Skyward Sword review thread [Newest Reviews - Cubed3 10/10, GC: A, AusGamers: 7/10]

Trevelyon said:
tumblr_lemkdyfPaq1qdoghio1_500.png
Click to expand...

I don't understand what you mean by this.
 
guek said:
I don't understand why you're obsessed with trying to make the reaction to this review bigger than it actually was. Some people overreacted, but you act like being critical of the content of a review is somehow a complete loss of rational thinking.
Click to expand...

Agreed.

Seems to be some sort of (weak) payback for how SonyGAF reacted to U3's 8/10
 
Mr. B Natural said:
You're asking a question you can answer yourself, why?

Or, if you can't, you can read the person's post you quoted and figure it out.
Click to expand...
read the post, still dont know what's driving him to copy posts from multiple tabs dozens of times
 
F#A#Oo said:
Did some digging...Tom Mc Shea pretty much hates motion controls...and he's very down on Nintendo in general...he doesn't like the 3DS and WiiU to him is just another gimmick...

http://uk.gamespot.com/features/reality-check-the-dangers-of-gimmick-gaming-6319890/
Click to expand...
see this is somewhat what I take problem with. How can someone so critical of motion controls be tasked with reviewing a game that is heavily focused on motion controls.

I don't want a super fanboy of the Wii doing the review either, but I think if someone is critical enough of a core foundation of the system itself, they shouldn't be able to review those games, because there will always be a present bias against it. Especially if you make that bias completely transparent by writing articles about it.

gondwana said:
uh oh, guy with divergent opinion. SECRET AGENDA confirmed
Click to expand...

Imagine tasking a creationist with reviewing a book on evolution. Would that go over well? Would the review be fair and justified if it were negative? Would someone interested in that book be able to take the opinion of the reviewer seriously if the reviewer already came into the review with a negative attitude?
 
Furret said:
I normally don't go in for conspiracy theories, but there is something very odd about the Gamespot review. The other lower marked reviews talk about a slow first few hours and not changing the formula enough - as far as I know no one has had the sort of issues Gamespot has had with the controls. Surely someone would've mentioned it by now if it'd been this kind of game-breaking problem?

And why was the Gamespot review so late anyway? In fact why are they always much later compared to other sites, even though they must surely get copies before anyone else?
Click to expand...

You sure about that? No one mentioned the fucked up aiming and shooting in UC3 reviews.
 
butter_stick said:
They should have got a motion control loving Nintendo fanboy to review it, for maximum objectivity.
Click to expand...

Having the exact opposite end of the spectrum do it instead isn't going to make it balanced.
 
butter_stick said:
They should have got a motion control loving Nintendo fanboy to review it, for maximum objectivity.
Click to expand...

Well they shouldn't have gotten a motion control hater...nor do I think they needed a Zelda fanboy obviously so it would get a perfect score...
 
balladofwindfishes said:
see this is somewhat what I take problem with. How can someone so critical of motion controls be tasked with reviewing a game that is heavily focused on motion controls.

I don't want a super fanboy of the Wii doing the review either, but I think if someone is critical enough of a core foundation of the system itself, they shouldn't be able to review those games, because there will always be a present bias against it. Especially if you make that bias completely transparent by writing articles about it.



Imagine tasking a creationist with reviewing a book on evolution. Would that go over well? Would the review be fair and justified if it were negative? Would someone interested in that book be able to take the opinion of the reviewer seriously if the reviewer already came into the review with a negative attitude?
Click to expand...

Well said.
 
thetrin said:
You sure about that? No one mentioned the fucked up aiming and shooting in UC3 reviews.
Click to expand...

I believe avclub did. Some people didn't notice/don't care about the aiming. I definitely noticed, but was able to get through it.

F#A#Oo said:
Well they shouldn't have gotten a motion control hater...nor do I think they needed a Zelda fanboy obviously so it would get a perfect score...
Click to expand...

So is your problem more with the score or the person who reviewed it?
 
marrec said:
Someone was going to do it because of the UC3 Wall of Shame. Better that he do it and show that the meltdowns in this thread are actually a lot more measured in their wailings and gnashing of teeth than in UC3. Besides, it's like a 'best-of' for us not following the thread.
Click to expand...
point being?
 
balladofwindfishes said:
see this is somewhat what I take problem with. How can someone so critical of motion controls be tasked with reviewing a game that is heavily focused on motion controls.

I don't want a super fanboy of the Wii doing the review either, but I think if someone is critical enough of a core foundation of the system itself, they shouldn't be able to review those games, because there will always be a present bias against it. Especially if you make that bias completely transparent by writing articles about it.

Imagine tasking a creationist with reviewing a book on evolution. Would that go over well? Would the review be fair and justified if it were negative?
Click to expand...
From what I hear on how GS tasks reviewers, they ask the reviewers with series and genre knowledge background. In this case, McShea loves Zelda and action-adventure and as a result got chosen. I think the office knew his dislike of motion gaming in general so that's completely irrelevant
 
thetrin said:
You sure about that? No one mentioned the fucked up aiming and shooting in UC3 reviews.
Click to expand...

I've never understood what this refers too. I played through UC3 and loved it and didn't notice any problem with the gunplay.

Mind you I've always considered that the least interesting bit of the game and would never dream of touching the multiplayer.
 
guek said:
I don't understand why you're obsessed with trying to make the reaction to this review bigger than it actually was. Some people overreacted, but you act like being critical of the content of a review is somehow a complete loss of rational thinking.
Click to expand...
He's trying to be the new Mama Robotnik and be referenced in several gaming websites.
 
Porthos said:
Reading through your list, I would say there is nothing wrong with at least half of those quotes. Sure, some belong on the Wall of Shame but I think you are stretching it with others.
Click to expand...
Probably. Which is likely a good thing, since the reaction here has been more measured.
 
F#A#Oo said:
Well they shouldn't have gotten a motion control hater...nor do I think they needed a Zelda fanboy obviously so it would get a perfect score...
Click to expand...
I imagine most of Gamespot's readers hate motion controls, so it seems like they're serving their audience at least.
 
Dr Eggman said:
He's trying to be the new Mama Robotnik and be referenced in several gaming websites.
Click to expand...
oh, well then carry on. 15 minutes of fame on gaming blogs is worth it. you can tell your grandkids about it.
 
jarosh said:
you know, i've been enjoying the game but it does have its flaws. i've gone into them at length in the official thread. sadly, control issues are among them. the gamespot review is also not the first one to mention them. like feep, i have found almost everything that doesn't have to do with sword fighting to work really well. almost all the items that use some sort of motion control work great and are a ton of fun to use. i have also found the bird to be very simple and straightforward to control. the various mechanics surrounding the flying also just feel very satisfying. the sword fighting on the other hand doesn't even come CLOSE to being anything i'd call "revolutionary" or - gasp - "perfect". and while the sword as a weapon CAN be somewhat finnicky and the game doesn't always recognize every motion correctly, the true problem with the sword fighting lies in the nature and design of the combat scenarios and enemy encounters: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=32648429&postcount=391 (all spoiler-free).
Click to expand...

I don' know how I missed that post of yours but it sums up my feelings about the combat perfectly. I guess I'm enjoying it a tad bit more combat-wise but it really shows its weaknesses in mob fights. 1on1 or 2on1 duels have been really engaging though.

How far into the game are you anyway?
 
butter_stick said:
I imagine most of Gamespot's readers hate motion controls, so it seems like they're serving their audience at least.
Click to expand...
I don't know about that. They gave Metroid Prime 3 a pretty good score. Not everyone in the office hates motion gaming.
 
balladofwindfishes said:
see this is somewhat what I take problem with. How can someone so critical of motion controls be tasked with reviewing a game that is heavily focused on motion controls.

I don't want a super fanboy of the Wii doing the review either, but I think if someone is critical enough of a core foundation of the system itself, they shouldn't be able to review those games, because there will always be a present bias against it. Especially if you make that bias completely transparent by writing articles about it.
Click to expand...
After thinking it over, I agree with this. If a normal PC reviewer docked a console shooter points because "the dual analogue control scheme is broken, there were repeated times in the game where I couldn't aim properly" when every other reviewer said the controls were fine we would give them shit.
 
BGBW said:
That's a meltdown?
Click to expand...
I don't think I mentioned that word.

-COOLIO- said:
oh, well then carry on. 15 minutes of fame on gaming blogs is worth it. you can tell your grandkids about it.
Click to expand...
BREAKING: NeoGAF user Crunched reveals SS Review Thread Wall of Shame

Says, "It's not too bad right now."
 
butter_stick said:
I imagine most of Gamespot's readers hate motion controls, so it seems like they're serving their audience at least.
Click to expand...

The tabloid press *does* like to stir the fires of prejudice, doesn't it?
 
General Shank-a-snatch said:
Sorry if I sounded harsh, but from an outsider's point of view (don't own a Wii, never played a Zelda game)
Click to expand...

This is what really annoys me about the U3 and SS review threads. The factioning of the various companies and their fans. Sure we all have different tastes, but why do we feel the need to say, "Nintendo-GAF is looking really terrible right now." or "Uncharted-GAF is embarrassing to watch."

Categorizing certain people into specific factions or even pretending these factions exist at all I think is what makes these wall of shames so popular - because those who find these factions so bold and overstated like to make themselves feel better by lumping people opposite them and throwing in some embarrassing posts in connotation. But is it fair to say that people belong to these factions at all? Or is is just our perception of what the poster defends and likes to talk about?
 
kayos90 said:
From what I hear on how GS tasks reviewers, they ask the reviewers with series and genre knowledge background. In this case, McShea loves Zelda and action-adventure and as a result got chosen. I think the office knew his dislike of motion gaming in general so that's completely irrelevant
Click to expand...
if this were a regular Zelda with a traditional control scheme, then yes, his bias against motion controls would be irrelevant.

But this is a Zelda game that is selling itself on its motion controls. Motion controls make up a huge aspect of the game, arguably the same amount as the actual Zelda part of the game.

The reviewer should be tolerable of Motion Controls. Maybe not a huge fan of them, but definitely someone who doesn't come out of the gate disliking the controls. At that point he's just going to keep looking for faults in the controls because that's what he already believes exist. And at least in this review, he was entirely wrong about a fault, as the game does not use that pointer system.
 
Crunched said:
It looks exactly like it is. We are seeing less personal attacks this time around, but there is still a subset of GAFfers who simply can't let one score go. Biased! Liars! Attention seekers! It's the same old story.
Click to expand...
I'm going to say this once and then misconceptions about the people not liking the 8.8 score can continue

-Gerstman's review gave TP 8.8
-in the review he says TP is better than OoT
-he (or someone at GS, I've not looked recently) gave the VC version of OoT an 8.9, and the N64 original a 10

Now, by Gamespot's system, is it better than OoT or is it not? It seems like a trivial thing to argue over, but the lack of clarity is on Gamespot, NOT the people who disagree with it.

Now this remains to be decided until I can play the game (and I can speak on its quality) but people seem to be liking Skyward more than Twilight Princess, even though the review averages are somehow lower.

Now maybe SS isn't perfect, but either the reviews are spot-on or they've been feeding fans a huge crock of shit as hype during its development. For example, months passed as previews were saying the controls work (even as far back as E3 2010!), now some of the reviews are saying not so. What gives?
 
balladofwindfishes said:
Imagine tasking a creationist with reviewing a book on evolution. Would that go over well? Would the review be fair and justified if it were negative? Would someone interested in that book be able to take the opinion of the reviewer seriously if the reviewer already came into the review with a negative attitude?
Click to expand...
In general, I think knowing in advance that someone might have an ax to grind when reviewing something is useful information for the reader to know. However, I don't think it automatically renders the reviewer's analysis incorrect. It might. It might not.

However, just as it might be reasonable to suspect that the reviewer may have an agenda given his/her history that might influence their evaluation, is it not also plausible that some who are seeking to discredit these reviewers might also have an agenda of their own? I'm not accusing everyone who dislikes this review of being some sort of hypocrite, mind you. However, I just think it's important to keep in mind that it's worth criticizing this review if you have a consistent standard about entertainment criticism that's being violated. It's not worth getting worked up about if the motivation is "Not my beloved franchise! Won't somebody think of the Metacritic score!?"

And if the person in question wants the game to be good, to get high scores, how can I trust that their analysis reflects the former and not the latter?
 
Willy105 said:
Having the exact opposite end of the spectrum do it instead isn't going to make it balanced.
Click to expand...
Didn't you get the memo? The world works in dichotomies now.
 
Dragon said:
So is your problem more with the score or the person who reviewed it?
Click to expand...

I don't have a problem with Gamespot...I live in the UK...I never visit the site...I don't know a single reviewer of theirs other than this Tom...

I personally feel that they probably thought SS should be reviewed by someone who doesn't like motion controls with the hope that he/she could go from hating to loving...

It didn't work out...thus 7.5...I think at the most a point was taken off...so had he liked it I think 8.5 would have been the score anyways...
 
BGBW said:
That's a meltdown?
Click to expand...
its the straws uncharted fans are grasping at to make it look like some other group was more fucked up than them over a low review score.

edit: I was thinking it would be worse but it seems the crazy tapered off really early. People arent throwing death threats and making giant paragraphs. Completely different compared to the 8.8 for tp.
 
BGBW said:
Others have.
Click to expand...

Since I made it on there, I'm sure half of it is probably people joking. I've been mocking BruiserBear from the Uncharted thread this whole time. He said things like "I haven't even played the game, but it doesn't warrant anything less than a 9, anyone in gaming knows this," etc.
 
MisterHero said:
Now, by Gamespot's system, is it better than OoT or is it not? It seems like a trivial thing to argue over, but the lack of clarity is on Gamespot, NOT the people who disagree with it.

...

Now maybe SS isn't perfect, but either the reviews are spot-on or they've been feeding fans a huge crock of shit as hype during its development. For example, months passed as previews were saying the controls work (even as far back as E3 2010!), now some of the reviews are saying not so. What gives?
Click to expand...

Expecting consistency is folly. I don't expect it from even publications I truly respect and admire, such as Edge. Different writers, different time periods. Heck, I've changed my mind on games within a two month time span.

EDIT: Wait a minute...I think I just got had.
 
-COOLIO- said:
so it's a wall of temperance?
Click to expand...
It's a wall of making a point

Reviews are opinions, and there's no reason to say "wrong!" or "attention whore!" because someone disagrees with you. Especially when most haven't even played the game.

Deadbeat said:
its the straws uncharted fans are grasping at to make it look like some other group was more fucked up than them over a low review score.
Click to expand...
Yes, clearly. My reactions to the UC3 8/10 were so extreme I barely escaped with my sanity intact.
 
Steve Youngblood said:
In general, I think knowing in advance that someone might have an ax to grind when reviewing something is useful information for the reader to know. However, I don't think it automatically renders the reviewer's analysis incorrect. It might. It might not.
Click to expand...
But what about when the bias comes through the review? The reviewer got an aspect of the control system wrong, and has criticism with the control scheme dozens of other reviews never even mentioned as a problem and that nobody seemed to know existed during previews.

I'm just skeptical that a reviewer with a known bias against motion controls, that rates a game almost 20 points lower than the average, and that gets aspects of the control scheme wrong in the review, really did the review in good faith

Crunched said:
Reviews are opinions, and there's no reason to say "wrong!" or "attention whore!" because someone disagrees with you. Especially when most haven't even played the game.
Click to expand...

isn't that the poster's opinion though :P
 
Crunched said:
It's a wall of making a point

Reviews are opinions, and there's no reason to say "wrong!" or "attention whore!" because someone disagrees with you. Especially when most haven't even played the game.
Click to expand...

Dude, your list of quotes is terrible. Thats really what matters in this situation.
 
Regulus Tera said:
oh god this thread is still going and you guys did 500 posts since the last time I checked

what the fuck is wrong with all of you
Click to expand...
why does it make you aaaannnnggrry?

i couldnt care less about the review anymore, what's interesting to me is how people get so worked up about people who are even less worked up about a review.
 
Crunched said:
Did I miss anyone?

The worst thing about this is, a lot of you guys were fine, rational people until this review came along. And then it went all conspiracy talk. It's one opinionated review. No one's out to assault the metascore.
Click to expand...


Not sure why I'm on that list. I clearly stated that I have no idea if it will be good or not.
 
Regulus Tera said:
oh god this thread is still going and you guys did 500 posts since the last time I checked

what the fuck is wrong with all of you
Click to expand...
The topic has changed to why ZeldaGAF is apparently worse than every other sub group on this website.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Silent Hill f Review Embargo Broken - Dualshockers 9.5/10 (Review summary inside)
2 3
144
1K
PlayStaytion replied
TOTK is easily a 10/10 with the Switch 2 upgrade
2 3 4
156
4K
Jack Videogames replied
Hades 2 | Review Thread
Review  2 3 4
177
560
manfestival replied
Infinity Nikki Review - IGN (9/10) > Stellar blade: IGN 7/10
NSFW  2 3
123
11K
tTHANOSs replied
Ghost of Yotei | Review Thread
Analysis Review  11 12 13 14 15
738
739
viveks86 replied
Top Bottom