By using the imprints on a bull's feces as a calculator, I suppose.
-
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.
IGN Splatoon Re-Review is up
- Thread starter jmizzal
- Start date
By using the imprints on a bull's feces as a calculator, I suppose.
I'll never understand this nonsensical view.
Reviews exist to give people guidance when looking to purchase things, meaning if they aren't up to date they are irrelevant and somewhat useless beyond well written ones continuing to be interesting reads.
victreeb3l
Member
Was a 9 to me at launch and Ive grown to love the game even more. Possibly GOTY.
One of the most fun, unique and freshest (yes pun intended) games Ive ever played.
One of the most fun, unique and freshest (yes pun intended) games Ive ever played.
How do you mathematically calculate any review score? It's all totally arbitrary.
mhayes86
Member
I can't access the link from work. Who did the re-review? I could have sworn I remember Jose Otero answering a question during Nintendo Voice Chat before Splatoon's release about re-reviewing the game due to the trickled content. I think he answered along the lines of reviewing a game as it is and that he doesn't see why they should do a re-review.
Might have been my imagination.
Might have been my imagination.
VendettaRed07
Member
I agree with rereviewing the game in this case simply because all the added content was free. Splatoon has so much more content right now and players were not nickeled and dimed for it. That earns them a rereview for adding to what the original price of entry offers
robertlebrone
Member
I don't understand re-reviews. I barely give a shit what professional reviewers say on day one. A year later? It's just pointless. Who looks at reviews of a game a year out? Not saying that as an elitist thing, but what I mean is 1 year after a game is out aren't you mostly operating under user impressions? The people still playing/streaming/talking about the game, that know 10 times more about it than some random individual that was told he had to re-review it for his job?
Reviews have a shelf life in my opinion.
Reviews have a shelf life in my opinion.
HawthorneKitty
Sgt. 2nd Class in the Creep Battalion, Waifu Wars
I'm pretty sure he said along the lines of doing re-reviews if updates during the life of the game fix issues that were brought up in the original review when substantial enough.
Dr. Black Jack
Member
This is why magazine-style "definitive reviews" are dumb and outdated. Don't "re-review" something, just do a write up on how much different the game is now/your impressions of the new content and leave it at that. If the product is constantly changing then the format of its evaluation shouldn't be static and "definitive", especially on the day/week the damn game comes out.
CamHostage
Member
Anything below an 8 is just picking nits as far as points of scores, but in the higher rankings, a little more granularity and thought put into the decimal score is appreciated IMO. There's a pretty big space between a 9.5 and a 10 and miles between an 8 and a 9, effort should be put into determining where a game fits on that scale (if that's your review scale.) It's still a number pulled out of somebody's ass that could be argued about until the end of time, but it means something to the reviewer and thus it means something to the content they post.
Monocle
Member
Everybody needs to re-review The Wonderful 101.
Windom Earle
Member
The game itself is amazing, it's the stupid map rotation and forced game modes in ranked that ruin it for me. Not sure if IGN is touching on this.
I still like the rotations. They keep things fresh (hahahahoohee).
Except when it puts Port Mackerel on Splat Zones AGAIN
BrokenFiction
Member
Reviews should evolve into something like:
1st one) Initial impression post-launch
2nd one) After some time has been spent with the game/after completion
3rd one) If post-launch content is available and significant, then new impressions later
1st one) Initial impression post-launch
2nd one) After some time has been spent with the game/after completion
3rd one) If post-launch content is available and significant, then new impressions later
They need to implement some sort of a system in the sequel that balances each team depending on what weapons are present. I mean putting both snipers as well as the other long ranged rifles in the same team on arowana mall against a team of low-mid ranged weapons is ridiculous. When you're playing on the highest level in ranked it's almost impossible for the other team to win, loosing for this reason feels unfair.
I get they're going for total unpredictability, that by having completely random weapon loadouts no game plays out the same way. However it feels unfair when something like the above example occurs.
Most well balanced and fun map/mode combination in the game.
I get they're going for total unpredictability, that by having completely random weapon loadouts no game plays out the same way. However it feels unfair when something like the above example occurs.
I still like the rotations. They keep things fresh (hahahahoohee).
Except when it puts Port Mackerel on Splat Zones AGAIN
Most well balanced and fun map/mode combination in the game.
lensoftruth
Member
Not from IGN, there scale starts at 7 and ends at GTA.
But it's not how the game is anymore. Almost all complaints are not valid anymore, thus the reviews are outdated.
paradise_circus
Member
Will re-reviews now be more common?
It has ass controls? I thought it was game pad only.
Icyflamez96
Member
What is wrong with it? This is a very consumer friendly thing thing to do.
So if someone now went to read the original review, would that review be accurate?
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
So where is the Driveclub one, and MCC (this should have been re-reviewed every month after the initial), etc etc?
HawthorneKitty
Sgt. 2nd Class in the Creep Battalion, Waifu Wars
Go badger the IGN staff that did their reviews if you care that much.
CrAzY FiNgErS
Member
I guess it's better than leaving the score as it was. I think online centric games should never have a number score. I am kind of sick of number score anyway.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Or how about having a policy that is not "pick and choose" if you are going to do shit like this.
I am sure they are reading this.
I only learned this recently but that's against Metacritic policy. They only accept the first published score and never update.
HawthorneKitty
Sgt. 2nd Class in the Creep Battalion, Waifu Wars
You ask for more re-reviews and then call them shit mmmkay.
Nice. I'd love to play this game and I would have bought it day one, but Nintendo's stupid idiotic decision to choose what mode we should play and dripfeed two maps at a time for us to play in a session ruined it for me. I can't believe they haven't changed that. It truly make me angry because the game looks fun.
That's not how you ask for stuff
Because it's stupid to have reviews that are only accurate for the first few months the game is out? If reviews are supposed to help purchase decisions then how does it make to keep reviews that are factually incorrect and doesn't actually provide you relevant information. And that's w\o going into the journalistic aspect of having a review that reflects the current situation.
The very least reviews' texts have to be updated to inform you how the game changed and if the writer believes these changes justify lowering or increasing the score then go for it.
And the combination that has taken the most years off my lifespan.
Windom Earle
Member
I still like the rotations. They keep things fresh (hahahahoohee).
Except when it puts Port Mackerel on Splat Zones AGAIN
Yeah, I can live with the map rotation. I just really like Splat Zones in ranked, the rest not so much.
Still, the new equipment is pretty hype, so I am casually back into the game.
Jawbreaker
Member
Re-reviews are great because they serve to inform readers who then take that information into account when deciding whether they want to purchase the game. Of course, it should be clearly noted in the review that it has been updated with an explanation/additional content. Simply changing the numerical value is the wrong way to go about it (not saying this is what IGN did since I haven't read the review or compared it to the original), so I would expect clarification.
lastrealgameralive
Member
Meh. They could just write that they are reviewing Splatoon v. 2.1.0 or whatever it's at now. I certainly wouldn't mind a competent reviewer to score each version; that would not include IGN with their asinine .6's and .9 scores.
pizzapizza64
Member
Reviews shouldn't be about how much content is offered. Think of how incredible Rocket League, Telltale's Walking Dead, and Gone Home are despite being fairly short experiences. Splatoon is in that category too. It's about how fun, engaging, and enjoyable the experience is...not having 8 maps vs 16 maps.
Monocle
Member
I award this post a 7.48. And don't you dare round that up to a 7.5.
Splat Zones for life! Splat Zones > Rainmaker >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tower Control
as far as the ranked modes go
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
You misunderstood, I do not mind them at all... I meant picking and choosing is a shitty practice. If games improve, then they all should be looked at.
What difference does it make. You can round the number if you can't handle more details, and everyone else can still have the 100 point scale.
Why?
PapaEmeritus
Member
so a .6 increase deserved it's own thread? WHy even bother doing that on IGN's management side- makes no sense.
Very clear explanation lol.
For some people, variety of modes to play, or maps to play on determines how fun that is. You got others that don't care to play on any other maps except nuketown in BlackOps, DM-Deck 16 or facing worlds in UT or DE_Dust in counterstrike. Different stuff floats different peoples boats and that goes for reviewers too.
The Last Wizard
Member
Same here, I didn't like that and the 2 map rotation. Killed the game for me pretty fast, good game but some boneheaded Nintendo decisions hurt it.
I keep saying I'm gonna go back but I can't muster the will to:/
It's surely coming.
It sets a precedent that is impossible to live up to and inconsistent across the board. How is it possibly fair if they aren't re-reviewing every game. When the Splatoon servers going down in a few should they re-review it to zero?