Are Critics Killing The Traditional RPG?
White Knight Chronicles 2Sadly, traditional RPGs really aren't what they used to be. That's true. But there is one phenomenon that may indicate something different...
The first White Knight Chronicles didn't fare so well in the critical world; the Metacritic average sits at only 64, despite many role-playing aficionados defending Level-5's effort. Now, the second WKC is available in Europe (US gamers have to wait until September) and yet again, we're finding the exact same discrepancy between reviewers and fans. And what's the primary source of conflict?
Critic: "Bah, it's just old and outdated. Nobody wants games like this, anymore."
RPG fan: "Um, yeah, we do."
When we awarded the original White Knight Chronicles an 8.5, we knew what we were doing. We knew what type of gamer would enjoy such a production, and we knew there were more of them out there than big publishers - and critics - seem to think. The game wasn't broken or bad; the second probably isn't broken or bad. Both simply seem "old" and the sequel is just "more of the same."
So no wonder developers have no interest in creating traditional RPGs anymore. The critics will hate them, which will in turn have an immediate impact on sales. And if that's going to happen, why bother?
Related Game(s): White Knight Chronicles 2
Tags: wkc2, white knight chronicles 2, white knight 2 reviews
7/7/2011 10:58:59 AM Ben Dutka
Put this on your webpage or blog:
Email this to a friend
Follow PSX Extreme on Twitter
Comments (125 posts)
Nlayer
Thursday, July 07, 2011 @ 2:07:10 PM
I feel like critics do this kind of thing to other genres as well. Good games get low scores it seems. Bad games get high scores.
Can we just get rid of reviews all together? Why must we have a "score" for a game? Why can't critics just share their opinions without giving a silly number. If they got rid of the number, maybe people would actually try the game themselves instead of making a judgement based on seeing low scores. (Because we all know everyone doesn't actually read the reviews, they just look to the score)
Can we just get rid of reviews all together? Why must we have a "score" for a game? Why can't critics just share their opinions without giving a silly number. If they got rid of the number, maybe people would actually try the game themselves instead of making a judgement based on seeing low scores. (Because we all know everyone doesn't actually read the reviews, they just look to the score)
1 up, 1 down
maxpontiac
Thursday, July 07, 2011 @ 2:50:35 PM
You shouldn't be shocked over it though Highlander. Reviews have killed more then one game.
It's why I believe that there should be a governing body over the review system and the individual reviews.
Reviewers, as professionals, must have accountability. For example, If I, as a designer release an incomplete set construction documents, I will have to answer for it with State and Local officials. If the review industry already has something similar in place, please Ben, correct me on this.
It's why I believe that there should be a governing body over the review system and the individual reviews.
Reviewers, as professionals, must have accountability. For example, If I, as a designer release an incomplete set construction documents, I will have to answer for it with State and Local officials. If the review industry already has something similar in place, please Ben, correct me on this.
1 up, 2 down
jimmyhandsome
Thursday, July 07, 2011 @ 4:13:42 PM
You want state or federal goverment bodies to oversee reviews of movies and videogames? No, this isn't communist China. Reviewers should be held to a standard, but by readers not a governing body.
You take review scores with a grain of salt. inFamous 2 I believed average an 84 or so on metacritic, I personally think its in the low to mid 90s. People have different opinions, and unfortunately there alot of hack journalists and reviewers out there.
In terms of RPG review scores I'm sure that critics butcher scores. You need to be educated on who is reviewing it and what type of games they like.
You take review scores with a grain of salt. inFamous 2 I believed average an 84 or so on metacritic, I personally think its in the low to mid 90s. People have different opinions, and unfortunately there alot of hack journalists and reviewers out there.
In terms of RPG review scores I'm sure that critics butcher scores. You need to be educated on who is reviewing it and what type of games they like.
0 up, 0 down
Clamedeus
Thursday, July 07, 2011 @ 4:43:36 PM
I don't look at reviews or scores for a game,
(Mind you I do read them, but that isn't my main focus point of purchasing a game whether or not the author liked it or didn't like it and what score they gave it)
I look at video's and if it catches my eye's and I like what I'm seeing I will do more research on it, if it hits home I will buy it. I do that with all of my games. I didn't buy any of my games because of review scores.
Last edited by Clamedeus on 7/7/2011 4:45:02 PM
(Mind you I do read them, but that isn't my main focus point of purchasing a game whether or not the author liked it or didn't like it and what score they gave it)
I look at video's and if it catches my eye's and I like what I'm seeing I will do more research on it, if it hits home I will buy it. I do that with all of my games. I didn't buy any of my games because of review scores.
Last edited by Clamedeus on 7/7/2011 4:45:02 PM
2 up, 0 down
Lotusflow3r
Thursday, July 07, 2011 @ 7:50:37 PM
I'm 42hrs in WKC2....
All on here who liked the original are going to doubly love it. I PROMISE you.
The improvements are fantastic, the story is now gripping, ive grown attached to the characters and it's very imaginative.
It captures the old school, golden era charm at the same time as giving you something new.
It has flaws, but they don't stand out over all the things it does right.
I'm hooked. I'm captivated and i'm getting "the feeling" you don't get with today's rpgs.
My theory is that the West just wants to beat the east at everything and just brush off the root so they can plant their own...NEVER GONNA HAPPEN.
Eventually, everything comes back home and the industry will go back to Japan.
As long as we have our Level 5's, From Software's, Team Ico, Sony's and more...it's all good.
Last edited by Lotusflow3r on 7/7/2011 7:52:10 PM
All on here who liked the original are going to doubly love it. I PROMISE you.
The improvements are fantastic, the story is now gripping, ive grown attached to the characters and it's very imaginative.
It captures the old school, golden era charm at the same time as giving you something new.
It has flaws, but they don't stand out over all the things it does right.
I'm hooked. I'm captivated and i'm getting "the feeling" you don't get with today's rpgs.
My theory is that the West just wants to beat the east at everything and just brush off the root so they can plant their own...NEVER GONNA HAPPEN.
Eventually, everything comes back home and the industry will go back to Japan.
As long as we have our Level 5's, From Software's, Team Ico, Sony's and more...it's all good.
Last edited by Lotusflow3r on 7/7/2011 7:52:10 PM
2 up, 0 down
Highlander
Thursday, July 07, 2011 @ 9:30:10 PM
Max, I'm not talking about a single game, and neither was Ben, they're killing a genre.
Jimmy, I'm not sure what is up with your reply, I made no mention of politics so let's keep the government creep paranoia elsewhere please.
Jimmy, I'm not sure what is up with your reply, I made no mention of politics so let's keep the government creep paranoia elsewhere please.
0 up, 2 down
Nlayer
Friday, July 08, 2011 @ 2:08:48 AM
@Highlander - I think Jimmy was responding to Max about the government stuff.
3 up, 0 down
Highlander
Friday, July 08, 2011 @ 8:51:41 AM
Nlayer,
OK, I wish he'd have included who that was directed at since it was a reply under my original comment. But I see that, thanks.
OK, I wish he'd have included who that was directed at since it was a reply under my original comment. But I see that, thanks.
0 up, 0 down
maxpontiac
Friday, July 08, 2011 @ 10:31:13 AM
jimmyhandsome -
You either failed to read what I posted or didn't understand it. Only reasons I can think of to explain your "communistic" comments.
I am a professional designer of light commercial and residential projects. I am currently taking steps to earn my Architect Seal. My point? As a professional, I am bound by laws through various local and federal organizations (btr dot com). It is my opinion, that reviewers and websites who offer reviews should be bound by something similar to this. As professionals, it should be something they embrace, for it would separate those are serious from those who blog.
Highlander -
I know. But my point was that how many reviews have trashed a game (some deserving) and as result cost someone's job? A closure of company? I am all for reviewers and critics informing the consumers of low quality titles, but considering that reviews for any given title are usually all over the place, all that shows that there isn't a standard in place.
Eventually, I see some governing body in place to separate the tabloids (Destructiod)from the professional (PSXE) sites. This business is getting big enough, wouldn't you agree?
You either failed to read what I posted or didn't understand it. Only reasons I can think of to explain your "communistic" comments.
I am a professional designer of light commercial and residential projects. I am currently taking steps to earn my Architect Seal. My point? As a professional, I am bound by laws through various local and federal organizations (btr dot com). It is my opinion, that reviewers and websites who offer reviews should be bound by something similar to this. As professionals, it should be something they embrace, for it would separate those are serious from those who blog.
Highlander -
I know. But my point was that how many reviews have trashed a game (some deserving) and as result cost someone's job? A closure of company? I am all for reviewers and critics informing the consumers of low quality titles, but considering that reviews for any given title are usually all over the place, all that shows that there isn't a standard in place.
Eventually, I see some governing body in place to separate the tabloids (Destructiod)from the professional (PSXE) sites. This business is getting big enough, wouldn't you agree?
0 up, 1 down
jimmyhandsome
Friday, July 08, 2011 @ 11:36:35 AM
Maybe I misunderstood what you meant by "governing body" but I interpreted it as having a government or organization that regulated or somehow controlled review scores. I think thats highly unnecessary, even with the amount of crappy websites out there.
I take it that your Architect Seal is some sort of certification from the state you live in, correct? I think that the two are very different in terms of being regulated. Its necessary that you as a professional need to follow those state guidelines. Reviews and review scores of videogames or anything else are just people's opinions of a new product. I don't think we need anyone but ourselves to regulate that? And how would you determine what you call a tabloid and what you consider professional?
I take it that your Architect Seal is some sort of certification from the state you live in, correct? I think that the two are very different in terms of being regulated. Its necessary that you as a professional need to follow those state guidelines. Reviews and review scores of videogames or anything else are just people's opinions of a new product. I don't think we need anyone but ourselves to regulate that? And how would you determine what you call a tabloid and what you consider professional?
0 up, 0 down
maxpontiac
Friday, July 08, 2011 @ 12:20:32 PM
Oh no, these agencies don't control everything, but for example, what the BTR does for architects and engineers is provide guidelines for each professional to follow while creating construction documents. Now while it's up to the individual first and foremost to provide a service to the best of their abilities and do what's "right", there have been cases in which that doesn't happen.
Another example I want to point out is to take a look at the Association of Food Journalists. It's set in place not to tell food critics what to do, but it offers a standard for ethical conduct and credibility. All agencies whether they are associations or state jurisdictions are very similar in that regard. In my opinion, this is very similar to the video game reviews and reviewers.
Yes, I understand the reviews are opinions, but in some cases, some of what's covered in the review is factual such as graphical and frame-rate issues. But most reviews have statements such as "boring" (for example) in place, which in all likelihood, it may be isolated to the reviewer himself due to their dislike of the genre. You or I may find the game-play very fulfilling.
When it comes to what separates a tabloid from a serious site, it's pretty obvious to most of us since we come here. I know it's why I do! I don't have to navigate through the attention grabbing articles or reviews that are heavily biased. In my eyes, PSXE is cut above the rest for this very reason.
Last edited by maxpontiac on 7/8/2011 12:23:15 PM
Another example I want to point out is to take a look at the Association of Food Journalists. It's set in place not to tell food critics what to do, but it offers a standard for ethical conduct and credibility. All agencies whether they are associations or state jurisdictions are very similar in that regard. In my opinion, this is very similar to the video game reviews and reviewers.
Yes, I understand the reviews are opinions, but in some cases, some of what's covered in the review is factual such as graphical and frame-rate issues. But most reviews have statements such as "boring" (for example) in place, which in all likelihood, it may be isolated to the reviewer himself due to their dislike of the genre. You or I may find the game-play very fulfilling.
When it comes to what separates a tabloid from a serious site, it's pretty obvious to most of us since we come here. I know it's why I do! I don't have to navigate through the attention grabbing articles or reviews that are heavily biased. In my eyes, PSXE is cut above the rest for this very reason.
Last edited by maxpontiac on 7/8/2011 12:23:15 PM
0 up, 0 down
Highlander
Friday, July 08, 2011 @ 2:06:08 PM
I do think the business is big enough Max, but in the US regulation is the devil's work, so you likely won't see any kind of governing body - unless market forces create one...
Anyway.....What would help a lot if is both Google and Metacritic were more discerning in their decisions about what is a real news site and what is a blog.
Anyway.....What would help a lot if is both Google and Metacritic were more discerning in their decisions about what is a real news site and what is a blog.
2 up, 0 down
maxpontiac
Friday, July 08, 2011 @ 3:11:21 PM
Excellent point Highlander, and thanks for discussing this with me (as with the others too).
Well, the reviewers and authors can easily create an Association. The small firm I am currently with is a charter member with a local building association. It is an entity that has help separate the license contractors who are serious from those who fly by night.
Right now, video game review sites are a dime a dozen. Why? Tons of intelligent people out there play video games, and have access to internet. It's not a bad thing, but separates one critic from another? What do you think it would take for a governing body to come into effect?
Last edited by maxpontiac on 7/8/2011 3:12:00 PM
Well, the reviewers and authors can easily create an Association. The small firm I am currently with is a charter member with a local building association. It is an entity that has help separate the license contractors who are serious from those who fly by night.
Right now, video game review sites are a dime a dozen. Why? Tons of intelligent people out there play video games, and have access to internet. It's not a bad thing, but separates one critic from another? What do you think it would take for a governing body to come into effect?
Last edited by maxpontiac on 7/8/2011 3:12:00 PM
0 up, 0 down
Highlander
Friday, July 08, 2011 @ 8:55:13 PM
Hmmm... great question.
I think that if there was enough willingness to create a trade association, then there really should (in that case) be enough willingness to start demanding actual journalism qualifications. Whether through verifiable work experience or educational qualifications. But that would only be a voluntary trade association - something like the chartered engineers, but with far fewer teeth.
The thing is that without some kind of regulatory basis how does such a body do anything? It comes down to peer pressure. I don't know if you've read Ben's editorials on the subject, but it's clear that most print journalists don't have a high view of gaming journalism in general - presumably for the same reasons we are discussing this now.
I just can't see how a trade association could help the situation though since everyone with an IQ above their shoe laces can get online and have a website to play with.
I think that if there was enough willingness to create a trade association, then there really should (in that case) be enough willingness to start demanding actual journalism qualifications. Whether through verifiable work experience or educational qualifications. But that would only be a voluntary trade association - something like the chartered engineers, but with far fewer teeth.
The thing is that without some kind of regulatory basis how does such a body do anything? It comes down to peer pressure. I don't know if you've read Ben's editorials on the subject, but it's clear that most print journalists don't have a high view of gaming journalism in general - presumably for the same reasons we are discussing this now.
I just can't see how a trade association could help the situation though since everyone with an IQ above their shoe laces can get online and have a website to play with.
0 up, 0 down
maxpontiac
Thursday, July 07, 2011 @ 11:35:16 AM
Reply
Critics are killing more then RPG genre, and it's nothing new. It's why certain games get reviews that ignore issues while other games get faulted for it. For the record, PSXE does not do this.
On topic, and I speak only as a new person to the RPG genre, I am glad traditional RPG's are becoming a thing of the past. Why? My favorite games to play are Fallout and Dragon Age.
The action RPG is the way to go.
Last edited by maxpontiac on 7/7/2011 11:35:39 AM
On topic, and I speak only as a new person to the RPG genre, I am glad traditional RPG's are becoming a thing of the past. Why? My favorite games to play are Fallout and Dragon Age.
The action RPG is the way to go.
Last edited by maxpontiac on 7/7/2011 11:35:39 AM
7 up, 15 down
coverton341
Thursday, July 07, 2011 @ 11:41:00 AM
Both Fallout and Dragon Age are good franchises, but why would you be glad that traditional RPGs are becoming a thing of the past? That is equivalent to wanting simulation racers to become obsolete because you only like arcade racers. Why can't both options live harmoniously together so that fans of either flavour can have what they enjoy?
I think that this way of thinking is doing more damage to the gaming variety than critics alone. The "my way is better so the other should go away" mentality that seems to permeate the thinking these days.
I think that this way of thinking is doing more damage to the gaming variety than critics alone. The "my way is better so the other should go away" mentality that seems to permeate the thinking these days.
18 up, 0 down
Highlander
Thursday, July 07, 2011 @ 11:43:00 AM
Max, Coverton nailed you with his post, and he's 100% correct in his post.
12 up, 0 down
FM23
Thursday, July 07, 2011 @ 12:27:37 PM
Yeah, I think I should say thank god for action RPG's instead of saying...too hell with classic RPGS...lol
9 up, 0 down
maxpontiac
Thursday, July 07, 2011 @ 1:01:07 PM
Coverton - Well, for one, if Dragon Age and Fallout played like a traditional turn based game, I would have never bought it, nor gotten to enjoy two of my favorite series.
I stand corrected. Perhaps I should have said I am glad "action" RPG's seem to be replacing the traditional ones.
I stand corrected. Perhaps I should have said I am glad "action" RPG's seem to be replacing the traditional ones.
4 up, 9 down
coverton341
Thursday, July 07, 2011 @ 1:25:47 PM
Again max you seem to be glad that one genre is fading away. That is entirely your prerogative but I don't see why anyone should be happy that one genre is going away in place to another. Again I feel like the more the merrier. Traditional RPGs have just as much place as action RPGs. I don't see why Dragon Age and Fallout (which started out as a PC exclusive turn-based 3/4 view mind you) can't coexist along side White Knight Chronicles and the like. I personally enjoy both and am sad to see traditional RPGs go the wayside because of this mentality that people seem to have that since they don't like it there is no place for it.
I hate football games but I don't hope that Rugby games start to replace them. I loath arcade racers but I don't want them to disappear and be replaced solely by sims. You know why I don't want that to happen? Because everyone deserves to be able to enjoy their chosen genre of games regardless of my preferences.
I hate football games but I don't hope that Rugby games start to replace them. I loath arcade racers but I don't want them to disappear and be replaced solely by sims. You know why I don't want that to happen? Because everyone deserves to be able to enjoy their chosen genre of games regardless of my preferences.
9 up, 0 down
cLoudou
Thursday, July 07, 2011 @ 1:38:51 PM
"I wish WRPGs would die" is what I would be saying since I prefer traditional turn based RPGs, but I've learned to accept it and I actually enjoyed Mass Effect 2.
0 up, 0 down
Jawknee
Thursday, July 07, 2011 @ 1:39:39 PM
Max, you and usually see eye to eye but on this one we must part ways. Games like Fallout 3 and Dragon Age are not even in the same league in terms of quality, game play, character development, presentation or story telling as franchises like Final Fantasy, Dragon Quest and countless other JRPG's. If Fallout 3 and Dragon Age are an indication of the future of RPG's, I consider the genre dead.
Last edited by Jawknee on 7/7/2011 1:45:24 PM
Last edited by Jawknee on 7/7/2011 1:45:24 PM
7 up, 2 down
maxpontiac
Thursday, July 07, 2011 @ 2:45:10 PM
coverton341 -
You are making an assumption. I am not glad traditional RPG's are shrinking in popularity. I am however glad the action RPG's are becoming the norm.
I absolutely love the characters and stories from Dragon Age (for example), but I am glad I can still play it in real time, and with two, I can press the button manually.
Jawknee -
Yeah, well, we can't always see eye to eye! I believe if the trend continues with "action RPG's" fans such as yourself will continue to be in the minority.
You are making an assumption. I am not glad traditional RPG's are shrinking in popularity. I am however glad the action RPG's are becoming the norm.
I absolutely love the characters and stories from Dragon Age (for example), but I am glad I can still play it in real time, and with two, I can press the button manually.
Jawknee -
Yeah, well, we can't always see eye to eye! I believe if the trend continues with "action RPG's" fans such as yourself will continue to be in the minority.
1 up, 7 down
coverton341
Thursday, July 07, 2011 @ 5:08:33 PM
"I should have said I am glad "action" RPG's seem to be replacing the traditional ones."
" I am glad traditional RPG's are becoming a thing of the past."
I don't think with these two statements that I am making an assumption. Rather I am going off of your own words and responding to that. Replacing one genre for another and being happy about it says you are happy one is being replaced by the other not that you are glad there are a lot of action RPGs.
Saying you are glad that traditional RPGs are becoming a thing of the past is not saying you are glad that there are more action RPGs.
Sorry if I read that wrong but I honestly can't think of any other way to take it other than you being happy that a genre that other people like is seemingly disappearing in favour of a genre that you prefer.
If what you mean to say is that you are glad you found some action RPGs that you enjoy, then more power to you and I am glad you found something you can enjoy. I don't think anyone should be glad that variety is disappearing in gaming though.
" I am glad traditional RPG's are becoming a thing of the past."
I don't think with these two statements that I am making an assumption. Rather I am going off of your own words and responding to that. Replacing one genre for another and being happy about it says you are happy one is being replaced by the other not that you are glad there are a lot of action RPGs.
Saying you are glad that traditional RPGs are becoming a thing of the past is not saying you are glad that there are more action RPGs.
Sorry if I read that wrong but I honestly can't think of any other way to take it other than you being happy that a genre that other people like is seemingly disappearing in favour of a genre that you prefer.
If what you mean to say is that you are glad you found some action RPGs that you enjoy, then more power to you and I am glad you found something you can enjoy. I don't think anyone should be glad that variety is disappearing in gaming though.
6 up, 0 down
Nlayer
Friday, July 08, 2011 @ 2:20:28 AM
I don't think Max was trying to say that he wants the old RPGs to die out. I think he was trying to say he enjoyed developers making the western style of RPGs instead of making the older style of them. There's nothing wrong with that view.
My view: I'm a big fan of Final Fantasy 7 since it released, but I enjoy Mass Effect 2 a whole lot more nowadays. I love to see new Mass Effect style of games currently. Not as much as I do with FF7 style of games. Why? Well, the old RPGs were great back in the day, but now I think the western style is what's good right now. In another ten years I'll probably not be looking forward to any Western style RPGs, but instead whatever else is popular/good at the time in the future. This is my view, however, and you certainly do not have to own it. I just think that everything evolves. I like the old RPG style because of the nostalgia it gives me(But an entirely new game with old RPG elements doesn't do much to me nowadays).
Please don't let nostalgia blind your view when talking with others.
My view: I'm a big fan of Final Fantasy 7 since it released, but I enjoy Mass Effect 2 a whole lot more nowadays. I love to see new Mass Effect style of games currently. Not as much as I do with FF7 style of games. Why? Well, the old RPGs were great back in the day, but now I think the western style is what's good right now. In another ten years I'll probably not be looking forward to any Western style RPGs, but instead whatever else is popular/good at the time in the future. This is my view, however, and you certainly do not have to own it. I just think that everything evolves. I like the old RPG style because of the nostalgia it gives me(But an entirely new game with old RPG elements doesn't do much to me nowadays).
Please don't let nostalgia blind your view when talking with others.
3 up, 1 down
maxpontiac
Friday, July 08, 2011 @ 10:13:36 AM
coverton341 -
No need to apologize, but since it is MY opinion that I am speaking about, of course it's going to come off that way. This isn't as black or white as you (and others) make it sound. I am a huge fan of Gran Turismo. Does that mean I want Burnout to fade away. No. Make sense?!
With RPG's going the "action" route, I have been treated to an experience that no other TPS or FPS can deliver.
So yeah, I am thrilled with the prospect of more "action" RPG's coming out. If that means the death of traditional JRPG's and the like, so be it. I have compassion for folks like you, but it might end up just be a case of you having to move on or adapt to the change your genre is experiencing.
Nlayer -
Thank you for understanding what I am saying. I am currently playing Dragon Age 2 right now, and dare I say, I love it! Perhaps even more then the first!!
I agree with your last statement. Nostalgia plays a huge part in peoples opinion whether they want to admit it or not!!
Last edited by maxpontiac on 7/8/2011 10:16:41 AM
No need to apologize, but since it is MY opinion that I am speaking about, of course it's going to come off that way. This isn't as black or white as you (and others) make it sound. I am a huge fan of Gran Turismo. Does that mean I want Burnout to fade away. No. Make sense?!
With RPG's going the "action" route, I have been treated to an experience that no other TPS or FPS can deliver.
So yeah, I am thrilled with the prospect of more "action" RPG's coming out. If that means the death of traditional JRPG's and the like, so be it. I have compassion for folks like you, but it might end up just be a case of you having to move on or adapt to the change your genre is experiencing.
Nlayer -
Thank you for understanding what I am saying. I am currently playing Dragon Age 2 right now, and dare I say, I love it! Perhaps even more then the first!!
I agree with your last statement. Nostalgia plays a huge part in peoples opinion whether they want to admit it or not!!
Last edited by maxpontiac on 7/8/2011 10:16:41 AM
1 up, 1 down
Xombito
Thursday, July 07, 2011 @ 11:52:44 AM
Reply
I don't really follow what critics are scoring games anymore. I read too many that just seem off. I think most critics have completely lost touch of what makes a game fun anymore and just based their reviews in current trends and being over objective. I played too many games that were deemed either awful or mediocre but had a blast playing.
4 up, 0 down
Excelsior1
Thursday, July 07, 2011 @ 11:54:09 AM
Reply
maybe, although i feel the rise of twitch gaming and military fps are more to blame. it is really game sales that dictate what games get made. review score can impact game sales, though.
the bottom line is this... if traditional jrpgs sold enough copies publishers would be more than happy to make them, right? i often wonder about that. i would love to see a full budget traditional jrpg made and thrown out there to see what really happens.
it's strange becuase there has been a history of some really high scoring games that do not sell. so it seems like review scores do not always have an impact on games sales. a low metacritic score can seem to affect game sales pretty negatively, however. duke nukem comes to mind.
i'd be real curious to know what japanese gamers thought about wkc2.
the bottom line is this... if traditional jrpgs sold enough copies publishers would be more than happy to make them, right? i often wonder about that. i would love to see a full budget traditional jrpg made and thrown out there to see what really happens.
it's strange becuase there has been a history of some really high scoring games that do not sell. so it seems like review scores do not always have an impact on games sales. a low metacritic score can seem to affect game sales pretty negatively, however. duke nukem comes to mind.
i'd be real curious to know what japanese gamers thought about wkc2.
3 up, 1 down
Highlander
Thursday, July 07, 2011 @ 12:03:41 PM
The thing is, that gamers on the fence read reviews and when a game gets abused by the critics, it does have an impact. If you want to see the disparity between review scores and game quality, you can look at the difference between the critical apprasal at somewhere like Metacritic, and then compare it against the kind of user reviews at Amazon or Metacritic.
7 up, 1 down
Beamboom
Thursday, July 07, 2011 @ 12:56:22 PM
I agree with you guys here, but Highlander, that specific point about user reviews it not valid imo. user ratings mostly is a question of either full score or no score, and by far most often full score.
Why? Cause it's mostly the fan boys or haters that *bother*, and fan boys are in the majority.
Just browse user ratings at Amazon or Play and try to calculate the average score across all products. I'd not be surprised if the *average* were 4.5/5 stars.
Last edited by Beamboom on 7/7/2011 12:57:49 PM
Why? Cause it's mostly the fan boys or haters that *bother*, and fan boys are in the majority.
Just browse user ratings at Amazon or Play and try to calculate the average score across all products. I'd not be surprised if the *average* were 4.5/5 stars.
Last edited by Beamboom on 7/7/2011 12:57:49 PM
1 up, 1 down
Highlander
Thursday, July 07, 2011 @ 1:11:03 PM
Beamboom, that's why you have to look at the user reviews. On amazon I look at the pattern of scores and then sample the reviews to gauge whether it's a fanboy reaction or honest reviews. I mentioned the metacritic user reviews because I'd already mentioned Metacritc for critics reviews. However their user reviews are very prone to the fanboy voting. YOu can read the posted reviews there to make your own mind up, but Metacritic is very vulnerable to skewed voting. Amazon is far less vulnerable to that.
However if you do go look, you can see what I am referring to, and in the majority of cases it's actually valid. Sufficiently to make the general case that for RPGs critical reviews are overly harsh and perhaps even biased - in my opinion.
However if you do go look, you can see what I am referring to, and in the majority of cases it's actually valid. Sufficiently to make the general case that for RPGs critical reviews are overly harsh and perhaps even biased - in my opinion.
2 up, 0 down
SayWord
Thursday, July 07, 2011 @ 1:42:20 PM
Famitsu gave wkc2 a 33/40. They said the story was so-so but they loved the gameplay saying it was a lot better than the first. (I liked the first one and I would trust japanese reviewers on jrpgs more so than western at this point).
3 up, 0 down
Beamboom
Thursday, July 07, 2011 @ 1:53:17 PM
High, I see what you mean and indeed there have been times where the user reviews have been *good* too.
Good user reviews do exist. And when used carefully they may be of good value.
However I put *far* more trust into the professional reviews. I simply find the typical pro review to be *way* more balanced, objective and fair than the typical user review. So when a difference is found, I'd say almost always the pro review score is closest to the objective truth (to the degree such a thing can even exist).
Last edited by Beamboom on 7/7/2011 1:56:43 PM
Good user reviews do exist. And when used carefully they may be of good value.
However I put *far* more trust into the professional reviews. I simply find the typical pro review to be *way* more balanced, objective and fair than the typical user review. So when a difference is found, I'd say almost always the pro review score is closest to the objective truth (to the degree such a thing can even exist).
Last edited by Beamboom on 7/7/2011 1:56:43 PM
1 up, 5 down
Excelsior1
Thursday, July 07, 2011 @ 3:01:24 PM
i was able to find the review scores of wkc in famitsu. it got 7/8/7/7. 29/40 which comes to 72.5 score. the first game did not impress the mag very much, and its online mode was heavily criticised.
wkc2 has faired better with a score of 8/8/9/8 33/40 that comes 82.5. the mag praises the improvements made so that's good news..
Last edited by Excelsior1 on 7/7/2011 3:02:52 PM
wkc2 has faired better with a score of 8/8/9/8 33/40 that comes 82.5. the mag praises the improvements made so that's good news..
Last edited by Excelsior1 on 7/7/2011 3:02:52 PM
2 up, 0 down
Lotusflow3r
Thursday, July 07, 2011 @ 7:57:33 PM
WKC2 had good reviews and loads better user feedback in Japan.
Here in Europe, the message board in-game on WKC2 is full of people saying this is what FF13 should of been or how much they're loving it
Here in Europe, the message board in-game on WKC2 is full of people saying this is what FF13 should of been or how much they're loving it
3 up, 0 down
Looking Glass
Thursday, July 07, 2011 @ 10:37:12 PM
@Beamboom
You clearly haven't read IGN's so-called "review" of Atelier Rorona. It's utterly disgusting.
The professional reviews are generally subjective personal opinions too. The only real difference between them and the customer reviews is that people get paid to do them.
And I have indeed noticed them being more hostile toward certain kinds of games such as niche games like Afrika and Sengoku Basara: Samurai Heroes as well as JRPGs like Atelier Rorona and White Knight Chronicles.
Last edited by Looking Glass on 7/7/2011 10:47:56 PM
You clearly haven't read IGN's so-called "review" of Atelier Rorona. It's utterly disgusting.
The professional reviews are generally subjective personal opinions too. The only real difference between them and the customer reviews is that people get paid to do them.
And I have indeed noticed them being more hostile toward certain kinds of games such as niche games like Afrika and Sengoku Basara: Samurai Heroes as well as JRPGs like Atelier Rorona and White Knight Chronicles.
Last edited by Looking Glass on 7/7/2011 10:47:56 PM
0 up, 0 down
Highlander
Friday, July 08, 2011 @ 12:17:24 AM
Looking_glass,
Indeed. That is a charming game and very solid and enjoyable at that. Of course my opinion is laid out in my user review.
One of the majors also gave HyperDimension Neptunia 2/10, and whatever that games issues are, it's at least playable, absolutely not a 2/10. But the criticisms are generally culturally based (not biased, *based*). What I mean is that the harsh criticism leveled at the games is rooted in cultural difference and a lack of understanding. It's not about whether the game is any good, it's often about belittling the art style or the character archetypes. Sometimes it borders on xenophobic.
Indeed. That is a charming game and very solid and enjoyable at that. Of course my opinion is laid out in my user review.
One of the majors also gave HyperDimension Neptunia 2/10, and whatever that games issues are, it's at least playable, absolutely not a 2/10. But the criticisms are generally culturally based (not biased, *based*). What I mean is that the harsh criticism leveled at the games is rooted in cultural difference and a lack of understanding. It's not about whether the game is any good, it's often about belittling the art style or the character archetypes. Sometimes it borders on xenophobic.
1 up, 0 down
Beamboom
Friday, July 08, 2011 @ 5:15:47 AM
No I havent read that review, LG, and furthermore I don't even know the game so I would not be able to judge the review anyways.
And yes, you two may be very right in that the western media may generally devalue non-western culture in games. I believe that right away.
It makes perfect sense. We find the exact same to be true with movies. The further away from the western culture that movie is, the harder it is for it to gain a good reception and an audience in the western world. That's simply a fact. It's automatically labelled a niche movie the moment any other language than english is used.
That being said, I must say that the reviews I've read regarding WKC is pretty much spot on with my perception of the game. I guess I'm a more "typical westerner" than you guys, but I honestly believe that you have to have a particular affection for the japanese culture in order to rate these games much higher than its metascore.
* * *
Also, I must say that I really do not understand those of you who thumb down my statement that professional reviewers *generally speaking* write more reliable and realistic reviews than amateurs/fanboys. There are exceptions, yes, but give me just ten minutes and I'll return with a list of links to a HUNDRED outrageous, worthless user "reviews" that's not even *close* to the worst ever professional review. It's *too* easy, really. just click at some random game you know over at Play or Amazon and browse the user reviews. 8/10 are *pure trash*.
Last edited by Beamboom on 7/8/2011 5:24:12 AM
And yes, you two may be very right in that the western media may generally devalue non-western culture in games. I believe that right away.
It makes perfect sense. We find the exact same to be true with movies. The further away from the western culture that movie is, the harder it is for it to gain a good reception and an audience in the western world. That's simply a fact. It's automatically labelled a niche movie the moment any other language than english is used.
That being said, I must say that the reviews I've read regarding WKC is pretty much spot on with my perception of the game. I guess I'm a more "typical westerner" than you guys, but I honestly believe that you have to have a particular affection for the japanese culture in order to rate these games much higher than its metascore.
* * *
Also, I must say that I really do not understand those of you who thumb down my statement that professional reviewers *generally speaking* write more reliable and realistic reviews than amateurs/fanboys. There are exceptions, yes, but give me just ten minutes and I'll return with a list of links to a HUNDRED outrageous, worthless user "reviews" that's not even *close* to the worst ever professional review. It's *too* easy, really. just click at some random game you know over at Play or Amazon and browse the user reviews. 8/10 are *pure trash*.
Last edited by Beamboom on 7/8/2011 5:24:12 AM
1 up, 1 down
Highlander
Friday, July 08, 2011 @ 9:10:18 AM
Beamboom, I disagree with what you're saying about needing to have an affection for the artistic style or cultural context of the game to see it in a more positive light. Yes professional reviewers typically write a better - asn in more sound - review of a game. But, let's face it, not every review written and published on every major site is written by a professional. There are a lot of jumped up bloggers pretending to be journalists out there now, and they are no better than you or I.
However with regard specifically to RPGs (and games of any genre), I understand what you're talking about with respect to having an affection for a culture. However, the job of a critic or a reviewer is to be more objective and analyze the game without cultural bias. When I see reviews that actively belittle the culture, art style or character archetypes inferring that they are some how inferior, or too simplistic or simply distasteful, then I know I am not dealing with an objective review or reviewer.
As I said; "What I mean is that the harsh criticism leveled at the games is rooted in cultural difference and a lack of understanding. It's not about whether the game is any good, it's often about belittling the art style or the character archetypes. " Just as you're saying that in your opinion you have to have an affection for particular things to see them in a more positive light. I can also point out that the opposite is true, if you have antipathy towards something, you will see it in a more negative light. When reviews contain what amounts to cultural superiority, there is not doubt about the negativity on display. As I said though, reviewers are supposed to be objective, and personally I feel that when reviewing a game you have three possible options, a reviewer that is completley and professionally objective, a reviewer with a cultural bias for the aesthetic and genre in the game, and a reviewer with a cultural bias against the aesthetic and genre in the game being reviewed. Why would you get the reviewer with the cultural bias against the aesthetic or genre to review the game?
Obviously you want the objective reviewer in an ideal situation. However if you cant' have that, at least with the positive spin on the culture and aesthetic you are giving the game the benefit of the doubt. The reviewer who dislikes the aesthetic or genre (or culture) will certainly produce a more negative review. It's not really sufficient to have a RPG reviewer review games that are within the JRPG either. Just in this article's comments alone you can see at least three subsets of bias, action RPGs, western RPGs and JRPGs. Reviewers have to be objective, and if anything they neet to be actively open to other cultures and understanding that whether they like the style or not, they still have to assess the game for what it is.
Look at Ben's Mass Effect 2 review. He freely admits that the setting and style of the game is not his cup of tea and then proceeds to fairly review the game without detectible bias. That is what I expect from reviews, and that is what I so very rarely see in reviews.
Last edited by Highlander on 7/8/2011 9:10:42 AM
However with regard specifically to RPGs (and games of any genre), I understand what you're talking about with respect to having an affection for a culture. However, the job of a critic or a reviewer is to be more objective and analyze the game without cultural bias. When I see reviews that actively belittle the culture, art style or character archetypes inferring that they are some how inferior, or too simplistic or simply distasteful, then I know I am not dealing with an objective review or reviewer.
As I said; "What I mean is that the harsh criticism leveled at the games is rooted in cultural difference and a lack of understanding. It's not about whether the game is any good, it's often about belittling the art style or the character archetypes. " Just as you're saying that in your opinion you have to have an affection for particular things to see them in a more positive light. I can also point out that the opposite is true, if you have antipathy towards something, you will see it in a more negative light. When reviews contain what amounts to cultural superiority, there is not doubt about the negativity on display. As I said though, reviewers are supposed to be objective, and personally I feel that when reviewing a game you have three possible options, a reviewer that is completley and professionally objective, a reviewer with a cultural bias for the aesthetic and genre in the game, and a reviewer with a cultural bias against the aesthetic and genre in the game being reviewed. Why would you get the reviewer with the cultural bias against the aesthetic or genre to review the game?
Obviously you want the objective reviewer in an ideal situation. However if you cant' have that, at least with the positive spin on the culture and aesthetic you are giving the game the benefit of the doubt. The reviewer who dislikes the aesthetic or genre (or culture) will certainly produce a more negative review. It's not really sufficient to have a RPG reviewer review games that are within the JRPG either. Just in this article's comments alone you can see at least three subsets of bias, action RPGs, western RPGs and JRPGs. Reviewers have to be objective, and if anything they neet to be actively open to other cultures and understanding that whether they like the style or not, they still have to assess the game for what it is.
Look at Ben's Mass Effect 2 review. He freely admits that the setting and style of the game is not his cup of tea and then proceeds to fairly review the game without detectible bias. That is what I expect from reviews, and that is what I so very rarely see in reviews.
Last edited by Highlander on 7/8/2011 9:10:42 AM
1 up, 0 down
Beamboom
Friday, July 08, 2011 @ 9:32:22 AM
High,
Amateurs are amateurs even if they are wrapped in a "professional" wrapping. I talk about true, *real* reviewers, working at magazines/sites you trust. Not bloggers or hobby sites. And, well, I haven't seen that widespread antipathy in professionals reviews that you refer to. I simply see them in a different light, at least if we talk about wkc, who are one of the few typical Japanese games I've read a lot about.
I do maintain my opinion that you have to be particulary fond of the "Japanese style" to rate wkc much higher than the meta-score. Just like I'd rate most Marvel games higher than their meta-score. That was actually a quite good comparison I came up with there. I do impress myself sometimes.
Other than that I think we basically agree in all you're saying here in your last post, also I got this feeling we've discussed this before? :D
And yes, Ben's review of ME was indeed one of his few definitive highlights in an otherwise sea of darkness. (j/k Ben ;))
He's a stormtrooper, you know?
I look forward to get wkc2 and team up with you guys soon. mmo-style coop is definitely my cup of tea, being it of Japanese or western origins. :)
Last edited by Beamboom on 7/8/2011 9:53:24 AM
Amateurs are amateurs even if they are wrapped in a "professional" wrapping. I talk about true, *real* reviewers, working at magazines/sites you trust. Not bloggers or hobby sites. And, well, I haven't seen that widespread antipathy in professionals reviews that you refer to. I simply see them in a different light, at least if we talk about wkc, who are one of the few typical Japanese games I've read a lot about.
I do maintain my opinion that you have to be particulary fond of the "Japanese style" to rate wkc much higher than the meta-score. Just like I'd rate most Marvel games higher than their meta-score. That was actually a quite good comparison I came up with there. I do impress myself sometimes.
Other than that I think we basically agree in all you're saying here in your last post, also I got this feeling we've discussed this before? :D
And yes, Ben's review of ME was indeed one of his few definitive highlights in an otherwise sea of darkness. (j/k Ben ;))
He's a stormtrooper, you know?
I look forward to get wkc2 and team up with you guys soon. mmo-style coop is definitely my cup of tea, being it of Japanese or western origins. :)
Last edited by Beamboom on 7/8/2011 9:53:24 AM
0 up, 0 down
Looking Glass
Friday, July 08, 2011 @ 9:32:49 AM
@Beamboom
True, some customer reviews tend to be unhelpful in one way or another and for one reason on another. Others on the other hand are different and may be helpful for one reason or another.
But it's the same with professional reviews. Professional reviewers have their own flaws and biases too. That's one of the reasons why it's not very wise to rely too heavily on them. And that's not even taking into account the issue of conflicts of interests involving publishers and/or developers (Can you say Jeff Gerstmann?)
Customer reviews, for all their flaws, are written from the point of view of average ordinary people, people who are just like the ones reading the reviews. And they tend to understand things that professional reviewers may not, such as the appeal of niche games and JRPGs among other things. And this sometimes rings true for other games as well. A good example would be The Fight: Lights Out. That game was largely drubbed by critics but on Amazon it currently, as of the time of this writing, has a 4.5 out of 5 rating based on 155 customer reviews. Professionals tend to fault games for things that may not matter all that much to ordinary consumers and their expectations and desires tend to be different from ordinary consumers. They may simply want different things than the consumers. Or simply put professionals are not always on the same page as the average, ordinary consumers. One of the best examples of this would probably be with the movie Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen. On Rottentomatoes that movie has a critic rating of 20% but an audience rating of 76% and was a huge box office success.
If I were to put it more harshly and bluntly I might say something like "Professional reviews tend to be written by stuck up know-it-all types who are generally out of touch with the feelings and desires of average, ordinary people" (some people supposedly even pay for things like movie showings at least partially to spite critics/reviewers). Although I believe I should also note that I think Ben would be an exception to this. I don't always agree with him but he by all accounts seems to be more open-minded. And PSXE seems to be more consumer oriented than other review sites, which is one of the reasons I like it.
So the thing is while some customer reviews are more worthwhile than others there generally seems to be something more honest and open and certainly more relatable about them (and additionally I like the fact that Amazon gives consumers the option to rate individual customer reviews as either helpful or unhelpful). And of course, as is the case with the professional reviews and perhaps reviews in general, it's probably the wisest course of action to take in all of the customer reviews, or at least as many of them as you feel you need to, rather than limiting your scope too much.
But ultimately the best course of action for any person deciding whether or not to try and/or pay for a video game (or something else) would probably be to gather as much simple raw information about a game as possible (you don't necessary have to read a review to do this as there's always stuff like wikipedia and promotional materials and the like) and decide for his or herself whether or not it is right for him/her or at least whether or not it's worth a try. Listening to other people's opinions (both the positive and negative ones) is fine but it ultimately all comes down to the person and what he/she likes and/or wants.
Last edited by Looking Glass on 7/8/2011 9:47:43 AM
True, some customer reviews tend to be unhelpful in one way or another and for one reason on another. Others on the other hand are different and may be helpful for one reason or another.
But it's the same with professional reviews. Professional reviewers have their own flaws and biases too. That's one of the reasons why it's not very wise to rely too heavily on them. And that's not even taking into account the issue of conflicts of interests involving publishers and/or developers (Can you say Jeff Gerstmann?)
Customer reviews, for all their flaws, are written from the point of view of average ordinary people, people who are just like the ones reading the reviews. And they tend to understand things that professional reviewers may not, such as the appeal of niche games and JRPGs among other things. And this sometimes rings true for other games as well. A good example would be The Fight: Lights Out. That game was largely drubbed by critics but on Amazon it currently, as of the time of this writing, has a 4.5 out of 5 rating based on 155 customer reviews. Professionals tend to fault games for things that may not matter all that much to ordinary consumers and their expectations and desires tend to be different from ordinary consumers. They may simply want different things than the consumers. Or simply put professionals are not always on the same page as the average, ordinary consumers. One of the best examples of this would probably be with the movie Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen. On Rottentomatoes that movie has a critic rating of 20% but an audience rating of 76% and was a huge box office success.
If I were to put it more harshly and bluntly I might say something like "Professional reviews tend to be written by stuck up know-it-all types who are generally out of touch with the feelings and desires of average, ordinary people" (some people supposedly even pay for things like movie showings at least partially to spite critics/reviewers). Although I believe I should also note that I think Ben would be an exception to this. I don't always agree with him but he by all accounts seems to be more open-minded. And PSXE seems to be more consumer oriented than other review sites, which is one of the reasons I like it.
So the thing is while some customer reviews are more worthwhile than others there generally seems to be something more honest and open and certainly more relatable about them (and additionally I like the fact that Amazon gives consumers the option to rate individual customer reviews as either helpful or unhelpful). And of course, as is the case with the professional reviews and perhaps reviews in general, it's probably the wisest course of action to take in all of the customer reviews, or at least as many of them as you feel you need to, rather than limiting your scope too much.
But ultimately the best course of action for any person deciding whether or not to try and/or pay for a video game (or something else) would probably be to gather as much simple raw information about a game as possible (you don't necessary have to read a review to do this as there's always stuff like wikipedia and promotional materials and the like) and decide for his or herself whether or not it is right for him/her or at least whether or not it's worth a try. Listening to other people's opinions (both the positive and negative ones) is fine but it ultimately all comes down to the person and what he/she likes and/or wants.
Last edited by Looking Glass on 7/8/2011 9:47:43 AM
0 up, 1 down
Beamboom
Friday, July 08, 2011 @ 10:07:30 AM
I understand your logic LG, I just fundamentally disagree in your conclusions, cause they do not harmonize with my experiences.
To put it very simple: Of all my ps3 games I think the metascore is fair (meaning within the realms of my own rating of that game) on *all* but one single title. One single exception, that's all. Please note that I'm talking about the metascores here. There's been single reviews now and then I've disagreed with, but the consensus amongst the sites scanned by gamerankings I've nearly always agreed with.
User reviews basically have just been of use to me in those cases where they contain some factual information. A very typical example is info about subtitles on a given bluray-release that are missing from the product description. In *those* cases user reviews are gold. But that's really not part of the actual "review" anyways.
I'd like to add one more exception btw: The user reviews over at imdb com. Some of those guys are exceptionally good, but I'd hardly call some of them "amateurs" either. Plus, a title has typically like five HUNDRED user reviews each, so it's almost unavoidable that some of them are good. :D
Last edited by Beamboom on 7/8/2011 10:22:20 AM
To put it very simple: Of all my ps3 games I think the metascore is fair (meaning within the realms of my own rating of that game) on *all* but one single title. One single exception, that's all. Please note that I'm talking about the metascores here. There's been single reviews now and then I've disagreed with, but the consensus amongst the sites scanned by gamerankings I've nearly always agreed with.
User reviews basically have just been of use to me in those cases where they contain some factual information. A very typical example is info about subtitles on a given bluray-release that are missing from the product description. In *those* cases user reviews are gold. But that's really not part of the actual "review" anyways.
I'd like to add one more exception btw: The user reviews over at imdb com. Some of those guys are exceptionally good, but I'd hardly call some of them "amateurs" either. Plus, a title has typically like five HUNDRED user reviews each, so it's almost unavoidable that some of them are good. :D
Last edited by Beamboom on 7/8/2011 10:22:20 AM
0 up, 0 down
Looking Glass
Friday, July 08, 2011 @ 11:01:00 AM
@Beamboom
So it seems that you don't consider any factual information included in a user review to be part of a review. That seems to be a point open to debate right there but never mind that. In any case by that logic the same would also be true for the professional reviews and any factual information they contain. And in professional reviews (and perhaps reviews in general) it doesn't seem to always be a simple matter to separate the fact from the opinion.
As for the rest of the stuff you just said: fair enough. Professional reviewers are not always on the same page as average, ordinary consumers but sometimes they are.
But my point is that it's not particularly wise to rely too heavily on them because professional reviewers have their own flaws and biases too (that's of course not only reason). This is especially obvious with how they tend to treat certain kinds of games. And just because you may do something unwise repeatedly with no resulting negative outcome, like driving without buckling your seatbelt, that doesn't make doing it any less unwise. And just because you personally have not really been burned (or at least been at odds with) all that much by these flaws and biases of professional reviewers that doesn't mean that they're not there and that also doesn't make my point any less valid.
Last edited by Looking Glass on 7/8/2011 11:11:37 AM
So it seems that you don't consider any factual information included in a user review to be part of a review. That seems to be a point open to debate right there but never mind that. In any case by that logic the same would also be true for the professional reviews and any factual information they contain. And in professional reviews (and perhaps reviews in general) it doesn't seem to always be a simple matter to separate the fact from the opinion.
As for the rest of the stuff you just said: fair enough. Professional reviewers are not always on the same page as average, ordinary consumers but sometimes they are.
But my point is that it's not particularly wise to rely too heavily on them because professional reviewers have their own flaws and biases too (that's of course not only reason). This is especially obvious with how they tend to treat certain kinds of games. And just because you may do something unwise repeatedly with no resulting negative outcome, like driving without buckling your seatbelt, that doesn't make doing it any less unwise. And just because you personally have not really been burned (or at least been at odds with) all that much by these flaws and biases of professional reviewers that doesn't mean that they're not there and that also doesn't make my point any less valid.
Last edited by Looking Glass on 7/8/2011 11:11:37 AM
0 up, 0 down
Beamboom
Friday, July 08, 2011 @ 12:00:42 PM
Yeah I do differ between fact and review. Facts are objective product information. Like this:
Artist: BeamBoom
Album: The Boom Of The Beam
Tracks: 12
Duration: 1:24
Genre: Dubstep
This is not a review. Sure, facts are often included in a review, but a review is a qualitative human consideration of a given product. This is a review:
"With Beambooms latest album he's really showing how low you can go. Quite literary; Never have I heard a lower bass recorded on tape."
That's a kind of a review. Well, at least part of one.
So yeah I separate between facts and opinions.
Last edited by Beamboom on 7/8/2011 12:01:27 PM
Artist: BeamBoom
Album: The Boom Of The Beam
Tracks: 12
Duration: 1:24
Genre: Dubstep
This is not a review. Sure, facts are often included in a review, but a review is a qualitative human consideration of a given product. This is a review:
"With Beambooms latest album he's really showing how low you can go. Quite literary; Never have I heard a lower bass recorded on tape."
That's a kind of a review. Well, at least part of one.
So yeah I separate between facts and opinions.
Last edited by Beamboom on 7/8/2011 12:01:27 PM
0 up, 0 down
Beamboom
Friday, July 08, 2011 @ 12:22:15 PM
I forgot to add the words "in my opinion" above but of course, these are all just my views on this topic. Hastily written too.
I'd like to add one thing to the "facts vs review" topic: Facts tell nothing about the *quality* of the product. "Norwegian subtitles" say nothing about how good the movie is. "Dubstep" tells nothing about how good that album is. That's what you want to know when you read a review.
Regarding to rely too heavily on the reviews: No of course not, there we agree 100%. They are just guidelines, a source of inputs. I have deliberately bought games that are rated below my general limit (80%) quite a few times (ref: Marvel games), and will do so again with Madness Returns, for instance. I do however not expect my personal rating of that game to be radically higher than the meta-score of 73%. Maybe I'll go as high as 76% (I dunno yet) but that's still what I consider to be within the range of the metascore.
Last edited by Beamboom on 7/8/2011 12:29:27 PM
I'd like to add one thing to the "facts vs review" topic: Facts tell nothing about the *quality* of the product. "Norwegian subtitles" say nothing about how good the movie is. "Dubstep" tells nothing about how good that album is. That's what you want to know when you read a review.
Regarding to rely too heavily on the reviews: No of course not, there we agree 100%. They are just guidelines, a source of inputs. I have deliberately bought games that are rated below my general limit (80%) quite a few times (ref: Marvel games), and will do so again with Madness Returns, for instance. I do however not expect my personal rating of that game to be radically higher than the meta-score of 73%. Maybe I'll go as high as 76% (I dunno yet) but that's still what I consider to be within the range of the metascore.
Last edited by Beamboom on 7/8/2011 12:29:27 PM
0 up, 0 down
Looking Glass
Friday, July 08, 2011 @ 1:39:55 PM
@Beamboom
Let's not forget that quality itself is generally a subjective thing. "One man's trash is another man's treasure" as they say.
And yes one shouldn't rely too heavily on reviews. But I think this is especially true for professional reviews because as I've said they tend to fail to understand the appeal of certain games or certain kinds of games. In which case it's good to hear from the people that the games do appeal to: average, ordinary consumers. Sometimes they even call out the professional reviewers. And of course ordinary consumers may also (and sometimes do) highlight unappealing things that the professional reviewers may overlook for whatever reason. Possibly a need to foster a relationship with the publisher and/or developer.
In any case I believe that the customer reviews are important because they provide a fresh alternate perspective on things (there are other reasons of course). I think this is why Highlander suggested looking at both the professional AND customer reviews. To get the best perspective possible. Of course I personally prefer the customer reviews for reasons that I think I've already established. Among them being that I myself am an average ordinary consumer so therefore I am interested in what other average ordinary consumers think.
But as for you, you have often agreed with the professional reviews. I understand that. But all the same my advice (not that you actually seem to need it or anything) would be to not to put too much stock in them or rely too much on them and ultimately make your own decisions.
Let's not forget that quality itself is generally a subjective thing. "One man's trash is another man's treasure" as they say.
And yes one shouldn't rely too heavily on reviews. But I think this is especially true for professional reviews because as I've said they tend to fail to understand the appeal of certain games or certain kinds of games. In which case it's good to hear from the people that the games do appeal to: average, ordinary consumers. Sometimes they even call out the professional reviewers. And of course ordinary consumers may also (and sometimes do) highlight unappealing things that the professional reviewers may overlook for whatever reason. Possibly a need to foster a relationship with the publisher and/or developer.
In any case I believe that the customer reviews are important because they provide a fresh alternate perspective on things (there are other reasons of course). I think this is why Highlander suggested looking at both the professional AND customer reviews. To get the best perspective possible. Of course I personally prefer the customer reviews for reasons that I think I've already established. Among them being that I myself am an average ordinary consumer so therefore I am interested in what other average ordinary consumers think.
But as for you, you have often agreed with the professional reviews. I understand that. But all the same my advice (not that you actually seem to need it or anything) would be to not to put too much stock in them or rely too much on them and ultimately make your own decisions.
0 up, 0 down
Highlander
Friday, July 08, 2011 @ 4:31:33 PM
Regarding game reviews. I am honestly more likely to pay attention to a reviewer who I know likes RPGs when it comes to reviews of RPGS. I mean, if you have a reviewer that doesn't like or is not familiar with the genre, then they will review the game from a point of view that already starts in unfamiliar and uncomfortable (out of their comfort zone) territory. A reviewer who likes the genre and/or is familiar with the genre will give a fairer appraisal (in my opinion) of a game in that genre.
So if you have a reviewer that really doesn't care for JRPGs and normally plays shooters and you have a second reviewer who plays lots of RPGs and is OK with JRPGs (not their preference, but they are familiar with them). If you look at those two reviewers, which is likely to give a fairer review of an RPG or a JRPG? I'm going to trust that RPG reviewer - unless of course I already know that they have a specific bias against JRPG style.
Objectivity is fine, but you also have to have someone who knows and likes the genre to get a truly fair review. Just as has been said about other games - GT5 comes to mind.
So if you have a reviewer that really doesn't care for JRPGs and normally plays shooters and you have a second reviewer who plays lots of RPGs and is OK with JRPGs (not their preference, but they are familiar with them). If you look at those two reviewers, which is likely to give a fairer review of an RPG or a JRPG? I'm going to trust that RPG reviewer - unless of course I already know that they have a specific bias against JRPG style.
Objectivity is fine, but you also have to have someone who knows and likes the genre to get a truly fair review. Just as has been said about other games - GT5 comes to mind.
0 up, 0 down
Beamboom
Friday, July 08, 2011 @ 5:08:40 PM
@LG: "Let's not forget that quality itself is generally a subjective thing." -> Indeed it is, and that is why ratings differ! However, as a general principle I do put more trust into the opinion of a person who's played many hundred games across most genres and platforms and has proven himself as someone who a publisher would like to hire, rather than a more or less anonymous internet user who might just have played basically one kind of game (who knows) and might have a very shallow(?) perspective to what he is considering.
I know this is where we disagree, and that's why I said that our conclusions are fundamentally different. :)
@High: What you want from the reviewer is *knowledge* but also that (s)he's got more or less the same perspective as you.
And this may very well be the clue here: *My* perspective towards wkc (to continue using that as the example case) is probably much closer to the "typical" non-jrpg focused reviewer. Just like the reviewer I too have played and enjoyed rpg's before, just not jrpg in particular.
Therefore, what those reviewers write is much closer to how I experience this game too.
So I guess I agree with you after all! At least understand better. If your particular perspective is very divergent from the reviewers perspective, the value of his reviews is greatly decreased. Yes, this is all a question of perspective more than experience, really. That figures.
Furthermore, this is quite possibly why there is such an obscene amount of shady jrpg fans hanging out on this particular site - simply because Bens affection for the Japanese sex- uhm... Rp-games is so well flaunted.
;)
Last edited by Beamboom on 7/8/2011 5:17:57 PM
I know this is where we disagree, and that's why I said that our conclusions are fundamentally different. :)
@High: What you want from the reviewer is *knowledge* but also that (s)he's got more or less the same perspective as you.
And this may very well be the clue here: *My* perspective towards wkc (to continue using that as the example case) is probably much closer to the "typical" non-jrpg focused reviewer. Just like the reviewer I too have played and enjoyed rpg's before, just not jrpg in particular.
Therefore, what those reviewers write is much closer to how I experience this game too.
So I guess I agree with you after all! At least understand better. If your particular perspective is very divergent from the reviewers perspective, the value of his reviews is greatly decreased. Yes, this is all a question of perspective more than experience, really. That figures.
Furthermore, this is quite possibly why there is such an obscene amount of shady jrpg fans hanging out on this particular site - simply because Bens affection for the Japanese sex- uhm... Rp-games is so well flaunted.
;)
Last edited by Beamboom on 7/8/2011 5:17:57 PM
0 up, 0 down
Looking Glass
Friday, July 08, 2011 @ 6:09:21 PM
@Beamboom
By "our conclusions are fundamentally different" I assume you're referring to the fact that you prefer professional reviews and I prefer customer reviews.
But anyway your logic seems iffy. First of all making presumptions about different peoples experience, specifically that of customers and professionals. And then making a presumptions about a publishers hiring practices (that they're actually good and/or wise which they might not be) and assuming that just because someone got hired that makes them more reliable and makes their opinions somehow more valuable than others. It doesn't. The person who wrote that disgusting Atelier Rorona review was hired by a publisher for one thing.
And furthermore instances such as that are far from unique or rare: instances when the professional reviewers and ordinary consumers are certainly not on the same page and sometimes by a very wide margin. All this stuff about experience and perspective is really beside the point when it comes to reviewing something because when professionals write a review it doesn't matter how much experience or perspective they may (or may not) have if they have no understanding of the appeal of what they're reviewing. It may be good to have experience and perspective, but they both count for little, if anything, when you have flaws and biases and no understanding of the appeal of what you're reviewing.
Professional reviewers have their flaws and biases too and having experience and/or getting hired by a publisher doesn't change that and it doesn't make their opinions more reliable or valuable than anyone else's opinions.
But I really don't see the point of discussing this any further. You're not going to change my mind and I doubt that I'm going to change yours. We seem to be going in circles here. So how about we simply agree to disagree and end it there?
Last edited by Looking Glass on 7/8/2011 6:13:14 PM
By "our conclusions are fundamentally different" I assume you're referring to the fact that you prefer professional reviews and I prefer customer reviews.
But anyway your logic seems iffy. First of all making presumptions about different peoples experience, specifically that of customers and professionals. And then making a presumptions about a publishers hiring practices (that they're actually good and/or wise which they might not be) and assuming that just because someone got hired that makes them more reliable and makes their opinions somehow more valuable than others. It doesn't. The person who wrote that disgusting Atelier Rorona review was hired by a publisher for one thing.
And furthermore instances such as that are far from unique or rare: instances when the professional reviewers and ordinary consumers are certainly not on the same page and sometimes by a very wide margin. All this stuff about experience and perspective is really beside the point when it comes to reviewing something because when professionals write a review it doesn't matter how much experience or perspective they may (or may not) have if they have no understanding of the appeal of what they're reviewing. It may be good to have experience and perspective, but they both count for little, if anything, when you have flaws and biases and no understanding of the appeal of what you're reviewing.
Professional reviewers have their flaws and biases too and having experience and/or getting hired by a publisher doesn't change that and it doesn't make their opinions more reliable or valuable than anyone else's opinions.
But I really don't see the point of discussing this any further. You're not going to change my mind and I doubt that I'm going to change yours. We seem to be going in circles here. So how about we simply agree to disagree and end it there?
Last edited by Looking Glass on 7/8/2011 6:13:14 PM
0 up, 0 down
Highlander
Friday, July 08, 2011 @ 11:28:44 PM
L_G My son loves Afrika and I'm about to order Sengoku Basra. I haven't read that Atelier Rorona review you mentioned, I will however look it up. Considering how I reviewed Rorona, I suspect that I won't like the review you're talking about.
OK, I read enough. Are the F-ing kidding? That opening paragraph really should be actionable. Actually, the first three paragraphs should be actionable. What a total travesty. Perhaps I out to take the same glib and shallow approach to games like Grand Theft Auto or God of War, they can be made to sound cataclysmicly bad. My God, that is a horrible review, it's actually insulting to any player of the game.
Last edited by Highlander on 7/8/2011 11:49:37 PM
OK, I read enough. Are the F-ing kidding? That opening paragraph really should be actionable. Actually, the first three paragraphs should be actionable. What a total travesty. Perhaps I out to take the same glib and shallow approach to games like Grand Theft Auto or God of War, they can be made to sound cataclysmicly bad. My God, that is a horrible review, it's actually insulting to any player of the game.
Last edited by Highlander on 7/8/2011 11:49:37 PM
0 up, 0 down
Beamboom
Saturday, July 09, 2011 @ 6:17:25 AM
LG: Yeah that's what I'm referring to. I just know that my experience is clear on this, if I had to choose in the world, that from now on I'd *either* just have access to professional writings *or* user reviews, there is not a shadow of doubt what I'd choose.
So, yeah, if you'd pick user reviews then that's where we stand in this case. And that's alright too, isn't it?
But lets look at this "Atelier Rorona". I have too read that IGN review now. But since I've not played the game I have to ask, is what he tells in this review actually *true*? Quoting:
"Whether it's Rorona's master that makes jokes about molesting her while she sleeps, or the nice shopkeeper who gets drunk and actually does molest her, everyone wants a piece of Rorona. The American version changed the character's ages, making Rorona 17 instead of 14"
Was she just 14? Is this true? And is she molested?
"androgynous robot child who may or may not have been alchemized using horse dung and human semen"
Is this in fact part of the story or did the reviewer totally misunderstand?
Last edited by Beamboom on 7/9/2011 6:19:26 AM
So, yeah, if you'd pick user reviews then that's where we stand in this case. And that's alright too, isn't it?
But lets look at this "Atelier Rorona". I have too read that IGN review now. But since I've not played the game I have to ask, is what he tells in this review actually *true*? Quoting:
"Whether it's Rorona's master that makes jokes about molesting her while she sleeps, or the nice shopkeeper who gets drunk and actually does molest her, everyone wants a piece of Rorona. The American version changed the character's ages, making Rorona 17 instead of 14"
Was she just 14? Is this true? And is she molested?
"androgynous robot child who may or may not have been alchemized using horse dung and human semen"
Is this in fact part of the story or did the reviewer totally misunderstand?
Last edited by Beamboom on 7/9/2011 6:19:26 AM
0 up, 0 down
Looking Glass
Saturday, July 09, 2011 @ 12:00:36 PM
@Beamboom
Atelier Rorona does have a bit of sexual innuendo here and there and a little bit of suggestive humor here and there too (This is a Teen game after all). And there is a brief scene that involves a character getting drunk and giving the main character a very hard time. But the details aren't clear so it's unknown if any actual molestation took place. But it would seem unlikely seeing as how the main character doesn't hold it against the character in question afterwards.
And is the character 14? That depends on how you look at it or more specifically whether you choose to go by the original Japanese version or the American localized version.
And the child in question is a homunculus, not a robot. And the reviewer doesn't seem to know the difference between the two. And the part about human semen and horse dung is actually a real world alchemy legend about how to create a homunculus. This is something that the reviewer was apparently also ignorant of. And it's logical that this real world legend would be mentioned in the game seeing as how alchemy is a core part of the game.
And all of these things constitute a teeny tiny percentage of the games content. So the reviewer spends a significant portion of his short and non-detailed review nitpicking and making fun of some tiny pieces of content and ultimately dragging down the game's rating because of it.
Overall what he did was ignorant, very petty, very unfair, and very VERY immature.
And to make things even worse the review isn't even all that helpful, if at all. He doesn't even try to go in depth about the story or gameplay or really explain much about all the various gameplay mechanics and how they work. He just skims over all that stuff AT BEST.
And here's a quote from someone whom I think illustrates things nicely:
"I think back to the recent review of Atelier Rorona on IGN that ripped it for having JRPG tropes that fans either don’t mind or even see as plusses. When the title of a review accuses the game of having child molestation jokes, you know you’re not getting a fair shake."
Overall that review is bull crap. A very flawed and very biased review from a very flawed and very biased reviewer. Anybody could have done a better job of covering the game, professional or not. It's this kind of crap that gives IGN a bad name and it certainly doesn't reflect well on professional reviewers either. And as I mentioned before stuff like this, a professional reviewer having no understanding of a games appeal or maybe even of the game itself, is far from unique or rare. In fact I think that's pretty much the reason that Ben wrote the above article in the first place.
I actually understand why you lean more toward professional reviews. They've been for the most part working well for you so far. Just as they have most certainly not been working all that well, if at all, for a lot of other people. And that's okay. However just as some customer reviews are more worthwhile than others (and some are not worthwhile at all) the same is also true for professional reviews.
So I would urge you to watch out for bull crap professional reviews and also keep in mind that not all of the bull crap professional reviews are as blatantly obvious as IGN's Atelier Rorona review. More specifically my advice (once again not that you actually seem to need it or anything) would be to be keen to separate the worthwhile professional reviews from the ones that are not very worthwhile, if at all, on account of being flawed and biased (or in other words the bull crap reviews as I like to call them).
And in this endeavor I wish you good luck.
Last edited by Looking Glass on 7/9/2011 12:25:28 PM
Atelier Rorona does have a bit of sexual innuendo here and there and a little bit of suggestive humor here and there too (This is a Teen game after all). And there is a brief scene that involves a character getting drunk and giving the main character a very hard time. But the details aren't clear so it's unknown if any actual molestation took place. But it would seem unlikely seeing as how the main character doesn't hold it against the character in question afterwards.
And is the character 14? That depends on how you look at it or more specifically whether you choose to go by the original Japanese version or the American localized version.
And the child in question is a homunculus, not a robot. And the reviewer doesn't seem to know the difference between the two. And the part about human semen and horse dung is actually a real world alchemy legend about how to create a homunculus. This is something that the reviewer was apparently also ignorant of. And it's logical that this real world legend would be mentioned in the game seeing as how alchemy is a core part of the game.
And all of these things constitute a teeny tiny percentage of the games content. So the reviewer spends a significant portion of his short and non-detailed review nitpicking and making fun of some tiny pieces of content and ultimately dragging down the game's rating because of it.
Overall what he did was ignorant, very petty, very unfair, and very VERY immature.
And to make things even worse the review isn't even all that helpful, if at all. He doesn't even try to go in depth about the story or gameplay or really explain much about all the various gameplay mechanics and how they work. He just skims over all that stuff AT BEST.
And here's a quote from someone whom I think illustrates things nicely:
"I think back to the recent review of Atelier Rorona on IGN that ripped it for having JRPG tropes that fans either don’t mind or even see as plusses. When the title of a review accuses the game of having child molestation jokes, you know you’re not getting a fair shake."
Overall that review is bull crap. A very flawed and very biased review from a very flawed and very biased reviewer. Anybody could have done a better job of covering the game, professional or not. It's this kind of crap that gives IGN a bad name and it certainly doesn't reflect well on professional reviewers either. And as I mentioned before stuff like this, a professional reviewer having no understanding of a games appeal or maybe even of the game itself, is far from unique or rare. In fact I think that's pretty much the reason that Ben wrote the above article in the first place.
I actually understand why you lean more toward professional reviews. They've been for the most part working well for you so far. Just as they have most certainly not been working all that well, if at all, for a lot of other people. And that's okay. However just as some customer reviews are more worthwhile than others (and some are not worthwhile at all) the same is also true for professional reviews.
So I would urge you to watch out for bull crap professional reviews and also keep in mind that not all of the bull crap professional reviews are as blatantly obvious as IGN's Atelier Rorona review. More specifically my advice (once again not that you actually seem to need it or anything) would be to be keen to separate the worthwhile professional reviews from the ones that are not very worthwhile, if at all, on account of being flawed and biased (or in other words the bull crap reviews as I like to call them).
And in this endeavor I wish you good luck.
Last edited by Looking Glass on 7/9/2011 12:25:28 PM
0 up, 0 down
Beamboom
Saturday, July 09, 2011 @ 12:39:58 PM
If that part about "horse dung and semen" indeed belong to an old real world legend then that obviously puts this into an *entirely* different perspective.
Still, had I not known this prior to playing the game I would quite possibly have reacted just like the reviewer. Not that I mean that this review were particularly good (quite contrary, for several reasons), but I can understand how these things could over-shadow my view of the game. Have to admit that.
And if I had reacted to it, would it not also be right that it were mentioned in the review, should it be of use to me? You don't need to answer that btw, just thinking out loud here. :)
Anyways, thanks for your informative replies!
Last edited by Beamboom on 7/9/2011 12:46:18 PM
Still, had I not known this prior to playing the game I would quite possibly have reacted just like the reviewer. Not that I mean that this review were particularly good (quite contrary, for several reasons), but I can understand how these things could over-shadow my view of the game. Have to admit that.
And if I had reacted to it, would it not also be right that it were mentioned in the review, should it be of use to me? You don't need to answer that btw, just thinking out loud here. :)
Anyways, thanks for your informative replies!
Last edited by Beamboom on 7/9/2011 12:46:18 PM
0 up, 0 down
Looking Glass
Saturday, July 09, 2011 @ 3:26:10 PM
@Beamboom
First let me just point something out. I know that it's likely totally unnecessary for me to point this out but the quote I used in my last post obviously came out slightly distorted for some reason. And the first distorted word is "don't" and the second one is "you're" although I'm sure you already figured that out.
And yes, the part about horse dung and semen does indeed come from real world Alchemy legend. You can google it if you want as it is posted in more than one place on the internet. Although if you decide to give it a try I would strongly suggest you include the words Homunculus and/or Alchemy.
And true, actually knowing about the real world legend could have possibly had a significant impact with the reviewer (Possibly. But I'm not so sure seeing as how he is clearly and obviously very biased.) and the reviewer apparently didn't know. But nevertheless that's no excuse for the reviewer using that one teeny tiny piece of content (among a few other tiny pieces of content) to drag down the game's rating.
Now would you have done the same thing? I doubt that. I don't get that vibe from you.
And besides this brings up another problem with the review or perhaps more specifically the reviewer. You see he could have easily learned about the legend if he had simply done a little digging on google. But he apparently didn't care enough to do so. By all accounts it was a silly mistake that he could have easily been avoided but apparently he just didn't care enough to do so. He was apparently content be ignorant and make a risky assumption. In other words not only did he not understand but by all accounts he didn't even try to understand. And obviously that makes him both unreliable and sloppy. And I definitely do not get that vibe (or even that kind of vibe) from you.
And by the way false and/or misleading information is generally, if not always, more trouble than it's worth.
But in any case that was indeed a crap review and I'm glad that we both seem to be in agreement there.
And you're very welcome. I'm glad that you've found reading my words to be worthwhile. Sure it was a little tedious but I guess it was worth it and as they say all's well that end's well. And now I guess it's time for both us to end this prolonged online conversation and get on with our respective lives. Time to move on in other words. Even though we obviously seem to disagree on a number of things it was good talking to you. And who knows? Maybe sometime in the future we'll end up talking again about some other topic in the comment section for some other article on this website.
In any case, take care of yourself and I wish you well.
Last edited by Looking Glass on 7/9/2011 3:30:36 PM
First let me just point something out. I know that it's likely totally unnecessary for me to point this out but the quote I used in my last post obviously came out slightly distorted for some reason. And the first distorted word is "don't" and the second one is "you're" although I'm sure you already figured that out.
And yes, the part about horse dung and semen does indeed come from real world Alchemy legend. You can google it if you want as it is posted in more than one place on the internet. Although if you decide to give it a try I would strongly suggest you include the words Homunculus and/or Alchemy.
And true, actually knowing about the real world legend could have possibly had a significant impact with the reviewer (Possibly. But I'm not so sure seeing as how he is clearly and obviously very biased.) and the reviewer apparently didn't know. But nevertheless that's no excuse for the reviewer using that one teeny tiny piece of content (among a few other tiny pieces of content) to drag down the game's rating.
Now would you have done the same thing? I doubt that. I don't get that vibe from you.
And besides this brings up another problem with the review or perhaps more specifically the reviewer. You see he could have easily learned about the legend if he had simply done a little digging on google. But he apparently didn't care enough to do so. By all accounts it was a silly mistake that he could have easily been avoided but apparently he just didn't care enough to do so. He was apparently content be ignorant and make a risky assumption. In other words not only did he not understand but by all accounts he didn't even try to understand. And obviously that makes him both unreliable and sloppy. And I definitely do not get that vibe (or even that kind of vibe) from you.
And by the way false and/or misleading information is generally, if not always, more trouble than it's worth.
But in any case that was indeed a crap review and I'm glad that we both seem to be in agreement there.
And you're very welcome. I'm glad that you've found reading my words to be worthwhile. Sure it was a little tedious but I guess it was worth it and as they say all's well that end's well. And now I guess it's time for both us to end this prolonged online conversation and get on with our respective lives. Time to move on in other words. Even though we obviously seem to disagree on a number of things it was good talking to you. And who knows? Maybe sometime in the future we'll end up talking again about some other topic in the comment section for some other article on this website.
In any case, take care of yourself and I wish you well.
Last edited by Looking Glass on 7/9/2011 3:30:36 PM
1 up, 0 down
PorkChopGamer
Thursday, July 07, 2011 @ 12:03:26 PM
Reply
Saying White Knight is an 8.5 is implying that it is in stride with the efforts of Rogue Galaxy and Dragon Quest 8, which it isn't even close. The 65 is indicative of the effort, decent, but nothing spectacular either.
8 up, 5 down
Highlander
Thursday, July 07, 2011 @ 12:05:09 PM
With respect, I completely disagree with you, I think you are seeing Rogue Galaxy and DQ8 with rose tinted glasses. Not to mention that scoring games based on a subjective comparison against perceived classics is a flawed method of evaluating quality.
11 up, 2 down
Ben Dutka PSXE [Administrator]
Thursday, July 07, 2011 @ 12:19:22 PM
Look who's back stating his opinion as fact again.
'rolling eyes'
'rolling eyes'
6 up, 5 down
Arvis
Thursday, July 07, 2011 @ 1:20:07 PM
WKC1 is way better than Rogue Galaxy, which was rife with poor design and technical issues (on top of being totally intriguing and beautiful, btw).
Looks like opinions are subjective after all.
-Arvis
Looks like opinions are subjective after all.
-Arvis
3 up, 2 down
Underdog15
Thursday, July 07, 2011 @ 3:34:18 PM
Also, 8.5 is not on par with Dragon Quest 8. DQ8 has a metacritic average over 9.
It is, however, on par with Rogue Galaxy. In fact, I would say I enjoyed both equally.
At first, I quickly judged WKC in the 7 range for me. But I've been playing it the last 2 weeks, and I'm actually getting somewhere. Now I must retract my earlier thoughts. It's a fun title. A metacritic average in the 6-range simply isn't fair. I agree with Ben's review, keeping it the 8 range, as I still don't feel it's as high a quality as I'd like to see next-gen traditional jRPG's, but it's a solid game.
I've read some of those European reviews on WKC2. A couple make good points, but most are reviewed by people who clearly have no experience with jRPG's now or in the past.
When you read comments like, "Too much preparation into battles, micromanaging, and grinding" as main reasons to score a game low, you KNOW they don't know what they are talking about. Reviewers NEED to judge a game from within their genre. For example, just because a FPS scores in the 9's doesn't mean I'm going to get it. If a jRPG scores in the 9's, I guarantee I'd get it no matter if I'd heard of it or not!
I dunno, I just don't think many reviewers know how to properly compare games. Do you have ANY idea how many people compared DQ8 to the FF franchise?!?! SO annoying!!
It is, however, on par with Rogue Galaxy. In fact, I would say I enjoyed both equally.
At first, I quickly judged WKC in the 7 range for me. But I've been playing it the last 2 weeks, and I'm actually getting somewhere. Now I must retract my earlier thoughts. It's a fun title. A metacritic average in the 6-range simply isn't fair. I agree with Ben's review, keeping it the 8 range, as I still don't feel it's as high a quality as I'd like to see next-gen traditional jRPG's, but it's a solid game.
I've read some of those European reviews on WKC2. A couple make good points, but most are reviewed by people who clearly have no experience with jRPG's now or in the past.
When you read comments like, "Too much preparation into battles, micromanaging, and grinding" as main reasons to score a game low, you KNOW they don't know what they are talking about. Reviewers NEED to judge a game from within their genre. For example, just because a FPS scores in the 9's doesn't mean I'm going to get it. If a jRPG scores in the 9's, I guarantee I'd get it no matter if I'd heard of it or not!
I dunno, I just don't think many reviewers know how to properly compare games. Do you have ANY idea how many people compared DQ8 to the FF franchise?!?! SO annoying!!
3 up, 0 down
Excelsior1
Thursday, July 07, 2011 @ 3:59:00 PM
@underdog
i think puttting wkc in the 7-8 range is pretty fair. i think dq8 is a far better game, and review scores reflect that. i even enjoyed rogue galaxy more than wkc becuase i did not like the production values in wkc. it just doesn't look or feel like a top of line jrpg.
i think puttting wkc in the 7-8 range is pretty fair. i think dq8 is a far better game, and review scores reflect that. i even enjoyed rogue galaxy more than wkc becuase i did not like the production values in wkc. it just doesn't look or feel like a top of line jrpg.
2 up, 0 down
Lotusflow3r
Thursday, July 07, 2011 @ 8:02:49 PM
I disagree to an extent.
DQ8 and 9 SLAUGHTER WKC imo, but in no way is WKC a 6/10. It is a worthy installment in Level 5's dream like portfolio.
RG was better executed as a solo adventure and had more variety, but WKC has a better story, set locations and an online mode that takes the cake in how addictive it is.
Imo:-
DQ8 - 9.5/10
DQ9 - 9.1/10
RG - 8.0/10
WKC1- 8.5/10
and WKC2 is looking much better 42hrs in.
DQ8 and 9 SLAUGHTER WKC imo, but in no way is WKC a 6/10. It is a worthy installment in Level 5's dream like portfolio.
RG was better executed as a solo adventure and had more variety, but WKC has a better story, set locations and an online mode that takes the cake in how addictive it is.
Imo:-
DQ8 - 9.5/10
DQ9 - 9.1/10
RG - 8.0/10
WKC1- 8.5/10
and WKC2 is looking much better 42hrs in.
2 up, 0 down
Deathb4Dishonor
Thursday, July 07, 2011 @ 12:09:09 PM
Reply
I enjoyed the first white knight cronicles and i'm sure i'll enjoy the second too... It's pathetic how JRPGs at one point were the big sellers in games and now it's nothing but FPS Military shooters with no good story of any sort and the same old same old... That's why i see most ppl playing old JRPGs like FFVII,VIII,Xenogears, And Tales franchise... I for one would take a good RPG with great gameplay and story over any game any day
4 up, 1 down
FM23
Thursday, July 07, 2011 @ 12:34:55 PM
Crazy thing is there aren't that many military shooters outside of the obvious. Alot of franchise outside of the shooter genre are successful. It's just none of JRP's. Not everyone loves JRPG's like most on this site as anime and that form of art isn't mainstream in this country. PS2 gaming wasn't as mainstream as it now and developers want money...money is in mainstream gaming, not a form of gaming that isn't as popular as the other. the industry is changing.
Plus alot of games have good stories and gameplay, but I understand RPG's are you preference. I'm open to everything!
Plus alot of games have good stories and gameplay, but I understand RPG's are you preference. I'm open to everything!
2 up, 2 down
duomaxwell007
Thursday, July 07, 2011 @ 1:30:17 PM
anime isnt mainstream in the US? Well please explain to me why more than half of all the animated shows that air in the Us are anime? yugioh, pokemon, sonic x, dragonball z kai, fullmetal alchemist, etc etc.. I can name WAY more anime that airs on Us television than I can name american made animation that airs on Us television today. If that snot mainstream I dont know what is.
Oh and btw wrpgs suck imho... when Im running around and it feels more like Im playing uncharted than an RPG.. its not an rpg imho (mass effect and fallout Im looking at you) now I would at least classify two worlds 2, elder scrolls and dragon age as RPGs but even still I dont really like those games much.
Oh and btw wrpgs suck imho... when Im running around and it feels more like Im playing uncharted than an RPG.. its not an rpg imho (mass effect and fallout Im looking at you) now I would at least classify two worlds 2, elder scrolls and dragon age as RPGs but even still I dont really like those games much.
3 up, 5 down
Jawknee
Thursday, July 07, 2011 @ 1:43:19 PM
When you have white people trying to draw anime for Saturday morning cartoon slots...it's obvious anime is main stream in the US.
5 up, 2 down
Beamboom
Thursday, July 07, 2011 @ 1:45:19 PM
Duomaxwell, you can't claim that Fallout in *any* way is playing like Uncharted! And I say that in defence of *both* titles, actually.
Last edited by Beamboom on 7/7/2011 1:48:17 PM
Last edited by Beamboom on 7/7/2011 1:48:17 PM
3 up, 1 down
duomaxwell007
Thursday, July 07, 2011 @ 2:12:04 PM
I can indeed make that claim of it playing like uncharted when I speak of mass effect (third person shooting and cover system) sure your right I cant make that claim about fallout but the point I was making is that those games play more like TPS/FPS where im running around shooting stuff as opposed to swinging sword and flinging magic.. and fighting dragons.. you know.. that stuff you expect to see in RPGs as that sthe way its been since the 80s and only finally really tried to diverge from that path THIS gen?
when I buy an rpg i expect to level up get new weapons and equipment, do a lotta micromanagement and navigate menus and strategize during combat (doesnt tale a whole lot of strategy to line up a headshot against AI opponents... it does however take plenty of strategy to lets say beat emerald and ruby weapon if you didnt over level...
when I buy an rpg i expect to level up get new weapons and equipment, do a lotta micromanagement and navigate menus and strategize during combat (doesnt tale a whole lot of strategy to line up a headshot against AI opponents... it does however take plenty of strategy to lets say beat emerald and ruby weapon if you didnt over level...
2 up, 0 down
Beamboom
Thursday, July 07, 2011 @ 2:36:27 PM
These are some interesting opinions since I personally much prefer sci-fi to fantasy, and as such very much disagree that all rpg's should be about dragons and elves. Although, most are.
Technically speaking there's no real difference in shooting a gun or throwing some magic. It's all just damage VS armor anyways, and the level of difficulty all depends on how the game is balanced.
A powerful area nuke that render all enemies defenseless is no more "advanced" than a well placed head shot, to put it that way.
However, many games today are too easy! That I agree with. Fallout is way too easy. Also there's too few levels. Half way through the game you hit level cap. wtf is that all about... But that's a different discussion. :)
Last edited by Beamboom on 7/7/2011 2:36:52 PM
Technically speaking there's no real difference in shooting a gun or throwing some magic. It's all just damage VS armor anyways, and the level of difficulty all depends on how the game is balanced.
A powerful area nuke that render all enemies defenseless is no more "advanced" than a well placed head shot, to put it that way.
However, many games today are too easy! That I agree with. Fallout is way too easy. Also there's too few levels. Half way through the game you hit level cap. wtf is that all about... But that's a different discussion. :)
Last edited by Beamboom on 7/7/2011 2:36:52 PM
2 up, 0 down
duomaxwell007
Thursday, July 07, 2011 @ 4:23:42 PM
those "powerful area nukes" as you call also take skill and time to acquire.. wheres you can render an enemy dead with a headshot from the very beginning of the game (if you have a gun)..
with traditional RPGs stats determine wheter you win or lose, with an rpg that plays more like a shooter stats mean nothing if all you have to do is know where to shoot them, you could be level 1 and take down a level 10000000000 enemy if you put a bullet in their head, thus again I may as well be playing uncharted (or any other TPS) as opposed to an RPG in that case
with traditional RPGs stats determine wheter you win or lose, with an rpg that plays more like a shooter stats mean nothing if all you have to do is know where to shoot them, you could be level 1 and take down a level 10000000000 enemy if you put a bullet in their head, thus again I may as well be playing uncharted (or any other TPS) as opposed to an RPG in that case
0 up, 2 down
Beamboom
Thursday, July 07, 2011 @ 4:36:49 PM
I agree that "action skills" (like aiming) play a bigger role in todays rpgs, but stats still is an important factor, and in a game like Fallout it's *the* most important thing. You simply die *instantly* if you at a low level and with low skills attempt to kill a high level mob. It simply is undoable, as it should be. Fallout even has the paused stacking of commands.
The best weapons in Fallout are user created, and getting the blueprints and resources for those weapons takes time to acquire too. it really is not *that* much difference.
Also, damage types and strategy matters even in rpgs as heavily action oriented as Mass Effect, so it simply is not right to claim that stats means nothing. It does. Not as much as in the old, purely stat based "dice" games, sure, but stats count in all current rpgs that I know of.
Last edited by Beamboom on 7/7/2011 4:41:47 PM
The best weapons in Fallout are user created, and getting the blueprints and resources for those weapons takes time to acquire too. it really is not *that* much difference.
Also, damage types and strategy matters even in rpgs as heavily action oriented as Mass Effect, so it simply is not right to claim that stats means nothing. It does. Not as much as in the old, purely stat based "dice" games, sure, but stats count in all current rpgs that I know of.
Last edited by Beamboom on 7/7/2011 4:41:47 PM
1 up, 0 down
Deathb4Dishonor
Thursday, July 07, 2011 @ 4:50:17 PM
Agree with BeamBoom on this but duomaxwell also has a good point... although i don't consider games like fallout RPGs they are more like action/adventure with RPG elements... So games like fallout and mass effect r of their own genres
1 up, 1 down
Fabi
Thursday, July 07, 2011 @ 12:24:06 PM
Reply
I actually changed with the times too. The RPG used to be my favorite genre but as I got older I found it harder and harder to sit around leveling up. Well at least on the couch, for some reason when I do it on the PSP, it's not as bad. I really love that little system.
2 up, 0 down
MDeezy
Thursday, July 07, 2011 @ 12:28:29 PM
Reply
I love playing WKC and am bummed the second one has been such a delay. I agree that all games should exist. I understand that old school RPGs don't sell as well but I am glad someone is still making them. I don't love the migration towards FPS personally.
4 up, 0 down
Jawknee
Thursday, July 07, 2011 @ 1:43:48 PM
Not too much longer now. It's out in September no?
1 up, 0 down
SayWord
Thursday, July 07, 2011 @ 2:07:43 PM
Yes september! I cannot wait! Problem is though I still have to rebeat the first one as I lost the save file. :(
1 up, 0 down
Lotusflow3r
Thursday, July 07, 2011 @ 8:07:32 PM
@Say
Start all over again using WKC1 in WKC2. The improvements are great and it goes together with two like one seamless, huge rpg adventure from the golden era.
Start all over again using WKC1 in WKC2. The improvements are great and it goes together with two like one seamless, huge rpg adventure from the golden era.
1 up, 0 down
Jawknee
Thursday, July 07, 2011 @ 8:52:30 PM
Did they improve the graphics and fix the screen tearing?
0 up, 1 down
Underdog15
Thursday, July 07, 2011 @ 11:33:02 PM
@Jawk
Screen Tearing in White Knight? I haven't seen any of this, yet!
Screen Tearing in White Knight? I haven't seen any of this, yet!
0 up, 0 down
Jawknee
Friday, July 08, 2011 @ 2:32:35 AM
It's there though minor. Nowhere near Assassins Creed levels.
0 up, 0 down
Highlander
Friday, July 08, 2011 @ 8:53:47 AM
Jaw,
I only see any tearing (minor at the top of the screen) when I am in one of the busier environments and I pan the camera as quickly as possible, I hope they removed it too, but it was really minor and I actually have to look for it to notice it.
I only see any tearing (minor at the top of the screen) when I am in one of the busier environments and I pan the camera as quickly as possible, I hope they removed it too, but it was really minor and I actually have to look for it to notice it.
0 up, 0 down
Dreno
Thursday, July 07, 2011 @ 12:35:11 PM
Reply
The rpg was the first game genre I fell in love with, so it will forever be my favorite. Can't be helped.
I think the reason that the critics and revewiers are giving (j)rpgs a bad score is probabley because they know what appeals to the masses of today. The fps.
These revewiers are probably just fans of the fps genre and knowing that its the fps that appeals to the masses probably helps make the decision on how to review a rpg. They compare the rpg to the fps. Which shouldn't be done since they are 2 completely different types of games as we all know.
To compare an rpg to a fps, and most likely use the same review system is complete bull.
Personally, I loved wkc and I don't thin it deserved the 65 it got from reviewers.
The review from this site is much more agreeable.
I think that when a game gets reviewed, who reviews it should be taken into consideration. Maybe if your game getting reviewed is a fps, have and fps reviewer review it. And if its an rpg, have someone who knows how to review an rpg review it.
I think the reason that the critics and revewiers are giving (j)rpgs a bad score is probabley because they know what appeals to the masses of today. The fps.
These revewiers are probably just fans of the fps genre and knowing that its the fps that appeals to the masses probably helps make the decision on how to review a rpg. They compare the rpg to the fps. Which shouldn't be done since they are 2 completely different types of games as we all know.
To compare an rpg to a fps, and most likely use the same review system is complete bull.
Personally, I loved wkc and I don't thin it deserved the 65 it got from reviewers.
The review from this site is much more agreeable.
I think that when a game gets reviewed, who reviews it should be taken into consideration. Maybe if your game getting reviewed is a fps, have and fps reviewer review it. And if its an rpg, have someone who knows how to review an rpg review it.
2 up, 0 down
Beamboom
Thursday, July 07, 2011 @ 1:42:53 PM
With all due respect, but if you are talking about the larger, established review sites I strongly disagree.
They usually are written by someone who consider the games for what they are imo - and usually have done their homework too. Not without exceptions of course, but still. I honestly can't say I've ever read a review of a rpg that is reviewed like it should have been a fps.
They usually are written by someone who consider the games for what they are imo - and usually have done their homework too. Not without exceptions of course, but still. I honestly can't say I've ever read a review of a rpg that is reviewed like it should have been a fps.
1 up, 1 down
Dreno
Thursday, July 07, 2011 @ 2:38:07 PM
I'm just saying reviewers in general. And I didn't mean that they review an rpg like it should be a fps.
Just that I would be shocked to find out that when they reviewed any game that wasn't an fps (because let's face it, the fps is selling like hot cakes now )that they didn't use an fps type review as a guidline of sorts. I'm just saying that because fps are what most of NA play, reviewers may or may not use whats selling the best as a means of comparison.
With scores so low, what are other games besides fps being compared to? I know its a review and not a comparison of two genres, but I'm pretty sure there's gonna be a a guidline when doing a review, and since the fps is selling so well, I'm sure some reviewers just use that as their guidline.
Id just like to see rogs get reviewed fairly and for what the are. Not what the trend is.
Just that I would be shocked to find out that when they reviewed any game that wasn't an fps (because let's face it, the fps is selling like hot cakes now )that they didn't use an fps type review as a guidline of sorts. I'm just saying that because fps are what most of NA play, reviewers may or may not use whats selling the best as a means of comparison.
With scores so low, what are other games besides fps being compared to? I know its a review and not a comparison of two genres, but I'm pretty sure there's gonna be a a guidline when doing a review, and since the fps is selling so well, I'm sure some reviewers just use that as their guidline.
Id just like to see rogs get reviewed fairly and for what the are. Not what the trend is.
1 up, 0 down
Deathb4Dishonor
Thursday, July 07, 2011 @ 4:27:24 PM
BeamBoom
I don't kno what sites your talking about but aside from this site most sites are biased and usually prefer Xbox games... M$ will send them a few free systems and games and in return they give good reviews... They'll give halo games 10/10 when pretty much all the halos is exactly the same with few new vehicle and new story(I kno bc I beat them all).... Then they'll go and give a game like Uncharted 2 a 8/10 bc they say it wasn't a huge diffrence from the first... And huge sites like IGN and gamespot r infamous for doing this... I'm not saying Uncharted 2 should be a 10 for everyone although personally for me it is,but aside from the first Halo, no other Halo tile should've been a 10 either...That's why I only go by Ben's reviews on this site bc he's honest and not a sell out... And he's even gone as far as telling us to play some Xbox games that r good... All the other sites shyt on anything PS brand and praise everything Xbox
Sorry for that rant
I don't kno what sites your talking about but aside from this site most sites are biased and usually prefer Xbox games... M$ will send them a few free systems and games and in return they give good reviews... They'll give halo games 10/10 when pretty much all the halos is exactly the same with few new vehicle and new story(I kno bc I beat them all).... Then they'll go and give a game like Uncharted 2 a 8/10 bc they say it wasn't a huge diffrence from the first... And huge sites like IGN and gamespot r infamous for doing this... I'm not saying Uncharted 2 should be a 10 for everyone although personally for me it is,but aside from the first Halo, no other Halo tile should've been a 10 either...That's why I only go by Ben's reviews on this site bc he's honest and not a sell out... And he's even gone as far as telling us to play some Xbox games that r good... All the other sites shyt on anything PS brand and praise everything Xbox
Sorry for that rant
1 up, 0 down
Beamboom
Thursday, July 07, 2011 @ 4:49:49 PM
My personal opinion is that it looks like many are *very* quick on screaming "biased! biased! xbot!" as soon as their favourite ps3 game do not receive *top* scores. I would not be surprised if the exact same claims are being done in Xbox-communities whenever a ps3 game receive high scores too.
But if you look at the metasites and compare the average scores of the different titles with the scores from IGN & co, you will find that in the absolute majority of the cases they are pretty much dead on the average scores. At least in the same landscape. And even journalists *are* allowed their own opinions.
To say that they are corrupt is just silly. If it was that simple, why don't Sony just hand out some free systems too?
Or do you think all gaming sites are owned by Microsoft too? I think I read that on a conspiracy site someday. :)
Last edited by Beamboom on 7/7/2011 4:52:43 PM
But if you look at the metasites and compare the average scores of the different titles with the scores from IGN & co, you will find that in the absolute majority of the cases they are pretty much dead on the average scores. At least in the same landscape. And even journalists *are* allowed their own opinions.
To say that they are corrupt is just silly. If it was that simple, why don't Sony just hand out some free systems too?
Or do you think all gaming sites are owned by Microsoft too? I think I read that on a conspiracy site someday. :)
Last edited by Beamboom on 7/7/2011 4:52:43 PM
2 up, 0 down
Deathb4Dishonor
Thursday, July 07, 2011 @ 5:06:12 PM
I'm not mad that they gave a game I like a lower score... I get mad when they give a game that has made no leaps or major changes in their game a 10 and then go and give another game a 8 for not doing huge leaps and changes but still has better story and gameplay... And a lot sites r biased believe it or not... I remember seeing a blog at gametrailers i think or mayb another site but when the 360 slim was announced, during the whole confrence on the blog the guy was saying that everyone around him was saying how the confrence sucked and as soon they said free 360 slims for everyone attending here then everyone was like, M$ had the best confrence... It goes to show how ppl r quickly to change their minds as soon as free stuff start showing up... Mayb Sony should do it too but they don't and pretty sure they feel confident enough that their games r good enough to scare good score without having to kiss everyones ass... But at the end of the day, those sites treat MS more generous than Sony games
1 up, 0 down
Temjin001
Thursday, July 07, 2011 @ 12:36:11 PM
Reply
I want to play WKC. Right now I can't have an opinion speaking to the quality of it.
I sometimes wonder if players are going to eventually distance themselves from critical review. Today, the average moderate to higher budgeted
games are good games. Basically games pretty much free from any real obtrusive problems at a mechanical level. Duke and that Sega RPG come to mind as a few examples of critically flawed games. In the past there were a lot more crap game products on the market. Games were cheaper to produce back then and it'd seem we'd see a lot more crap blended in with the good. Critics were functionally more effective.
Today it seems poorer scores are coming from more subjective, preference based assessments. I can't tell you how many GT5 reviews missed the target. It's one of the highest quality games this gen and it's critical reception was just off the mark. Really, I no longer will trust the general consensus regarding Polyphony Digitals efforts, instead, I'll trust the developer without looking to reviews. They've earned it.
It just seems the enjoyment or fun a person can have with games critically scored in the 8-10 range has more to do with the game's appeal rather than how close to "perfection" a game is quality wise.
Basically, my point is, maybe
I sometimes wonder if players are going to eventually distance themselves from critical review. Today, the average moderate to higher budgeted
games are good games. Basically games pretty much free from any real obtrusive problems at a mechanical level. Duke and that Sega RPG come to mind as a few examples of critically flawed games. In the past there were a lot more crap game products on the market. Games were cheaper to produce back then and it'd seem we'd see a lot more crap blended in with the good. Critics were functionally more effective.
Today it seems poorer scores are coming from more subjective, preference based assessments. I can't tell you how many GT5 reviews missed the target. It's one of the highest quality games this gen and it's critical reception was just off the mark. Really, I no longer will trust the general consensus regarding Polyphony Digitals efforts, instead, I'll trust the developer without looking to reviews. They've earned it.
It just seems the enjoyment or fun a person can have with games critically scored in the 8-10 range has more to do with the game's appeal rather than how close to "perfection" a game is quality wise.
Basically, my point is, maybe
0 up, 0 down
Temjin001
Thursday, July 07, 2011 @ 12:45:00 PM
Just nevermind my last line on my post. Cellphone issues that's all
1 up, 0 down
bebestorm
Thursday, July 07, 2011 @ 1:07:38 PM
Reply
ITA! Gamers place way too much value in reviews. I think wrpgs plays a part too. I've never understood letting reviews determine which games you buy.
1 up, 0 down
Deathb4Dishonor
Thursday, July 07, 2011 @ 4:33:19 PM
I kno plenty of ppl that go by reviews especially if there's no demo to let us try it for ourselves and that's the biggest mistake a publisher can do... Release a game with no demo bc then most ppl have nothing to go on but reviews and videos that they put together to make it look better then it is... Kinda how movies do a good commercial and it looks good and u see the movie and it's garbage and the only good parts were the ones they showed in the commercials
1 up, 0 down
TheOldOne
Thursday, July 07, 2011 @ 1:07:48 PM
Reply
Reviews are a double edged sword. They help superior games get their recognition, but also push the sales down of many good games that have received average scores. Two good examples of underrated games are "Two Worlds II" and "Heavenly Sword". Both excellent games.
0 up, 0 down
Ben Dutka PSXE [Administrator]
Thursday, July 07, 2011 @ 4:20:09 PM
Heavenly Sword sold very well, and the majority of critics did like it.
And I'm sorry, as much as people liked Two Worlds II, that game had some serious problems. We still gave it a decent score, though. :)
And I'm sorry, as much as people liked Two Worlds II, that game had some serious problems. We still gave it a decent score, though. :)
1 up, 1 down
Looking Glass
Thursday, July 07, 2011 @ 1:58:25 PM
Reply
I would say no. The critics are not killing the genre per se. But they are seemingly TRYING to.
The sticking point here is that to say that critics are killing the genre implies that they are succeeding. And I don't think that they are.
True, the genre is nowhere near as popular as it once was. But I believe that it's still alive and well and here to stay. And the reason I say this is that a number of JRPGs have sold well regardless of a lackluster reception by critics. Some examples are White Knight Chronicles, Hyperdimension Neptunia, and Atelier Rorona. In fact Rorona from what I gather has actually sold better in the US than in it's homeland of Japan. I think that a lot fans of traditional RPGs and JRPGs are becoming jaded toward critics and learning to not care what they say.
The sticking point here is that to say that critics are killing the genre implies that they are succeeding. And I don't think that they are.
True, the genre is nowhere near as popular as it once was. But I believe that it's still alive and well and here to stay. And the reason I say this is that a number of JRPGs have sold well regardless of a lackluster reception by critics. Some examples are White Knight Chronicles, Hyperdimension Neptunia, and Atelier Rorona. In fact Rorona from what I gather has actually sold better in the US than in it's homeland of Japan. I think that a lot fans of traditional RPGs and JRPGs are becoming jaded toward critics and learning to not care what they say.
0 up, 0 down
Ludakriss
Thursday, July 07, 2011 @ 2:54:59 PM
Reply
I agree with whoever said that it's "good. the story is so-so but the mechanics are fine and the feel of the game isn't bad".
Still remembering Final Fantasy 12 and, YES they do have incredibly similar mechanics, I can't help but feel hurt by all the non-sense of PS3s true power and...WKC is the result. WKC who let's not forget is made by the same people who made Dark Cloud. Taking everything into consideration, Devs, please. Innovate. Somehow.
This game is just, dry. I'm being honest xD by the way and saying this whilst going through the second game with a LVL 50 party. Just my opinion. P.S. I LOVE ALL YOU SENSIBLE PEOPLE WHO WRITE ON THIS SITE!!! YES! Peace & RPG-ease!
Still remembering Final Fantasy 12 and, YES they do have incredibly similar mechanics, I can't help but feel hurt by all the non-sense of PS3s true power and...WKC is the result. WKC who let's not forget is made by the same people who made Dark Cloud. Taking everything into consideration, Devs, please. Innovate. Somehow.
This game is just, dry. I'm being honest xD by the way and saying this whilst going through the second game with a LVL 50 party. Just my opinion. P.S. I LOVE ALL YOU SENSIBLE PEOPLE WHO WRITE ON THIS SITE!!! YES! Peace & RPG-ease!
1 up, 0 down
Excelsior1
Thursday, July 07, 2011 @ 3:13:17 PM
i agree with that. the production values in wkc aren't very good for some reason. i was expecting some top of line jrpg that took advantage of the ps3...we really didn't get that in the first game.
2 up, 0 down
Slime
Thursday, July 07, 2011 @ 3:01:25 PM
Reply
I don't think it's the critics I think its the games makers and the consoles themselves.
Consoles because they are now capable of HD graphics which I dont think a lot of developers have / had the resources to properly take advantage of with reasonable cost.
Games makers because they are all trying to make there games more action orrientated which is something they have probabaly been wanting to do for years but did'nt have powerfull enough consoles to do it on.
Im sure turn based was invented as a stop gap for developers but which is something now that people miss, I know I do.
I like my action games too even rpg ones, but i really really miss sitting in my chair cigarette in one hand drink or food in other and playing for 14 hours which is something you cant always do with a action game.
DAMN IT give me FF7 - FFX with PS3 graphics ! and I will be happy :D
Consoles because they are now capable of HD graphics which I dont think a lot of developers have / had the resources to properly take advantage of with reasonable cost.
Games makers because they are all trying to make there games more action orrientated which is something they have probabaly been wanting to do for years but did'nt have powerfull enough consoles to do it on.
Im sure turn based was invented as a stop gap for developers but which is something now that people miss, I know I do.
I like my action games too even rpg ones, but i really really miss sitting in my chair cigarette in one hand drink or food in other and playing for 14 hours which is something you cant always do with a action game.
DAMN IT give me FF7 - FFX with PS3 graphics ! and I will be happy :D
2 up, 0 down
jimmyhandsome
Thursday, July 07, 2011 @ 4:26:27 PM
LOL the thought of your Slime avatar sitting in a chair smoking a cigarette and drinking a beer made me chuckle.
Last edited by jimmyhandsome on 7/7/2011 4:26:32 PM
Last edited by jimmyhandsome on 7/7/2011 4:26:32 PM
0 up, 0 down
Slime
Thursday, July 07, 2011 @ 4:21:08 PM
Reply
I also loved dungeon master :D think it was on the atari ST I had it.
Oh dear how the mind crumbles with age
If only I could get a memory reset so I could play all the old games again and forget the lush graphics I now crave.
I wouldnt say I was a graphics w***e but I just can't go back to old games, saying that I was playing diablo 2 again recently LOL
Or have I ?? that Déjà vu is getting worse unless its just senility ?(it does seem to be in the genes)
Last edited by Slime on 7/7/2011 4:28:55 PM
Oh dear how the mind crumbles with age
If only I could get a memory reset so I could play all the old games again and forget the lush graphics I now crave.
I wouldnt say I was a graphics w***e but I just can't go back to old games, saying that I was playing diablo 2 again recently LOL
Or have I ?? that Déjà vu is getting worse unless its just senility ?(it does seem to be in the genes)
Last edited by Slime on 7/7/2011 4:28:55 PM
0 up, 1 down
Slime
Thursday, July 07, 2011 @ 4:35:22 PM
Reply
Im prob mot supposed to double post but is edit supposed to move the position of your post ? (Doh forget it another senior moment) + wine :P
And yes that picture of me is a photo realistic pic I took minus beer + ciggy :)
But its why i miss turn based so much It was just so laid back and easy for long periods , dont really have to pause games , drink smoke eat, stroke cat at same time as playing if you wanted.
I liked the playstyle then and I like it now im 40 just wish I'd learned to type better when I was yunger but then again typings for girls ;)
Last edited by Slime on 7/7/2011 4:40:33 PM
And yes that picture of me is a photo realistic pic I took minus beer + ciggy :)
But its why i miss turn based so much It was just so laid back and easy for long periods , dont really have to pause games , drink smoke eat, stroke cat at same time as playing if you wanted.
I liked the playstyle then and I like it now im 40 just wish I'd learned to type better when I was yunger but then again typings for girls ;)
Last edited by Slime on 7/7/2011 4:40:33 PM
1 up, 0 down
SympoziumPawa
Thursday, July 07, 2011 @ 5:39:03 PM
Reply
Oh man Metacritic, thankfully I just buy the games that I buy all the time than rely on other peoples opinion. its just that some of them are really really wrong.
Giving a playable game 4.0 (guess cause I can't can't be bothered) is so silly. White Knight Chronicles isn't the likes of "legendary" "E.T" and a "Macdonalds endorsed game" etc etc. So why be so negative?
I've read two reviews... which obviously was this and TSA (worlds greatest site *cough* fanboy)that was after buying the game and I found WKC to be very good and a fun experience. It means... wow! hope more gamers are buying but IGN, Gamespot and the world of bellends; Gametrailers get like Millions of visits right? What happens after watching/reading a review? the visitor is negatively impacted thus the game is hated right?.
I guess is the same for Dynasty Warriors: Gundam 3 4.0 and one page from ze IGN? I fear there wouldn't be much online missions added on to the game if there isn't much people buying those games. Its sad and very true about critics murdering real proper games, they don't deserve it but you get idiots in the industry that ruin for many unfortunately.
(Sorry if the post is a bit wrong)
Giving a playable game 4.0 (guess cause I can't can't be bothered) is so silly. White Knight Chronicles isn't the likes of "legendary" "E.T" and a "Macdonalds endorsed game" etc etc. So why be so negative?
I've read two reviews... which obviously was this and TSA (worlds greatest site *cough* fanboy)that was after buying the game and I found WKC to be very good and a fun experience. It means... wow! hope more gamers are buying but IGN, Gamespot and the world of bellends; Gametrailers get like Millions of visits right? What happens after watching/reading a review? the visitor is negatively impacted thus the game is hated right?.
I guess is the same for Dynasty Warriors: Gundam 3 4.0 and one page from ze IGN? I fear there wouldn't be much online missions added on to the game if there isn't much people buying those games. Its sad and very true about critics murdering real proper games, they don't deserve it but you get idiots in the industry that ruin for many unfortunately.
(Sorry if the post is a bit wrong)
2 up, 0 down
Highlander
Friday, July 08, 2011 @ 9:01:01 PM
The post was perfectly understandable to me.
0 up, 0 down
Slime
Thursday, July 07, 2011 @ 5:51:31 PM
Reply
Then again its all down to personal preference I played one of the Gundam games , can't remember which is was that good imo ;)
I'm still waiting for Enchanted arms 2 btw :)
(EDIT) This and TSA are my 2 fav sites
Last edited by Slime on 7/7/2011 5:54:20 PM
I'm still waiting for Enchanted arms 2 btw :)
(EDIT) This and TSA are my 2 fav sites
Last edited by Slime on 7/7/2011 5:54:20 PM
0 up, 0 down
amonte
Thursday, July 07, 2011 @ 8:38:28 PM
Reply
If people want real RPG´s they have to let the companies know and demand this and have to support the games tha are by purchasing them, of course only if they are good.
1 up, 0 down
Gordo
Thursday, July 07, 2011 @ 9:48:31 PM
Reply
Are critics killing the traditional RPG?
Personally I think not. I blame it on "age creep"...
Rough estimate:
1990 - Average age of a gamer 20.
2010 - Average age of a gamer 30.
Again, generalising but a 20 year old gamer has a load more time to play games than a 30 year old gamer.
Quid Pro (Status) Quo...
The average age of the game rises, the market for 100 hour games decreases. Most 100 hour games are traditional RPG's so the number of them being developed declines.
How's that for a slice of "fried gold"?
Personally I think not. I blame it on "age creep"...
Rough estimate:
1990 - Average age of a gamer 20.
2010 - Average age of a gamer 30.
Again, generalising but a 20 year old gamer has a load more time to play games than a 30 year old gamer.
Quid Pro (Status) Quo...
The average age of the game rises, the market for 100 hour games decreases. Most 100 hour games are traditional RPG's so the number of them being developed declines.
How's that for a slice of "fried gold"?
1 up, 0 down
duomaxwell007
Friday, July 08, 2011 @ 10:43:05 AM
Umm Im 30 (well will be in 2 years) and I love JRPgs just as much as I did when i was 20 and even 16
0 up, 0 down
___________
Friday, July 08, 2011 @ 4:53:18 AM
Reply
not only RPGs, but in almost all genres!
i remember reading IGNs review of R&C ACIT and banging my head on the keyboard.
if i had a nickle for everytime i read a review that complained the game brought not enough new things to the series i would be rich enough to buy the big 3 50 times over by now!
DNF is a perfect example of this, i get the feeling they modernized the game, as in bringing in 2 weapon limit, regenerative health, ect,ect simply because if they left it out people would of hit on it because, well, hello this is 2011 not 1986!
hell theres still some complaining about dukes crass humor.
i mean what the *&^%?
THATS THE WHOLE F*CKING POINT OF THE GAME!
complaining about dukes crass humor is like complaining about kratos severe anger issues!
thats how the characters are, changing them would be changing the game!
im sick of games that just slap on the sequel name just to gain a few sales and change the whole game.
if i want something different ill buy something different.
prey 2 for example, what the ^%$# does prey 2 have to do with the original?
there 2 totally different games, so why are they under the same series?
if i want something different, then why would i buy it?
if i wanted to play a shooter then im not going to go buy the witcher 2 now am i?
so can we please, FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, PLEASE stop turning series into things there not?
PLEASE!?
enough with the resident evil 5 syndrome!
i remember reading IGNs review of R&C ACIT and banging my head on the keyboard.
if i had a nickle for everytime i read a review that complained the game brought not enough new things to the series i would be rich enough to buy the big 3 50 times over by now!
DNF is a perfect example of this, i get the feeling they modernized the game, as in bringing in 2 weapon limit, regenerative health, ect,ect simply because if they left it out people would of hit on it because, well, hello this is 2011 not 1986!
hell theres still some complaining about dukes crass humor.
i mean what the *&^%?
THATS THE WHOLE F*CKING POINT OF THE GAME!
complaining about dukes crass humor is like complaining about kratos severe anger issues!
thats how the characters are, changing them would be changing the game!
im sick of games that just slap on the sequel name just to gain a few sales and change the whole game.
if i want something different ill buy something different.
prey 2 for example, what the ^%$# does prey 2 have to do with the original?
there 2 totally different games, so why are they under the same series?
if i want something different, then why would i buy it?
if i wanted to play a shooter then im not going to go buy the witcher 2 now am i?
so can we please, FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, PLEASE stop turning series into things there not?
PLEASE!?
enough with the resident evil 5 syndrome!
2 up, 1 down
Ludakriss
Friday, July 08, 2011 @ 5:22:17 AM
Wowww. I admire ya, man. xD I could not stop laughing at "It's like complaining about Kratos' sever anger issues" hahahahhaha! Well done. I do agree with you though. Good day.
1 up, 0 down
Beamboom
Friday, July 08, 2011 @ 10:23:31 AM
@Ludakriss: lol yeah that was the highlight of this episode. :)
0 up, 0 down
Mornelithe
Friday, July 08, 2011 @ 12:30:23 PM
Reply
I hate to keep laying the blame at the feet of gamer's, but really, people allow themselves to be influenced far too often in their choices of what entertains THEM. Does anyone else see this as a complete fallacy?
I'm not saying reviewer's or critics are all 100% wrong, simply, you know better than anyone else what you enjoy. Why would you even consider listening to someone you don't know, have never met, and probably never will meet...to have any kind of relevant opinion on what you enjoy?
Games aren't cheap, and going into it blindly (which, just listening to a critic, is about the same as doing so blind) is going to leave you holding the bag. Critics are paid, regardless, their interests are purely profit, and exposure driven. Is it any surprise that a great many of them use purposefully inflammatory remarks in their reviews, just to nettle and barb people into starting up fanboy wars? It's only been going on...forever.
I urge you all, do your own research, take critics and reviews with a grain of salt, until YOU have looked into it. Developer diaries, developer forums, etc... are all vital sources of information on any and all games in the pipeline. They're there for a reason, and are filled with more data than critics/reviewers are likely to have access to.
I'm not saying reviewer's or critics are all 100% wrong, simply, you know better than anyone else what you enjoy. Why would you even consider listening to someone you don't know, have never met, and probably never will meet...to have any kind of relevant opinion on what you enjoy?
Games aren't cheap, and going into it blindly (which, just listening to a critic, is about the same as doing so blind) is going to leave you holding the bag. Critics are paid, regardless, their interests are purely profit, and exposure driven. Is it any surprise that a great many of them use purposefully inflammatory remarks in their reviews, just to nettle and barb people into starting up fanboy wars? It's only been going on...forever.
I urge you all, do your own research, take critics and reviews with a grain of salt, until YOU have looked into it. Developer diaries, developer forums, etc... are all vital sources of information on any and all games in the pipeline. They're there for a reason, and are filled with more data than critics/reviewers are likely to have access to.
0 up, 0 down
D1g1tal5torm
Friday, July 08, 2011 @ 3:18:31 PM
Reply
old school rpgs are not financially viable in todays current economic climate; they dont make the publishers/developers enough money.
Simple as.
It would have to be an rpg of epic proportions in every sense to re-vitalise the genre, and no house is going to invest that amount of money when it's going to be a gamble.
Simple as.
It would have to be an rpg of epic proportions in every sense to re-vitalise the genre, and no house is going to invest that amount of money when it's going to be a gamble.
0 up, 0 down
BigBoss4ever
Sunday, July 10, 2011 @ 1:16:54 AM
Reply
screw critics, screw mass media, JRPG with turn based forever!!!
0 up, 0 down
Jotun
Sunday, July 10, 2011 @ 12:52:48 PM
Reply
Gotta love anyone here who wants turn-based games to die out so they can get more of what they want. I play any and all RPG's that come out and have since the text-based adventures of the early 80's. I just want a great story with deep character development, great rpg elements, and combat that works. Do I prefer and miss turn-based games? Heck yes I do, but you know what? I loved Fallout 3 even though it's a travesty to compare it to the legendary FO1&2, I greatly enjoying DAI&II, I love the Tales series even though you basicly just mash buttons.
I mean what kind of person hopes that something goes away so they can more of what they want? I listen to underground death/progressive metal that will never rival the size or popularity of mainstream pop music and I hate nearly everything played on the radio post-1990, but wishing Rap or Pop will go away won't make my favirote genres any better. That is just selfishness for the sake of selfishness and is pretty disgusting to me.
I mean what kind of person hopes that something goes away so they can more of what they want? I listen to underground death/progressive metal that will never rival the size or popularity of mainstream pop music and I hate nearly everything played on the radio post-1990, but wishing Rap or Pop will go away won't make my favirote genres any better. That is just selfishness for the sake of selfishness and is pretty disgusting to me.
0 up, 0 down
Ather
Sunday, July 10, 2011 @ 1:32:02 PM
Reply
If real fans like the games, they'll buy it, and it won't matter what the critics think. Too many people put far too much faith in critics. Instead of a guide, people use them as make or break. Some will refuse to see a movie or buy a game if a critic says it's bad. Maybe they'd have liked it if they tried it.
0 up, 0 down
sansyeux
Sunday, July 10, 2011 @ 2:49:37 PM
Reply
I also do believe critics are doing this.While FFXIII wasn't too great but it wasn't too bad(if anything square enix did screw up FFXIV on PC).the game was a beautiful experience, some changes were made such as singular attacks but this pushed players to become more responsible to pay attention on the characters abilities.it's very strategic - like most turn based RPG's were.no one can deliver such rewarding cut scenes like square enix.
The gaming market is spoiled with the FPS genre with a lot of the same "I'm a marine an american patriot .let's kill some terrorists" or " we are marines, let's kill some aliens".
I am more driven with story telling and design than rather such games.games should always be fun.but they also should offer something different.RPg's in the old days became memorable for me because of the hours spent on them and the character development, and of course it's universe.
the gaming community should always have variety and different perspectives.like it did in the past.I have yet to play WKC.but this is my two scents on the thought.
Last edited by sansyeux on 7/10/2011 2:51:53 PM
The gaming market is spoiled with the FPS genre with a lot of the same "I'm a marine an american patriot .let's kill some terrorists" or " we are marines, let's kill some aliens".
I am more driven with story telling and design than rather such games.games should always be fun.but they also should offer something different.RPg's in the old days became memorable for me because of the hours spent on them and the character development, and of course it's universe.
the gaming community should always have variety and different perspectives.like it did in the past.I have yet to play WKC.but this is my two scents on the thought.
Last edited by sansyeux on 7/10/2011 2:51:53 PM
0 up, 0 down
sansyeux
Sunday, July 10, 2011 @ 4:54:41 PM
it is also the critics fault for pushing people away from these games.I've met people who never played (ie again FFXII) and said it was a horrible.even I did!
because I don't enjoy wasting 60 $ on a game that might suck,cause let's face it,games are too expensive! and in many reviews - critics have pointed mostly it's flaws and then people keep spreading those things out.CoD is fun sometimes.I enjoyed certain momentums in the game(s) but is it fair how of the ol same we get from the series? and with the online experience which only have a few tweaks.they should just release one CoD and keep providing us dlc and updates.CoD , is always a preference for comparison fpor many critics because of the marketing.sadly FPS is the new thang!.
Kojima, was right.things have changed in gaming =(
PS: sorry for my grammar.
because I don't enjoy wasting 60 $ on a game that might suck,cause let's face it,games are too expensive! and in many reviews - critics have pointed mostly it's flaws and then people keep spreading those things out.CoD is fun sometimes.I enjoyed certain momentums in the game(s) but is it fair how of the ol same we get from the series? and with the online experience which only have a few tweaks.they should just release one CoD and keep providing us dlc and updates.CoD , is always a preference for comparison fpor many critics because of the marketing.sadly FPS is the new thang!.
Kojima, was right.things have changed in gaming =(
PS: sorry for my grammar.
0 up, 0 down
SS4
Sunday, July 10, 2011 @ 6:33:25 PM
Reply
The average consumer is so easy to control. Whatever media and critics want to make mainstream take little effort and Mr everyday just buys into it...
Now if consumer were smarter and knew better than to listen to critics who are biased and do a little bit more research, then we wouldn't have this problem.
But lets face it, we live in a world full of dumb people that are leaded (almost controlled lol) by even dumber people and its the sad reality...
Now if consumer were smarter and knew better than to listen to critics who are biased and do a little bit more research, then we wouldn't have this problem.
But lets face it, we live in a world full of dumb people that are leaded (almost controlled lol) by even dumber people and its the sad reality...
0 up, 0 down
Arukugatari
Monday, July 11, 2011 @ 3:45:44 AM
Reply
Alot has been said quite quickly as always,so what I'm about to say is probably in there somewhere.
I'mthinking critics,western Eastern or Atlantian wherever probably acknowledge that there are old school RPG fans out there,in the same sense that there are hardcore,possibly oldschool fans of any genre of gaming.
Rather than looking for something new or something that catches the eye though,I'd like to believe in those critics--even if RPG's are my favorite type of games!!Any critic should try and release their bias,searching not for what's neew and shiny,but a firm step forwards in gaming!Perhaps in just the genre too,but that's not always enough for a game to be good.
Forgive my rhyming in advance,but words such as "Evolution" and "revolution" come to mind when I think of what a critic is entitled to rate high,and others should get the boot they deserve =/.Eventualy,if this continues RPG games willhave to have bad ratings mostly...but if sales keep up,the pudding will engluf the numbers now won't it?
I'mthinking critics,western Eastern or Atlantian wherever probably acknowledge that there are old school RPG fans out there,in the same sense that there are hardcore,possibly oldschool fans of any genre of gaming.
Rather than looking for something new or something that catches the eye though,I'd like to believe in those critics--even if RPG's are my favorite type of games!!Any critic should try and release their bias,searching not for what's neew and shiny,but a firm step forwards in gaming!Perhaps in just the genre too,but that's not always enough for a game to be good.
Forgive my rhyming in advance,but words such as "Evolution" and "revolution" come to mind when I think of what a critic is entitled to rate high,and others should get the boot they deserve =/.Eventualy,if this continues RPG games willhave to have bad ratings mostly...but if sales keep up,the pudding will engluf the numbers now won't it?
0 up, 0 down
GamerO1
Monday, July 11, 2011 @ 9:32:56 AM
Reply
Unfortunately True.
The problem with reviewers/critics is they generally rate games in the genre they like higher, and quite often "never" play the other genre, but "still" rate them. TRUTH !!!
I know many people that, due to RPG's "became" Gamers... Now they'd rather not play because it's so hard to find a "traditional" RPG.
So Sad... but luckily I own hundreds of RPG's and still play them Today.
The problem with reviewers/critics is they generally rate games in the genre they like higher, and quite often "never" play the other genre, but "still" rate them. TRUTH !!!
I know many people that, due to RPG's "became" Gamers... Now they'd rather not play because it's so hard to find a "traditional" RPG.
So Sad... but luckily I own hundreds of RPG's and still play them Today.
0 up, 0 down
Highlander
Reply
Thursday, July 07, 2011 @ 11:16:57 AM
Yes, the critic are killing the genre. Even critics who gave WKC a relatively rough landing are giving the sequel a rougher landing for being what it is. Not because it's a bad game but because it is what it is.
Why are reviewers/critics doing this? That's what I want to know. If a game is a good solid RPG, then why tear it to shreds for being a good solid RPG? As you point out, that's what RPG fans want, good solid RPGs. Is this some weird fashion thing where it's fashionable for reviewers to pour scorn on a genre?
Either way, I'm sick of it. Some reviews of RPGs have been absolutely derisive.
Last edited by Highlander on 7/7/2011 11:23:11 AM