Son of Godzilla
Banned
CrushDance makes me wish I owned a little puppy. I'd play with it's widdle paws.
Gamereactors editor in chief "I was blasted over Uncharted 2 review" + review scores
- Thread starter darkwings
- Start date
CrushDance
Banned
What? No. That's what I'm saying, I can't think of a singe action game that isn't cheesy.thetrin said:
theignoramus
Member
is that "his" score or the score his magazine gave?Corky said:
If that his score, then his comments have to be seen in a different light...a more humorous light.:lol
Rustymonke
Member
I don't need a response to that, do I? :lolCrushDance said:
When he says shallow in this context he's not referring to the 'intelligence' or quality of the game, but the completely limited gameplay open to you at any one stage. Every single person who plays is shunted from the same set piece to same set piece and is only allowed to approach them in nearly identical ways. Pretty much everything you post is wholly irrelevant. It's extremely enjoyable, and well crafted, but it's also cheap (not in the financial sense) and easy, takes little advantage of video games as a medium and does it no favours either. Every time you take the roller coaster, it's the same and you know exactly what to expect. Not even Naughty Dog themselves would deny that, why do you feel the need to defend them? UC2 is fantastic at what it does, with such tight story/gameplay integration, but I'd hate for every game to be the same (unfortunately games are becoming more and more 'cinematic').
Half-Life is the only thoughtful shooter? Buh? Now, I love Half-life but I have to conclude you have no idea what you're talking about. Half-Life is the quintessential roller-coaster fps. I recall Warren Spector lamenting that there's no possible way he could compete with the scripted experience of playing a Half-Life for the first time, but he was going to keep trying as that was the only way to get better. Of course, Deus Ex and HL are two extremes (although one has become a lot more popular than other)...
Epic quote btw. "Uncharted 2 will blow you away".
Sohter.Nura said:
Blockbuster games DON'T always feel like that though. There have already been many games released this gen that could be considered blockbusters that aren't "OMG SO EPIC" feeling. There's room for both. Reviews are about what a game does, not what it "should" do.
EmCeeGramr
Member
Every time there's a thread where a reviewer or publication talks about being flamed over a review and how dumb it is, the ensuing thread always turns out the same way.
-Posters looking up the reviewer/publication's review history for comparison to the reviewed game in question
-Posters typing up attempted rebuttals of the review in question, usually with the disclaimer of "it's his opinion but I disagree."
Neither of those things are the point. It's not about whether you agree with his review or even if he has supposedly "good" taste. His review history could be a trainwreck of bizarre and contradictory scores, it doesn't matter. The point is, flaming and insulting a reviewer over that is petty and childish.
-Posters looking up the reviewer/publication's review history for comparison to the reviewed game in question
-Posters typing up attempted rebuttals of the review in question, usually with the disclaimer of "it's his opinion but I disagree."
Neither of those things are the point. It's not about whether you agree with his review or even if he has supposedly "good" taste. His review history could be a trainwreck of bizarre and contradictory scores, it doesn't matter. The point is, flaming and insulting a reviewer over that is petty and childish.
ShockingAlberto
Member
So, if I'm to understand this
Guy makes a post saying how people are reactionary and feral when it comes to review scores
GAF responds to this by being reactionary and feral to a few review scores of a magazine 99% of them have not read and have literally no context for
Guy makes a post saying how people are reactionary and feral when it comes to review scores
GAF responds to this by being reactionary and feral to a few review scores of a magazine 99% of them have not read and have literally no context for
EmCeeGramr said:
Pretty much, but by actually commenting on the rage that petty nerds have directed against him (and the magazine), he essentially validates the whole shebang to be something more than some idiotic occurence on the net. Seriously, reviewers should also have the professionality of not retaliating stupid shit, setting a higher standard and refraining from stooping down to the kiddy level.
Vigilant Walrus
Member
ShockingAlberto said:
That's what I gather as well.
But even if they had read it... What's the point?
Am I the only one who thinks it's short sighted to dismiss someones opinion as irelevent depending on their personal gaming preferences?
Reviews are subjective. A good review has nothing to do with agreeing with it. If a perfect review was supposed to appeal to all kinds of people, every game would get rated 7.
We all dislike things that are universally, loved in the generalised culture.
Stabby McSter
Member
Why would this even be considered in the reviewing process? It has nothing to do with the core gameplay or anything.Swittcher said:
ShockingAlberto
Member
It doesn't really work this way in any other industry, does it?BeeDog said:
I mean, you have the occasional nutbags that think Avatar should have won Best Picture or been reviewed with perfect scores, or that Dan Patterson's newest book is as truly unputdownable as he claims, but by and large people accept that someone's opinion is their opinion and it doesn't have to match yours. In the video game industry, if a reviewer doesn't agree with you about something that is, in your eyes, objectively great, then the problem is with them.
Look at every month's EDGE thread, especially this one. Some people in that thread have gone capital-C Crazy. Why? Edge doesn't like the games they like, so they're wrong, stupid, have financial motivations and are thus evil, xenophobic, etc., etc.
One of the reasons I got out of reviewing is I realized you can't just make your point, you can't state your opinions on the game and get out. Half the people want you to tell everything about the game like a Wiki entry, the other half want to know if you like it, but every one of them places emphasis on the score and not the text. And god help you if you disagree.
I once marked some innocuous little game....Sonic Battle, I think, with a pretty standard review and score. Then I later gave Fire Emblem: Path of Radiance, probably my favorite game of a series I've been playing for about a decade now, a fairly high score. You would not believe the hatemail I got for those two reviews.
But if I were reviewing two movies and liked one and disliked the other, no one would have cared. People would have just made up their own minds and said "That guy disagrees with me, oh well!"
ShockingAlberto said:
Fair point, but that's the thing, stupid nerd gamers devote too much of their time (and parts of their souls) to argue about petty and subjective stuff on the net. You're right in that it seems to be fairly unique to this medium alone, but I guess I'm naïve when I expect (or rather, hope) that reviewers can let it slide after they've printed their opinion. Movie critics, for example, do get their fair share of flak (take the White review of District 9 as an example), but, as you said, it is indeed more common here.
This is one thing EDGE actually does well; they hide the reviewer behind the collective magazine name. This is really something more publications need to do, and then they wouldn't feel as singled out as some outlets now seem to feel. Perhaps if this became more widespread, then the often-personal attacks on reviewers would stop.
CrushDance
Banned
Rustymonke said:
You're moving from one piece to another in every game are you not? What's the difference between that and level to level or world to world in Mario? You can't break a game with a story to tell(Cinematic games like you mention) into separate pieces, there's a beginning, middle and end. What he originally said was the following:
The only thing I argued was that the games were fun first and scripted after the fact. Go watch the GOW2 dev diary for an example, they talked about how even though they had some cool ideas, they were never implemented due to them not being fun for the player. He said "more gameplay substance", what more less does Uncharted do over Tomb Raider? It's more action/shooter orientated but you're still playing, climbing, jumping, shooting. What more gameplay are you guys talking about? All I'm talking about is the core gameplay mechanics that makes games fun. Nobody is going to sit through something if they don't find it enjoyable. I still play Uncharted 2 to this day with Gaffers in the multiplayer and occasionally play some of my favourite chapters in singleplayer. Maybe there's a misunderstanding here because all the points I brought up originally, such as a skins were only meant for the discussion of gameplay/replayability.
As for the thoughtful shooter comment, I was talking in regards to Killzones plot. XD
ShockingAlberto
Member
That's the other side of the stupid-coin, though. Because EDGE doesn't use names, people think everything's being written by one guy named EDGE.BeeDog said:
I mean, intellectually, yeah. They know it's different people. But then you still get "EDGE gave Dragon Age a bad score, but loved ______!" as if the reviewer were definitely the same.
People like to lash out at identities.
I AM JOHN!
Banned
Well come now, if you score Sonic Battle anything less than the 5,000,000/10 it rightfully deserves, then you warrant all the hate you get.ShockingAlberto said:
I think the long and the short of it is just that gaming is still incredibly immature and while there's rabid fanboyism in other mediums, it usually manifests itself in an appreciation of the auteur (a band or a James Cameron or what have you), not the collective (Sony, Microsoft, Nintendo, individual franchises). Plus most people who read movie and book reviews aren't idiots who think that reviews should be "as objective as possible," which is another sign that the gaming audience has a long way to go.
Dogenzaka said:
Why do you think an 8 or 9 for Mass Effect 2 would be "really harsh"? The game isn't perfect; it is a really fun RPG-shooter with amazing sci-fi universe, but it also has lots of flaws (almost non-existed main storyline is only one of them).
And about this thread, boy is it similar to the EDGE thread. Once again it seems people do not understand that reviews are just opinions and not everyone has to love (that is, give 10/10) big blockbuster games.
And <lol> at "how they scored Halo games", "GTA4 games" etc. How is it even relevant to what the guy is saying?
ShockingAlberto said:
I honestly think one can chalk this phenomenon up to be because of the (generally) lower average age in the gamer demographics. Youngsters with too much time on their hands have a knack for targetting specific identities unlike older people, just as you said, but I also think game reviewers are more sensitive just because they're more connected to their "consumer" group than in other fields, and take criticisms/tantrums to the heart much easier. Reviews published on the Internet always have some form of Comments section connected to it, and we all know just how easily they turn into cesspools.
In my humble opinion, I'd say going the EDGE route is the lesser of two evils. We would still see the same people whining about double standards and whatnot every month, but at least that way others can laugh at the stupidity that those topics bring. Hurting people's intellect by not pinpointing the exact reviewer is a complete banality, and outside of some Internet ragers, wouldn't be a major problem (unless the actual reviewer decides to read everything on the Internet).
"trying to be a movie"
Nice meme...
Does this cover every game that's accessible, has gorgeous visuals, and beautiful character animations?
He's dismissing an entire genre/style.
Which is fine I guess because I think puzzle games in all their various disgusting disguises suck a big fucking dick.
Nice meme...
Does this cover every game that's accessible, has gorgeous visuals, and beautiful character animations?
He's not defending his review.Mr_Zombie said:
He's dismissing an entire genre/style.
Which is fine I guess because I think puzzle games in all their various disgusting disguises suck a big fucking dick.
Pristine_Condition
Member
Darklord said:
Funny post, but it doesn't apply to Uncharted 2 at all. Five months after its release, Uncharted 2 is still winning Game of the Year awards.
Uncharted 2 has basically been the Christoph Waltz of videogames. You saw Waltz's performance, and you knew he was a winner. Same thing playing Uncharted 2. Just like Waltz, it wins every major award it's up for.
Sure, there are a few haters that come out of the woodwork (that may or may not have actually played the game) but I'm pretty sure Uncharted 2 fans who were talking about what a triumph Uncharted 2 was back then still feel the same way now. If they don't, they probably just need to slide the game back in the PS3, and give it a play again.
I know when I did a playthrough recently at a buddy's house, I was grinning from ear-to-ear during the game, both reliving my own experience, and watching a group of people having that experience for the first time. Especially though scenes like:
- "There's a guard above you! ...There's a guard below you!"
- When Drake is chased down the street by the armored car
- The first gunship chase-collapsing building scene
- The train scene
- The "calm" village scene
- The tank battle in the village
- The convoy scene, jumping from truck to truck
- The grave scene-ending "tears in a jar"
- When Drake is chased down the street by the armored car
- The first gunship chase-collapsing building scene
- The train scene
- The "calm" village scene
- The tank battle in the village
- The convoy scene, jumping from truck to truck
- The grave scene-ending "tears in a jar"
...and so many more. When you've played through it a few times, you do start to take its greatness for granted, like how every single element of the game, and every single game-making tool is utilized in such a refined way. The gameplay, graphics and physics, the sound and music, the quality of writing and the actors' brilliant performances--so many moving parts, each beautifully well-executed, but even greater when all are blended together in one experience.
When you see people play it for the first time, it reminds you how great it really is. It's good to be reminded too, because, bottom line, Uncharted 2 is still a heck of a lot of fun to play.
Thunderbear
Mawio Gawaxy iz da Wheeson hee pways games
I would argue that Uncharted 2 is MORE interactive than action games of the past like Tomb Raider. Instead of watching cut scenes, you were often playing them. It didn't play itself but as a developer you have to set the normal to the largest audience. If you want a challenge, start at hard.
Uncharted 2 is one of my favorite games ever, I am extremely happy that this guy is in the minority with his thoughts.
Heavy Rain on the other hand, I can see his point. After having played it I wouldn't have given the game a score higher than 7-8. The story was great, but to me it really was a sort of Dragon's Lair WITH some great moments where you really felt the repercussions of your actions. Most of the time, the game played itself IMO.
But Uncharted 2 was more interactive than most games attempting to be cinematic. Scenes we usually would see in a cut-scene, like a building falling with you in it, you were controlling your character and fighting enemies in a dynamic environment.
I never agree with name-calling and cussing someone out like Gaffers love to do. The guy is allowed to have his opinion. I disagree with it. Pretty much completely.
Uncharted 2 is one of my favorite games ever, I am extremely happy that this guy is in the minority with his thoughts.
Heavy Rain on the other hand, I can see his point. After having played it I wouldn't have given the game a score higher than 7-8. The story was great, but to me it really was a sort of Dragon's Lair WITH some great moments where you really felt the repercussions of your actions. Most of the time, the game played itself IMO.
But Uncharted 2 was more interactive than most games attempting to be cinematic. Scenes we usually would see in a cut-scene, like a building falling with you in it, you were controlling your character and fighting enemies in a dynamic environment.
I never agree with name-calling and cussing someone out like Gaffers love to do. The guy is allowed to have his opinion. I disagree with it. Pretty much completely.
A game has to be fun foremost but most of what you wrote was about non gameplay.CrushDance said:
I was a big Uncharted fan but the game is almost exactly the same each time I play it. The AI does a lot of stuff but it is confined in small areas and homes in on Drake immediately if it "knows he is there". The tank always knocks down the wall at certain spot, the helicopter follows a set path, drake has random platforming abilities based on the script, the wack a mole mercenaries line up in certain areas that are not free form fights. If the game had more variety to action like Metal Gear Solid 3 I would have zero complaints about it.
Killzone 2. Single player was not even enjoyable when I tried going back to earlier levels. I did like the online though, I eventually stopped because I do not like online shooters with gamepads much. I was thinking only of single player when I complained about it not being all that it can be. If the single player was sandbox areas like Crysis the single player game would have been brilliant.
God of War just does not have "it" with the combat. Press buttons and cool shit happens but it is not as engaging as DMC, Bay, Godhand, or even Mad World. Theoretically I should like god of war a lot because of the camera, the spinning camera and lockon system of DMC and bayonetta drives me bonkers.
Shallow is not the best word. These games lack the high level of ambition in pure mechanics(not cutscenes and mood which they have tons of ambition in). As far as grabbing the controller and having an amazing game these games could aspire to be more. In some games the stuff you do makes up for production values and makes a great game like Godhand. Uncharted, Killzone, and Gow, are making up for "average" with movie like presentation.
CrushDance
Banned
Ah, I see. See for me it's about the whole package and that includes all the things mentioned before. You're talking always being in control and doing everything, I don't mind the cutscenes and scripted events. That's why I started going off about this and that with the gamesGrayman said:
Having the camera pan out and show you where you are etc I think is neat, blowing up bridges and so forth. I see what you mean now though.
8 is a great score for a game like Uncharted 2 if 8s weren't given out so freely by GR. But I mean come on. Most gamers will admit that this is probably the best in it's genre. So when you have 3-4 games a month getting an 8 and sometimes 9, it IS a lower score than most people would give it.
JordanLMiller
Member
Haven't read anything in this thread except the OP and I think movie-like games have been given really inflated scores, especially lately. It's not just people casually browsing the videogame section who are pulled in by cinematic quality graphics - it's professional reviewers too. The funny thing is, in a year or two these games are gonna look a lot worse in comparison to the next big thing and then what are you left with? Still, sad to see stuff like this happening...
theignoramus
Member
determines his level of credibility when he says he doesnt go apeshit over interactive movies. looking at his history, apparently he does, so why do you demand that others take him seriously?Mr_Zombie said:
Safe Bet said:
He is doing both. He is defending his review by explaining that he doesn't like the way the industry is heading with those Hollywood-style games.
theignoramus said:
I've never played Halo games but I've played a lot of GTA games and GTA is anything but an interactive movie; so, again, what's the point?
Rustymonke
Member
Except in Uncharted everybody who plays goes from the exact same piece to exact same piece in the exact same order. Level to level in Mario? That's a completely different scale, that's not "Mario" gameplay. Mario is a very linear game, back when limited technology made it more acceptable. I don't know why you chose that game in particular, but you still have lots of verbs and possible actions open to you as you play to use creatively. To defeat a hammer bro, you could sneak underneath and wait until he drops to the lowest column of bricks and hit hin from underneath, run and slide under him, be aggresive and jump on his head, take a shell from earlier enemy, use a powerup to shoot him or fly overhead. Etc etc. And any combination of said moves. Meeting the same enemy with a different surrounding geography, and supplementary baddies gives you wholly different situations to figure out. And actually even how you finish a level decides what levels you can play next (particularly in SMW). And that's from what I'd call a linear game btw. Sure you can use different guns in Uncharted 2, but the vast majority of the game is hiding behind cover with different backgrounds. The village scene is an commendable and notable exception btw, I want to see more of that.CrushDance said:
Tomb Raider? Why do you keep bringing up examples I never mentioned? These are all false dichotomies. Tomb Raider is also very linear, although there is a bit more freedom and exploration than UC2 (you are at least not being rushed from one palce to another to create easy tension). There is place for these games (a large place), I just wish audience demand wasn't making every single game go this route. And the climbing is my favourite bit of UC btw; I wish it was more the focus in the sequel rather than less.
Next. Of course stories need to have an arc, but they don't always have to be the bloody same, and you don't always have to do it the same way. Did you sneak in the back of the mansion? Did you disguise yourself as a courier? Did you poison the food? Did you sniper from a distance? Did you go in all guns blazing? Did you plant remote mines? (And so on with the Hitman examples) Videogames can do things no other medium can. They can reflect and be shaped by the individual thoughts, opinions and creativity of each player! Let's leverage that; let's not fuck it up people. Deus Ex. QED.
Of course they had plenty of good ideas that didn't made in GoW2, the same is true of every single game. So bloody what? The mechanics of GoW still amount to clearing a room of enemies with the same combos, and moving to another room, cleverly broken up a puzzle, vista, talky or new enemy. No one is questioning how well crafted they are, just that they offer one really great experience and not a large spectrum of interesting, surprising ones. Because if I wanted a great, tightly scritped experience I'd watch a bloody film.
Really, if you do think the core mechanics are what make a game fun, then why not concentrate on those instead of manufactured cinematic moments? Core mechanics that can create personal, unscripted cinematic moments naturally. Ugh. I don't even know what I'm arguing anymore... blah blah blah....
Misterinenja
Member
Completely agree with him. Uncharted 2 was a good ride but doesn't have a longevity, gameplay mechanics or impact for a classic status. Or any of those qualities I personally appreciate in a video game of that scale.
drakesfortune
Directions: Pull String For Uninformed Rant
But Uncharted 2 is so much more than just an interactive movie. That's why it's bullshit, and that's why he's getting called out. The story elements are awesome, no doubt, but the cut scenes aren't an hour long with tons of unnecessary bullshit. The gameplay mechanics, the platforming, the shooting, the cover, and all of that is why Uncharted 2 is such a great game. The fact that the story is one of the best told on top of the stellar gameplay is why Uncharted 2 has received the accolades it so deserves. I mean, clearly his opinion that it's just an unspectacular interactive movie is out of the mainstream opinion. He did have the lowest score for the game on Metacritic. One other person gave it an 8/10, and the next nearest score is an 89, and there's only one of those. That's only three scrores below a 90 out of 106 reviews. Those with the lowest and highest always get shit.
Rustymonke
Member
lolololLunchbox said:
::Ed - Tbh, I don't know how I got dragged into such a silly, tangential debate over such a thing. Especially with someone who seemingly has no experience of what I'm talking about. I'm just saddened that there's a generation of gamers growing up thinking of games only in the light, and even worse the possibility that these gamers will become the future creators.
CrushDance
Banned
So do you not want any scripted events then? How are you supposed to progress then with current games? Most of these games are meant to be accessible while being "teh hardcore" They give you a sense of scale and often times hint at where or what you're supposed to do next. The reason I brought up TR was due to its similarities with Uncharted, many people(I'm not saying you specifically) always say that TR has more gameplay, I was just trying to figure out exactly what type of games you see as having that balance or not.Rustymonke said:
Give me an example of these games you're talking about, doesn't have to be the same genre.