Support NeoGAF

[Amir0x]

DAILY RADAR!! thank you, that's what I was trying to remember.

funny that you say universally almost everyone hated it.. everyone I knew (IRL that is) loved it. not only was it simple, but their reviews were RARELY schizophrenic because of the weighted 20/100 point scales we have now. "the controls are weird, the graphics have problems, it ends too short, 7.9" so if you saw something was a hit that you previously weren't interested in, it got you to read the review to see why they liked it. if you saw something was a miss that you were interested in, you read the review to see why they didn't like it. not like now where a 7.9 could be good or bad depending on the context of the review.

I would love to see a 4 star review system.. and for those pointing out thumbs up/down, that is essentially a three star system because it is two reviewers. ebert in his Sun Times(?) column uses 4 stars. but ebert and roper essentially gives you 1 (two down), 2 (one up one down), and 3 (two up).

Heh, I used to post at Daily Radar back in the day. I remember I took so much hate for predicting the demise of Dreamcast there (down to the month and year), and then it happened

 

[Y2Kev]

Bullshit. Whether a game controls well or not is so far from "cut and dry," especially on the PSP and DS, thanks to the relatively archaic controller hardware on each.

Case in Point: Metroid Prime Hunters. I've seen arguments that the game controls quite well once you get used to it. However, I played the shit out of it for a review and could NOT get a handle on the controls at all. So how is that cut and dry? Does that mean that I should tell you, my reader, that the control is good because I've seem some people claim it to be so, even though I think it's fucking horrendous?

I can completely see how Splinter Cell on PSP would suffer the same issues, thanks to the single analog stick. I haven't played the game, but I know that in almost any 3D action title on that system, camera control is a problem. So Shoe -- a huge fan of the series -- simply can't come to grips with that sort of thing, while the other reviewers were either willing to accept it or really weren't bothered by it. Doesn't make any of them wrong.

I love how people bitch about review scores and act like there's some scientific method or empirical way to measure exactly what a game deserves. Get over yourselves.

Oh give me a break. How are those at all comparable? Someone being unable to get a hang of the controls on a new, innovative control scheme and saying, "It has a steep, steep learning curve," is not at all analogous to someone taking a pretty conventional method on the PSP and saying it is uncontrollable.

Then, uncontrovertibly, the reviewer states that Splinter Cell does not belong on handhelds at all and is an utter disaster, while the other reviewers didn't even FEEL this concern?

I'm accounting for varying opinions here, but 5.5 (literally 50% of the scale) on the grounds that the game is completely broken? Of course I see where you are coming from (so there is no need to be so testy), but I just find it a little strange.

 

[LukeSmith]

If 1up is anything to go by the people at EGM are cynical fucks who sit around and pick apart great games for no apparent reason. They dont seem capable of enjoying anything.

How this bit of irony was lost is beyond me.

 

[TheDuce22]

Ya its their job to review games but this whole trend where they sit there and talk about nothing but the flaws is getting old. Going back to the whole Ebert and Whoever thing, ive never seen them talk about all the reasons a movie sucked then give it a thumbs up. Some of these game reviewers seem to have lost touch.

 

[Zerodoppler]

- Pilot Wings Revolution in Development

How did I miss this? Best news EVER!!!

 

[SuperPac]

Game you like gets scored too low = EGM r jaded fuks!
Game you hate gets scored higher than you think it should = EGM moneyhats!

Makes me laugh every time I see it. (Which is every month.) Stay saucy, Internet.

 

[Beowvlf]

That is horrible logic. That would mean every time a new genre is released on a platform it would get a 10. When Goldeneye: Rogue Agent was released on the NDS the closest competition was the Metroid Prime Hunters demo. Should G:RA receieved all 10s because there wasn't a better FPS on a handheld?

What you are describing is horrible logic; on that I agree. But what you are describing isn't what I said. I said 'as a barometer of expectation', not as a direct comparison of quality/feature set/ingenuity/etc. Games above the average mark usually don't have as many faults as they do have aspects that 'could've been done better'. I think there is a clear difference between the two.

Thus, what I'm saying is for all the aspects of Daxter, Syphon Filter and Metroid that the reviewers think 'could've been done better' (as it's pretty obvious from every other review on those titles that none contain any out-and-out flaws), how much 'better' should one really expect? Well, to remain fair, reasonable and somewhat objective, you should base your expectation on what currently exists. That expectation shouldn't be the ceiling of course, because simply meeting expectations shouldn't necessarily warrant a perfect score.

And of course I'm not suggesting this to be a black or white philosophy, but I think you catch my drift.

this is not a very good idea. As has been pointed out, launch games would always be rated high because nothing else was available. Future games would have to be rated against the higly rated launch games. You could make a case that as long as there isn't another game available that it should be rated against a last gen game instead, but then you are really setting the standard against last gen anyway.

But using the philosophy I described above launch games still shouldn't be inherently rated higher. We've been through enough generation shifts to have a fairly good idea of what to expect, and thus you can set within yourself a reasonable expectation of a new generation. This will of course vary greatly from reviewer to reviewer, as it's wholly subjective, but I still think it should be done. I think many reviewers have done a shit ass job of this for the 360 launch, as I feel that not only will the system itself see much better titles, but so will the generation on a whole. The 360 was unfortunately rushed, and I think looking back many, many scores for those games will seem downright laughable in comparison.

Interestingly enough, EGM was one of the few publications that seemed rather tempered with their reviews. Seems the shoe is on the other foot now...

 

[Odysseus]

Reviews. Heh.

Feel, don't think. Use your instincts.

Reach out with the Force.

 

[stewy]

Oh give me a break. How are those at all comparable? Someone being unable to get a hang of the controls on a new, innovative control scheme and saying, "It has a steep, steep learning curve," is not at all analogous to someone taking a pretty conventional method on the PSP and saying it is uncontrollable.

Then, uncontrovertibly, the reviewer states that Splinter Cell does not belong on handhelds at all and is an utter disaster, while the other reviewers didn't even FEEL this concern?

I'm accounting for varying opinions here, but 5.5 (literally 50% of the scale) on the grounds that the game is completely broken? Of course I see where you are coming from (so there is no need to be so testy), but I just find it a little strange.

See, I can totally see that happening. There are some games that stuff will just happen, both in a mag like EGM and in the real world. Things like Ape Escape or Katamari Damacy. Some people find the dual-stick controls brilliant, some people find it impossible to use. No one's wrong.

Or, say, Tekken. I find that fighting system basically useless. Other people love that series. Is that supposed to somehow convince me that I'm having fun with the game? Is my opinion supposed to convince a Tekken fan that they're not having fun? Again, review scores could go either way because of something like that, but no one would be "wrong."

I tend to side with Shoe in this point. Yes, the conventional control scheme on the PSP is what all these third-person action games use, but I don't think that means we have to accept it simply because we can't get something good instead. Personally I find 90% of those games on PSP to be a major hassle to play.

 

[rod furlong]

What you are describing is horrible logic; on that I agree. But what you are describing isn't what I said. I said 'as a barometer of expectation', not as a direct comparison of quality/feature set/ingenuity/etc. Games above the average mark usually don't have as many faults as they do have aspects that 'could've been done better'. I think there is a clear difference between the two.

Thus, what I'm saying is for all the aspects of Daxter, Syphon Filter and Metroid that the reviewers think 'could've been done better' (as it's pretty obvious from every other review on those titles that none contain any out-and-out flaws), how much 'better' should one really expect? Well, to remain fair, reasonable and somewhat objective, you should base your expectation on what currently exists. That expectation shouldn't be the ceiling of course, because simply meeting expectations shouldn't necessarily warrant a perfect score.

lol, what? If you actually read the EGM reviews, you would see that flaws are noted for all three titles. If you're really saying that because the other reviews you *have* read don't mention any flaws (which I find incredibly hard to believe) that therefore those games are flawless, then triple lol.

 

[SA-X]

What do you people want, them to give every game that comes along a 9? If they did that you idiots would be complaining that they're paid off. I'm not saying egm is a great source for reviews or anything, but its nice to see a place that uses more than just 8.5-9.5 on the scoring scale.

 

[Amir0x]

this is just a dead end discussion that happens every month. you can't satisfy all parties, people have different, inconsistent opinions... etc etc... read the content, agree/disagree and move on i guess

 

[Beowvlf]

lol, what? If you actually read the EGM reviews, you would see that flaws are noted for all three titles. If you're really saying that because the other reviews you *have* read don't mention any flaws (which I find incredibly hard to believe) that therefore those games are flawless, then triple lol.

Did you even read my post? I'm not going to reiterate it all again, so I'll simply say read it again please. It directly addresses your response.

Tip: recognize the difference between 'flaw' and 'aspect that could've been done better'.

 

[citrus lump]

Feel, don't think. Use your instincts.

Reach out with the Force.

Is this some sort of vague Revolution hint? :O

 

[Dr. Kitty Muffins]

I'm sorry but those Suikoden 5 scores are ridiculous. :lol

 

[borghe]

But using the philosophy I described above launch games still shouldn't be inherently rated higher.

but the philosophy you stated above pretty much goes in the face of rating it a bit higher for being the only alternative currently for the generation.

I agree with you in that games should be judged against certain criteria that transcend generation and competition. if I have a hard time controlling a game, it should get a lower score. if no one else has a hard time controlling the game I will be an anamoly (and get lambasted by GAF). if everyone else has a hard time controlling the game, then I will be in the majority (and be lambasted by GAF).

Does a game look visually appealing? I've seen a number of X360 games that frankly don't look that great (Rumble Roses comes to mind). again I'll rate it what I rate it and it will either fall in line with most other reviewers or it won't.

but really, at the end of the day, the ONLY thing, and I mean this expressly, the ONLY thing that people are really bitching about is that stupid 20 or 100 point scale. it's a fucking pissing contest that serves no other purpose than to make a review seem more critical (as in detailed, not trashing the game) than it is. Our review carries more weight because we grade down to the tenth of a point. in most cases if a magazine added or subtracted a point from a controversial review it likely would shut everyone up.

I think a lot (but not all) of the criticism on reviews would go away by switching to a like/loved/disliked/hated scale. because really, to sum up a review what more needs to be said?

 

[Y2Kev]

I tend to side with Shoe in this point. Yes, the conventional control scheme on the PSP is what all these third-person action games use, but I don't think that means we have to accept it simply because we can't get something good instead. Personally I find 90% of those games on PSP to be a major hassle to play.

The Syphon Filter control scheme works fine and I want to know why it isn't being used in practically every third person action game. Especially in the PSP Tomb Raider.

 

[CoolTrick]

Case in Point: Metroid Prime Hunters. I've seen arguments that the game controls quite well once you get used to it. However, I played the shit out of it for a review and could NOT get a handle on the controls at all.

Low IQ?

 

[Beowvlf]

but really, at the end of the day, the ONLY thing, and I mean this expressly, the ONLY thing that people are really bitching about is that stupid 20 or 100 point scale. it's a fucking pissing contest that serves no other purpose than to make a review seem more critical (as in detailed, not trashing the game) than it is. Our review carries more weight because we grade down to the tenth of a point. in most cases if a magazine added or subtracted a point from a controversial review it likely would shut everyone up.

I think a lot (but not all) of the criticism on reviews would go away by switching to a like/loved/disliked/hated scale. because really, to sum up a review what more needs to be said?

Agreed. When I rate games I use four stars, no halves, and I grade two categories seperately (presentation and play) with no overall rating. I like that, because IMO it de-emphasizes the numerical grade, as it isn't so cut and dry and specific. I'd previously used an identical system when I perused a film board a couple years ago, and it worked for that perfectly.

I'd love it if every single publication/website changed their ratings systems' to something like that. It embraces the subjectivity of rating entertainment, and I think it would do wonders for the hardcore community.

 

[LanceStern]

I don't think there's any correct side to go on.

While I do agree that EGM's inconsistencies (7 to a 2) is stupid (Remember they did this with Star Fox Adventures as well, it got a 8.0 and another gave it a 2.5), I've noticed that magazines usually score harder than websites.

I have no idea why, but it's like a pattern. Non-perfect games get 9+ on websites then 7-8s in magazines. But then magazines hand out more 10s and 9.5s than websites.

However, the fact that Daxter, Metroid Prime, Tetris and Syphon Filter didn't appeal to ANY reviewer enough to score over an 8 is suspicious.

I for one will stick to GameInformer, who do some OUTSTANDING previews, have great insightful articles, in-depth (though ridiculous if the game is low-scoring) reviews and a great design. ANd Nintendo Power is good for Nintendo coverage.

 

[MrSardonic]

Too Human will change Dyack's world...into one of unemployment.

Creator (Dyack) says it just might change the world

"We approach game story from a Shakespearean model: he'd write cerebral metaphor for the people in the balconies while also including dirty jokes"

Metaphysical channeling of Nietzsche

:lol

Went to MS because Nintendo wants to make smaller, simpler games and MS understands big buget extravaganzas.

Or maybe Nintendo wanted SK to make smaller, simpler games so that way they actually got more than 1 product out every 5 years...which goes on to sell like ass.

Too Human sounds like a Bladerunner meets Ghost in the Shell meets a little Terminator rip-off mixed in with Dyack's inevitable mis-reading of Nietzsche (probably Human, and All-Too-Human - way to rip-off a title Dyack). Doesn't fill me with confidence, but at least its funny to see this guy talking to the press again...he makes Peter Moore look sensible and understated

 

[Alcibiades]

"It's gonna have no camera controls! It's gonna be better than God Of War! It's gonna make statements about technology! Complex mythology! 25 Hours! Huge bosses! Controls! Nintendo sucks! Jung! Freud! Nietzsche! Shakespeare! Shiggy! Kojima! Norse mythos! The Super Bowl! And then we're going to Washington DC to take back the White House! YEAAAAAAAARGH!"

LMFAO...

as read through this and after I couldn't stop laughing...

hahaha

I could just imagine Dyack doing this... your parody illustrates perfectly what he may have been doing...

:lol

 

[Flynn]

*shrugs.* I've been getting EGM free for years, and I still read it. I no longer base my buying decisions off of it, but I can usually count on them to make a valid point or two that IGN or Gamespot miss. If I just wanted numbers, I could buy a pair of dice.

Now here's somebody talking sense.

Seems like a lot of you don't want hear other people's opinions, just re-affirmations of your own.

 

[Gigglepoo]

Thus, what I'm saying is for all the aspects of Daxter, Syphon Filter and Metroid that the reviewers think 'could've been done better' (as it's pretty obvious from every other review on those titles that none contain any out-and-out flaws), how much 'better' should one really expect?

I still disagree. If the reviewer for Metroid thought the control sucked they should penalize the game. Even if it has better control than other similar titles. Even if it is the best an FPS can control on the NDS. Just like I have no problem with people complaining about the framerate in SotC, even though it has a bigger enviroment than any other PS2 title, it is a valid complaint.

You need to judge a game on how fun it is. If it's a pain in the ass to play it must be punished accordingly.

 

[FortNinety]

anyone who needs to invoke homer, socrates, plato, aristotle, dante, shakespeare, cervantes, mozart, rembrandt, goethe, baudelaire, nietzche, proust, joyce, and lawrence to describe his slash-em-up videogame is an idiot. there's no kind way to put it. bonus points if his last game was completely plagiarized from lovecraft, whose name he curiously neglects to drop.

Best quote of the entire thread.

And for the people who think ragging on EGM's scores is a bit too much... while its true that they're "just some people's opinions", but they reflect the magazine as a whole (its a primary reason why people read them in the first place, isn't it?).

All I can is say is that even though I haven't played Kingdom Hearts 2, I have a funny feeling its not a 10 game. There used to be a time when getting a 10 was a monumental event in the pages of EGM. And now they hand it out like its nothing. It just shows a lack of... perspective, to a certain degree. A 10 game has to last the ages... will KH2 do just that?

 

[EmCeeGramr]

Hold on a minute, didnt shoe give splinter cell ds somewhere between a 4-6? So according to him the psp version is worse?

:lol

 

[Amir0x]

Best quote of the entire thread.

And for the people who think ragging on EGM's scores is a bit too much... while its true that they're "just some people's opinions", but they reflect the magazine as a whole (its a primary reason why people read them in the first place, isn't it?).

No, it reflects the individual opinion of the reviewer. The only thing that is supposed to "reflect the magazine" as a whole is the quality of the writing.

The primary reason people read them is to get just one or a few insights on a particular titles quality. It is an opinion. EGM usually has a few reviewers on a game, so the expectation is not that they all got together and came out with a fair score but that they expressed their unique opinions and let you, the reader, come to his/her own conclusions. It's a "guide" to help you decide where you should spend your money if you're unsure. And as with any guide it's not a end-all-be-all determinate for your decision.

Having multiple viewpoints is a great format because it allows others to bring up valid points than another reviewer might not have thought of. Maybe that specific point is something you like, or don't like. Maybe you'd be able to make a more informed judgment then.

None of it is a fact, none of it is particularly objective, EVERY reviewer has some bias, and if you're just reading it to reaffirm your own position then it's not going to do anything for you.

All I can is say is that even though I haven't played Kingdom Hearts 2, I have a funny feeling its not a 10 game. There used to be a time when getting a 10 was a monumental event in the pages of EGM. And now they hand it out like its nothing. It just shows a lack of... perspective, to a certain degree. A 10 game has to last the ages... will KH2 do just that?

No, getting three 10s is a "monumental" event. Kingdom Hearts II got different scores from three different reviewers, and the consensus was that it was an extremely high quality game. The funny thing is you don't even have to agree with that. How does three independent reviewers thinking it's a great game act as an indictment of the quality of EGM reviews? If one thought it was worthy of 10, and another a 9.5... what's the issue here? Read it, agree or disagree and move on.

The most hilarious thing with your post, and I'm sorry if it sounds like picking on you but just to make an example here...

...you haven't even played Kingdom Hearts II. You admit that. There's a lot of people here doing complaining that also haven't played the games behind the review scores. This is obviously not true in all, or even most cases... but this is part of why it's silly. How do you know KHII won't "last the ages"? You don't. You can make an educated guess reading previews/reviews, playing the first game... but you don't know until you play and beat it.

But let's say you did play and beat it. Your conclusion is "I don't think KHII will last the ages." Now you go and read a review, and they think it's a monumental achievement that will be looked back upon for years to come. Is the reviewer wrong?

Will KHII last the ages? I don't know. I personally doubt it, but that's irrelevant. It's three unique, independent opinions that don't have to jive with my own view. That's the nature of it.

 

[Bloodwake]

The Tetris DS score is absolute bullshit.

I'm sorry, but Tetris on any handheld is fucking awesome. That is one reason I bought a Game Boy in the first place. When I heard (and played) Tetris DS for the first time online with four other people, it was fucking awesome. Nothing has changed about the game at all.

Absolute bullshit.

 

[Amir0x]

Nothing has changed about the game at all.

This is actually false, regardless of your opinion of the title. I think Tetris DS is good too (hey, wait... so does EGM judging by these scores!), but things have definitely changed in the game.

 

[Bloodwake]

This is actually false, regardless of your opinion of the title. I think Tetris DS is good too (hey, wait... so does EGM judging by these scores!), but things have definitely changed in the game.

I get you there too, I forgot to mention the other modes of play in the game, which are also awesome. The basic game, however, didn't change enough for me to notice in the short time I had it. Multiplayer seems to be similar to other forms of Tetris multiplayer I have played throughout the ages, but again, I will give you that one, because it's been a while.

When I first started getting an EGM subscription three years ago, they consistently graded games about where I would grade games. Now they are easily a point or two off either for the better or for the worse.

I will say the Godfather review is exactly where it needs to be. Dunno about Kingdom Hearts II, haven't played it yet. But definitely the portable scores are off.

 

[Amir0x]

I get you there too, I forgot to mention the other modes of play in the game, which are also awesome. The basic game, however, didn't change enough for me to notice in the short time I had it. Multiplayer seems to be similar to other forms of Tetris multiplayer I have played throughout the ages, but again, I will give you that one, because it's been a while.

Tetris DS has the new rules in single player which any new tetris game has to have, which do hurt the game a lot. I love my tetris, though, so I'm anal.

But it IS a good game, which EGM acknowledges. So, heh, don't get your panties in a bunch.

When I first started getting an EGM subscription three years ago, they consistently graded games about where I would grade games. Now they are easily a point or two off either for the better or for the worse.

...I'm not sure where you're going with this. So now that their reviews don't jive with your personal opinion exactly, you like the magazine less? I'm genuinely confused.

 

[Bloodwake]

There have been other things too, but I am not a major fan of EGM right now. They charged me with some automatic renewal once and I was just going to let it run out. However, I ended up having to pay for more magazines. I wasn't a fan of that.

I thought Tetris should have been an 8.5 - 9. Of course, they are getting paid money, and I am typing my opinion free on GAF, so... whatever.

 

[Amir0x]

There have been other things too, but I am not a major fan of EGM right now. They charged me with some automatic renewal once and I was just going to let it run out. However, I ended up having to pay for more magazines. I wasn't a fan of that.

No yeah, that sucks. But to be fair, that issue is entirely seperate from the editorial content of EGM.

 

[Gigglepoo]

The Tetris DS score is absolute bullshit.

I'm sorry, but Tetris on any handheld is fucking awesome. That is one reason I bought a Game Boy in the first place. When I heard (and played) Tetris DS for the first time online with four other people, it was fucking awesome. Nothing has changed about the game at all.

Absolute bullshit.

Wow, you're easily pleased. I bought this and Metroid the second they came out. Needless to say, I only own one of those now. I loved being able to go online and challenge someone in Tetris, but that alone did not justify a $35 purchase for me. I look at Metroid, which is a unique experience, and then see the same old puzzle game with online and a few new, worthless modes. I good game, yes, but not worth $35. I can certainly understand how EGM would give it hte score they did. I figure, if it gets higher than an 8 than fans of that genre would enjoy it. I am a huge puzzle fan and did not feel Tetris DS was worth the price.

You can't just repackage the same game over and over and expect a 10 every time.

 

[GamerZero]

I read on another forum that the upcoming June issue of EGM will have a Nintendo Revolution cover story, is this true?

 

[Gigglepoo]

I read on another forum that the upcoming June issue of EGM will have a Nintendo Revolution cover story, is this true?

You could have read that in this thread as well... I mentioned it earlier.

 

[Amir0x]

Wouldn't surprise me. That's a post E3 issue, right? Revolution will be the talk of the show.

 

[Wario64]

the reviews text can be found on 1up.com


here's hsu's comments on splinter cell:

Sam Fisher, superagent extraordinaire, is accused of a few unpatriotic acts against his outfit. Is he working for the bad guy, or is he being set up in this Tom Clancy world of political intrigue? I would give a crap...if this game weren't so goddamn terrible.

Essentials is near impossible to control. The problem is, Splinter Cell is as 3D a game as they get--you have to be constantly looking up, down, and all around at your surroundings, searching for paths and avoiding enemy peepers. The PSP is 100 percent not the platform for this style of stealth-action. You get a couple of control and camera options, and you will eventually get better at moving and looking, but you will never feel comfortable doing anything in this game. Ever. I'll jump when I meant to look down. I'll crouch when I meant to look right. I'll cry when what I really want to do is snap my PSP in half. Oh, and the game has rough graphics, a few crashes, hiccup pauses when something new is happening onscreen, long load times (load screens have load screens!), and an unfun, throwaway spy-versus-spy multiplayer mode (with only four maps).... Wait, all this just to play a Splinter Cell that offers no gameplay innovations whatsoever?

It's official. Splinter Cell is not meant to be a portable game. I think these other reviewers are too forgiving because Splinter Cell's so great to begin with. But I'm a fan of the series, and I think this one stinks.

 

[Amir0x]

Already posted, Wario. You lose buddy!

 

[levious]

Tetris DS has the new rules in single player which any new tetris game has to have, which do hurt the game a lot. I love my tetris, though, so I'm anal.

What's new besides the floor spin?

 

[Cornfish]

PSP
Daxter (7.5, 7.5, 7.0)
Capcom Classics Collection Remixed (8.5, 8.5, 9.0)
Syphon Filter: Dark Mirror (7.0, 7.0, 6.0)

You have to be kidding me right? :lol

So Daxter is the best platformer on the system and a very good one on any system. Syphon has most everything a handheld gamer could want, good single player game, online play, email, message boards, leaderboards, friends lists, clans, voice chat, unlockables, etc.

By EGM standards (and 1up for that matter), Capcom Classics should be the game to follow. So, if developers made ports of really old arcade games, not let you save them, don't have the option to make the games look like the arcade games with scan lines, don't allow any type of online play and royally screw some of the games controls, then you have made a real winner on the PSP. :lol

EGM and 1up, you guys kick @SS!!

 

[Shawn]

How Daxter and Syphon Filter can get such sh*tty scores is beyond me. Does. Not. Compute.

 

[Y2Kev]

Can we get review texts for the PSP reviews or is that against the rules?

 

[adrockthekid]

the reviews text can be found on 1up.com

.

 

[SuperPac]

While I do agree that EGM's inconsistencies (7 to a 2) is stupid (Remember they did this with Star Fox Adventures as well, it got a 8.0 and another gave it a 2.5), I've noticed that magazines usually score harder than websites.

Since you so kindly brought it up... I was the low-scoring reviewer on Star Fox Adventures and I gave it a 4.5, not a 2.5 as you seem to think. And it's perfectly consistent with my opinion that the game is a middling/below-average suckfest. The other guys thought it was great. I don't see how that's an inconsistency, especially when I backed up my opinion in the review text, and they backed up theirs. What, my opinion had to be the same as the other two guys even though I didn't like the game? Welcome to "the point" of a multi-reviewer system, genius. What, do you complain if Ebert & Roeper split on a movie? How can one give it a thumbs down while the other gives it a thumbs up? Madness!

However, the fact that Daxter, Metroid Prime, Tetris and Syphon Filter didn't appeal to ANY reviewer enough to score over an 8 is suspicious.

It shows nothing except that EGM is harsher on game reviews than other places. And this is not news.

 

[levious]

Since you so kindly brought it up... I was the low-scoring reviewer on Star Fox Adventures and I gave it a 4.5, not a 2.5 as you seem to think. And it's perfectly consistent with my opinion that the game is a middling/below-average suckfest. The other guys thought it was great.

Good for you, SFA was crap.

 

[FortNinety]

No, it reflects the individual opinion of the reviewer. The only thing that is supposed to "reflect the magazine" as a whole is the quality of the writing.

I see your point of view, but at the end of the day, the reviews do leave perhaps the greatest impact of one's impression of a magazine. When people remember Nick Rox's blue shadow vs purple shadow comments about Street Fighter Alpha 2, they think of Gamefan as a whole. When that one person (the name escapes me) at Game Informer admitted to giving Paper Mario a lower score just because it just would have seemed "weird" (or whatever else sentiment or justification was used) with a higher score, it reflects upon the publication as a whole. Afterall, the opinion of the one sole writer is still supported by the editor, publisher, etc.

Having multiple viewpoints is a great format because it allows others to bring up valid points than another reviewer might not have thought of. Maybe that specific point is something you like, or don't like. Maybe you'd be able to make a more informed judgment then.

None of it is a fact, none of it is particularly objective, EVERY reviewer has some bias, and if you're just reading it to reaffirm your own position then it's not going to do anything for you.

... Where exactly did I state that I felt otherwise?

No, getting three 10s is a "monumental" event. Kingdom Hearts II got different scores from three different reviewers, and the consensus was that it was an extremely high quality game. The funny thing is you don't even have to agree with that. How does three independent reviewers thinking it's a great game act as an indictment of the quality of EGM reviews? If one thought it was worthy of 10, and another a 9.5... what's the issue here? Read it, agree or disagree and move on.

And like I said, I remember a time when just getting one 10 was something to take notice. Like when Ed Semrad gave Tempest 2000 a perfect score (when I believe another person gave it a 6)... I went, "holy shit, for Ed to give it such a high number, it must be something truly amazing!" So my point was that giving 10s was a such super big deal back then, so perhaps more thought went into it. Hey, everyone is entitled to their opinion (I'm rather bothered and even annoyed by your inference that I feel the opposite), but I'm just stating my opinion (which happens to be of someone who's been reading the magazine since it first began, so take that for whatever it worth).

Though I believe one possible reason behind the liberal issuing of 10s might be because the review crew has so many people that rotate. So there's less of a "review history" between the reviewer and the reader, but that's another point entirely....