Barajas_201
Member
It's a bit strange there's no mention of GT on Defy's homepage, at least none I can see
Could it be a sign of the end of times? D:
Brandon and the gang bought themselves out. I WANT TO BELIEVE.
-
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.
Gametrailers Thread: Good Night and Good Game
- Thread starter Hasney
- Start date
Could it be a sign of the end of times? D:
AgentChris
Member
It's a bit strange there's no mention of GT on Defy's homepage, at least none I can see
I've recently become a fan of Kinda Funny and looooove the GameOverGreggy podcast, even more than their gaming stuff. I obviously like games but I get games commentary literally everywhere, and I think we all agree that we like GT for their personalities. Would love a show where they just talk about their lives and whatever interesting topics people throw at them every week.
I remember one episode of GameOverGreggy had them talking about gun control, music, journalism, and what object they would want buried with them in the grave. Was a lot of fun to listen to imo. I like when Ian injects that spontaneity into GT Time from time to time but I think my favorite direction for them to take would be a moderated, focused gaming show with GT Time and a more casual one with a podcast version of ManUp Nights or something new altogether.
I remember one episode of GameOverGreggy had them talking about gun control, music, journalism, and what object they would want buried with them in the grave. Was a lot of fun to listen to imo. I like when Ian injects that spontaneity into GT Time from time to time but I think my favorite direction for them to take would be a moderated, focused gaming show with GT Time and a more casual one with a podcast version of ManUp Nights or something new altogether.
Strange, not there for me
Would be cool, during the streams on Twitch they kinda go OT and discuss whatever, especially the longer ones like the FF7 stuff (which is why I like it so much).
Most of them seem a bit reluctant to discuss more controversial topics though, maybe because they're representing a brand.
I don't know if i would like that, to be honest.
In small tidbits, like in MUnights or during streams, it's great, but to be a standard segment?
First of all, talking about stuff like gun control and in general shit that isn't even remotely relevant to videogames is a useless minefield to cross, and it's not like they'd have something particularly salient to say on any given issue (i mean because they have no peculiar expertise or knowledge on the subject like they do in regards to videogames).
Already when they talk about movies you can see the gap, compared to their videogame talk (i'm generalizing here, but hopefully you get my point).
Again, it's stuff that you can chat about during a casual stream, but a dedicated show? I don't think that'd be a great idea.
Just my 2 cents though, i'd likely still watch it if they were to do something of the sort.
I just don't think it'd be that interesting to hear Huber or whoever talk an hour about his position on the ethics of euthanasia; there would a good chance for it to be sort of inappropriate for the tone of the site, as well as cringe worthily out of place.
AgentChris
Member
Strange, not there for me
Would be cool, during the streams on Twitch they kinda go OT and discuss whatever, especially the longer ones like the FF7 stuff (which is why I like it so much).
Most of them seem a bit reluctant to discuss more controversial topics though, maybe because they're representing a brand.
I clicked around a bit. It should definitely be on the Our Brands page but its not.
http://www.defymedia.com/about-us/
Eh that's a fair point I suppose, but all I can say to counter is that I like Kinda Funny's show and would be down to see that from GT's dudes. Maybe avoid politics if they don't want to talk about it but hell I don't see what's wrong with them talking about whatever shows they happen to be watching or enjoyed in the past. I mean, I'm sure they've got more hobbies and interests than gaming lol. I'd be down to hear about it.
Just to be clear, i'd love something like that too, if the show itself is set on general, loose concept (like MUnights is) them talking for an hour specifically about one (not gaming related) subject, would be less interesting, i think.
Even something like Trailer Score to me is so interesting because it's clear that they (Brandon especially) have expertise and experience on the subject, i don't know if it'd work as well if they were talking specifically about something they consume casually, which again, is different than having that one conversation come up organically in a kitchen sink type show (which i would also like).
All I want is for them to record and upload their GOTY discussions, even if it's just audio.
I know they've said before that they wouldn't because it gets heated, but that's what the people want! They've moved to a more personality based website and GOTY deliberations are perfect for that, just look at Giant Bomb.
Bloodworth please, make it happen!
I know they've said before that they wouldn't because it gets heated, but that's what the people want! They've moved to a more personality based website and GOTY deliberations are perfect for that, just look at Giant Bomb.
Bloodworth please, make it happen!
This, i wholeheartedly agree with, it basically needs to be done!
Mikey Jr.
Member
Agreed!
Video would be great. Just a round table of people talking/arguing. Doesn't have to be fancy or whatever.
The way the GameOverGreggy is structured is that they have all four of the guys come into the show with a topic, either a fan suggestion or just something they feel like talking about. Can be literally anything at all, and they talk about each topic for about 20-30 minutes each and wrap up at around an hour and a half to two hours.
Mind you I don't really want them to make the exact same show, but I'm sure Ian, Elyse, Bosman, or whoever decides to run it could come up with something to spice it up. All I'm sayin though is that isn't them talking about economics for an entire hour or anything lol. Since they each pick their topic there's at the VERY least one person who's passionate about it and so the others bounce off that enthusiasm for about 15 to 20 min before moving on. Since it's a casual, loose kinda show there's no need to worry about timing too strictly.
I just like that "life" sorta shit. In the case of Kinda Funny I honestly enjoy that show more than their actual gaming ones just because it's more unique.
Edit - I actually think recording the "Top 10 meetings" and releasing them AFTER the actual Countdown episode would be really cool and distinctly "Gametrailers" in content.
They'd be too aware of the camera, I'd prefer them to bash it out themselves then do the interview style videos explaining their choices like last year.
That is such a fantastic idea
IdreamofHIME
Member
Kyle & Huber make Fallout characters, best show on GT.
Ben Moore!
TheDarkKnight774
Member
Wait Friday is moving day? Where are they going?
Napalm_Frank
Member
To another Defy office nearby.
No more GT Time on the stage?
Man they just got set up all cosy for streaming too.
fuck yes, glad that dude works so hard to review games.
IdreamofHIME
Member
Really enjoyed Bens sit down with Brandon about his Fallout review. Very personal and interesting, would love to see more stuff like that. Especially when a game has clearly left its mark on one of the guys.
Don Draper's Hat
Member
They're moving? They've only just set up their latest sets. Stop fucking 'em about, Defy!
Loved the Fallout character video.
Everyone looks like a mass murderer or paedophile according to Bosman and Huber until...
*black guy comes on screen* "Oh...he's cool."
Very good reviews of both Fallout 4 and Tomb Raider.
Loved the Fallout character video.
Everyone looks like a mass murderer or paedophile according to Bosman and Huber until...
*black guy comes on screen* "Oh...he's cool."
Very good reviews of both Fallout 4 and Tomb Raider.
I feel like the sit down with Brandon fully explains that and it totally deserves the score. I mean, you're putting down a number that matches an opinion and it's hard. When a game grabs you so much that you want to tell stories about playing it to anyone that listens, you can't just say "It's all I've played, thought and talked about since I started playing it and it's all I want to do. But the framerate dips and lip sync is wonky. 5/10"
I've played and finished every one of these games since Fallout 3 before the first patch and there were times in New Vegas where the issues were so bad that I actually said "fuck this game", because one of the glitchiest developers in Obsidan was working with Gamebryo in an UNEASY ALLIANCE straight out of jank hell, but it didn't matter. The game had me by the balls and I couldn't play or watch anything else until I finished it. I'd be comfortable giving it 10/10 in spite of the game full on crashing on me more than once.
Yes, they're inexcusable, but if the game is so good it manages to drag you past the jank, there's no way you should mark it down just for that. Reviews are opinons, not objective and they never should be objective because that would be boring. Like Brandon says, take in a ton of reviews, see the ones where the technical issues were stopping the game from being enjoyable and read those too. But a lot of people were swept along by having fun with it in spite of any issues.
That made me laugh, so transparent, lol.
Kenzodielocke
Banned
It's his choice, but if I were a reviewer, I would never give a game with such severe technical problems an 9/10. Then again, 9/10 would be a score I wouldn't give that often.
Edit: really share the Jeff Gerstmann opinion on this, I would like to see more reviewers would talk about like that.
Jeff Gerstmann's Mixlr - Fallout 4 Is A Technical Mess On Consoles
Edit: really share the Jeff Gerstmann opinion on this, I would like to see more reviewers would talk about like that.
Jeff Gerstmann's Mixlr - Fallout 4 Is A Technical Mess On Consoles
I think it's a very subjective thing: How much "jank" did you experience, and how did it affect your playthrough. I can totally see Ben's view of it not really dragging down his experience as a whole, just as much as I understand people who thinks it makes the experience worse. I don't really think any of those perspectives are "wrong".
Most reviewers point out the technical problems in their review of the game, and that's all you can ask for imo. I'm not a fan of the opinion I've seen on GAF a lot these last couple of days, that reviewers are somehow responsible to "punish" Bethesda for the technical mess their games always are. If it didn't impact the experience it shouldn't matter that much to a reviewer's overall impression of the game, like it didn't seem to with Ben. I wouldn't be that surprised if Jeff himself ends up giving it a low 4/5.
Kenzodielocke
Banned
Of course, but I am also scared that something will fuck up in my playthrough. For instance, there was a long quest where I had to follow a guy and then it lead to following another guy and I wanted to go back because my inventory was full.
But I didn't had the guts to do that, because what the hell will happen to that quest if I leave now.
That kind of jank is ruining my experience, party that is. I like the game overall, really like it, but the frame drops in firefight in buildings and often also outside are really annoying.
Some games are just that good, Witcher 3 was a technical mess but under that definitely one of the best games of the year and gen so far.
I personally wouldn't give either a high score, then again I wouldn't just throw out 8s and 9s like most reviewers do. I can understand why it happens though.
I personally wouldn't give either a high score, then again I wouldn't just throw out 8s and 9s like most reviewers do. I can understand why it happens though.
Hydrophobic
Member
Does anyone know if there will be a review of Legacy of the Void? It won't impact my purchasing decision (I already bought the game), I'm just curious if it's getting reviewed by anyone.
I haven't really enjoyed a Bethesda game since Morrowind (which is among my favorite games of all time).
That game was jank incarnate, but it balanced that with a real sense of freedom, further Bethesda games kept the shitty combat, the shitty writing, the shitty production values and polish, but started to remove the freedom of level of player agency more and more, to the point where now you don't even have real dialog options (not to mention settling on very generic art direction, too).
So really, the balance isn't there anymore for me, and i got tired of waiting for them to fix those fundamental problems.
I did buy Oblivion and Skyrim on D1 out of habit, but i'm done now, i'm skipping FO4 for now and probably get it cheap at some steam sale.
That game was jank incarnate, but it balanced that with a real sense of freedom, further Bethesda games kept the shitty combat, the shitty writing, the shitty production values and polish, but started to remove the freedom of level of player agency more and more, to the point where now you don't even have real dialog options (not to mention settling on very generic art direction, too).
So really, the balance isn't there anymore for me, and i got tired of waiting for them to fix those fundamental problems.
I did buy Oblivion and Skyrim on D1 out of habit, but i'm done now, i'm skipping FO4 for now and probably get it cheap at some steam sale.
Bloodworth
Member
Huber's working on it, but in typical Blizzard fashion there was no early access. He just had to start along with everyone else last night.
I've been thinking over the Fallout 4 review and Ben and Brandon's talk and I just can't agree with the verdict. I mean this is all in good will so I don't want to offend anyone at GT, especially Ben.
Ultimately, I suppose the question is: Is Ben reviewing a product or an experience?
Despite emphasising to the viewer that the game is "immersive" and "fun", he describes the technical shortcomings of the game as "inexcusable" and in the review, "severe". I personally feel you can't say that about a game then give it a 9. This is where the decision as to whether Fallout 4 is being reviewed as a product or an experience. If it's an experience that Ben feels is made up for by the gameplay and story then fine but it's a fact that this is a faulty product. The list of bugs and glitches continues to grow alongside an alarming amount of game-breaking moment testimonials. This isn't even mentioning the framerate issues on PC. What's worse is over the last year how much of this industry's journalistic output has been geared towards shunning "broken games" then this game comes out that people have been looking forward to and it's technical faults are ACKNOWLEDGED and then essentially ignored when it's time to give out the scores.
What irritates me as well (and really nothing irritates me about GT) is despite the game receiving a better score, The Witcher 3 comes under HEAVY fire any time it's brought up in discussion on streams or GT Time regarding its technical shortcomings. Even Huber, who could usually hype the fuck out of a next-gen E.T. Remaster is first to complain about the experience bug or other technical aspects of the game that stopped him from finishing the game. Now, in my opinion, we're talking about a game here that's far bolder, is definitely more aesthetically pleasing and has just as much (if not more) content than Fallout 4. Not to mention that it's produced with a far smaller team so why does Bethesda get off the hook and CD Project Red doesn't? (Tbh, that's aimed at the games journalism as a whole this week).
Anyway, this comes from a place of love and I understand you guys are a small team where not every member gets to play every game (especially Ben this year who's been handed the bricks for the most part) but it sort of irked me how you too shook off some of the game's significant shortcomings as I felt you guys were always consumer friendly and pretty spot on with your scores. But it's Ben's opinion and if his EXPERIENCE was one worthy of a 9 then fair enough.
Ultimately, I suppose the question is: Is Ben reviewing a product or an experience?
Despite emphasising to the viewer that the game is "immersive" and "fun", he describes the technical shortcomings of the game as "inexcusable" and in the review, "severe". I personally feel you can't say that about a game then give it a 9. This is where the decision as to whether Fallout 4 is being reviewed as a product or an experience. If it's an experience that Ben feels is made up for by the gameplay and story then fine but it's a fact that this is a faulty product. The list of bugs and glitches continues to grow alongside an alarming amount of game-breaking moment testimonials. This isn't even mentioning the framerate issues on PC. What's worse is over the last year how much of this industry's journalistic output has been geared towards shunning "broken games" then this game comes out that people have been looking forward to and it's technical faults are ACKNOWLEDGED and then essentially ignored when it's time to give out the scores.
What irritates me as well (and really nothing irritates me about GT) is despite the game receiving a better score, The Witcher 3 comes under HEAVY fire any time it's brought up in discussion on streams or GT Time regarding its technical shortcomings. Even Huber, who could usually hype the fuck out of a next-gen E.T. Remaster is first to complain about the experience bug or other technical aspects of the game that stopped him from finishing the game. Now, in my opinion, we're talking about a game here that's far bolder, is definitely more aesthetically pleasing and has just as much (if not more) content than Fallout 4. Not to mention that it's produced with a far smaller team so why does Bethesda get off the hook and CD Project Red doesn't? (Tbh, that's aimed at the games journalism as a whole this week).
Anyway, this comes from a place of love and I understand you guys are a small team where not every member gets to play every game (especially Ben this year who's been handed the bricks for the most part) but it sort of irked me how you too shook off some of the game's significant shortcomings as I felt you guys were always consumer friendly and pretty spot on with your scores. But it's Ben's opinion and if his EXPERIENCE was one worthy of a 9 then fair enough.
To me the video felt like incoherent rambling of a huge Bethesda games fan who contradicts himself in the same video. The discussion was all over the place and I'm not even sure what the point of the video was...other than "must churn out as many f4 videos as possible!"
Write a good review and there's no need for additional clarification videos.
I liked the review and loved the additional discussion, but the review was enough to stand on its own. Really hoping they do it for more games. It was the discussion of someone conflicted as to if it deserved that score, which must be hard as fuck because shoving a number next to your opinion of something is so reductive that I wish it never existed.
I think its fair for "reviewer's tilt" to impact the review itself. If a reviewer feels like the good parts of a game really elevate it and work together to make it more than just the sum of its parts then its justified in my eyes.
Personally I can't stand bethesda's games, but I've had similar feelings about other games in the past so I can see where he is coming from.
Personally I can't stand bethesda's games, but I've had similar feelings about other games in the past so I can see where he is coming from.
Bloodworth
Member
Yeah, I really love Fallout 3. I spent more than a month with that game. It had bugs that screwed me out of hours of progress or wouldn't allow me to enter certain locations, but I still loved the heck out of it. It's a weird thing. Curious whether I'll feel the same about 4.
Bloodworth
Member
Do I have me currently reviewing a game? Nothing big, but there are some things we missed I'd like to try to catch up on.
I'm personally starting to prep for the move and think through some other things that I hadn't been able to focus on with the review crunch, but most people will be continuing on projects until they have to pack up Friday. Ben, Brandon, and Huber are all currently working on reviews.
brotkasten
Member
As much as I dislike reviews, I don't envy anyone who's doing them, exactly because so much work is being put into them and they always result in conversations like this. GT is the only gaming outlet I follow in any capacity and I much prefer those post-review videos or better, a proper Just Played over any review. I don't care about fact sheets and bullet points and what xp system a game has and if there are weapon unlocks and upgrades and what factions you can join, how many cars it has and whatnot. That's absolutely meaningless to me and tells me nothing. I'll discover that for myself when I play the game. What I want to know is how and what the person felt while playing the game. What were their thoughts and reactions. Tell me stories from the game or the experience you had with the series and how does the latest entry compare to that? And I want to hear that in a conversation about the game and not some monologue. That's why I'd rather watch/listen to "The Travesty of Tony Hawk", "Brad's not buying Batgirl" or the Mario Kart 8 Just Played over any review. I get that reviews are necessary and definitely helpful for some, but Ben talking about that letter in Fallout 4 or Kyle talking about that moment when he found the subway map in MK8? That's what "sells" me on a game.
tl;dr: I don't want your number, just tell me how you really feel
tl;dr: I don't want your number, just tell me how you really feel
whats your definition of 'severe technical problems'? game is running perfectly fine for me on ps4.
i can appreciate it if you prioritise graphics and framerate, but if that really were the case, you should be playing on a PC.
for me personally, the world theyve created, the game theyve created, is a 9. if i was getting an extra 10fps, itd be a 9.5. if the lips were synced during dialog, 10/10.
IdreamofHIME
Member
Jeff sits down and talks about his experience, rather than just shout out thoughts. Here he lists stuff the other two didn't experience and they said they didn't nearly the same problems as he did.
So what do you do there? Not everyone is experiencing the same levels of problems.
I mean, i played through Assassins Creed Unity and apart from the game shitting the bed performance wise in the 2nd to last mission, i didn't see any of the stuff the game has become so infamous for that the president of Ubisoft had to apologize for it on his E3 stage. So i tend to sing the games praises and recommend to people all the time (it's still the most beautiful game this generation).
Brad Grenz
Member
I have to say I'm a bit disappointed by Ben's FO4 score. So much of the GameTrailers ethos is about being able to love game despite their flaws. I think it's perfectly possible to have a great experience with a game while acknowledging it has shortcomings, even severe ones. Huber often talks about his enthusiasm for "sevens" and it was just the top ten topic. So while it is perfectly fair for Ben to love playing Fallout 4, I really believe the score needed to reflect it's numerous technical problems. Consumers deserve to know that as fun as it could be this is a product that could easily become unplayable or lose them hours and hours of progress. And Bethesda needs a business reason to get their house in order and effecting their all important metascore is one of the few ways for reviewers to do so.
Brad Grenz
Member
Tom Chick somewhat famously gave New Vegas a zero after a game breaking bug prevented him from completing the game after 50+ hours of progress. Bethesda's history is such that ignoring a litany of technical problems to give a really high score is tantamount to asking your audience to play Russian roulette with their money. The same way one might score a game a seven because it isn't going to be to everyone's taste but it may be worth taking a chance on it, I think reviewers should also be willing to reflect the inherent risk in buying a game built on such a dilapidated engine with their scores.
Only if you think a 7 is average.
It seems like that is the starting point for a lot of people, for a game that is decent fun, and that is why you have to end up using decimal nonsense.
While 1 through 6 is basically shades of bad, that nobody cares about.
Unless you're purposefully going for a logarithmic scale, it doesn't make sense, and locks you into giving every other big game an 8 or a 9 (with the 10 being the untouchable sacred cow).
I personally don't listen to reviews in the first place and I definitely watch GT's because I "know" the person who wrote each review and take it as a very personal opinion, in that sense I can appreciate the content of a review; when it comes to their scoring system though, I can't say I agree with it at all.
Then again I'm more of a 5 star system sort of person myself... I'm not sure how you can tell the difference between an 8.7 and an 8.5.
Speaking of which, and I know Brandon reviewed the ps4 version, which worked fine, I had to finally uninstall my copy of Batman AK, never having gotten past the first 10 minutes of the game, after WB came out and said (after months of supposed work on it, that didn't fix anything) that they simply "can't fix the game" (I.e. do not want to) and that you can ask for a refund if you want (which in my and many others' case doesn't apply, since I didn't buy directly from steam or GMG).
That's the biggest "fuck you" I've experienced from a gaming company in 20+ years of gaming, and definitely would make me go Polygon on their review and retcon it to a zero.
meanwhile, new vegas is one of the best games ive ever played.
you say its russian roulette to play their games, but this is my 5th bethesda game without any major issues. how many copies of their games have they sold? skyrim alone is up around 20 million. how come there arent millions of people complaining about their broken games? i swear there is a vocal minority on the internet who love to exaggerate and feed into their own hysteria. russian roulette with their money. a famous zero. hysteria.
Brad Grenz
Member
Good for you, but it's the height of bad faith to pretend like there aren't an enormous number of people out there on every gaming related forum or social media platform reporting huge problems with every single Bethesda game. What percentage have to get burned before we're allowed to care?
Similar threads
- Locked