PDA

View Full Version : Gamespot is biased


8 bit Orgy
11-05-2002, 06:13 AM
Is it me or do they hate good Gamecube games? Or I supposed Deathrow for Xbox was far superior to PSO.

http://gamespot.com/gamespot/stories/reviews/0,10867,2896605,00.html

Everytime there is a big named GC game Gamespot hates it and gives a senseless review so vague you don't know what the fuck they're talking about. They make it seem the camera is even a factor in this game. It's an RPG, not Rayman. The game features a quick look-ahead camera button (which they fail to mention). What else do they fucking need? Do they really expect the godamn camera to be like Max Payne? The camera HAS to be sluggish in an RPG or you'll get lost when enemies surround you. And you not "find yourself struggling with the camera to adjust your line of sight so that you can target a specific enemy. " Ever. They keep bring up how bad the camera is. It sounds so retarded and obvious they just want something to complain about.

And the storyline is NOT weak. It's a MMORPG. Who the hell cares? It's probably the most believable and immersive MMORPG story yet. Again, another stupid complaint. Music isn't memorable?! MEMORABLE!! Is that even a complaint!? The music sounds pretty damn fitting to me. It's rare to even see games with such a deep soundtrack. Most MMOPRGs don't even HAVE music! They hardly also bring up the graphics.

The readers gave it a 9.1. And many of the reviews give it a "0" complaining that GC is for teh kiddies.


Also EGM gave the game a 10,9,9. IGN gave it a 9. Gamepro gave it a 4.5 out of 5. Gamers.com gave it a perfect score. Gamestyle a 9 out of 10. Xen Gamers a A-. Not bad for a port with little new features. but hey, most of us never played it for the DC....

xsarien
11-05-2002, 06:22 AM
Gamespot's criteria:

http://gamespot.com/gamespot/misc/userreview/explained.html

Admittedly, they're pretty strict about it, but I think that can come in handy every so often.

Or you could just ignore game reviews, (or at best, use them as a yardstick) and rent the game to see how you like it. :)

8 bit Orgy
11-05-2002, 06:49 AM
I guess that criteria is an excuse to rate shitty fucking Xbox games higher than Mario Sunshine.


Seriously speaking, they actually rate shitty fucking Xbox games higher than Mario Sunshine.

Because we all know a linear action games with no replay value are far better.


http://gamespot.com/gamespot/filters/products/0,11114,561544,00.html

Alucard
11-05-2002, 08:02 AM
I thought all the reviews were seperate for each of the consoles? Different groups? so that one group could be atotal whore when it comes to XBox, yet the other group, being GC, are alot more narrow minded on what they want. I dont know I'm guessing about the groups things.

I find I prefer Gamespot reviews to IGN, simply because they go into detail about the game and every point of it. They will say stuff like 'camera is prone to go wherever it likes blahblahblahblha', then say what they think. Unlike IGN where the drool happily over everything and cloud your judgement by saying how uber it is. I dont really pay too much attention to the score. Mainly the review itself. And Gamespot give more indepth info about a game then say IGN do.

Someone should tell them half the games on the PS2 that they give high scores for suck hardcore. Like Ace Combat 4 for example. I have a HUGE beef to pick with this game. I dont care how pretty the game is <despite the fact that its an entire stinkin bitmap for a stage>, or how nice the story is or lovely the stills are for the story. Which they are. Gorgeous. The actual game plays WAY too arcady. I hate that its nigh impossible to shoot down a plane with your trashy little gun. You have to focus mainly on missiles. The turning is TRASH for dog fighting. ugh.. That game leaves a sour taste in my mouth.

I SO went off the track then...

baratus
11-05-2002, 10:48 AM
Wow, easy with the bad words here folks. I pretty much agree that GameSpot can sometimes be quite hard on the reviews, especially on Nintendo?s and their GameCube coverage sucks compared to the others. There are fine examples of this such as the old N64 reviews, Mario Kart and Diddy Kong Racing with scores below 7, come on! :too mad: That was outrageous, and giving that kart racing Crash Bandicoot game on the Ps1 an 8.something score was the last straw.
RE remake got an 8.9 score just because they didn?t liked the control style and yet Code Veronica X on the Ps2 got a 9.0 despite being a slightly upgraded port of the Dreamcast version with exactly the same RE style control. That was totally unfair.
However I kind of agree with Alucard here, IGN is sometimes kind of blind with some games and are willing to forgive some fatal flaws on a game and give it a higher score than normal just because they are hyped, like they did with SFA, a 9.0 score was just far more than what that game deserves and GS gave it a 8.3, wich I agree with.
Dunno about PSO on the GameCube because I haven?t played it yet, but I think GS was kind of hard on it, among some other reasons they underrate it just because the four splitted multiplayer mode was frustrating, when everyone knows that the online option is the main mode on the game.
Another thing I?ve noticed about their reviews is that they seem to dislike the kind of game where there?s too much backtracking, that was one of the main reasons SMS got an 8.0, and they praise Ratchet & Clank because there?s little backtracking on the levels.
If this is true I don?t see them giving Metroid Prime a score above 9, heck the game is based on exploration, wich means you have to go back to previous levels and stuff.

Alucard
11-05-2002, 11:08 AM
Why did you feel SFA deserved an 8.3? I'm currently playing it and about 60% through it. Bloody huge game. But so far I'm enjoying it alot. The game is gorgeous. Everything moves almost, like grass and flowers. The stages are very original and cool. Excellent sound, that goes for music and voice acting.. And some pretty cool controls with it. I though a 9 was what it deserved, though I'd have given it higher. And unlike IGN who I think are extremely biased towards the PS2, they gave Jax and Daxter a 9.4. A game I find completely inferior to SFA. Still a good game, but SFA is way better.

baratus
11-05-2002, 11:19 AM
Originally posted by Alucard
Why did you feel SFA deserved an 8.3? I'm currently playing it and about 60% through it. Bloody huge game. But so far I'm enjoying it alot. The game is gorgeous. Everything moves almost, like grass and flowers. The stages are very original and cool. Excellent sound, that goes for music and voice acting.. And some pretty cool controls with it. I though a 9 was what it deserved, though I'd have given it higher. And unlike IGN who I think are extremely biased towards the PS2, they gave Jax and Daxter a 9.4. A game I find completely inferior to SFA. Still a good game, but SFA is way better.

I find it sadly disappointing, yes it has excellent graphics (I doubt you'll see them on any other system) and controls but the music is just average for a Rare game and the game itself is ridiculously easy and linear, not to mention there's a total lack of replay value.

Robo Halloween
11-05-2002, 11:44 AM
No 8bO, Gamespot isn't biased, they are just simply full of snot.:D

Kid0_oIcarus
11-05-2002, 11:47 AM
Sorry farm boy,

I'mma gonna hafta go wit' baratus on this one.
You just wait 'tills ya finish it.
There ain't not a thing left to do.
But start it up over again.

Alucard
11-05-2002, 12:28 PM
As platform style/Adventure games on consoles go, linearity is a given. Its not too difficult no. Though the boss fights are a bit nasty at times and some of the very well done puzzles can get tricky sometimes. Music is nice, but yes it isn't anything to write home about.

As for replay value....thats something that people shouldn't get my opinion of. I mean how many games have you replayed more then once? Say out of 20.. Maybe 3? I've got about 10 games or so waiting to be played right now. I doubt I'll ever go back to SFA or any other game. If there isn't a multiple ending or such, I wont play the game again. Which is why so far Shadow of Memories is the only game with a replay value that beats any other game out there. Not only does it have about 5-6 different endings, theres multiple new story paths to uncover every time you play it. The game is legendary. Only other game with replay value is Star Ocean games, since you can choose to pick other characters to invite into your party since you alway sget a choice now and then between 2.

blueskied
11-05-2002, 01:01 PM
I'd agree with the 8.3 score for SFA. I finished the game in 16 hours, with no help from FAQs or anything (the game is fairly simple and incredibly linear). It was a good experience and I don't regret it, but you're right, when it's done it's done, and I have no desire to ever play through it again. The visuals are a mixed bag in my opinion. The textures and character models are for the most part unsurpassed and there is ZERO popup/draw-in, but the trade off is an often choppy framerate that bugged the heck out of me. I mean, sometimes, the frame rate was total "choppy chop". I *hate* choppy framerates. Personally, I think a game like "Eternal Arcadia" on the dreamcast had better overall graphics, as that game was smooth as silk but still had gorgeous scenery.

It was a good game, but far too linear and constrained. "Do this, go here, etc". That's the whole game. It would have been cool to use different weapons, and perhaps have some towns and stuff to go to for fun side quests or to buy new equiptment, etc.

As far as games you play through more than once, I remember playing through Seiken Densetsu 3 about 6 or 7 times from start to finish. Each time I was one of the 6 different main characters (they all had slightly different quests and endings). I think I played that game for one straight year. Wow. I still think that's the best game ever made in the history of the universe. Also Sakura Wars 2, 3, & 4. So many different endings in those you can play them for months on end and still keep coming back. Great games.

cheers!

Kid0_oIcarus
11-05-2002, 02:19 PM
Well see, it's as linear as linear could be.

Still, it's a good game and I did enjoy my brief stay. I didn't mind the frame rates, because I couldn't care less about that stuff. The game does look good and dinosaurs are always cool.

But I didn't like how you can never go back and play around in the world unless you start over.. Hello? You can't even do the arwing missions or the maze! (Oh and wtf was THAT all about?? Maybe they forgot to include enemies.. or.. something there?) ..

The combat was fun for about the first 30 minutes too. After that, never a challenge and you fight the same enemies over and over...

They could've let you go back and play it with a blaster as a bonus, or allowed there to be different difficulty setting.. even if it just meant more or stronger enemies.

It was good- but it should've been better.

IoriYagami n8
11-05-2002, 02:24 PM
Originally posted by 8 bit Orgy
Not bad for a port with little new features. but hey, most of us never played it for the DC....

I do agree that most of the Gamespot reviews I read do little to my opinion in deciding on what to buy. I got PSO on Gamecube because I loved it on Dreamcast. And while Episode One is essentailly just a port with some extras. Episode Two is a completely new part of the game. Episode Two is pretty much the sequel, but Sonic Team felt that since they could fit Episode One in as well, they would because it also gives Gamecube players the feel of a more complete game. They don't just start from story point B, they start from the old point A, and still get all the nifty stuff of point B after.

8 bit Orgy
11-05-2002, 06:36 PM
The Thing got an 8.4. The Thing obviously must be a superior product to Star Fox Adventures.

DBJAY
11-05-2002, 08:22 PM
What is really flawed about their criteria is that they judge games based on the hardware. Therefore, if a game isn't hitting imaginary visuals that the Gamespot reviewers think is possible, then the game loses points. This clearly does not apply to the PS2...and especially to GTA:Vice City. If you've seen the Two Towers game, you know that the PS2 can create great visuals. It has set a new benchmark for which all PS2 games should be judged, but you will never see GS downgrade a PS2 game that doesn't feature the same amazing graphics. It is bias to inconsistently apply their judging criteria.

DeathStroke
11-06-2002, 01:11 AM
I would take The Thing over Star Fox Adventures anyday. There were loose ends at the end of Star Fox that kept me from truly enjoying the story. The gameplay was good but nothing really impressive. Overall, I think the game was rated too highly on several different sites. It deserves near an 8.5 so I do agree with GS's review.