• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Modern Game Journalism: The Movie: The Trailer (Mega64)

MrHicks said:
IN A PERFECT WORLD....ALL reviews should be scoreless
actually forcing people to READ the damn thing

still don't get why more serious reviewers don't adopt this trend
Click to expand...

The majority want scores.
 
snap0212 said:
Bad argument. Reviews are a huge part of this industry and if you're interested in it, there's just no way to simply ignore them. Aside from that, if someone feels that there's something wrong with "insert X" then the solution shouldn't be "ignore it".
Click to expand...
There are plenty of websites and magazines offering reviews. If you don't like some, just visit the others. You can ignore reviews from publications you don't like/trust. You aren't forced to read them. I don't like reality tv, lots of people do, I just ignore it and don't watch it. Doesn't mean there is anything wrong with all tv.

There isn't anything wrong with reviews, people just have different tastes. If someone gives a game a 9/10 and you think it deserves a 6/10, the review isn't suddenly wrong.
 
MrHicks said:
IN A PERFECT WORLD....ALL reviews should be scoreless
actually forcing people to READ the damn thing

still don't get why more serious reviewers don't adopt this trend
Click to expand...
Even though I prefer written reviews, I can't help but feel the age of video has spoiled me. I usually skip to the bottom of a review to see the last few paragraphs. If I can't instantly understand what they enjoyed and didn't enjoy, I'll read from the beginning.

In all of this, however, I don't pay (much) attention to the numerical score.

It's a shame that aggregate sites are necessary for a lot of lesser-known reviews review getting hits. That's the double-edged sword, in my mind, for the content providers. If they're not getting the traffic (and resulting ad revenue) from aggregate sites, they probably won't survive long enough to keep putting out reviews. Hence, the score. Unless you're doing it out of sheer passion and are fine with footing the bill, it seems Metacritic is a necessary evil.
 
ClosingADoor said:
There are plenty of websites and magazines offering reviews. If you don't like some, just visit the others. You can ignore reviews from publications you don't like/trust. You aren't forced to read them. I don't like reality tv, lots of people do, I just ignore it and don't watch it. Doesn't mean there is anything wrong with all tv.

There isn't anything wrong with reviews, people just have different tastes. If someone gives a game a 9/10 and you think it deserves a 6/10, the review isn't suddenly wrong.
Click to expand...
I completely agree. However, I still think there's a discussion to be had about reviews in general. Not reading one outlet's reviews but reading another one's doesn't "solve" anything.

There's a discussion to be had when reviewers chose to ignore flaws in one game while pointing out the very same flaws other games, for example. And why don't we have a discussion about reviewers who claim that a fancy review event doesn't influence their opinion about the game? They're completely ignoring how the humans work, ignoring the fact that this stuff does influence them. They're completely ignoring that Publishers wouldn't spend a single cent for something that doesn't give them anything in return, they're completely ignoring that people who criticise them might have a point. All they have to say is „It's just my opinion, man... accept it.“. There's valid criticism and ignoring that or accepting everything simply because reviews are one's opinion doesn't change anything.
 
MrHicks said:
IN A PERFECT WORLD....ALL reviews should be scoreless
actually forcing people to READ the damn thing

still don't get why more serious reviewers don't adopt this trend
Click to expand...
Because then they don't get all those hits from people who only care about scores and more hits from people looking at Metacritic.
 
MrHicks said:
IN A PERFECT WORLD....ALL reviews should be scoreless
actually forcing people to READ the damn thing

still don't get why more serious reviewers don't adopt this trend
Click to expand...

gfw magazine - one of the most serious, high quality outlets around - tried this back when it was still around and they got such a hugely negative response to it from their readers that they changed it back after an issue. i don't think the gaming audience is receptive enough to no scores for it to work, outside of on sites like kotaku where reviews are second to news; they want scores as a guide and writers ultimately have to serve their audience.
 
snap0212 said:
I completely agree. However, I still think there's a discussion to be had about reviews in general. Not reading one outlet's reviews but reading another one's doesn't "solve" anything.

There's a discussion to be had when reviewers chose to ignore flaws in one game while pointing out the very same flaws other games, for example. And why don't we have a discussion about reviewers who claim that a fancy review event doesn't influence their opinion about the game? They're completely ignoring how the humans work, ignoring the fact that this stuff does influence them. They're completely ignoring that Publishers wouldn't spend a single cent for something that doesn't give them anything in return, they're completely ignoring that people who criticise them might have a point. All they have to say is „It's just my opinion, man... accept it.“. There's valid criticism and ignoring that or accepting everything simply because reviews are one's opinion doesn't change anything.
Click to expand...
Of course there can be a discussion about it, but I also understand the reviewers (being in that position myself). No matter that you write, there is always a group of people who will complain all the time. Give Modern Warfare 3 a 9? You are a COD fanboy and got millions of dollars from Activision. Give it an 8? Another group will scream about you being a Battlefield fanboy, bought by EA. If you give Skyrim a 9.5 you get people complaining it's too low, because Oblivion got a 9.6 and this one is obviously better. What more can you do then, then just say "it's my opinion, read my review to understand why."

With (p)review events, of course publishers try to influence your opinion. They would be doing a bad job if they didn't actually. It's up to the reviewer to give a fair score and not a 9+ if they are 'friends' with the publisher. If you don't trust a reviewers ability to do that, you can't do anything else then just ignore them. That's just the way the world works and isn't limited to videogames.
 
I think I liked the idea of this trailer better than its execution. I'd like to see them instead mimic an existing trailer from some thriller or drama movie.

However, I did fucking love the scene of the fat guy shaving and commenting how the game has been getting a lot of 9s and 10s. I don't know, it was so perfect in tone and style! Someone make a gif.
 
ClosingADoor said:
Of course there can be a discussion about it, but I also understand the reviewers (being in that position myself). No matter that you write, there is always a group of people who will complain all the time. Give Modern Warfare 3 a 9? You are a COD fanboy and got millions of dollars from Activision. Give it an 8? Another group will scream about you being a Battlefield fanboy, bought by EA. If you give Skyrim a 9.5 you get people complaining it's too low, because Oblivion got a 9.6 and this one is obviously better. What more can you do then, then just say "it's my opinion, read my review to understand why."

With (p)review events, of course publishers try to influence your opinion. They would be doing a bad job if they didn't actually. It's up to the reviewer to give a fair score and not a 9+ if they are 'friends' with the publisher. If you don't trust a reviewers ability to do that, you can't do anything else then just ignore them. That's just the way the world works and isn't limited to videogames.
Click to expand...
I know you'll never be able to satisfy everyone but that's also not what I'm asking for. Is it too much to ask for honesty, for example? Is it too much to ask a reviewer to admit that their opinion was influenced by the things surrounding the review process, for example?

Reviewers go to review events knowing their experience will definitely not be the same as it would be if they'd be reviewing the game at home. Yet they all agree that it's more important to get the early review, to be part of the Publisher's plan instead of saying „No, we don't attend“ to give their readers an honest opinion. I'm not saying anyone gave Modern Warfare 3 a better score because they went to a fancy review event. What I'm saying is that most outlets don't even try to eliminate some of the factors that could influence their opinion. They're not trying to not play by the Publisher's rules because they think an early review is worth more than a review done under regular circumstances.

They're not even trying to not be PR tools anymore. GiantBomb seems to be heading in the right direction when they tell Publishers they won't cover their game every single time they send them preview code. 1UP seemed to try as well – they paid for all their flights and hotels themselves, nothing was paid for by the publisher.
 
Eh, I didn't think it was that good but it drives the point home. Reviews for anticipated games and internet nerds who rage over them shouldn't be taken seriously at all.
 
snap0212 said:
They're not even trying to not be PR tools anymore. GiantBomb seems to be heading in the right direction when they tell Publishers they won't cover their game every single time they send them preview code. 1UP seemed to try as well – they paid for all their flights and hotels themselves, nothing was paid for by the publisher.
Click to expand...

As someone who's never been paid to review something, and who often has to buy the games he reviews, I can honestly say it's a harder gig than many people probably think. If you're fortunate enough to receive a review copy of something, naturally, you'd like to keep getting games, and there's no telling if a publisher will just tell you to piss off if you don't give everything a good score.

I'd also honestly like to have a job with an IGN, or wherever, because I'd like to actually get paid, and I really don't know if being blunt with my criticisms, and "harsh," relatively speaking, with my scoring hurts my chances because these sites seem to be so in-bed with the publishers.

For anyone trying to break into the business of being a critic on their own, it's really kind of a no-man's land because you're being pulled in two directions. One right ethically and possibly likely to screw you over professionally, and one ethically wrong, but that may help you professionally.
 
I like the idea for the trailer more than the trailer itself.

Should have taken it dead serious. Would've been better commentary, and possibly funnier.

But that's my opinion, and that's a fact. 4/5
 
Pretty nice. I like how nobody was responding to the actual content of the guy's review (even though when they show him writing it he's praising the game), everybody was just freaking out over the score. That's pretty spot on.
 
I think most likely they've read most of the forum comments, some of those dialogues were just too spot on :lol

That guy rolling on the fence and his dialogue was just too awesome, and the obsession with the metascore!
 
JABEE said:
What point? That people who are fans of video games say stupid things about video game reviews? I guess that's funny. I was hoping they would make fun of the people writing the reviews who are bribed with consoles and marketing items like statues and game "swag." They seem to want you to laugh about the "paying for reviews" aspect of fan criticism, but when many writers accept trips to Las Vegas and attend publisher parties with buffets of food, then there is a certain truth to that specific criticism.
I think laughing at the response is too easy, especially when these review websites thrive and feed into that response with their arbitrary numerical scoring systems. I understand why people find this funny, but I believe there was a lot of room for a much more stinging satire, when you consider that this kind of "laughing at the nerd who read my poorly written review" sequence of jokes has been driven into the ground by Destructoid and others very recently.
Click to expand...

Are you honestly mad because they made fun of people's ridiculous reactions to a review? Did you also throw a tantrum when they made fun of the reality of independent game developers?

Uncharted 3's review sparked so much ridiculously stupid posts (as detailed in the post far above mine). Getting that worked up over a game is stupid. That's a fact.
 
HP_Wuvcraft said:
Are you honestly mad because they made fun of people's ridiculous reactions to a review? Did you also throw a tantrum when they made fun of the reality of independent game developers?

Uncharted 3's review sparked so much ridiculously stupid posts (as detailed in the post far above mine). Getting that worked up over a game is stupid. That's a fact.
Click to expand...
You might want to reread his post, I don't see at all how you took his tone as angry, and he's pretty clearly just saying he wished they would have taken another angle with the topic, not throwing a tantrum.

I wonder what people from Mama Robotnik's Hall of Fame would think when they see this video? I guess the whole thing would go over their heads? Or maybe they only get excited about certain games and the context of the video they could laugh at other people, justifying it by convincing themselves "Well of course it's stupid to get mad at a review, but Uncharted (or whatever other game) is different!"

Someone should PM everyone in the Hall of Fame and then make a thread for them to post their reactions to the video. Even if only two or three actually did it it'd likely be an awesome read.
 
snap0212 said:
I know you'll never be able to satisfy everyone but that's also not what I'm asking for. Is it too much to ask for honesty, for example? Is it too much to ask a reviewer to admit that their opinion was influenced by the things surrounding the review process, for example?

Reviewers go to review events knowing their experience will definitely not be the same as it would be if they'd be reviewing the game at home. Yet they all agree that it's more important to get the early review, to be part of the Publisher's plan instead of saying „No, we don't attend“ to give their readers an honest opinion. I'm not saying anyone gave Modern Warfare 3 a better score because they went to a fancy review event. What I'm saying is that most outlets don't even try to eliminate some of the factors that could influence their opinion. They're not trying to not play by the Publisher's rules because they think an early review is worth more than a review done under regular circumstances.

They're not even trying to not be PR tools anymore. GiantBomb seems to be heading in the right direction when they tell Publishers they won't cover their game every single time they send them preview code. 1UP seemed to try as well – they paid for all their flights and hotels themselves, nothing was paid for by the publisher.
Click to expand...
There will always be this conflict between having the (p)review as early as possible and doing a good job at it. I just think most of the complaints about it are exagurated. I don't think games that deserve 4s are being given 9s for example because of some trip or ad money. You simply can't ruin your name that way, people will look through it.

What do you want a review to say then? 'I gave this game a 9, but that might be because I've been to a fancy press event'? The arguments you write down in your review support the score you give, no matter where you played the game. If you don't agree with the content of the review, that's fair, but there are so many people just complaining about the score and not the content.
 
ClosingADoor said:
There will always be this conflict between having the (p)review as early as possible and doing a good job at it. I just think most of the complaints about it are exagurated. I don't think games that deserve 4s are being given 9s for example because of some trip or ad money. You simply can't ruin your name that way, people will look through it.

What do you want a review to say then? 'I gave this game a 9, but that might be because I've been to a fancy press event'? The arguments you write down in your review support the score you give, no matter where you played the game. If you don't agree with the content of the review, that's fair, but there are so many people just complaining about the score and not the content.
Click to expand...
Does reviewing a game that is highly reliant on multiplayer or any game at all at an event with helpers at it really represent a normal person's experience playing a game?Reviewer's attitudes toward the game can't help but be influenced implicitly by the environment that the publisher places them in.

Sometimes you have to ask the question, "Why am I here?" People who are friends with developers and deal with the development team firsthand also have a influence effecting their opinion on a game that an average person would not.

On another note, My main point on this video is that they could have went a different way with this to have a much greater effect with their satire. Everyone knows the reaction to these reviews are laughable, but I was hoping for a more original angle to the video. I am not angry in any way. I just made an observation and gave my own personal opinion on this subject.
 
JABEE said:
Does reviewing a game that is highly reliant on multiplayer or any game at all at an event with helpers at it really represent a normal person's experience playing a game?Reviewer's attitudes toward the game can't help but be influenced implicitly by the environment that the publisher places them in.
Click to expand...
Of course, but it's better then not having anyone to play against until the releasedate. Or what about capacity problems in the first week (which almost every major multiplayer shooter seem to have). Those will also influence an opinion, even while people buying the game a month later won't have those issues.

Multiplayer games are almost impossible to really review around launch anyway, since balancing issues and other problems are only found after weeks and weeks of playing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Inside the Chaotic Development of Modern Warfare 3 - A Documentary
Analysis Trailer 
1
237
EverydayBeast replied
MoonStreet: The Playable Movie - Official Trailer
Trailer Indie 
0
145
IbizaPocholo replied
Skyrim but it's a modern game..
26
967
Jack Package replied
The Super Mario Galaxy Movie | Level Up
Trailer 
35
616
StreetsofBeige replied
Todd & Aaron's GAME AWARDS 2025!!!!!!11111 (Mega64)
9
304
manfestival replied
Top Bottom