Giant bomb "dot com" official thread 12 - anime + waluigi discussion webzone

Status
Not open for further replies.
Seventy70 said:
I wish this RAD "bullying" interview came out before this weeks podcast, so that Jeff would tear them up. Hopefully next week.
Click to expand...

I wish I gave a shit enough to edit the "I don't like thing" pic to end with someone calling the guy a bully.

Only I don't give enough of a shit about that or the Order to do it.
 
Seventy70 said:
I wish this RAD "bullying" interview came out before this weeks podcast, so that Jeff would tear them up. Hopefully next week.
Click to expand...

It irks me that they're trying to group themselves with people who are actually being bullied by terrible Internet people. Sorry, potential customers being down on your game is not the same as bullying.
 
Guys what if we start bullying GB because they aren't giving us what we want?

On a side note I don't want to ruin the fun but Drew being practically the same color on a thermal camera as the wall behind him means he's actually not very hot at all...

Actually it could also be that the Shaq image taped up on the other wall is making the entire room hawt.
 
Chris Kohler of Wired has been tweeting some disagreements to Dan's Kirby review regarding including the price of a game in the review. https://twitter.com/kobunheat

I do *not* agree that price should ever be taken into account in a review because price fluctuates like crazy from the moment a game is released. 10 or so years ago (when games were static things on a disc) I thought about this a lot: Should reviews take price into account? After everything, I came to the conclusion that the only workable procedure was just to write about the quality of the experience w/o price.

Because price differs by location, by person, by time, but the game itself is forever (note: this is not the case today.) So basically, if you would give a game an 8/10 if it were $20 but only a 6/10 if it were $60, you're doing it wrong. The wrongest. Because you've written something that's useless to me. I don't know if the game is good or bad or what. I just know how much money you have.
Click to expand...
 
It's weird that people are getting stuck on the price thing when that's not even the main reason Dan gave it a low score. It's like there's some residual resentment from the Captain Toad review or something.
 
Nintendo games seem like a bad example since they rarely drop in price, and if they do it's after a very long time. At least that's my experience. Also, as Brad said: "most people are savvy enough to reframe a value determination in a contemporary context"
 
Price is an important part of how a game is perceived. Like, drop it low enough and suddenly I'm interested in buying it. (I'm looking at you, Square-Enix Humble Bundle!)

This is also why every MMO ever made should get a 0/10 for price alone. Infinitely more expensive, no matter how much recycled content is thrown at the player.
 
A review is a buyer's guide. Price absolutely matters. But as Jeff has pointed out continuously, whether a game is worth someone's time is important as well as the financial factor.

I feel it's a matter of time before GB drops scores as well. Either that or reviews in general, but I'm sure they still do very well in terms of traffic.
 
Incandenza said:
It's weird that people are getting stuck on the price thing when that's not even the main reason Dan gave it a low score. It's like there's some residual resentment from the Captain Toad review or something.
Click to expand...

He did do the exact same thing in that review, too, so I can see why people are bringing it up.

Also, being a good writer also involves knowing what not to write, especially if it distracts from your core argument.
 
Aww, they didn't read my email about Mario being the canonical last name of the Mario Bros. in the Bombcast. You guys ever try writing in? Ever get read on the show?

Also, the wrestling terms conversation was hilarious. Jeff's ashamed acknowledgement of knowing the terminology made it better. One step closer to getting Brad into wrestling.
 
Incandenza said:
It's weird that people are getting stuck on the price thing when that's not even the main reason Dan gave it a low score. It's like there's some residual resentment from the Captain Toad review or something.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it's weirding me out too. It was just a throwaway line at the end, not what he hung his review hat on.
 
Reviews are barely relevant after the first week of release so I don't know why people act like it will be such a big deal reading the review in ten years time.
 
Dan's review (and Alexa's) makes the levels in Rainbow Curse sound kind of... boring as all hell. And also like not at all a proper sequel to Power Paintbrush. :(
 
Reading his Twitter feed now and this comment

Because you've written something that's useless to me. I don't know if the game is good or bad or what. I just know how much money you have.
Click to expand...

Seems particularly foolish. You don't like Dan brought the game's price into it; fine. But the review is crystal clear on how Dan feels about the game on its own merits in the nearly ten paragraphs he spends talking about the game.

It's this kind of pedantry that makes me instantly sympathetic whenever a publication eliminates review scores, because you get people latching on to things regardless of how prominent they are within the review themselves, and attempting to dismiss the entire piece despite Dan clearly finding the game itself "frustrating" and "soulless".

I also disagree value should be a verboten topic in review scores because prices are subjective. Given the U.S. tends to be be one of the cheaper retail markets, differing regional prices make value for money, more of a concern, not a reason for negating it as consideration.

And assuming a future prospective consumer cannot look at a review when the game is, say, $20, and realign their expectations based on that new information appears very condescending.

Myggen said:
Nintendo games seem like a bad example since they rarely drop in price, and if they do it's after a very long time. At least that's my experience. Also, as Brad said: "most people are savvy enough to reframe a value determination in a contemporary context"
Click to expand...

Brad out this way more eloquently than me.
 
Hot Coldman said:
Dan's review (and Alexa's) makes the levels in Rainbow Curse sound kind of... boring as all hell. And also like not at all a proper sequel to Power Paintbrush. :(
Click to expand...

It sure didn't look very entertaining in the quick look, either. Something about this and Epic Yarn just feels kind of slow and lifeless, I totally get what Dan meant.
 
Dazzler said:
guys, where did y'all import puyo puyo tetris from?
Click to expand...
Ami Ami, Nippon Yasan, Nin Nin Games, or Play Asia.

Mr. F said:
It sure didn't look very entertaining in the quick look, either. Something about this and Epic Yarn just feels kind of slow and lifeless, I totally get what Dan meant.
Click to expand...
Or it could be like the 3DS Kirby game, which Patrick loved but only after actually figuring out how it was designed to be played.
 
danm999 said:
Reading his Twitter feed now and this comment



Seems particularly foolish. You don't like Dan brought the game's price into it; fine. But the review is crystal clear on how Dan feels about the game on its own merits in the nearly ten paragraphs he spends talking about the game.
Click to expand...

I feel like he clearly transitions away from Dan's review specifically and more towards reviews generally by the time he makes that statement.
 
Of course price matters. Price is a key component in value. I kinda doubt it matters to many reviewers though since they most often forget that games actually cost money and don't show up in an envelope a couple of weeks early.

I have a really hard time thinking of a game that exists in a magical vacuum where its price wasn't a consideration.

For an example if Ground Zeroes had been $60 I would have called it a bad value and passed it until it became cheaper.
 
giant_frying_pan said:
A review is a buyer's guide. Price absolutely matters. But as Jeff has pointed out continuously, whether a game is worth someone's time is important as well as the financial factor.

I feel it's a matter of time before GB drops scores as well. Either that or reviews in general, but I'm sure they still do very well in terms of traffic.
Click to expand...

I mean, when Patrick did his Gone Home review a couple of years ago, a lot of people pointed out how it should have factored in, or at least mentioned, how a $20 price point might be rather steep for what was effectively 2 hours of gameplay.

Not that I'm saying it's the same people now making a hypocritical criticism, rather that there is a group of consumers looking for a value evaluation.
 
The answer is to make the price you're willing to pay for a game your review score

"I'd buy it for a high price"

"Steam sale game"

"You couldn't pay me to play"
 
Price matters, but isn't the point that some people have more disposable income than others which makes the whole "value" thing relative and subjective?
 
komplanen said:
Of course price matters. Price is a key component in value. I kinda doubt it matters to many reviewers though since they most often forget that games actually cost money and don't show up in an envelope a couple of weeks early.

I have a really hard time thinking of a game that exists in a magical vacuum where its price wasn't a consideration.
Click to expand...

I agree, but it's so tough. It's probably the single toughest thing to fairly factor into a review (if you're going to at all). Every other factor, from graphics to controls to story, have some level of binary good or bad. But value? That's so different on a human level from person to person. Value probably means something different to the guy buying some long-named drink at Starbucks every morning versus the guy who makes Nabob at home and brings it in a thermos to work.

So while i agree that it should contribute, I empathize that it's a tough balance to strike.
 
The price of video games and the amount of content you get for said price, on average, varies far more than any other medium other there. It should totally be a factor in a review. It probably shouldn't be one of the main factors of a review unless it's a special case (like perhaps Ground Zeroes), though.
 
EmCeeGramr said:
I feel like he clearly transitions away from Dan's review specifically and more towards reviews generally by the time he makes that statement.
Click to expand...

Expanding the responses to his tweets makes that clearer (I hate navigating Twitter though personally), so I might have characterised him unfairly with regards to Dan's review.

But I still really feel the attitude value cannot be used whatsoever to evaluate a product a bad one.
 
Liquid Shake said:
Price matters, but isn't the point that some people have more disposable income than others which makes the whole "value" thing relative and subjective?
Click to expand...



People have different opinions about the value and quality of any given thing. If you can't use price as a factor because it's different to every reader, then you can't review anything ever because not everybody will agree with your criteria or your assessment of the product.
 
fuck new guns, old guns are way cooler.

you're gonna tell me a shotgun that blows you back like two feet isn't cooler than some damn ass assault rifle "man there's an lcd screen that shows how many bullets are in your clip" fuck off don't talk to me
 
nckillthegrimace said:
It irks me that they're trying to group themselves with people who are actually being bullied by terrible Internet people. Sorry, potential customers being down on your game is not the same as bullying.
Click to expand...

Plenty of the negative comments are coming from people who had no interest in ever playing the game.
 
Incandenza said:
I like the idea of this if only because it has no upper bound which means we could have Dragonball-style score escalation over the years.
Click to expand...
Well, I remember people giving Garnett Lee shit for saying he'd pay a thousand dollars for Flower back on 1up Yours or Weekend Confirmed. lol
 
Curufinwe said:
Depends on the content of the comments.
Click to expand...

I'm talking about what the dev stated in the interview, and they only focus on people reacting poorly to the game's length without having played it. Just attacking a game or a studio, no matter how irrational that might be without having played the game, is hardly bullying. And that's all they talked about as far as I can see.
 
Myggen said:
I'm talking about what the dev stated in the interview, and they only focuses on people reacting poorly to the game's length without having played it. Just attacking a game or a studio, no matter how irrational that might be without having played the game, is hardly bullying. And that's all they talked about as far as I can see.
Click to expand...


But they were MEAN. They didn't say they loved our shitty looking game! MEAN.
 
nckillthegrimace said:
The Order 1866 is truly the Yamcha of video games.
Click to expand...

i hope we get a Vinny quick look of Dragon Ball Xenoverse, if only because there's supposed to be a Yamcha dying pose as an emote and as a special attack

also because it's literally about making your own stupid overpowered dragonball OC you made when you were 10 and beating up every character
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

ANIME SPOILER ALERT : an important day for every old Pokémon anime fan
3
7K
Rya.Reisender replied
Counter Strike: Go to the Bomb Site
19
7K
Aintitcool replied
  • Locked
Giant Bomb |OT33| LOOK AT THAT CORN!
157 158 159 160 161
8K
746K
mattp replied
  • Locked
Giant Bomb |OTXXX| Fondle it
400 401 402 403 404
20K
1M
OdysseusVA replied
Giant Bomb |OT32| I've been meaning to love a boat
397 398 399 400 401
20K
2M
jambo replied
Top Bottom