Published on 1st December 2008 by
Originally Posted by GamingHoboAs a footnote, I find the accusation somewhat amusing since I'm sure other people have said the exact opposite about games journalists, that they're too quick to gush about supposedly innovative titles at the loss of perspective.
Originally Posted by Bluephoenixwhich ones got the 10s again joe?
might be worth looking at those again for the holidays
Originally Posted by BauulIIRC: Half Life 2: Episode 2, Bioshock and Braid.
Originally Posted by CardJoeOh, Left4Dead - if only I hadn't been on holiday when you were released! :'(
Originally Posted by ArticleKeith points to the IGN review
Originally Posted by ArticleNobody would mind the shaky camera and so forth
For me, this raises a couple of important issues and Im going to go out on a limb and say first that the comparison is flawed because films are intrinsically more shallow than games. There are some truly deep and re-watchable movies for sure, but for audience involvement and commitment its hard to beat a good computer game.
Do games critics need to understand how important innovation is?
Originally Posted by kt3946Joe you highlight some points, but do you really answer the question? Just because a reviewer nit-picked certain aspects of the game, doesn't mean that it wasn't 'innovative', or that it should be highlighted just because it was different... The fact of the matter is, this is entertainment. ***Was the game 'fun' or not?***
Originally Posted by BauulQuote:Originally Posted by CardJoeOh, Left4Dead - if only I hadn't been on holiday when you were released! :'(
You turned your back on the zombies...
And they only got a nine!
We henceforth ban you from ever going on holiday ever again. Ever again.
Originally Posted by Kúsař
Joe, were you thinking about changing the way you rate games at BT? I mean - like when Baz reviews PC cases - Features, Build Quality, Performance....etc.
You can rate technical aspect of the game(stability, graphic & sound engine, in-game bugs), game artwork(textures, sounds, music), gameplay experience(if it's based on story like your favourite adventures or replay_ability like Diablo2 or fantastic multiplayer like L4D, generaly how much did you enjoy playing that game, in-game bugs...)
There are games which can't be rated with just one number, like - Stalker: Clear Sky. In review you said that intensive gaming experience was mixed up with terrible technical issues. You could rate these separately - while technical issues can be solved by patches, gaming experience usualy cannot. At least BT readers would know that they might try checking later to see if problems were fixed. Stalker: CS might be completely different experience by now.
Originally Posted by CardJoeNo, we're not changing our scoring method. If I had my way then there wouldn't be any score anyway. The review should stand on it's own, not require a score to sum it up which only distracts readers.
Originally Posted by CardJoe
No, we're not changing our scoring method. If I had my way then there wouldn't be any score anyway. The review should stand on it's own, not require a score to sum it up which only distracts readers.
Originally Posted by StephenKY'know, that would be a really interesting thing to try. See what people make of a review when they can't just skip to the end and have to actually read the thing :)
You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.
© Copyright Dennis Publishing Limited. Under licence from Felix Dennis.