|
|
|
A Nintendo community by the fans!
|
|
|
∧ |
Forum main |
|
|
Do you take video game journalism and reviews seriously anymore? [roundtable]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NinSage said:oh yea, Giant Bomb is very serious.....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-vbuKcZ8048
Maybe when it comes to non-Wii games they are? Yes, clearly it's just Wii games. See, you're mistaking their humor/dislike of crappy games for the journalism aspect of their site. Quick Looks are just them playing games for 15 minutes to an hour or so. They're usually pretty funny, and you can typically learn what you need to about the game. If the game sucks, or is busted, they won't fail to harp on it. They also lay all their biases on the table instead of trying to pretend to be objective about everything, because we as humans actually like different things, and 100% objective based reviews, for example only take you so far. Opinion does play a role eventually. (Also, they've had to play about 10 billion Dragon Ball games, so they grew sick of them a loooong fucking time ago.) Anyway, if you want their more serious articles, you generally turn to Patrick Klepek over there (and by serious I mean there is investigative journalism or journalism in general going on, not that there "can't be humor cause we're super srs"); http://www.giantbomb.com/news/the-humans-are-dead-long-live-the-beast/4433/http://www.giantbomb.com/news/worth-reading-102612/4426/http://www.giantbomb.com/news/the-authorship-of-a-video-game-part-1/4417/http://www.giantbomb.com/news/the-authorship-of-a-video-game-part-2/4425/http://www.giantbomb.com/news/the-text-adventure-isnt-dead/4316/And you can't tell me creating and playing host to an international game jam isn't good shit: http://www.giantbomb.com/news/welcome-to-the-molyjam2012/4039/http://www.giantbomb.com/news/it-came-from-the-molyjam-bowl-or-die/4091/http://www.giantbomb.com/news/it-came-from-the-molyjam-secret-dad/4093/http://www.giantbomb.com/news/it-came-from-the-molyjam-peter-molyneux/4096/http://www.giantbomb.com/news/48-hours-later-some-thoughts-on-molyjam/4065/I actually learned a TON behind the creative design of video games and the hardships even a weekend-long game jam can create from that crap. It was AMAZING. And don't act like they don't treat the Wii fair: http://www.giantbomb.com/the-legend-of-zelda-skyward-sword-video-review/17-5280/Right now they're actually harping on the extended lifespan on this console cycle and are looking forward to the Wii U because they're sick of their aging Xboxes and PS3s having constant framerate issues and looking muddy. Surprisingly (for me at least) they have all built (aside from Klepek who is on his way to building) PCs and hooked them up to their TVs because they felt the generation had grown stale. Now, the reason that's surprising was because they were hugely console-focused at the launch of their site, and to an extent still are. But they themselves grow tired of an overlong generation and do what they can to adapt. So I expect a total deluge of Wii U content. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@deathly_hallowsI don't think there's any problem with saying a game is really good. There isn't a problem with being very passionate about how much you've liked it. And I don't have problems with statements like "This game makes this console worth buying" at the start of a gen if the reviewer feels that way. But don't you think saying "This game is so good, the sequels that I know nothing about totally make the next system I know nothing about worth buying?" I don't think the IGN reviewer was paid off, but he certainly is an idiot prone to hyperbole. How could I take anything he says seriously? If someone on a message board had said it, I would probably think "Okay..." and take everything that person says with a saltshaker. But a paid reviewer? Holy cow, man, contain yourself. You'd never find a movie reviewer vouching for a non-existent sequel while gushing about a good movie. Come on. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Also, since it's relevant to the discussion at hand: Giant Bomb Halo 4 review.They seem to think it's a great game, but it emulates the old games a little too much and relies too heavily on already-established crap. Doesn't make it bad, just nowhere near as exciting as it could be. Jeff Gerstmann said:The presentation end of Halo 4 is quite nice. The music is outstanding, breaking away from the franchise's past a bit by updating the sound and getting away from some of the overt monk chanting that one still tends to associate with Halo. It helps make Halo 4 sound like its own thing, and that goes a long way. Visually, Halo 4 has some terrific moments that really stand out, but it also holds up well on the technical end with a good frame rate, great lighting, and, for the most part, sharp texture quality. Again, these things help to make Halo 4 look and feel different from its predecessors, probably more than the gameplay does. No "monitor-melting visuals" here. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@GuillaumeI'm not disagreeing that the review reflects poorly on IGN, but I'm personally not to the point to where I think the whole site is crap and I'm not going to stop reading their reviews, especially their playstation reviews. @StephenI'm not disagreeing with you that the IGN review was fanboyish, all I'm saying is that one poorly written review doesn't mean that the game is bad, and it also doesn't mean that IGN is a worthless site and all gaming journalism and reviews in general are bogus and/or paid advertisements (in response to the OP). Also I respect your right to make up your own opinion about the game, and to disagree with the reviews if it doesn't give you want you want as a Halo fan. I don't even have a 360, I have no skin in the game here, some day I do hope to play these games somehow (I haven't played Reach or ODST either) but as someone who doesn't want to support Microsoft and their unfair pricing practices (Xbox Live) it makes it difficult. @Xbob42I like Jeff Gerstmann's reviews, but for the last two years he's being saying that every console game has bad graphics because he has a high-end gaming PC that he uses to play everything, and that's his standard, the fact that he didn't take a dump on Halo 4's graphics is actually a huge compliment! All the Giant Bomb guys are like that, except Patrick who plays Wii games and crazy shit like Tokyo Jungle that the rest of the crew would never touch with a ten foot pole. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@Xbob42Oh boy. It was the "don't buy it" part that was key. The Wii bit is only important because of the effort level put in to the review. In other words, even though they put no effort in to the review, they feel justified saying it's not worth even considering. I own the game and it IS good. You can tell just from the video it's not some cheap cash-in like the dozens of fighting games in the DB(Z) franchise. which is exactly why they should have been more harsh on the Kinect game... if all things were equal. Now, I'm not trying to boil an entire website down in to a comparison of two videos. I was presenting one piece of strictly anecdotal evidence. However, the point I was making in my previous post was that if YOU wanted to compare those two videos, it was not leading to a favorable conclusion.... nothing more, nothing less. Jeff G. on Bonus Round, however? Yikes. Also, I know people love the "can't deal with differing opinions" argument. However, I run a forum whose original slogan (that I coined) was "it's not about agreeing all the time, it's about understanding that opinions can differ." ( upper left image) Soooo, let's shelve that one, shall we? Lastly, I try to avoid discussions with folks who can't muster the respect or self-control to avoid calling the thoughts of others "fucking retarted." We can avoid the ad homonym going forward, right? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
∧ |
Forum main |
|
|