Support NeoGAF

[Spring-Loaded]

Gies isn't being taken to task for not liking a game. Gies is being taken task for failing his professional duty as a video game reviewer.

As I mentioned, there are certainly plenty of reviewers that didn't like the game, and they still performed their job at the end of the day.

I seriously am not asking in regards to Gies. He is irreverent to me.

I legitimately want to know what the defenders of the game and/or its controls would find acceptable before writing off complaints about either. It seems as if some people can't fathom people genuinely disliking the control scheme, regardless of proficiency or time spent with it.

 

[TI82]

I seriously am not asking in regards to Gies. He is irreverent to me.

I legitimately want to know what the defenders of the game and/or its controls would find acceptable before writing off complaints about either. It seems as if some people can't fathom people genuinely disliking the control scheme, regardless of proficiency or time spent with it.

Don't let fanboys dictate your life and enjoyment of games. If you don't like something after playing one level you are still entitled to that opinion.

 

[Schnozberry]

I seriously am not asking in regards to Gies. He is irreverent to me.

I legitimately want to know what the defenders of the game and/or its controls would find acceptable before writing off complaints about either. It seems as if some people can't fathom people genuinely disliking the control scheme, regardless of proficiency or time spent with it.

I think complaints about the controls are fair game if you've played the game for 10 minutes. The part that grates on me personally is when "I don't like the controls, this isn't for me" somehow extrapolates into some larger thesis about gaming because you need to fill up an article and didn't play enough of the game to write about it.

 

[TrueBlue]

I dunno. Reviewer or not, if Gies dislikes the game enough to not want to finish it, doesn't that tell the reader what he thinks? After all, reviews at their core are the opinions and thoughts of a critic.

 

[Menitta]

What I'm getting from this thread and from reviews is that I should just get Star Fox 64 3D. I've never played a Star Fox game ever, and I was hoping this would be good. It seems that the gyro aiming isn't super good. As someone who hated the gyro aiming in Splatoon, I don't think I'll like it in Star Fox any more than in Splatoon.

 

[NotLiquid]

I seriously am not asking in regards to Gies. He is irreverent to me.

I legitimately want to know what the defenders of the game and/or its controls would find acceptable before writing off complaints about either. It seems as if some people can't fathom people genuinely disliking the control scheme, regardless of proficiency or time spent with it.

I don't think anyone here is running to the desperate occasion of defending the game as a flawless masterpiece, nor is anyone actively writing off people who have reservations with the control schemes. There are no set rules to how long you need to spend with a game to form an opinion that's inherent to you, especially with Star Fox which is a short game. I imagine even if you struggle with the controls at first you should ideally have a good idea of what to expect from the game itself and if learning to understand those controls will have been worth it for the experience that's to come. For some people they click, for some they don't. That's fine.

It's kind of like TW101 which is at this point practically cherished as a cult classic despite it's very obtuse entry barrier. Most people expected the controls to be the main thing that people will criticize this game for, but I think I've seen more debate about the game's length and the perception of these ratings rather than a tricky control scheme which was a given to everyone.

 

[Golgo 13]

I seriously am not asking in regards to Gies. He is irreverent to me.

I legitimately want to know what the defenders of the game and/or its controls would find acceptable before writing off complaints about either. It seems as if some people can't fathom people genuinely disliking the control scheme, regardless of proficiency or time spent with it.

I'd say if you're not a professional reviewer, you can play a game for any length of time and express your opinion. Maybe give it an honest effort to adapt before you write the game off, but I don't think anyone here would scorn you for having an opinion, regardless of what side you were on.

People are just annoyed because Gies basically couldn't be bothered to do his job, which includes finishing and reviewing games that he may or may not personally enjoy (something that is irrelevant to completing a review) -- something I've never seen a publication of website do, to be quite frank. It's pretty lame that Polygon would just go "Yeah Art, go ahead and run with that. Didn't want to finish it. Great! Why don't you have lunch on the company, take a nap if you need to. Sorry to inconvenience you." I mean WTF

 

[TheGreatMightyPoo]

I dunno. Reviewer or not, if Gies dislikes the game enough to not want to finish it, doesn't that tell the reader what he thinks? After all, reviews at their core are the opinions and thoughts of a critic.

He gets paid, this is his job. Not finishing a short game is half assed and not being good at your job and could set a bad precedent for other assignments he has in the future if he doesn't like the subject. You're not going to have fun always at your job but you still should give it all you got. Or else people might not take you seriously.

 

[Jim_Cacher]

It's just so disappointing to see that something I've always deeply loved (games that I can start up and beat opening to credits in one session, under 2 hours or so, but requiring finesse and mastery to do well) is now considered a bad thing. For years I've had to put up with games ballooning in length and scope, which I've never really been a fan of outside of RPGs (which I play on and off with other games in between). Now, finally, a game of the style I really like comes out, with a 2-3 hour campaign that requires you to come back to it again and again until you feel like you've totally mastered it 50 or 70 or 100 times through, and people are saying that's "archaic" or somehow a waste of money.

I'd much rather have a high skill ceiling 2 hour game I can sit down and go from opening to credits in one session and hone my skills at it for months, learn all the tricks, and achieve maximum possible scores at than a 20 hour game that I play once and never touch again, but no one makes games like that anymore. Now Nintendo has. I am so excited to finally get my hands on this on Friday.

Great post. I love my times when playing Metal Slug, House of the Dead and other arcade-y games. I have played them for a few hundred times and not even get bored. I can see that Star Fox Zero is going to be one of these games that I keep playing on and on.

 

[Merc_]

Yep, these are pretty much the scores I expected after listening to the previews on GameXplain. Especially the stuff about other journalists contacting Andre about how to uses the controls more effectively.

 

[Artanisix]

It's just so disappointing to see that something I've always deeply loved (games that I can start up and beat opening to credits in one session, under 2 hours or so, but requiring finesse and mastery to do well) is now considered a bad thing. For years I've had to put up with games ballooning in length and scope, which I've never really been a fan of outside of RPGs (which I play on and off with other games in between). Now, finally, a game of the style I really like comes out, with a 2-3 hour campaign that requires you to come back to it again and again until you feel like you've totally mastered it 50 or 70 or 100 times through, and people are saying that's "archaic" or somehow a waste of money.

I'd much rather have a high skill ceiling 2 hour game I can sit down and go from opening to credits in one session and hone my skills at it for months, learn all the tricks, and achieve maximum possible scores at than a 20 hour game that I play once and never touch again, but no one makes games like that anymore. Now Nintendo has. I am so excited to finally get my hands on this on Friday.

high skill ceiling? a little bit early to call star fox zero a "high skill ceiling" game, we hardly know what the level design is like or if it is even as close to brilliant as the N64 version is. the gameplay videos i've seen on youtube look pretty disappointing tbh.

 

[Snaggle]

I am one of those people that has played Lylat Wars over 100 times. I just love beating my score and finding new routes or secrets (which have all been discovered a long long time ago), infact I still love firing it up every now and again just to have a quick go as I love the shooting mechanics (also love the way the water flies up when you skim your ship over the surface of it in the first level) but unfortunately the motion controls and gamepad use in this latest version = an instant no buy for me. Nintendo's control scheme with their last 2 consoles has been the only major let down for me which sux because I so badly want to play and enjoy their games but the most important aspect (the controls) is always ruined.

 

[Malvingt2]

whelp

Arthur Gies hated Star Fox Zero so much he didn't finish it so he can't give it a review score

http://www.polygon.com/2016/4/20/11...t=chorus&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter

He is getting a write up?

 

[NipplesAndToes23]

These review scores are terrific. Wish I had the game.

 

[Reptars Revenge]

Reviews higher than I thought. Can't wait to gamefly it.

 

[noshten]

Gyro controls are awesome on Splatoon - so it sounds like I'd get it eventually.

 

[Theognosis]

Well, the problem is that it's competing against a lot of fantastic titles that are both better and offer more content at lower price points. It's one thing if all you game on is a Wii U, but for consumers with plenty of options, that's $60 that could go towards two great games. I could buy Stardew Valley and Ratchet & Clank for a little less right now. Of course there may be people who prefer Star Fox, but I'm speaking generally.

Star Fox Zero and Ratchet & Clank were the games I was planning to purchase this month. But after watching the DF comparison between the PS4, PS3 and PS2 versions of R&C, I'm not getting the PS4 version at full price. The PS3 version of Racthet & Clank looks and plays better at 60 fps in my opinion. An action game running at 30 fps no matter how beautiful is not for me.

 

[Retromelon]

That giantbomb review, oof. I had a sinking feeling an on rails shooter made in 2016 would not be received well.
Its like there's no place in the industry for games like this anymore..the 360/ps3 generation killed these mid tier budget games.

 

[OrbitalBeard]

Well, in the end, this game has reviewed a bit better than I expected it to.

 

[Tiktaalik]

I was almost entirely in the dark about this game, but looking forward to seeing how it would turn out, as I really enjoyed the previous games. I was hoping it'd be worth buying but after seeing the reviews I think I'll pass or pick up at a heavily discounted price.

I already have a Star Fox 64 remake for the 3DS so it's pretty disappointing to read that they stuck to the formula so closely that some reviewers felt like it was a Star Fox 64 rehash.

 

[Jimmyfenix]

Star Fox Zero and Ratchet & Clank were the games I was planning to purchase this month. But after watching the DF comparison between the PS4, PS3 and PS2 versions of R&C, I'm not getting the PS4 version at full price. The PS3 version of Racthet & Clank looks and plays better at 60 fps in my opinion. An action game running at 30 fps no matter how beautiful is not for me.

Ratchet and clank for ps4 is not even full price it launched at $40

 

[Trojan]

Star Fox Zero and Ratchet & Clank were the games I was planning to purchase this month. But after watching the DF comparison between the PS4, PS3 and PS2 versions of R&C, I'm not getting the PS4 version at full price. The PS3 version of Racthet & Clank looks and plays better at 60 fps in my opinion. An action game running at 30 fps no matter how beautiful is not for me.

I couldn't disagree more, I think the game looks amazing on PS4. You're comparing it to a different ratchet game on PS3, so I don't think the comparison is great. But to each their own I suppose.

 

[Dr.Social]

He gets paid, this is his job. Not finishing a short game is half assed and not being good at your job and could set a bad precedent for other assignments he has in the future if he doesn't like the subject. You're not going to have fun always at your job but you still should give it all you got. Or else people might not take you seriously.

He doesn't get paid to play games he gets paid to write about them. He played enough of the game to write a piece about why he didn't like the game. He did his job.

 

[OrbitalBeard]

He doesn't get paid to play games he gets paid to write about them. He played enough of the game to write a piece about why he didn't like the game. He did his job.

I really don't care whether or not he finished the game, but as a reviewer, he is absolutely being paid to play games, not just write about them.

 

[botty]

That giantbomb review, oof. I had a sinking feeling an on rails shooter made in 2016 would not be received well.
Its like there's no place in the industry for games like this anymore..the 360/ps3 generation killed these mid tier budget games.

Oh there is a place for them.... and a price.

 

[AcademicSaucer]

Oh there is a place for them.... and a price.

isnt this game $50 and $60 if you also want Guard ?

 

[Freezie KO]

It kinda mystifies me that they chose probably the Wii U's last big exclusive to try and justify the game pad. Would have made a lot more sense as a launch title.

Just wanted to chime in and say that your comment is what makes me concerned about NX.

Star Fox was something that the hardcore base had been desiring for years. Giving the game to Platinum was a great idea that had been thrown around the internet and even Tweeted by Kamiya himself.

The GamePad, on the other hand, was something that the market rejected as a whole. Nintendo tried to create something appealing, but it just didn't work out for them. Learn and move on, right? Not with Nintendo.

The fact that Miyamoto, as Supervising Director, forced Platinum to make you look back-and-forth between the screens is baffling. Forget about motion controls, which often work. Nintendo used this title to prove a stubborn point: You want two-screen console gameplay, even if you don't.

This late into the Wii U's lifespan, Nintendo is still telling its customers what they want. But if they want to be successful with NX, they should do more listening and less telling.

Personally, I no longer feel obligated to pick up mainline titles of beloved franchises if they don't deliver what I'm looking for. And Wii U was the generation that cemented that feeling for me.

I wish them the best, but the GamePad is an albatross on an arwing. Nintendo still insists that they know what you want more than you do, and that's a bad philosophy to take into a critical console that defines the future of the company.

 

[GavinGT]

Gies isn't being taken to task for not liking a game. Gies is being taken task for failing his professional duty as a video game reviewer.

As I mentioned, there are certainly plenty of reviewers that didn't like the game, and they still performed their job at the end of the day.

That's between him and his employer. What do you care if Polygon doesn't have a review of the game? There are plenty of other reviews out there.

 

[Ridley327]

That's between him and his employer. What do you care if Polygon doesn't have a review of the game? There are plenty of other reviews out there.

I think I speak for a lot of people when I say that we should expect better from reviewers, regardless of their profile in the field. If any of them can't do their job properly, they deserve to be called out on it.

 

[WrenchNinja]

At what point can someone say they don't like the game and/or the controls a not be arraigned for it? How long do you have to play and how good will you have to be in order to say that?

Only asking so that I can know when it's okay to post impressions after playing it

it's never enough time to justify it to some people. It's always an excuse to defend "misunderstood masterpieces"

 

[orthodoxy1095]

The fact that Miyamoto, as Supervising Director, forced Platinum to make you look back-and-forth between the screens is baffling. Forget about motion controls, which often work. Nintendo used this title to prove a stubborn point: You want two-screen console gameplay, even if you don't.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-x1stkifVq8

I think I speak for a lot of people when I say that we should expect better from reviewers, regardless of their profile in the field. If any of them can't do their job properly, they deserve to be called out on it.

Granted this is a short game, which might complicate the issue, but in a more general sense, is a reviewer ever allowed to say "to hell with the game" and just call it quits? Or do you think they have to persevere until the very end?

 

[SaintMadeOfPlaster]

Did anyone actually expect anything better from Polygon? Posting pages about his review is only giving him what he wants.

As for the reviews, this is only solidifying my opinion that Miyamoto needs to retire ASAP. Almost every game he has had a lot of input in has turned out having major issues, usually due to something he was stubborn about.

 

[GavinGT]

I think I speak for a lot of people when I say that we should expect better from reviewers, regardless of their profile in the field. If any of them can't do their job properly, they deserve to be called out on it.

Roger Ebert walked out of multiple films he was reviewing. These guys aren't putting out house fires, they're giving you their opinions on videogames.

 

[Trojan]

Seems like all the anger and hand-wringing about this game not reviewing well is being directed at Gies. He didn't finish the game, but that's kind of the point, right? Would you feel better if he forced himself to finish and then assigned it a bad score?

His job is to give his opinion and he did exactly that...he didn't finish it because he hated it, and by Polygon rules he can't give it a score. He says all that plainly in the review. Disagree with it all you want, but saying he was "not professional" by never finishing it is missing the forest through the trees.

 

[Tom Nook Sawyer]

Roger Ebert walked out of multiple films he was reviewing. These guys aren't putting out house fires, they're giving you their opinions on videogames.

People read Roger Ebert's reviews for Roger Ebert; few go to Polygon exclusively for Gies reviews--they go for reviews in general (and he didn't even review the game, by his own admission). Roger Ebert also didn't receive copies of movies a month in advance and had an entire team of in-house employees or freelancers he could have thrown it to if he wasn't willing to stick through with it.

The problem isn't that he specifically hated the game, or couldn't even make it through it, but that Polygon as publication wasn't willing to find someone willing to put more than an hour or two and give it a proper review--regardless of what the score ended up being.

Seems like all the anger and hand-wringing about this game not reviewing well is being directed at Gies. He didn't finish the game, but that's kind of the point, right? Would you feel better if he forced himself to finish and then assigned it a bad score?

I imagine most people would, yes. Hence why his is getting attention whereas most are understanding of Giant Bomb's review. There's a difference between being critical and being dismissive.

And that's not even getting into the fact that one was a well-respected critic who had a legacy that he earned, and the other is Gies.

 

[orthodoxy1095]

Seems like all the anger and hand-wringing about this game not reviewing well is being directed at Gies. He didn't finish the game, but that's kind of the point, right? Would you feel better if he forced himself to finish and then assigned it a bad score?

His job is to give his opinion and he did exactly that...he didn't finish it because he hated it, and by Polygon rules he can't give it a score. He says all that plainly in the review. Disagree with it all you want, but saying he was "not professional" by never finishing it is missing the forest through the trees.

As I mentioned before, I do find this part slightly odd. They've not finished games before, but I guess those have tended to be RPGs.

 

[AntMurda]

Just wanted to chime in and say that your comment is what makes me concerned about NX.

Star Fox was something that the hardcore base had been desiring for years. Giving the game to Platinum was a great idea that had been thrown around the internet and even Tweeted by Kamiya himself.

The GamePad, on the other hand, was something that the market rejected as a whole. Nintendo tried to create something appealing, but it just didn't work out for them. Learn and move on, right? Not with Nintendo.

The fact that Miyamoto, as Supervising Director, forced Platinum to make you look back-and-forth between the screens is baffling. Forget about motion controls, which often work. Nintendo used this title to prove a stubborn point: You want two-screen console gameplay, even if you don't.

This late into the Wii U's lifespan, Nintendo is still telling its customers what they want. But if they want to be successful with NX, they should do more listening and less telling.

Personally, I no longer feel obligated to pick up mainline titles of beloved franchises if they don't deliver what I'm looking for. And Wii U was the generation that cemented that feeling for me.

I wish them the best, but the GamePad is an albatross on an arwing. Nintendo still insists that they know what you want more than you do, and that's a bad philosophy to take into a critical console that defines the future of the company.

You are really making a lot of stuff up here. You know that Nintendo programmed the game right? Check the interviews and credits. You know that the lead director was Yugo Hayashi from Nintendo right. Check the interview and credits. Platinum joined the project to help finish it and essentially add some style and muscle. They weren't forced to do anything. It wasn't their vision.

 

[Trojan]

As I mentioned before, I do find this part slightly odd. They've not finished games before, but I guess those have tended to be RPGs.

He says that in some cases they can argue to give it a score if it's a situation where they've seen "enough" of a game or maybe the review deadline comes up faster than they can finish the content. Long RPGs probably fall into that bucket.

Either way, I think the fact that he essentially said "this game is hot trash; I'm going to stop and not give it a score" is all you need to know...the score is kind of irrelevant in this case because it would have been super low.

 

[Shiggy]

People read Roger Ebert's reviews for Roger Ebert; few go to Polygon exclusively for Gies reviews--they go for reviews in general (and he didn't even review the game, by his own admission). Roger Ebert also didn't receive copies of movies a month in advance and had an entire team of in-house employees or freelancers he could have thrown it to if he wasn't willing to stick through with it.



I imagine most people would, yes. Hence why his is getting attention whereas most are understanding of Giant Bomb's review. There's a difference between being critical and being dismissive.

And that's not even getting into the fact that one was a well-respected critic who had a legacy that he earned, and the other is Gies.

What's the difference between posting an article with a very negative article and posting a review with a bad score? Gies made pretty clear what he thinks of the game.

People get way too fed up when someone talks bad about their "software darling".

 

[GavinGT]

People read Roger Ebert's reviews for Roger Ebert; few go to Polygon exclusively for Gies reviews--they go for reviews in general (and he didn't even review the game, by his own admission). Roger Ebert also didn't receive copies of movies a month in advance and had an entire team of in-house employees or freelancers he could have thrown it to if he wasn't willing to stick through with it.

So you're worried about the people who will go to Polygon looking for a Star Fox review and not find one?

 

[Tom Nook Sawyer]

So you're worried about the people who will go to Polygon looking for a Star Fox review and not find one?

I think one of the largest video game outlets should have standards higher than a common blog, yes.

But Polygon is free to do as they want; it's not a surprise they've garnered the reputation they have as the result

People get way too fed up when someone talks bad about their "software darling".

Thanks for putting words into my mouth and being condescending in the same post. I have no issues with any reviewer who actually played through the game. The Giant Bomb review is a fine review--perhaps even one of the better ones.

 

[Ridley327]

What's the difference between posting an article with a very negative article and posting a review with a bad score? Gies made pretty clear what he thinks of the game.

People get way too fed up when someone talks bad about their "software darling".

Why do you keep persisting with this narrative that people don't like how Gies approached the situation because of hurt feelings? There's been little hubbub over Giant Bomb trashing the game and there's been next to nothing about GameKult drubbing it (though, understandably, the language barrier plays into that). You're seeing something that isn't there and comes off as way more of agenda on your part than it does for anyone else.

 

[KC Denton]

That giantbomb review, oof. I had a sinking feeling an on rails shooter made in 2016 would not be received well.
Its like there's no place in the industry for games like this anymore..the 360/ps3 generation killed these mid tier budget games.

If it's supposed to be a mid tier budget game, why is it priced the same as a AAA game at $60 when Ratchet and Clank released last week at only $40?

 

[GavinGT]

I think one of the largest video game outlets should have standards higher than a common blog, yes.

But Polygon is free to do as they want; it's not a surprise they've garnered the reputation they have as the result

By "higher standards", you mean they should have reviews for every game? I fail to see what they've done wrong here.

 

[Shiggy]

Why do you keep persisting with this narrative that people don't like how Gies approached the situation because of hurt feelings? There's been little hubbub over Giant Bomb trashing the game and there's been next to nothing about GameKult drubbing it (though, understandably, the language barrier plays into that). You're seeing something that isn't there and comes off as way more of agenda on your part than it does for anyone else.

Then why is it so much of a problem? With Polygon not having a proper review, they are an easy target for the defense force, Giant bomb made it more difficult for them.

If it's supposed to be a mid tier budget game, why is it priced the same as a AAA game at $60 when Ratchet and Clank released last week at only $40?

Read this thread and you know why. Those wanting a new Star Fox game at any cost, will buy it at that price regardless of content or quality. Simple pricing theory. Nintendo knows they cannot get more people to buy Wii U, so they try to maximize profits from individual customers. When they have to focus on a small nice as they do right now, this makes sense in the short term (in the long term customers might feel ripped off if they realise).

 

[Tom Nook Sawyer]

By "higher standards", you mean they should have reviews for every game? I fail to see what they've done wrong here.

That isn't what I said at all. No review would be preferable to the half-assed piece he put in place of a proper review.

Then why is it so much of a problem? With Polygon not having a proper review, they are an easy target for the defense force, Giant bomb made it more difficult for them.

It's easy to lump everyone together with blanket and mindless terms like "defense force," isn't it? I haven't commented on the quality of the game at all

 

[Ridley327]

Then why is it so much of a problem? With Polygon not having a proper review, they are an easy target for the defense force, Giant bomb made it more difficult for them.

If we can have forum-wide meltdowns over a goddamned 8/10, I don't think a 2/5 is a particularly treacherous hill to climb.

 

[Shiggy]

If we can have forum-wide meltdowns over a goddamned 8/10, I don't think a 2/5 is a particularly treacherous hill to climb.

Which game with an 8/10 caused a meltdown? Just curious.

 

[Ridley327]

Which game with an 8/10 caused a meltdown? Just curious.

Uncharted 3.

And that was a generally enthusiastic and inoffensive review.

 

[bart64]

Dudes, this game is all about the contols and second screen, that is why it exists. Arguing that it would be better with other contols is missing the premise. It's like saying Avatar is better in 2D--you sound like a douche if you dismiss the creators' vision and effort to hone the technology.

And that Polygon guy is not to blame, that whole website is trashy and this is just one example of setting the bar very low--too bad because their graphics team is super. A one-of-a-kind control scheme, developed by an industry legend, a nostalgic skin, gameplay developed by one of the world's best action studios. Sounds like a perfect time for some clickbait bullshit!