I think it has more to do with the huge staff it requires to consistently pump them out on a twoish year development cycle.
-
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.
WSJ: Borderlands 2 not COD enough, should be priced the same as Nascar Unleashed
- Thread starter Trojita
- Start date
I think it has more to do with the huge staff it requires to consistently pump them out on a twoish year development cycle.
Pai Pai Master
Banned
Seriously that was the weirdest point of the article to me. The guy can't comprehend the concept of a co-op lootwhore game (even though he's writing a review on one) but almost knows what "manga" is and considers it the pinnacle of animated coolness.
This reads like something that was written by the Halo Bro in my freshman political science class, and I was under the impression that Borderlands was the kind of game that appealed to dudebros and hardcore gamers alike.
I H8 Memes
Member
Forbes >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Gamefaqs>>>>>>Yahoo Comments Section>wsg
Danny Dudekisser
I paid good money for this Dynex!
This may honestly be the worst review since 1up's Devil May Cry 4 PC review.
Meatvillain
Banned
I've long thought Forbes' game coverage was pretty terrible, but this really puts shit into perspective.
Interfectum
Member
Does this review top the Escapist's Dragon Age 2 review? It's a close call IMO.
*right-click Save As*
The NASCAR Unleashed Loot Tables need optimized, I never get ANYTHING when I win a race.
Meatvillain
Banned
Be more ridiculous.
StickSoldier
Member
Makes me frustrated that people will actually listen to the shit this writer is posting on their website.
Kacho
Member
This comic is amazing.
I H8 Memes
Member
Everything I've read from Forbes recently, well the articles that have been posted here on GAF, have been excellent.
Kai Dracon
Writing a dinosaur space opera symphony
That comic encapsulates two thirds of arguments over videogames or for that matter, anything else.
This-thing-is-terrible-because-everything-is-supposed-to-be-like-this-totally-different-thing.
D
Deleted member 47027
Unconfirmed Member
WSJ blog isn't written for gamers, it's written for non-gamers who play games. I don't see anything wrong with their perspective or viewpoint, even if I disagree - they're entitled to their opinion from their side of the tracks and that's okay. This isn't some massive slight - this is just the way the game is perceived.
Dreams-Visions
Member
what gamers are reading WSJ for game reviews or critiques?
Dudebros aren't generally into manga though...
Don't they generally have like $100million advertising budgets? That's assuredly where the $$ goes.
I know I always head for the WSJ when I want the idiot's point of view.
D
Deleted member 47027
Unconfirmed Member
None of them should be. That's what PR emails are for.
What if the manga is Bleach?
Nah man, avocados are the new hip thing.
The Albatross
Member
Hey Gaf: Your reaction to this article is why game journalism sucks. When mainstream press covers your hobby, you nerd rage because they don't like the same things that you do or "they don't get it." So the result is that we get niche publications that get all of their financing from videogame companies, and then you throw your arms up when they're biased or influenced by game publishing dollars. Fact is, we can't have it both ways.
Kai Dracon
Writing a dinosaur space opera symphony
This is a point, but...
... I can't help but think their perspective also exemplifies what has been done to the first-person-anything genre by the game industry and big publishing. Chasing the COD dollar has turned every game that could vaguely be defined as a first person and now even third person shooter, into something very generic in the mainstream's eyes.
So many games have tried to clone COD (most failing to achieve the desired success), that even mainstream writers now perceive first person shooters as being only one thing. They've been well trained. Seems kind of degenerate.
The Albatross
Member
Sadly, this is exactly what game journalism needs, we as gamers will just never accept any review or criticism of something by someone who is not some "approved hardcore" gamer.
D
Deleted member 47027
Unconfirmed Member
Well that's really the thing - in the past, say, 7 years, 'gaming' has tapped into non-gamers, and found out there were a hell of a lot of non-gamers (people who do not identify as gamers, as well) playing games. So, they pursue those. I'm surprised that people are upset about this, because it basically is coming from the viewpoint of one of your friends' parents offering their thoughts on a game they tried. It feels out of touch to us because it is - but their audience isn't us.
Agreed. The hubbub is laughable.
Omegasquash
Member
My mind is full of fuck. And laughter.
Here we have an article written by a fellow that likes a certain game and certain designs, and thinks things that do not match are bad. Oh well.
Edit: No, I have not played Borderlands 2. All I'm saying is that this "review" is pretty poorly written.
Here we have an article written by a fellow that likes a certain game and certain designs, and thinks things that do not match are bad. Oh well.
Edit: No, I have not played Borderlands 2. All I'm saying is that this "review" is pretty poorly written.
Fine Ham Abounds
Member
Watch Da Birdie
I buy cakes for myself on my birthday it's not weird lots of people do it I bet
I kind of want to read more of them for a laugh (although I imagine they aren't all bad, really). I'm not that much of a fan of Borderlands,
Nothing beats the Video Game reviews done by Pro-Christian websites, however.
EDIT: This dude, "Game Theory", only has 2 articles so far though it seems.
Nothing beats the Video Game reviews done by Pro-Christian websites, however.
EDIT: This dude, "Game Theory", only has 2 articles so far though it seems.
diffusionx
Gold Member
I don't see what is so different about this than the many "I'll buy it for $20" comments that come when game XYZ is released.
The writer has a point - is Borderlands 2 compelling for the massive audience that buys Halo and COD?
I think the writer would have been well-served to see BL1's success, but the WSJ has a business/growth slant to its writings (obviously). Will Borderlands 2 grow T2's business? Will it expand the audience?
The writer has a point - is Borderlands 2 compelling for the massive audience that buys Halo and COD?
I think the writer would have been well-served to see BL1's success, but the WSJ has a business/growth slant to its writings (obviously). Will Borderlands 2 grow T2's business? Will it expand the audience?
It's the most pre-ordered game in their entire history, so I'd say yes?
1. That's not even the point that the writer makes.
2. If that's what you want to make a point out of then yes, BL2 is compelling for most people who play videogames. Is it compelling enough to 'crossover' and become some kind of massive media empire that is a culture unto itself like COD did? FUCK NO. But if that's how we measure the value of $60 dollar video games then the ONLY games that would ever measure up are COD and Madden.
hardcastlemccormick
Banned
Disregarding genre conventions and ignoring what the game actually sets out to do - instead proposing a delusional fantasy game concept in its place - is bad writing no matter whose perspective you pretend the article is proposing to assume. The blatant market ignorance just makes it worse.
If someone's going to publish their review under the WSJ and pretend there's actually something to be said, they can at least be expected to find out what the hell they're discussing. An ignorant perspective is a foolish perspective. Reviews of every other medium have more understanding of their medium than this.
It's one thing to make your writing accessible to outside perspectives, and open to different viewpoints. That's laudable, and it's something that gaming writing gets bogged down by.
However, that's not the issue here. The issue is that the writer clearly has no idea what he's talking about. And that's simply indefensible in any form of writing.
Fruitster
Member
You may be right there. Personally i'd prefer gaming journalism to be more detatched. To be critics first and fans second so to speak. It seems to be the other way around alot of the time.
No, this isn't what is needs. This is a totally bias article that depicts a game in a fashion that it isn't. He even points out that game having a fault which is what the entire game is compromised of.
"cutting-edge development, engrossing campaign gameplay, scads of downloadable content, a rich social media/community experience, sharing of loot and gear and online multiplayer modes that keep you and your friends coming back until the next version of the game comes out."
That right there, pointing that out as a fault, when it is there in the game, along with all the other points as well, makes this article absolutely ridiculous and we should shame them for it.
