Support NeoGAF

[Yoboman]

I'm still trying to comprehend Gamespot's complaints. They say it has too many gameplay features and this leads to an identity crisis. Isn't every Ratchet like this? They've all had a wide variety of mini-games of sorts strewn throughout the game.And how does this equate to an identity crisis?

And they complain about the story? Every other review say it's the strongest in the series by far

I'd be happy if they'd just tacked on complaints about lack of multiplayer and being more of the same, at least those are legitimate.

 

[BadlyCookedTurkey]

Gamespots a little bit shit, isn't it?

 

[rakka]

I didn't get the hype for this game so this sort of confirms my impressions of the game even though its Gamespot. I'll skip this one. Its not like I have to worry, Mario Galaxy is coming.

gtfo

and what if galaxy (which will also be awesome) gets the same treatment? you'll skip it right ^_^

 

[D3MO]

I'm still trying to comprehend Gamespot's complaints. They say it has too many gameplay features and this leads to an identity crisis. Isn't every Ratchet like this? They've all had a wide variety of mini-games of sorts strewn throughout the game.And how does this equate to an identity crisis?

And they complain about the story? Every other review say it's the strongest in the series by far

I'd be happy if they'd just tacked on complaints about lack of multiplayer and being more of the same, at least those are legitimate.

too little variety bad
too much variety bad

then what the fuck do u want gamespot? what the fuck do u want?

 

[FrequentlyNasty]

I'm still trying to comprehend Gamespot's complaints. They say it has too many gameplay features and this leads to an identity crisis. Isn't every Ratchet like this? They've all had a wide variety of mini-games of sorts strewn throughout the game.And how does this equate to an identity crisis?

And they complain about the story? Every other review say it's the strongest in the series by far

I'd be happy if they'd just tacked on complaints about lack of multiplayer and being more of the same, at least those are legitimate.

it's that typical, "ok, we'll give that game a 7.5, now let's try to find some points to make it look legitimate, and use them bitch it down the drain"-thing.
just take a look at GS's rating history, and you'll realize, that they're not really a trustworthy source..

 

[Petrae]

Because no one cares about gamecritics.com. Big sites like Gamespot, IGN, 1up, etc have a significant amount of influence and should be fairly reputable and consistent and as objective as possible, which is why people bitch when they're sporadically "off" on their scores. When you're off the general consensus by that much, you clearly didn't do a good job of being objective, and if we wanted more subjective "other people's opinions," we wouldn't be going to a big site and reading reviews. There are plenty of fanboy/hater opinions all over the internet.

A review this far off only damages the reputation of the publication. Anyone who's never played Halo 3 can look at the general consensus of scores, and notice that the fool who gave it a 7 is clearly missing something. It's a similar situation in this case with Ratchet, only the fool is supposedly one of the more "professional" outlets.

So, in other words, the big sites should all say the same thing? Then... what's the sense of having three sites? Since when are game reviews supposed to be objective? I'm of the belief that reviews are individual opinions regarding a game and its overall impression. Reviews can be a mixture of facts and opinions, but whether a game is great or not is purely subjective.

If a review score is significantly different than the others, I will admittedly read it to find out why. Unlike the most jaded of readers out there, I'm willing to see whether there's some merit as to the scoring difference. While I can't say for sure that GameSpot is purposely undercutting its review scores to attract hits, I will say that I don't believe this to be the case for this instance.

 

[fortified_concept]

WOAH there... you might want to slot in an "IMO".
RandC is an unknown quantity, but could well be AAA, but ...

is HS -REALLY- an AAA quality game?

i get the feeling AAA is thrown around WAY to easily these days. I enjoyed the game and thought it was good but theres no way I`D PERSONALLY call it AAA.

The only reason Heavenly Sword was slammed to death was its duration while a certain other game called Halo 3 which is even shorter got 10s by the dozens, just like Bioshock which is also a short game. Yes Heavenly Sword is an AAA game. In other news your post reminds me of what AltogetherAndrews wrote about you a while ago:

The problem with you is that you're so ridiculously one-sided. An overly positive statement regarding PS3? It must be confronted. A less than positive statement regarding PS3? Must be agreed on, albeit under the guise of "the devil's advocate". Wouldn't be so ridiculous if I hadn't seen your responses to criticism of games on other systems, and the systems themselves where you're acting in very much the same ways that seemingly annoys you so much when it's coming from others. I like you and really, I don't mind you doing what you do, but could you at least drop the act? And if it's not an act, you may want to look into balancing your input a bit.

 

[Yoboman]

it's that typical, "ok, we'll give that game a 7.5, now let's try to find some points to make it look legitimate, and use them bitch it down the drain"-thing.
just take a look at GS's rating history, and you'll realize, that they're not really a trustworthy source..

I generally agree with all of GS's reviews, I think they're one of the most honest sources about. Sometimes they're off like with MGS3, but it's not by much. However this particular review just stinks and I think it's the reviewer at fault, the game is not a 7.5, but it's their reasoning for it that irks me most.

 

[Awntawn]

But it's very very hard to objectively score entertainment products. For me Halo 3 is a 9+/10 game, but I could see why someone would score it 7/10 and that's why I don't think someone who rated it that low isn't necessarily a jackass. If complaints are justified I don't see why a reviewer can't give a low score to a hyped game if he feels it wasn't that satisfying experience.

Some are more difficult than others, namely niche products (like Folklore), and you generally see a wide range all across the board for stuff like that. For more conventional tried and tested genres like with Ratchet and Clank, it's really not that difficult, as you can see a vast majority of the reviewers all can come up with a similar conclusion.

I assume Gamespot pays their writers? If it's that hard to be objective, you don't deserve to get paid to write reviews, period.

 

[mintylurb]

too little variety bad
too much variety bad

then what the fuck do u want gamespot? what the fuck do u want?

Ratchet on xbox 360 ;d

 

[Forsete]

Oh Gamespot, how Ive stoped caring about your opinion.

 

[Awntawn]

So, in other words, the big sites should all say the same thing? Then... what's the sense of having three sites? Since when are game reviews supposed to be objective? I'm of the belief that reviews are individual opinions regarding a game and its overall impression. Reviews can be a mixture of facts and opinions, but whether a game is great or not is purely subjective.

If a review score is significantly different than the others, I will admittedly read it to find out why. Unlike the most jaded of readers out there, I'm willing to see whether there's some merit as to the scoring difference. While I can't say for sure that GameSpot is purposely undercutting its review scores to attract hits, I will say that I don't believe this to be the case for this instance.

It's not that they should score based on each other, it's just that if all goes well, it should end up relatively close. 3 is a bit tough to work with, let's say 5 big sites.

If all 5 big sites say a game is good, you can be pretty sure the game is good. If all 5 say a game is bad, you can be pretty sure the game is bad. If 4 say it's good and 1 says it's bad, you're likely to think there's something off with that 1. If 2 or 3 say it's bad, which would then be considered "mixed reviews," then you're more likely to think that the game appeals fairly differently to different people.

And every genre has audiences it appeals to or doesn't appeal to. I am not a baseball fan, and I do not play baseball games. The best baseball game in the world can come out and get a 110% rating on metacritic, and I do not need to find a review of a person who dislikes baseball games as much as me to decide that I am probably not going to buy it.

Anyhow, in perspective here over 20 or so critics think this is a 9+, 2 or so think it's 8ish, and one thinks it average (And let's be honest here, with video games a 7.5 is an average score. You can't score 95% of the industry with a one scale, then go around trying to justify a score graded on 1-10 scale. This is what you call a double standard, and it's not the least bit fair). You don't need to do much (if any) math to gather information from this data.

 

[LM4sure]

ouch. didn't see this coming!

 

[szaromir]

Some are more difficult than others, namely niche products (like Folklore), and you generally see a wide range all across the board for stuff like that. For more conventional tried and tested genres like with Ratchet and Clank, it's really not that difficult, as you can see a vast majority of the reviewers all can come up with a similar conclusion.

I assume Gamespot pays their writers? If it's that hard to be objective, you don't deserve to get paid to write reviews, period.

On the other hand, I often lost money buying games that have inflated review scores, because reviewers were looking for objective values rather than writing how they really felt about the game.

Thankfully now when most games have demos on marketplace(/PSN), I can get a glimpse at gameplay mechanic myself and (if I like it) how the game as a whole turns out - it's not about review score any longer for me, but rather informations about length, story etc. And there is metacritics so I can see what general consensus on the game is (all games tend to get radical scores on both sides). No need to get worked up over a single review.

 

[Kildace]

The only reason Heavenly Sword was slammed to death was its duration while a certain other game called Halo 3 which is even shorter got 10s by the dozens, just like Bioshock which is also a short game. Yes Heavenly Sword is an AAA game.

So does the fact that Halo3 offers more difficulty modes, 4 player co-op and a very beefy online mode not count at all?

 

[FrequentlyNasty]

I generally agree with all of GS's reviews, I think they're one of the most honest sources about. Sometimes they're off like with MGS3, but it's not by much. However this particular review just stinks and I think it's the reviewer at fault, the game is not a 7.5, but it's their reasoning for it that irks me most.

GS and honest? ooook. my impressions of GS: if you're game, and want a halfways decent score, you'd better be a) a FPS b) a racer or c) a maddenesque sports game. ah, and being MS funded game helps too.
gamespot on bioshock: does it have an MP? no, but not every game needs that
gamespot on ratchet: does it have an MP? no, disappointment-ton.
i'd better not start with gamespots view on the story of, let's say halo3...
it's sooo f***in obvious.

 

[szaromir]

GS and honest? ooook. my impressions of GS: if you're game, and want a halfways decent score, you'd better be a) a FPS b) a racer or c) a maddenesque sports game. ah, and being MS funded game helps too.
gamespot on bioshock: does it have an MP? no, but not every game needs that
gamespot on ratchet: does it have an MP? no, disappointment-ton.
i'd better not start with gamespots view on the story of, let's say halo3...
it's sooo f***in obvious.

That's why I said playstation fans in my first post. Because of people like that.

 

[DCharlie]

The only reason Heavenly Sword was slammed to death was its duration while a certain other game called Halo 3 which is even shorter got 10s by the dozens, just like Bioshock which is also a short game. Yes Heavenly Sword is an AAA game. In other news your post reminds me of what AltogetherAndrews wrote about you a while ago:

... do you even understand how "opinions" and "facts" differ?

Oh, AltogetherAndrews wrote that about me? Wow - it must be true then!

If you are really interested in my opinion of HS, you can read my review in the official thread.

(p.s. Halo 3 is not shorter than Heavenly Sword - especially comparing single player to single player)

 

[nelsonroyale]

WOAH there... you might want to slot in an "IMO".
RandC is an unknown quantity, but could well be AAA, but ...

is HS -REALLY- an AAA quality game?

i get the feeling AAA is thrown around WAY to easily these days. I enjoyed the game and thought it was good but theres no way I`D PERSONALLY call it AAA.

hmmm, I find it difficult to say what is AAA or not...it really comes down to my own enjoyment. Res 4 for instance was pronounced AAA, yet I have the game, and me and my bro only played 10 mins of the thing and havent touched it for a year or so...I suppose its because my interest in games is not entirely gameplay focused...I like and interesting context otherwise I become bored.... HS had a lot of flaws (too short, story too compressed, wasted potential given epic level design, lack of challenge linearity), but because of the production values it really broke some new ground in the way the story was conveyed (in the gaming medium)...you have other games like NInja Gaiden which are pronounced AAA, and while the gameplay is quite fun...the consistancy of the world, story depth, music, character design is all pretty damn poor and inconsistant....

I guess what Im trying to say is that there are different criteria for judging games, and personally I find it difficult to rate a game on a percentage scale...

I tend to rate my gaming experience on the overall level of satisfaction the game gave me...there are lots of games I enjoyed, but only a few standouts.

 

[Petrae]

It's not that they should score based on each other, it's just that if all goes well, it should end up relatively close. 3 is a bit tough to work with, let's say 5 big sites.

If all 5 big sites say a game is good, you can be pretty sure the game is good. If all 5 say a game is bad, you can be pretty sure the game is bad. If 4 say it's good and 1 says it's bad, you're likely to think there's something off with that 1. If 2 or 3 say it's bad, which would then be considered "mixed reviews," then you're more likely to think that the game appeals fairly differently to different people.

And every genre has audiences it appeals to or doesn't appeal to. I am not a baseball fan, and I do not play baseball games. The best baseball game in the world can come out and get a 110% rating on metacritic, and I do not need to find a review of a person who dislikes baseball games as much as me to decide that I am probably not going to buy it.

Anyhow, in perspective here over 20 or so critics think it's a 9+, 2 or so think it's 8ish, and one thinks it average (And let's be honest here, with video games a 7.5 is an average score. You can't score 95% of the industry with a one scale, then go around trying to justify a score graded on 1-10 scale. This is what you call a double standard, and it's not the least bit fair). You don't need to do much (if any) math to gather information from this data.

First off, thanks for clarifying your viewpoint for me. I understand more about where you're coming from, and your point is valid. I will agree that the GS score in this instance is a definitive outlier, based on the other review scores that have been posted.

I guess that my concern is that I don't want a review culture where a writer for a big site isn't able to break away from the pack if he (or she) finds flaws in a game that others might have been willing to overlook (or that they didn't find as damning). Maybe said game isn't the slam dunk that you might think.

 

[FrequentlyNasty]

That's why I said playstation fans in my first post. Because of people like that.

looking at YOUR post history i can fully understand YOUR point of view. but for me, it seems to be quite ridiculous to bitch down a game like ratchet for its story while hyping halo3 for it...

 

[DCharlie]

hmmm, I find it difficult to say what is AAA or not...it really comes down to my own enjoyment. Res 4 for instance was pronounced AAA, yet I have the game, and me and my bro only played 10 mins of the thing and havent touched it for a year or so...I suppose its because my interest in games is not entirely gameplay focused...I like and interesting context otherwise I become bored.... HS had a lot of flaws (too short, story too compressed, wasted potential given epic level design, lack of challenge linearity), but because of the production values it really broke some new ground in the way the story was conveyed (in the gaming medium)...you have other games like NInja Gaiden which are pronounced AAA, and while the gameplay is quite fun...the consistancy of the world, story depth, music, character design is all pretty damn poor and inconsistant....

I guess what Im trying to say is that there are different criteria for judging games, and personally I find it difficult to rate a game on a percentage scale...

I thoroughly agree - AAA is inherently about opinion, what i was getting at was Fortifieds "AAA" classification of HS without a "IMO" - he`s still in his response asserting that it IS AAA and everyone who doesn`t agree is confronting all good PS3 news. Hmmm...

Also - i had a similar RE4 experience in that i hated the demo. I ended up buying the game and letting it sit for an age before playing it a little, leaving it, then going back to it one bored Saturday and was utterly blown away by it. But that`s another thread.

 

[Yoboman]

GS and honest? ooook. my impressions of GS: if you're game, and want a halfways decent score, you'd better be a) a FPS b) a racer or c) a maddenesque sports game. ah, and being MS funded game helps too.
gamespot on bioshock: does it have an MP? no, but not every game needs that
gamespot on ratchet: does it have an MP? no, disappointment-ton.
i'd better not start with gamespots view on the story of, let's say halo3...
it's sooo f***in obvious.

Gamespot didn't say anything about Ratchet's lack of MP being a problem (though their complaints were far more unsubstantial than that).

At least read the review before you complain

 

[Broktune]

I don't have a ps3. R and C is one of those games that could sway me. I'm glad to see that it has received great reviews. What I don't understand is why so many people flip out over ONE FUCKING OPINION. Good lord, there are people who hated The Godfather or Goodfellas. There are people who think Jessica Alba is a dog. There are people who think that the Beatles or Led Zeppelin are the biggest hacks in music. If you disagree, why would you let it bother you? Opinions are like assholes, everyone has one.

I'm sorry, I can't see how criticism of something you are not personally attached to gets people so riled up. But, video games are serious business and I'm a junior so I don't know shit and I should post a picture of a cat eating corn.

 

[Awntawn]

On the other hand, I often lost money buying games that have inflated review scores, because reviewers were looking for objective values rather than writing how they really felt about the game.

Thankfully now when most games have demos on marketplace(/PSN), I can get a glimpse at gameplay mechanic myself and (if I like it) how the game as a whole turns out - it's not about review score any longer for me, but rather informations about length, story etc. And there is metacritics so I can see what general consensus on the game is. No need to get worked up over a single review.

The only place I can imagine this happening is when you trod into a genre you don't like that much to see what the vibe is about. But the bottom line is that someone who doesn't like FPSs isn't going to like Halo. Someone who hates JRPGs most likely isn't going to like Final Fantasy (With XII being a prominent exception, and it was often noted so in reviews). I feel your pain here, I bought Ninja Gaiden Sigma and it was probably the biggest waste of $60 I've ever spent. But I read, "THIS GAME IS VERY HARD," and did not pay enough heed to it. So despite the high review scores, I really have no one to blame but myself. A lot of people dislike games for being too hard, but if they all wrote professional reviews based on the fact that they hated it for what it was and gave it horrible scores, does that do the game justice? Of course not.

 

[AdventureRacing]

hmmm, I find it difficult to say what is AAA or not...it really comes down to my own enjoyment. Res 4 for instance was pronounced AAA, yet I have the game, and me and my bro only played 10 mins

I don't think RE4 has the greatest storyline either. However im not sure how you came to that conclusion after 10 minutes. In the first 10 minutes of a game about the only thing you can judge is gameplay cause there hasn't been enough time to develop the story yet.

 

[szaromir]

looking at YOUR post history i can fully understand YOUR point of view. but for me, it seems to be quite ridiculous to bitch down a game like ratchet for its story while hyping halo3 for it...

The point is that a standard response in this thread is:
-they are paid by microsoft to score it that low
-they are a bunch of xbots
-'x' game on 360 got higher score despite...

Which is completely ridiculous.

 

[Stop It]

Hang on, I thought Gamespot were Anti-Nintendo?

:lol

Anyway, this thread is meltdown central, so I'll escape before it turns really nasty, ciao!

 

[Awntawn]

I don't have a ps3. R and C is one of those games that could sway me. I'm glad to see that it has received great reviews. What I don't understand is why so many people flip out over ONE FUCKING OPINION. Good lord, there are people who hated The Godfather or Goodfellas. There are people who think Jessica Alba is a dog. There are people who think that the Beatles or Led Zeppelin are the biggest hacks in music. If you disagree, why would you let it bother you? Opinions are like assholes, everyone has one.

I'm sorry, I can't see how criticism of something you are not personally attached to gets people so riled up. But, video games are serious business and I'm a junior so I don't know shit and I should post a picture of a cat eating corn.

Would a writer for The Rolling Stones, however, be able get away with expressing said bolded opinion in the magazine?

 

[Petrae]

I don't have a ps3. R and C is one of those games that could sway me. I'm glad to see that it has received great reviews. What I don't understand is why so many people flip out over ONE FUCKING OPINION. Good lord, there are people who hated The Godfather or Goodfellas. There are people who think Jessica Alba is a dog. There are people who think that the Beatles or Led Zeppelin are the biggest hacks in music. If you disagree, why would you let it bother you? Opinions are like assholes, everyone has one.

I'm sorry, I can't see how criticism of something you are not personally attached to gets people so riled up. But, video games are serious business and I'm a junior so I don't know shit and I should post a picture of a cat eating corn.

I was with you up until the bolded statement. Self-deprecation gets you nowhere fast.

 

[DCharlie]

Would a writer for The Rolling Stones, however, be able get away with expressing said bolded opinion in the magazine?

is this the same though, this is more like saying that the new Oasis album is good, but not great isn`t it?

 

[Phife Dawg]

I love these threads, GS shits on anticipated game on favourite console - people go apeshit. GS shits on anticipated game on rival console - the same people that went apeshit before now laud GS or shit on game themselves.

I still think GS sucks but at least their reviews make up for some really funny threads.

FUCK GAMESPOT

They are owned by MS (indirectly, MS owns part of CNET)...bunch of fucking fanboys.

FUCK GAMESPOT and their stupid retarded staff.

Fuck Microsoft and their...RROD

Fuck WiiFit and its...WiiFitting-ness

Needs more meltdown.

 

[fortified_concept]

... do you even understand how "opinions" and "facts" differ?

Oh, AltogetherAndrews wrote that about me? Wow - it must be true then!

If you are really interested in my opinion of HS, you can read my review in the official thread.

(p.s. Halo 3 is not shorter than Heavenly Sword - especially comparing single player to single player)

I thoroughly agree - AAA is inherently about opinion, what i was getting at was Fortifieds "AAA" classification of HS without a "IMO" - he`s still in his response asserting that it IS AAA and everyone who doesn`t agree is confronting all good PS3 news. Hmmm...

Also - i had a similar RE4 experience in that i hated the demo. I ended up buying the game and letting it sit for an age before playing it a little, leaving it, then going back to it one bored Saturday and was utterly blown away by it. But that`s another thread.

So wait every time someone talks about AAA games it should come with a "IMO" disclaimer? Well then, it's xbox fans' opinion that Halo 3 and Bioshock are AAA games. I demand from them to edit all their posts with imo's every time they mention "X360 AAA games".

PS. And no, just because AltogetherAndrews said it, it doesn't make it the truth. It's just the fact that he was so right on spot that makes it the truth.

 

[fortified_concept]

Needs more meltdown.

:lol Ok that was embarassing. How did I miss that post?

 

[bj00rn]

Only a 91 on metacritic, canceling preorder as we speak.

It's down to 89 now, you better hurry..

 

[Awntawn]

is this the same though, this is more like saying that the new Oasis album is good, but not great isn`t it?

Oh please, you can't rate 95% of the industry with one scale and then try to justify a score on another scale. Face it, a 7.5 by video game industry industry standards, or by Gamespot's scoring standards even, is hardly a good score. This isn't rottentomatoes. It's the concept of a double standard (Yes, it means what it sounds like. It means two standards), which is what people are constantly bitching about especially this gen. Sometimes they're just being ridiculous, but sometimes they have a point.

 

[konrad77]

Why are you guys/girls so angry. Its one review. Does it really matter that a "biased site" gave it a score you didnt agree with, when the rest of the reviews are really sky high?

You know that 7.5 score doesnt change the fact that the rest of the media world loved the game.

 

[rakka]

I love these threads, GS shits on anticipated game on favourite console - people go apeshit. GS shits on anticipated game on rival console - the same people that went apeshit before now laud GS or shit on game themselves.

there are plenty in this thread shitting on GS for their scores in general, TP, Bioshock, MP3, R&C, etc.

 

[PAYBACKill]

The problem with you is that you're so ridiculously one-sided. An overly positive statement regarding PS3? It must be confronted. A less than positive statement regarding PS3? Must be agreed on, albeit under the guise of "the devil's advocate". Wouldn't be so ridiculous if I hadn't seen your responses to criticism of games on other systems, and the systems themselves where you're acting in very much the same ways that seemingly annoys you so much when it's coming from others. I like you and really, I don't mind you doing what you do, but could you at least drop the act? And if it's not an act, you may want to look into balancing your input a bit.

wow, what thread was this in? Never seen DC pwn3d so bad in my 3-4 years here.

 

[PetriP-TNT]

Hmm, Metal Gear Solid 3 got 8.3 so its 10, this has to mean R&C got 9.2!!

 

[nelsonroyale]

is this the same though, this is more like saying that the new Oasis album is good, but not great isn`t it?

music is even more difficult to judge, lets not get into this haha.... Its like you recognise other people might like some stuff (such as Oasis cough cough), but personally cant enjoy or particularly rate the stuff on most levels.

As for RE4, perhaps I need to give it another shot...Ive played most of the games in the series, but never completed them...RE4 looked like something different, however, I probably wont play it since RE5 looks to play quite similarly and looks completely fantastic..I want it to fresh

 

[quetz67]

And the SMG fanboys bitch over 38/40 and they dont even have a demo to know how good the game is (but at least it has online multiplayer, a great story and an identity)

 

[mugwhump]

This thread makes me want to revist the GS Twilight Princess review thread. Good times, good times... well, actually at the time I was muttering angrily to myself about fatty Gertsman, but they were good times in retrospect...

 

[manxor]

Similar to downgrade, calling unproven bias really needs to be a bannable offense IMO.

One day it's 1up/EGM, next day it's IGN, today it's Gamespot.

Seriously??

 

[theBishop]

I canceled my preorder.