Support NeoGAF

[PepsimanVsJoe]

So you're angry that he thought Uncharted 2 was an 8.

Anyone who gives Uncharted 2 less than a 9 should just quit gaming cause it's obvious they have no idea what they're talking about.

 

[beelzebozo]

Anyone who gives Uncharted 2 less than a 9 should just quit gaming cause it's obvious they have no idea what they're talking about.

for real, did he see the production values?

 

[sleeping_dragon]

Just to remind you that Uncharted 2 is GAF's 2009 game of the year by a long margin, has 96% on Metacritic, and it has won every majors awards in the gaming industry. Name me a game that have done better.

 

[jibblypop]

I actually get my recommendations from Gaf.

Same here. GAF is the only place where I know there will be at least SOME people with the same taste in games as me.
Review sites love to tell me that I like outdated garbage that sucks. Since it's not the way they want the industry to be.
Well I don't like the overhyped blockbusters very often and GAF is the only place where I seem to get opinions tailored to my tastes so I know which game suits me the best.

 

[LiK]

omg, he has a different opinion!

 

[EmCeeGramr]

Just to remind you that Uncharted 2 is GAF's 2009 game of the year by a long margin, has 96% on Metacritic, and it has won every majors awards in the gaming industry. Name me a game that have done better.

my favorite color is red and i like cheddar cheese and lots of people like those things too


See, anyone can post something totally irrelevant to the thread topic.

 

[beelzebozo]

my favorite color is red and i like cheddar cheese and lots of people like those things too


See, anyone can post something totally irrelevant to the thread topic.

thank you for doing that so i didn't have to mention mario galaxy and look silly

 

[Wickerbasket]

Yeah, this is a bunch of bullshit.

First off, there ARE "large areas with great A.I. and could play out very differently" in Uncharted 2. Yes, there are scripted enemy waves/events, but how you play with them is up to you. If you are bored, you are probably playing the game using the same, boring pattern. Mix up your style.

I just finished playing Uncharted 2 with a bunch of total noobs, and I played the game completely differently then they do, and the battles then play out completely differently.

I used a lot of stealth to set up firefights. These guys would go in guns blazing or grenade throwing. I stealth kill, melee, and run-and-gun a lot and I use blindfire under cover a lot. I use the verticality of levels to my advantage. I hang-and-shoot a lot. These guys never run-and-gun, tend to stay on the ground using cover, and almost always zoom the rifle and aim for headshots. So the battles, even though they are from the same construction and scripted elements, play completely differently once the game's A.I. takes over.

The reason I play differently is partly because I play a lot of stealth games, less FPSs than they do, and I played through Crushing in Uncharted. When you play the different difficulties, especially Crushing in Uncharted: Drake's Fortune, you MUST learn to run-and-gun and blindfire. So that learned mechanic comes naturally to me, while a noob who's coming from playing 100 hrs of MW or GoW to Uncharted 2 will bring their old habits into the game, which changes the A.I.'s approach to killing you, especially in harder difficulties.

So, if you want a new challenge with the game, change difficulties, which forces you to learn new skills, or change the way you tend to play the game. If you are a "Gears-type" or FPS player primarily, and you finish Uncharted 2 kinda sticking to that style, learn to use stealth. Learn to melee. Learn to run-and-shoot. Look for vertical traversal elements to climb to get the high ground or hang-and-shoot.

Doing this completely changes the gameplay and how the A.I. reacts to you.

Yeah, if you play the game the same way every time, it'll play the same way. But if you mix it up and have FUN instead of just sticking to your safe, learned and practiced pattern, (what's the fun of that anyway?) you'll have more fun...because the A.I. will still try to kick your ass.

All that wall of text and all you're really saying is that he's playing the game wrong. The majority of people who play Uncharted 2 are going to play it like Gears of War because the combat system looks to be the same. I'm sure if you do crazy shit the A.I. will adapt, just like any game nowadays, but most people will be playing the way that gets the easiest results. If that leads to samey fights and boring gunplay then that's the developer's fault

If you have to tell someone they're playing the game wrong, usually that's the developers fault. Look at Space Giraffe as an example; blaming the user for boring gameplay is a sign of desperation.

 

[faridmon]

Anyone who gives Uncharted 2 less than a 9 should just quit gaming cause it's obvious they have no idea what they're talking about.

this is just pathetic and pity worthy.

 

[Dr Bad Dude PHD]

Uh...a review is a personal expression of ones tastes. If someone doesn't like interactive cinematic experiences, then they may not like U2. You're unhappy that he didn't like a game you liked and he didn't like it for reasons you do like it.

It's ok that that is what he is opinion is, what seems a bit silly to me is why someone who doesn't think this kind of game should exist is reviewing the game. It's kind of like having a website that reviews restaurants and sending the guy who doesn't like pizza to review the new pizza place that just opened.

Just ftr the above statement does not go hand in hand with the claim that we should just let fanboys only review games so everything gets a 10.

 

[selig]

Seems like he's just trying to start shit. That's one of the joys of being a reviewer, you'll catch shit from folks no matter what score you give a game, no biggie.

If anyone, it´s the opposite "group" that´s trying to start "shit". Giving UC2 an 8 sounds reasonable. It´s not like he gave it a 3/10.

 

[Segata Sanshiro]

I finished UC2 on Sunday and I think I'd be more likely to give it an 8 than a 10. Probably I'd be comfortable with an 8.5. As a big Naughty Dog fan from waaaay back I'm not sure I understand why Jak got so maligned while this series is doing so well. I mean, they're both great series, but the strengths and weaknesses are very, very similar in my opinion.

Jak 2 is still ND's best game imo.

 

[Rustymonke]

I actually get my recommendations from Gaf. If I want to know if a game is actually worthwhile, I'll head over here and read everyone's opinions. I will use a 'professional' site if I just want to get a quick peek at a specific game because of time constraints, i.e. as I scarf down breakfast before heading to work.

Now having said that, the problem with these reviewers is that they attempt to use an scale system, when they should just say 'Recommend/Don't Recommend' and just list the pros and cons they picked noticed during their time with the game. Thus, as much as I hate Kotaku, I do think that they'll approached reviews the best out of the bigger gaming sites.

Agreed. It's not particularly amazing criticism, scant little video game journalism is, but they're great reviews. They communicately a lot of useful analysis well, and allow me to judge how it would apply to my tastes.

 

[EmCeeGramr]

i'm playing rondo of blood and it probably got a lot of awards in japan and in turbografx magazine

I can also testify that it won Best Action Game of All Time from Penis Lords Weekly, which is more reputable than any other publication written by man or L. Ron Hubbard

So, imo, I disagree, respectfully, in my opinion, but anyone who disagrees with me is an idiot because, even though we all know that numbers don't matter (pulls out metacritic stats) these numbers prove that anyone who disagrees with me is dumb. But frankly I don't care if someone disagrees with me using a number, because numbers don't matter. If they express that same opinion of using words that roughly equal that same number, however, I will fucking murder them for being so goddamned stupid and I hope they lose their job. IMO respectfully.

So while it may be his opinion, it is a fact that Rondo of Blood cannot be compared to any other video game. It was like the road to Damascus. One time I fought an enemy and I whipped them, and another time I used a cross, and sometimes I like to mix it up and use an axe from below. I call this the Perfect Stealth Plan. No other game allows this.

Finally if someone does not enjoy classic castlevania games and notes certain flaws inherent to the genre which can drive away certain people, then I hope someone drives a truck into his dog's face. I don't care if you feel that games lacking certain elements are tiring and flawed and that this game is an example of that, I want to know if you think this game is objectively perfect and if not when I can firebomb your car.

So in conclusion, butts butts butts butts butts butts butts butts butts butts butts butts butts butts butts butts butts butts butts butts butts butts butts butts butts butts butts butts butts butts

 

[faridmon]

i'm playing rondo of blood and it probably got a lot of awards in japan and in turbografx magazine

I can also testify that it won Best Action Game of All Time from Penis Lords Weekly, which is more reputable than any other publication written by man or L. Ron Hubbard

So, imo, I disagree, respectfully, in my opinion, but anyone who disagrees with me is an idiot because, even though we all know that numbers don't matter (pulls out metacritic stats) these numbers prove that anyone who disagrees with me is dumb. But frankly I don't care if someone disagrees with me using a number, because numbers don't matter. If they express that same opinion of using words that roughly equal that same number, however, I will fucking murder them for being so goddamned stupid and I hope they lose their job. IMO respectfully.

So while it may be his opinion, it is a fact that Rondo of Blood cannot be compared to any other video game. It was like the road to Damascus. One time I fought an enemy and I whipped them, and another time I used a cross, and sometimes I like to mix it up and use an axe from below. I call this the Perfect Stealth Plan. No other game allows this.

Finally if someone does not enjoy classic castlevania games and notes certain flaws inherent to the genre which can drive away certain people, then I hope someone drives a truck into his dog's face. I don't care if you feel that games lacking certain elements are tiring and flawed and that this game is an example of that, I want to know if you think this game is objectively perfect and if not when I can firebomb your car.

So in conclusion, butts butts butts butts butts butts butts butts butts butts butts butts butts butts butts butts butts butts butts butts butts butts butts butts butts butts butts butts butts butts

Rondo of Blood is the definition of 8. you are clearly wrong

 

[ThatObviousUser]

for real, did he see the production values?

:lol Damn it, of all the posts to get me. :lol

 

[Goodacre0081]

why is it always PS3 games that seem to attract this type of controversy?

 

[Salazar]

why is it always PS3 games that seem to attract this type of controversy?

I don't think there has to be a reason, a perceptible or explicable cause. Just a cosmic law we have to deal with.

 

[Dabanton]

why is it always PS3 games that seem to attract this type of controversy?

To be honest i think it's the months and in some cases years of hype that the games get PS3 fans seem to be a bit more 'passionate' in hyping themselves up for certain exclusive games.

We've seen it with KZ2,MGS4,UC2 and the latest one Heavy Rain when scores are given that would otherwise be just fine the shit hits the fan and the calls of conspiracies and other far fetched theories come out to play.

 

[Pristine_Condition]

All that wall of text and all you're really saying is that he's playing the game wrong. The majority of people who play Uncharted 2 are going to play it like Gears of War because the combat system looks to be the same.

Yeah. I know this. I basically said this in my post. But the combat system isn't "basically the same." It only appears that way to shitty players who only scratch the surface. If you get out of your Gears comfort zone, you realize that really quick. That's what I was saying. You are basically agreeing with me.

And if you play multiplayer, you learn real quick this gameplay is very, very different from Gears.

I'm sure if you do crazy shit the A.I. will adapt, just like any game nowadays, but most people will be playing the way that gets the easiest results.

Really? Even on subsequent playthroughs? After all, that's what I was talking about. If that's the case, and most gamers just want an easy win, then people deserve what they get.

Personally, I don't buy your claim. I think most gamers do want challenge, especially when they replay a game.

Why else would you have different difficulty levels in games at all? Even more, why would you have unlockable difficulty levels like Crushing in Uncharted where the A.I. completely goes into a completely different level of behavior that requires you to learn a completely new style of play? Why would developers and players spend time on stylish, difficult combos in fighting games if all most gamers want is an easy win?

Why the hell would somebody just be "playing the way that gets the easiest results" if they aren't having fun anyway? What...is gaming a job to your or something? You have this big backlog of games you have to play or you're going to get fired?

If that leads to samey fights and boring gunplay then that's the developer's fault

At some point, you are responsible for being a boring fucking moron though. I can get through the single-player of most fighting games low kicking and jabbing the whole time. certainly, that's "playing the way that gets the easiest results," which, according to you is what most gamers want. Does that mean I should play that way, and never bother to learn any of the flashy, fun stuff?

Bullshit.

If you have to tell someone they're playing the game wrong, usually that's the developers fault. Look at Space Giraffe as an example; blaming the user for boring gameplay is a sign of desperation.

Wow, you just used Space Giraffe as an example in an Uncharted 2 discussion. Uncharted 2...the game that has come as close to sweeping every major gaming award as any game could reasonably be expected to...and you use Space Giraffe as an example in discussing its gameplay. I thought you were serious here...but now I realize I was responding to an obvious joke post.

 

[beelzebozo]

why is it always PS3 games that seem to attract this type of controversy?

if you're looking for a legitimate answer, my postulation is that it has much to do with the early sales troubles of the ps3, and the perception that a holy messiah of gamedom will come and turn the tide against the competitors. sony has been doing just fine chipping away at it piece-by-piece with just smart business decisions, good services, and good software; when a game is not universally agreed to be the second-coming, though, i think people feel desperate and backed into a corner. they want so badly to believe that this is the real jesus that they'll burn anyone who says otherwise.

 

[Ulairi]

Remove all numbered scores from reviews and the world would be a happier place.

Still, over 100 media outlets gave U2 GOTY, 40 gave it a perfect score on Metacritic. Giving a game an 8 when the vast majority of critical comment puts a median at well over 9 means your comments are close to being an outlier. When you back it up with personal opinion that you are against this type of game means you are critiquing the style of game rather than how the particular game executes. No one is interested in that sort of review when it becomes a discussion of your preferred game genre.

He uses phrases like "I know today that I want something else" and "Is it the right path for the action genre to go? I dont believe so" to emphasise his particular opinion on the game genre rather than the game itself.

Crap review is crap and he should have been lampooned over it no matter what score he gave.

I don't think you understand what a review is for. It is a personal opinion of a game. And yes, if you're are reviewing an action adventure game you will be critiquing the style of game as well as how that game executes. If someone doesn't like how the action/adventure genre has moved this generation, they will use that as a foundation of why they may not like a specific game.

you're unhappy that uncharted 2 got an 8.
What's wrong with games journalism? GAF.

 

[BlackTyrano]

you are awsome, mate and agree with you.

Having said that, i can never imagine anyone hating on Bioshock unless he approached it in a wrong way. The game is not an FPS and is trying to do something completely different.

as for me, i never read reviews until i play a game for x amount of hours and see if what have i missed in terms of how i initially approached it.

and you know what it bloody works and i am glad i can enjoy more games that way.

no you don't

 

[neojubei]

If you don't agree with the reviews and scores, just don't buy the magazine or visit the website. I pretty much ended my subscription to play magazine after they gave heavenly sword a 10, I mean really if that is what that magazine considered the best then I really didn't see eye to eye with them.

I'll admit there are reviews out there that made no sense, one such review docked points from uncharted 2 because Drake didn't leave prints in the snow, which was why i totally ignored that one.

Now to this gamereactors editor in chief, he should know that is giving his opinion on something and that opinion is also open to criticism. How many times have GAF criticism film critics on the OT boards or sports critics or music critics? The editor should know that he, in any opinion he gives will be criticized from everybody. And why not? If people didn't criticize reviews, notorious half-true reviews would run rampant. If I was a game reviewer I would want someone to criticize my work and take pot shots at me as I would know that my work is being read and I do have an audience.

 

[Pristine_Condition]

if you're looking for a legitimate answer, my postulation is that it has much to do with the early sales troubles of the ps3, and the perception that a holy messiah of gamedom will come and turn the tide against the competitors. sony has been doing just fine chipping away at it piece-by-piece with just smart business decisions, good services, and good software; when a game is not universally agreed to be the second-coming, though, i think people feel desperate and backed into a corner. they want so badly to believe that this is the real jesus that they'll burn anyone who says otherwise.

But how exactly does this apply to Uncharted 2, a game that actually does have universal acclaim?

It doesn't. The vast majority of people...gamers, the vast majority of game awards voters, journalists, game developers ect.--they all agree that Uncharted 2 was brilliant. Most thought it was the best game they played in a year absolutely packed with great games.

People aren't saying it's that good because they've all got some sort of farcical "backed into a corner" feeling like they are waiting for the "messiah of gamedom." You think the vast majority of gaming journalists and game developers are foaming at the mouth Sony fanboys? Of course not. This isn't a "legitimate answer" in terms of talking about Uncharted 2 at all.

We know what the motivation for Uncharted 2 fans is then...it is a great game that actually IS that good.

Clearly the only people shitting on Uncharted are a tiny minority. What's their motivation?

 

[DCharlie]

Wow, you just used Space Giraffe as an example in an Uncharted 2 discussion. Uncharted 2...the game that has come as close to sweeping every major gaming award as any game could reasonably be expected to...and you use Space Giraffe as an example in discussing its gameplay. I thought you were serious here...but now I realize I was responding to an obvious joke post.

nope, his post made sense - even if i don't fully agree with it.

Space Giraffe *looks* a hell of a lot like Tempest, and people who played it expecting it to be like Tempest ended up throwing their arms in the air and saying "what IS this crap?" , what did it get at IGN? 2? something like that? This certainly links back to his point that people will see U2 and think it plays like GoW2.

The game needed a clearer tutorial, which it got in the form of some great online videos.

I -love- Space Giraffe, most people will simply not get it and the game doesn't help you figure it all out (which i personally enjoyed!) - it's a fault in the game itself for some because it doesn't lay it all out. I personally wouldn't attribute any blame, i've sat through Iridis Alpha and other Minter mindfukk games and being thrown in the shark infested custard is part of what makes the games so great. I don't think "if you have to tell the someone they are playing it wrong...." is quite right for this OR Uncharted 2.

U2 - i didn't even think about how i was playing it, i just played it. Stuff happened organically and i didn't personally feel that the game had "samey" / boring fights. Infact, pointing out constantly the different ways you can do something in the game may go someway to ruining that part of the game.

Game is absolutely great if you ask me, but that doesn't change that i can see why some people didn't quite throw cartwheels over it.

It doesn't. The vast majority of people...gamers, the vast majority of game awards voters, journalists, game developers ect.--they all agree that Uncharted 2 was brilliant. Most thought it was the best game they played in a year absolutely packed with great games.

but here is the thing.... someone who didn't go absolutely ape about the game (certainly seemed to like the game) scored it an 8.... inline with Mass Effect 2 and GOW3. THAT is a sign of a great game. Is that really "shitting on Uncharted" ?

 

[Segata Sanshiro]

It's pretty much just the Sony fan's version of 8.8.

Happens with any largely well-liked game when someone has the audacity to not enjoy it quite as much as the rest.

Clearly the only people shitting on Uncharted are a tiny minority. What's their motivation?

Is an 8/10 really "shitting" on a game, though?

 

[neojubei]

But how exactly does this apply to Uncharted 2, a game that actually does have universal acclaim?

It doesn't. The vast majority of people...gamers, the vast majority of game awards voters, journalists, game developers ect.--they all agree that Uncharted 2 was brilliant. Most thought it was the best game they played in a year absolutely packed with great games.

People aren't saying it's that good because they've all got some sort of farcical "backed into a corner" feeling like they are waiting for the "messiah of gamedom." You think the vast majority of gaming journalists and game developers are foaming at the mouth Sony fanboys? Of course not. This isn't a "legitimate answer" in terms of talking about Uncharted 2 at all.

We know what the motivation for Uncharted 2 fans is then...it is a great game that actually IS that good.

Clearly the only people shitting on Uncharted are a tiny minority. What's their motivation?

That is an interesting question.

It's pretty much just the Sony fan's version of 8.8.

Happens with any largely well-liked game when someone has the audacity to not enjoy it quite as much as the rest.

What about those that complained about the modern warfare 2 review? I guess the PS3 version fans were upset at this? Sorry you cannot just dump all sony fans and then go "lol" All fans sonyfanboy or not will criticize reviews. What would the fallout be if Alan Wake gets an 8 or less from the same editor?

 

[beelzebozo]

But how exactly does this apply to Uncharted 2, a game that actually does have universal acclaim?

zealotry tends to inspire some pretty caustic, irrational, emotional reactions. let's say hypothetically this guy gives the game an 8, and legitimately believes it's about an eight. because of what many fans of not only UC2, but also the system in general, perceive to be a high stakes situation--"uncharted 2 must be great, and must sell well, because it legitimizes the system as good and worth owning"--the very idea that this has not come to fruition causes violent outbursts of emotion. the fact that the acclaim is largely favorable only tends to make these outbursts more focused.

i'm sure there are lots of studies about this that could be referenced in fields outside video gaming, of course, but i'm not really inclined to do a lot of scholastic research on fanaticism in order to talk about the topic. but i think from general good horse sense you can look at the pieces on the board and see how this happens every time a big ps3 release is questioned.

 

[Chrange]

That is an interesting question.

I can't believe they 'shit' on it with an 8/10! Outrageous!!!

 

[Segata Sanshiro]

That is an interesting question.



What about those that complained about the modern warfare 2 review? I guess the PS3 version fans were upset at this? Sorry you cannot just dump all sony fans and then go "lol" All fans sonyfanboy or not will criticize reviews. What would the fallout be if Alan Wake gets an 8 or less from the same editor?

I would think by referencing the "8.8" situation I was clearly not specifying Sony fans.

 

[Servizio]

Can you imagine a world where we didn't assign an arbitrary number to games to represent our subjective enjoyment of them?

Shudder

 

[Loudninja]

I dont get it, he is talking both Uncharted 2 and Modern Warfare 2 in the op.Yet some how this is all about Uncharted 2?

 

[Foxtastical]

What if I really didn't like Uncharted 2? What if it just didn't work for me due to characters, atmosphere, gunplay, etc? What do I score it?

 

[neojubei]

I would think by referencing the "8.8" situation I was clearly not specifying Sony fans.

Oh ok, didn't get the 8.8 reference.

Sometimes I wish reviews would just use the thumbs up or thumbs down type of reviewing or buy it or rent it type. Everyone gets so uptight with 9.2 and 9.3 difference in reviews and even looking at it, the numerical point system feels very flat as most games that do get the glorious 10 does not always mean the same to someone else.


Anyways that Editor should learn to take criticism, as he is someone that critiques someone's work, there will be people to criticize the editor's reviews.

 

[Segata Sanshiro]

Oh ok, didn't get the 8.8 reference.

Sometimes I wish reviews would just use the thumbs up or thumbs down type of reviewing or buy it or rent it type. Everyone gets so uptight with 9.2 and 9.3 difference in reviews and even looking at it, the numerical point system feels very flat as most games that do get the glorious 10 does not always mean the same to someone else.


Anyways that Editor should learn to take criticism, as he is someone that critiques someone's work, there will be people to criticize the editor's reviews.

I've always hated the numbering system, but what can you do... it sells magazines and/or brings in the hits.

And yes, that editor needs to get some thicker skin. I got fucking buried in hatemail for giving Sonic Adventure an 8/10, and you didn't see me complaining.

 

[Equus Bellator Apex]

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.

I agree.

 

[Slavik81]

It's a free magazine

Close thread.

So was EGM, practically speaking. Even the paid subscriptions would barely cover more than the postage.

 

[Pristine_Condition]

zealotry tends to inspire some pretty caustic, irrational, emotional reactions. let's say hypothetically this guy gives the game an 8, and legitimately believes it's about an eight. because of what many fans of not only UC2, but also the system in general, perceive to be a high stakes situation--"uncharted 2 must be great, and must sell well, because it legitimizes the system as good and worth owning"--the very idea that this has not come to fruition causes violent outbursts of emotion. the fact that the acclaim is largely favorable only tends to make these outbursts more focused.

i'm sure there are lots of studies about this that could be referenced in fields outside video gaming, of course, but i'm not really inclined to do a lot of scholastic research on fanaticism in order to talk about the topic. but i think from general good horse sense you can look at the pieces on the board and see how this happens every time a big ps3 release is questioned.

Once again...a lot of words about a lot of things, but none of them actually apply to Uncharted 2, which is the subject here.

Look, at some point, the critic himself has to look at the vast majority of opinion among his peers at least.

If he did, which is quite easy to do, thanks to Metacritic, he'd realize that out of 105 critics' reviews, if his review was included, it would have been tied for the LOWEST review the game received from any of his critic peers, and his review score was off by more than a full point or even two from 103 out of 105 peers.

So it shouldn't be shocking to him that people were surprised by his comparatively low review. It was indeed low. It was indeed well out of the norm. That doesn't mean it's wrong for him to feel that way, or that his opinion is wrong, but it certainly means his opinion is far outside the median. When you have an opinion so far out of the mainstream, don't be silly and act surprised that people don't agree with you.

To me, this critic just seems like he's grandstanding now. Nobody cares who you are or that you got some hate mail dood. It happens to people all the time, especially critics. Stop crying and begging for us to pay attention to you. It's obviously desperate.

 

[Pristine_Condition]

but here is the thing.... someone who didn't go absolutely ape about the game (certainly seemed to like the game) scored it an 8.... inline with Mass Effect 2 and GOW3. THAT is a sign of a great game. Is that really "shitting on Uncharted" ?

I never said the reviewer who gave the 8 to Uncharted was "shitting on Uncharted." Those are other people. This was in response to the zealotry comments that don't have any place in this discussion.

I read the guy's review and he was mostly positive. His negatives were actually pretty lame. He certainly wasn't shitting on it though, and he certainly wasn't one of those people I'm talking about.

 

[beelzebozo]

Once again...a lot of words about a lot of things, but none of them actually apply to Uncharted 2, which is the subject here.

it applies completely. you can't see the forest for the trees, man. read the post about "why is it always about ps3 games?" that's what i was responding to.

Look, at some point, the critic himself has to look at the vast majority of opinion among his peers at least.

no, he doesn't. that's the worst thing he can do when writing his review or forming an opinion, really.

 

[Pristine_Condition]

it applies completely. you can't see the forest for the trees, man. read the post about "why is it always about ps3 games?" that's what i was responding to.

smh.

no, he doesn't. that's the worst thing he can do when writing his review or forming an opinion, really.

I'm not saying he does it WHILE he's forming his opinion or writing his review...I'm saying he does it AFTERWARDS, if he's confused why he's getting piles of hate mail, like this guy was.

I thought that was pretty clear, but I guess I have to spell that out for you.

 

[beelzebozo]

the hate mail itself is the retarded part.

 

[bobbytkc]

Holy crap this guy perfectly explained why I never shared in the ridiculous acclaim Uncharted 2 got. The game really is quite good but I guess "good" just isn't enough for many people for whatever reason. If you think Uncharted 2 is amazing that's perfectly fine and all but attacking people for not liking the game enough?

Although I guess, to be fair, when you see 8.8 happen nothing about responses to review scores should be surprising anymore.

Well, many people base a large part of their gaming purchases on such reviews. It is perfectly understandable that people will be pissed because they felt that they were mislead by a review with opinions startlingly different from their own.

 

[jman2050]

But how exactly does this apply to Uncharted 2, a game that actually does have universal acclaim?

Among a relatively small subset of the human population, yes.

It doesn't. The vast majority of people...gamers, the vast majority of game awards voters, journalists, game developers ect.--they all agree that Uncharted 2 was brilliant. Most thought it was the best game they played in a year absolutely packed with great games.

This is starting to sound like an Appeal to Authority defense.

People aren't saying it's that good because they've all got some sort of farcical "backed into a corner" feeling like they are waiting for the "messiah of gamedom." You think the vast majority of gaming journalists and game developers are foaming at the mouth Sony fanboys? Of course not. This isn't a "legitimate answer" in terms of talking about Uncharted 2 at all.

Sony fanboys have nothing to do with this, I agree.

We know what the motivation for Uncharted 2 fans is then...it is a great game that actually IS that good.

I don't think it's THAT good, but as I said, opinions and whatnot.

Clearly the only people shitting on Uncharted are a tiny minority. What's their motivation?

And this sentence gets to the reason this is such an issue. Saying the game is "pretty good" is somehow not good enough for Uncharted fans, to the point where giving the game an 8 or attempting to point out flaws or misgivings one had with their experience means they're "shitting on it". It's 8.8 all over again but on a much wider scale because these fans have the good fortune of having a few hundred people who happen to have voices in the industry not giving a dissenting view. I'll defend my favorite games on an objective level, and have done so plenty of times on this board, but I never EVER go into a debate with the idea that if someone doesn't like the game as much as I do that something is wrong with them.

 

[RustyNails]

 

[Master Z]

Personally I love "interactive movie" style games and UC2 is a 9/10 for me but I have no problem with this man's perspective and review score, even if he gave it a lower score because, well it's just his opinion man. I'm all up for debate but personally attacking this guy for his opinion is childish and I don't understand why people get all pissy like that. Some form of insecurity perhaps? Group think? Another man's opinion about something will never affect my enjoyment of it. Never.

 

[Equus Bellator Apex]

why is it always PS3 games that seem to attract this type of controversy?

(sorry about the typos)

Early in the PS3's life gaming journalist kept bring the point of wether or not a game was

worth 500-600 dollars, i.e. x game is really good but is it really worth $600 dollars? People

thought this line line of thinking was unfair and presented an "unwinnable" scenerio. This

was one of the factors that led up to current "us versus them" school of thought that is

now present throughout some sectors of Sony Fandom.


In regards to Killzone 2, I think that's where most people first look as evidence that Sony

fans are the "worst". What gets lost on some people is that up until that first gameplay

trailer the the hoards of Mircosoft and Nintendo fandom were licking their chops to deploy

their LOL sony gifs if the gameplay trailer didn't live up to the standerds set by the initial

cg. During the run up to the reveal of the new trailer some some Sony fans felt so

confidant that Killzone would deliver tey Killzoned their avatar. Now this is a huge step

because at this point they have now idea how the trailer will turn out, they risk humiliation.

Trailer hits, more or less delivers and the Sony Fandom feels somthing they haven't felt in

awhile, vindication.

They put their trust into somthing intangible and got rewarded for it, thus the cycle

begins.

 

[faridmon]

no you don't

yes i do. Bioshock is not an FPS even though it is played from FP perspective. am I missing something?

 

[Pristine_Condition]

Personally I love "interactive movie" style games and UC2 is a 9/10 for me but I have no problem with this man's perspective and review score, even if he gave it a lower score because, well it's just his opinion man. I'm all up for debate but personally attacking this guy for his opinion is childish and I don't understand why people get all pissy like that. Some form of insecurity perhaps? Group think? Another man's opinion about something will never affect my enjoyment of it. Never.

Really, the guy probably isn't getting that much heat, at least not compared to bigger-name reviewers at the big-name sites/mags. Can you imagine the mail the 1Up guys were getting at the peak of their influence? Those guys know they are going to get email and comments, and they develop a thick skin. I don't think we ever heard Dan Hsu cry about people commenting about the "subtle beauty" shit, and you KNOW he got slammed. Why, 'cause those guys at EGM and 1Up were big-time. This guy is not.

Fact is, this guy and his little pub wouldn't even have been noticed if he hadn't been tied for the lowest Uncharted 2 review.

I think he's crying now to try to get some of that attention back. It's been five months since Uncharted came out. I doubt anyone still remembered what his review said or what his score even was, especially since it isn't on Metacritic.