-
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.
Game Informer's Excuse for Paper Mario's Score
- Thread starter Code_Link
- Start date
krypt0nian
Banned
BeOnEdge said:
Ban worthy
TheGreenGiant
Banned
krypt0nian said:
I asked for BOE's ban the other day; his trolling was/is getting incessant. Now this. Buy a fucking cube you loser and play some AAA titles.
Mr Nash
square pies = communism
But any given genre "is not for everyone". Some people like RPGs, some don't. Some people like sports games, some don't. Some people like platformers, some don't. By their logic, everything should be scored low then, because pretty much all games "are not for everyone". Heaven forbid reviewers keep a game's target audience in mind when reviewing a title...
JackFrost2012
Banned
Jonnyboy117 said:
Try "demographics"!
Pedigree Chum
Banned
Worst excuse for a low review score, ever. PM2 is the shiznit, these guys a morons for giving a reviewing based on how much the general public will like it, wtf, like it's even possible to quantify that. Fucking morons, the lot of them. This just shows that "professional" game reviewers are a fucking joke. Someone has to come in and get rid of all the fanboys and retards, maybe then will we get some decent mags for a change. If it weren't for demo discs, I wouldn't buy any of the VG rags out there.
Kai Dracon
Writing a dinosaur space opera symphony
The GI excuse is pure bullshit, but I suspect it's a peek at the kind of bullshit that is standard operating procedure in far too much of the "professional" videogame media.
Their rational falls apart in so many ways it isn't even funny. What if they were reviewing a game actually meant for kids? Would they give it a 3.9 even if it was the best kids' game ever, instead of just saying "In our opinion, this is purely a kids' game, but it's one of the finest ever made and a stellar product."
Their rational falls apart in so many ways it isn't even funny. What if they were reviewing a game actually meant for kids? Would they give it a 3.9 even if it was the best kids' game ever, instead of just saying "In our opinion, this is purely a kids' game, but it's one of the finest ever made and a stellar product."
TheGreenGiant
Banned
I'm interested to know what non Cube people think of this? Is it funny that nbots are rising up to defend a Nintendo title or do they see it as the defense of a truly excellent game. I guess the controversy is akin to NG's C- but one's from a website and the other published media that hits the newstands.
Personally, I was surprised at the score but HORRIFIED by their justification. If this is how it is.. every sports title I reviewed would get 2.
and by the way
most of Nintendo's titles are E
not for kids. Everyone.
Personally, I was surprised at the score but HORRIFIED by their justification. If this is how it is.. every sports title I reviewed would get 2.
and by the way
most of Nintendo's titles are E
not for kids. Everyone.
TheGreenGiant said:
http://forums.gaming-age.com/showthread.php?t=5721&highlight=famitsu+paper+mario
Paper Mario RPG (GC, Nintendo): 9 / 8 / 8 / 8 - (33/40)
I trust Famitsu more than most reviewers; if they gave the game a 33 then it is really that good.
I think what they want to politically incorrectly say, but couldn't is, "We didn't think the majority PS2 owning part of our audience would like this game. We know they'll love R&C3: UYA."
So, you see, GI could care less for the most part about what you guys are complaining about. It's not like they're worried about losing subscribers since they're on top by a lot. In fact, these scores might help them get more PS2 owning readers.
You could do the letter to the editor thing I guess, but the fact remains that GI's bread and butter readers own PS2.
Yeah, they have no critical integrity with hardcore fans like us, but the average gamer getting the free subscription with his used game card thinks the mag is great - mostly cause he thinks its free.
So, you see, GI could care less for the most part about what you guys are complaining about. It's not like they're worried about losing subscribers since they're on top by a lot. In fact, these scores might help them get more PS2 owning readers.
You could do the letter to the editor thing I guess, but the fact remains that GI's bread and butter readers own PS2.
Yeah, they have no critical integrity with hardcore fans like us, but the average gamer getting the free subscription with his used game card thinks the mag is great - mostly cause he thinks its free.
TekunoRobby
Tag of Excellence
I'm sorry I missed this thread, I truly am. 
Ninja Scooter
Member
jesus christ
Ok look...I need to clear something up. First off, I'll fess up a little. I'm Andy McNamara, EIC of GI (I'm screwing up my anonymous status here, so bear with me, and yes, I know you don't give a shit who I am). Jeremy, who wrote the post that you so openly quote, is extremely misunderstood in this whole matter.
We do not, and I will repeat, we do not review games based on what people will think of the title. I called him on it this morning, and he was upset that the whole thing is not being understood the way he had intended it to be. The internet, as we all know, is full of trappings and misunderstandings.
Yes, Jeremy and Lisa do not like the game. As EIC I challenged them on the review many, many times. All the staff knew that the review would not be openly accepted. But the reality is, whether you choose to believe it or not, they did not like the game.
I have not played the game in its entirety. I personally believe the game to be better than the 6.75 that they scored it. But when I challenged them on it over and over they stuck to their guns (and I gave them a crapload of grief on their reviews). I admire them for that. They went against the grain, and they believe and stand by the scores they gave.
What are we to do? Force people to change their scores? Change the scores because we know that people will be pissed? I think you already know the answer to that question, as we let the review fly. We are not changing reviews to please the public. If that was the case, we would have given this an eight and been done with it.
I know Jeremy stated in his post that he felt he was considering the game buying public when he was writing his review, but what he was trying to convey was that he felt that our reviewer's point-of-view is not unlike others in the gaming public, and that by making their views known, he was serving gamers (which IS something we are trying to do). Not everyone loves this type of game - I think our review is proof of that.
Rip on Game Informer all you like, but I won't force someone to change a review. Yes, I will question and challenge them on what they write, but in the end an opinion is just that - an opinion. Who am I, or anyone else, to question anyone's view? The world needs more media that will pick a stance and stand by it in my personal opinion.
Both of them (Jeremy and Lisa) are harcore gamers, and both loved Superstar Saga. They both didn't like The Thousand Year Door. So be it.
I respect the Gaming Age forums crowd as the hardest of the hardcore, and love to read these boards, but at times I think things get a little out of hand.
I see all kinds of tastes that find their way here, and I think people are a little quick to call others wrong or stupid for a differing opinion. It's a video game. God knows I love them. And I love the ones I like even more, which is one of the reasons I visit these boards - to read what people who are passionate about games like myself have to say about games.
Video games are truly the greatest entertainment medium in the world. And I, like you, love to argue over right and wrong, but at some point you just have to let things go as a point you simply can't agree on.
Cheers,
Andy
PS: I believe this is the point where you call me stupid and say that my magazine sucks.
We do not, and I will repeat, we do not review games based on what people will think of the title. I called him on it this morning, and he was upset that the whole thing is not being understood the way he had intended it to be. The internet, as we all know, is full of trappings and misunderstandings.
Yes, Jeremy and Lisa do not like the game. As EIC I challenged them on the review many, many times. All the staff knew that the review would not be openly accepted. But the reality is, whether you choose to believe it or not, they did not like the game.
I have not played the game in its entirety. I personally believe the game to be better than the 6.75 that they scored it. But when I challenged them on it over and over they stuck to their guns (and I gave them a crapload of grief on their reviews). I admire them for that. They went against the grain, and they believe and stand by the scores they gave.
What are we to do? Force people to change their scores? Change the scores because we know that people will be pissed? I think you already know the answer to that question, as we let the review fly. We are not changing reviews to please the public. If that was the case, we would have given this an eight and been done with it.
I know Jeremy stated in his post that he felt he was considering the game buying public when he was writing his review, but what he was trying to convey was that he felt that our reviewer's point-of-view is not unlike others in the gaming public, and that by making their views known, he was serving gamers (which IS something we are trying to do). Not everyone loves this type of game - I think our review is proof of that.
Rip on Game Informer all you like, but I won't force someone to change a review. Yes, I will question and challenge them on what they write, but in the end an opinion is just that - an opinion. Who am I, or anyone else, to question anyone's view? The world needs more media that will pick a stance and stand by it in my personal opinion.
Both of them (Jeremy and Lisa) are harcore gamers, and both loved Superstar Saga. They both didn't like The Thousand Year Door. So be it.
I respect the Gaming Age forums crowd as the hardest of the hardcore, and love to read these boards, but at times I think things get a little out of hand.
I see all kinds of tastes that find their way here, and I think people are a little quick to call others wrong or stupid for a differing opinion. It's a video game. God knows I love them. And I love the ones I like even more, which is one of the reasons I visit these boards - to read what people who are passionate about games like myself have to say about games.
Video games are truly the greatest entertainment medium in the world. And I, like you, love to argue over right and wrong, but at some point you just have to let things go as a point you simply can't agree on.
Cheers,
Andy
PS: I believe this is the point where you call me stupid and say that my magazine sucks.
TekunoRobby
Tag of Excellence
Hi Andy! Can you guys make Final Fantasy for the Xbox, I mean the PS2 games are great and all but they'll be so much better on the Xbox! Also I want a new Mario game but in one where he rides cares and takes over the Mushroom Family crime ring. THX!Hemmdog said:
EDIT: Things ARE ALWAYS out of hand here. Thanks for being courteous enough to publicly address us!
rod furlong
Member
skip said:
well played
Ninja Scooter
Member
Hemmdog said:
do you like Phonecall Liberace?
JackFrost2012
Banned
WarPig said:
I just snorted water out of my nose, so I guess I got it.
I remember the time it was implied that playing Persona for 20 hrs to grab a single picture of the Snow Queen quest to be resized down for a 60-word sidebar in an obscure feature was, you know, my job. You like games, don't you? So get playing!!!
Ah. Gamers.com. *sniff*
TheGreenGiant
Banned
so you, Andy let this horrible review run; maybe he should have gotten someone to balance the game - if every mag let reviewers who hate a particular game (and for no good reason); then all game would be reviewed with 6.75 grades.
You're a disgrace and you know you made a mistake by not seeing if someone else on staff enjoyed the title. IGN, EGM and gamespotters all seem to REALLY enjoy the title. My copy is on the way; and if Pikmin's scores are anything to go by; I will enjoy this.
* ps.. review not withstanding but your mag blows.
You're a disgrace and you know you made a mistake by not seeing if someone else on staff enjoyed the title. IGN, EGM and gamespotters all seem to REALLY enjoy the title. My copy is on the way; and if Pikmin's scores are anything to go by; I will enjoy this.
* ps.. review not withstanding but your mag blows.
Your logic makes sense and it does sound valiable, but it still doesn't change the fact that people will read your magazine and think Paper Mario 2 is nothing more than average game and, worst of all, won't buy it or try it themselves. Sure, blame the people for their sheep-like behaviour, but I do feel it's because of this shit that games like Paper Mario don't get bought, yet EA's full-priced sportsgames rosterupdates sell like crazy.
Date of Lies
Banned
This was the most heated thread in quite a while, but I'm glad it had...it had...a...happy ending :*<
One thing about game mags, where do they find these "hardcore" girl gamers? They don't really exist, do they? I mean, maybe post-op or something.
One thing about game mags, where do they find these "hardcore" girl gamers? They don't really exist, do they? I mean, maybe post-op or something.
When it comes to reviews, IMO, yes, and it is a good possibility.Leviathan said:
In 2001 they ranked Halo 9th in the top 10 games for the year if I'm not mistaken. MGS2 was #1. They say they don't try to please, but the platform of the games that score well are a little suspicious to me.
So, with MGS3, GTA: SA, GT4 and even R&C3: UYA (recall the 10), I will be very surprised if they still find Halo 2 to be GotY in 2004.
Edit: Andy, GI does a great job with coverage, but when it comes to rating games, you guys are too far off for me to merit my full respect.