come before this has been able to prove itself?
J
JeremyEtcetera
Unconfirmed Member
This post is just a reminder to those unfamiliar with Edge or unfamiliar with how they review:
6 from Edge is not equivalent to a 6 from other reviewers like IGN.
A 6 from Edge is an above average product. It is the correct way to use a 6.
A 6 from other reviewers means the game is almost complete trash. It is the incorrect way to use a 6, as it invalidates scores below that number as just about meaningless.
Those two games being a 6 from Edge means that they are above average and most likely fun, just not completely phenomenal from start to finish. This is why the 5 star system should just be used by all reviewers, since people constantly feel 6's and 7's are bad scores no matter the source.
See here:
6 from Edge is not equivalent to a 6 from other reviewers like IGN.
A 6 from Edge is an above average product. It is the correct way to use a 6.
A 6 from other reviewers means the game is almost complete trash. It is the incorrect way to use a 6, as it invalidates scores below that number as just about meaningless.
Those two games being a 6 from Edge means that they are above average and most likely fun, just not completely phenomenal from start to finish. This is why the 5 star system should just be used by all reviewers, since people constantly feel 6's and 7's are bad scores no matter the source.
See here:
TheGreatMightyPoo
Banned
6 sucks no matter how you slice it.
Nobody wants a 6 game.
(not saying they deserve or don't deserve that score though)
Nobody wants a 6 game.
(not saying they deserve or don't deserve that score though)
J
JeremyEtcetera
Unconfirmed Member
There have been plenty of fun games rated 6.
Examples include Gravity Rush 2 and Godhand. I'm sure the specific people who subscribe to Edge know that 6 isn't garbage.
SomedayTheFire
Member
6 sucks because of the weird American review scale. It should be an above average score.
I agree. When even a turd like Star Fox Zero gets a 7 from Edge, claiming that Edge just uses the full scale sounds like a pretty bad excuse. A 6 does not imply they liked the game which you want to be good.
Nydius
Member
I just finished reading the GR2 review part and, as always, people are getting too hung up on the number. Erase the number from the end and I can find little fault with the review itself and agree with a lot of it. I enjoy the series and have put 50+ hours into GR2 so far. GR2 is a fun but ultimately flawed title with lots of small problems that add up over time.
It didn't devalue my enjoyment of it but Edge's review is fair.
Now to backtrack and read the Switch parts.
It didn't devalue my enjoyment of it but Edge's review is fair.
Now to backtrack and read the Switch parts.
forknknife
Banned
No positives at all? Wtf?
You typically refer to the publication and not the author. Similarly, you say Sony created a new game, instead of listing all the individuals involved in the game development process. Should be kinda obvious.
nelsonroyale
Member
I don't think what you say invalidates the claim that the reviewer weighted certain of his own preferences, which resulted in the score he gave. In this instance, it seems that his preferences were out of kilt with the norm. I think we need to do away with the idea that Edge reviews are somehow 'more balanced'...For a start, the people who review for them have changed over the years...There is no 'Edge' review as pswii60 commented above. Personally, I strongly disagree with the review score and question his opinion, but I don't disagree that the he is entitled to it. Just that it is necessarily a fair score in comparison with what other games have received in the publication.
For reference, I think the game has a very distinct and vibrant aesthetic, an original mechanical basis (which can be unwieldly, but ultimately there isn't anything else like it on the market), a well implimented OST, a wacky story, with a colourful cast (fair enough this is particularly subjective), pretty polished given that it is open world and the mechanics involved. On the flipside, it has some questionable design choices (stealth missions in particular) and side missions can be pretty repetitive. I suppose the degree to which you enjoy the game does rest on whether you enjoy the gravity mechanic or not, which is different from the standard mechanics prevalent in most open world games/action adventures. Otherwise, I think there is enough in there to acknowledge the game has some clear merits and should be commended for actually taking creative risks.
People don't care about what's inside or that the price of materials comes to £270 or whatever, they look at value, and £280 is not a good value whichever way you look at it. As a home console it's way more expensive than a normal PS4 and the same price as a Pro when you include 1 game. As a portable it's a ridiculous price, the 3DS failed at £250. The hybrid nature isn't something I think people are going to care much about or factor in to the value they see.
The next gamer you meet on a train playing Zelda, while you are playing with your thumb on your phone, will definitely see value, don't worry about it.
SprachBrooks
Member
Damn, a 6 for Gravity Rush 2.
the androgyne
Member
This post is just a reminder to those unfamiliar with Edge or unfamiliar with how they review:
6 from Edge is not equivalent to a 6 from other reviewers like IGN.
A 6 from Edge is an above average product. It is the correct way to use a 6.
A 6 from other reviewers means the game is almost complete trash. It is the incorrect way to use a 6, as it invalidates scores below that number as just about meaningless.
Those two games being a 6 from Edge means that they are above average and most likely fun, just not completely phenomenal from start to finish. This is why the 5 star system should just be used by all reviewers, since people constantly feel 6's and 7's are bad scores no matter the source.
See here:
"How do you expect to get a good job with exam results like these Remy?"
"Well according to Edge, 60% is above average, mum!"
*Grounded*
SprachBrooks
Member
Lol what?
Ugh. My point is that the reviewer thought it was a 6. Another reviewer at EDGE may have given it a different score. So it's useless to compare the 6 with a 6 from another game by a different reviewer at the magazine. As far as I'm aware, a videogame review in EDGE is not a team effort, unlike the Sony game you refer to.
I'm glad this made you laugh out loud. Are you telling me that the review and scoring process is a team effort for every game at EDGE, and not done by a single reviewer?
Haunted
Member
Doesn't look like they agree with you, an EDGE 6 is by no means a bad score or denotes a "crappy" game. EDGE uses more of the 1-10 scale compared to other outlets (where, you are correct in that thinking, anything <8 is crappy).
Haunted
Member
Clearly, EDGE doesn't score according to your country's school grading system.
60% would get you a 2:1 (just).
GinoFelino
Member
Most people who read Edge actually read the reviews to see if they'd like a game.
A 6 can go both ways.
In fact, the 6 for Poochy & Yoshi convinced me to get the game on 3DS at some point instead of putting me off.
You can debate about a 6's value all day long, but the only real value is in the written words that go with it.
A 6 can go both ways.
In fact, the 6 for Poochy & Yoshi convinced me to get the game on 3DS at some point instead of putting me off.
You can debate about a 6's value all day long, but the only real value is in the written words that go with it.
SomedayTheFire
Member
Your grading system is fucked then. 60 gets you a 2.1 in the UK and Ireland. Edge is UK based.
Joeshabadoo
Member
uh, wat? they mean either of those individually, or combined? if the former, what even is the point of that comparison. New hardware that comes with 2 controllers, each packed with lots of tech
SomedayTheFire
Member
Switch + Zelda is the same cost as a PS4 and it's the same cost as a PSVR. Been explained already.
GinoFelino
Member
Either/or. Just a phrasing thing in his summary.
professor denim
Member
Edge scored GodHand an 8 if i remenber correctly, right?
Nydius
Member
And what "norm" would that be? The reviewer here weighted his own preferences but since they are different than your own they're not the norm? Again, if you strip away the number and go read most of the other professional reviews on metacritic, you'll find a lot of them saying the exact same thing as the Edge reviewer does.
I never said they were more balanced, I just said it was fair criticism if you stripped away the score and read the review solely as text. As for the "there's no Edge review", that's a reach and you know it. Is there a specifically attributed author on the review itself? Nope, no by line in sight. Ergo, it's attributed to the publication as a whole. You have no idea who was the specific reviewer and therefore no way to determine whether or not he or she had specific biases going in.
I'm in perfect agreement with that.
Well not like anything on the market right now. But if you really think about it, is it really that much different than the various super hero genre games like Rocksteady's Batman series? Sure, Batman wasn't flipping gravity around but there was a lot of aerial combat and melee combos. We've had various implementations of similar mechanics for a very long time, whether it's Superman, Spiderman, or generic super hero games.
The review did specifically discuss the OST and how it made the game better:
Both of those are subjective, and while I agree with you on them there's plenty of people who are, even around here, scratching their heads about the story and chalking up the loopholes to "well at least I liked the characters". As for polished, not so sure I agree with you on that. There were copious bugs with the camera, bugs that sometimes broke gameplay, bugs that sometimes broke gravity styles, frame drops when Swarms or large amount of Nevi were present, oh and the whole less-than-a-week-old, four day maintenance that shut down the online functionality.
I really enjoyed the gravity mechanics but that's also a huge part of the problem: The very premise of the game was continually ripped out from under the player, most commonly in side missions but even in several main story missions. The review rightfully points this out and it's something that is brought up regularly on the OT here for the game.
I'm just at a loss as to what "creative risks" were taken, outside of releasing it in a day and age when a lot of mainstream gamers are content to stay with known quantities. Sure, that's a risk, but it's hardly creative. They didn't invent anything here. Flying about and doing aerial combat isn't new. Anime style stories isn't new. Quasi-cel shaded artwork isn't new.
It's a series that I personally enjoy but I don't see it as being some kind of groundbreaking title that's deserving of over the top praise.
I don't understand how even Edge can't see that £280 is a decent price. The PS4 launched at £350 and I think the Xbox One was more than that. Those consoles have had three years for the price of parts to come down, make revisions etc. Yes, the Switch isn't as powerful but it contains alot of advanced technology in a very small package. It's worth the cash imo.
New consoles cost more than ones that are already on the market. This has always been the case. The switch has managed to launch with a price tag that's no where near as high as the other two when they launched and I feel that's as good as we could hope for. I think people generally want Nintendo hardware to be cheap because they want to buy it as a secondary console and not their primary. Unfortunately Nintendo can't just lower the cost of parts because we also want to own a PS4
New consoles cost more than ones that are already on the market. This has always been the case. The switch has managed to launch with a price tag that's no where near as high as the other two when they launched and I feel that's as good as we could hope for. I think people generally want Nintendo hardware to be cheap because they want to buy it as a secondary console and not their primary. Unfortunately Nintendo can't just lower the cost of parts because we also want to own a PS4
A 6 is not a great score by anyone's metric. A 6 by Edge to me indicates a passing grade, whereas everything below that doesn't clear the bar. An IGN 6 may be considered worse, but regardless of the publication, a 6 will never be awarded to a game that the reviewer thought to be more than just adequate. It's just one guy's opinion, so I wouldn't mind it too much.
It was a 7, according to Metacritic and Wikipedia. Which is a fair score, although my enjoyment of the game would lift it to an 8 despite its flaws.
Back in the day I was salty as fuck when Zelda got an 8.8 from Gamespot. Don't make the same mistake I did by getting overly upset about review scores.
It was a 7, according to Metacritic and Wikipedia. Which is a fair score, although my enjoyment of the game would lift it to an 8 despite its flaws.
GinoFelino
Member
Please refrain from posting scans of the article, even smaller fragments to make a point.
Besides being against GAF rules, it defeats the purpose of buying the magazine which is what people ITT should be doing
Could you edit it out please?
7 according to this spreadsheet : https://fusiontables.google.com/DataSource?docid=1D1odIVhdCE8zlBp5Ha1bNsLNAU83UF1WBiYYl5A#rows:id=1
There are plenty of games in the 6/7 range here which I've had plenty of fun with, but these are only numbers, the review text really needs to be taken into account as well.
GinoFelino
Member
I've come to accept that this argument is lost on whoever doesn't feel that way already...
Me too but in retrospect I think the game deserved less.
I used to think like this but now I don't really care. Give me a 6 3D platformer over a 9 fps any day. I understand that 6 means the games has flaws or didn't try much to shine but If it's of a genre I like it will be worth it.
Btw I consider Yoshi WW in Wii U a 7.
True - the text is what's most important. If a game scores in the 6-7 range however, I will personally not pay full price for it, knowing that it's a flawed product. I picked up God Hand somewhere down the line and was glad that I did.
Friday night fight night! I loved it. Regardless, an 8.8 is still a great score.
People, unfortunately including the media, see only raw power as being valid for cost and so with it costing this and "being weak", it's not worth it.
Her summary.
I quickly typed that up when I should have been working but I don't see anything grossly wrong with my wording anyway. I didn't phrase it as "Switch + Zelda is around same price as PS4 Pro and PSVR bundled together" or use plus instead of and it should be self evident what was meant anyway for god's sake.
Not having a go at you Gino, just some of the responses that latched onto that one sentence and tried to make out there was some grand deception going on were genuinely insufferable.
GinoFelino
Member
This is why games aren't widely considered as art.
Pardon me! I do usually check even though 80% of GAF is male. And yeah, I was already saying to one of them that it was a summary typed out in kindness. Thanks again for that. Madam.
You can play Zelda without your thumbs?
Anyway doubt he ever sees someone out playing Zelda. I've yet to travel to this place where tons of people are playing 3DS in the street or at work outside of Japan. Remember seeing DS everywhere even quite a few PsPs but times have changed.
Well, that and a sparse year 1 software lineup that ticks few genre boxes, lack of basic smart device and/or console functionality, too many details TBA considering it's out in a month, confusing messaging regarding the future of their handheld strategy and an accessory pricing strategy that makes Vita memory cards look high value.
But yeah, just a bunch of uncultured morons moaning about power. That's all it is. And that crooked media, keep undermining Nintendo's perfect strategy with their negativity.
This. I dunno about in America, but just because five is in the middle, doesn't mean it's an average score.
That's a D in the UK grading system at school, so why confuse it with scores?
No-one wants a game that is a 6, regardless of your grading scale. You want a game that is an 8 or above, 7 if you're a fan of that particular franchise and are willing to take one of its weaker entries.
The way this scoring system works is that 0-4 is an almost impossible score to give a game, 0-1 is basically a broken game, like Big Rigs, 3-5 is a game which is playable, but only if you got it for free. 5-10 is for games where you paid money and expect a game of some sort. Just like with exam scores, where 0-50% is "you need to do this subject again, because you basically didn't study it£" and 50-100 is the "how good are you at this subject" score range.
And Edge score of 6 doesn't mean they're using the "right scale", that some people are talking about. They're just quite notorious for having quite critical reviews. That was their reputation back in the day anyway? They don't give out that many 10s.
People think that power is the only thing that defines the price of a console, regardless of how much ridiculous tech the console itself actually has. The fact that you can carry the switch around is a technical marvel, and the joycon tech is incredible. My only problem with the Switch price is that for that price you only really have one game to go along with it. If I'm paying a decent amount of money I expect a decent variety of games to choose from. I got it for Zelda, hopefully that, Nier, and Persona lasts me long enough before Splatoon comes out.
I take the train often and used to take the bus every day and since the 3DS' release I've seen exactly one person playing a 3DS. I've seen one person playing a Vita since release too. I doubt I'll run into any of these unicorns. And that is going in/out of London.