When a Mostly Positive Review Becomes "Controversial"

Reminds me of what happened to the norwegian gamesite Gamer.no. Uncharted 2 got an 8/10 (wich is a good score, they are known to use the whole scale) but since everyone else gave it a 10 some readers got furious. We are talking bat shit crazy-furious.

If the past 2 were any indication, Uncharted 3 is more of an 8. The graphics easily equal a 9 or 10, but...the sound design and gameplay itself. I mean, every single moment has to feel like a die hard 'jumping off the nakatomi plaza' moment. EVERYTHING has to be so stupid, and in an over the top manner that just doesn't feel right. You still can't crouch when your in cover, its whatever the game wants you to be in whatever position. I'll eventually play through uncharted 3, especially if it comes to redbox, which most sony exclusives do. I just don't feel like its worth 60 bones. Its missing that spark that gears of war, metal gear solid, or even the socom series used to have.

After reading Simon Parkin's review, I find he is well within his right to criticize the "shallowness of the player freedom and giving people a chance to misstep key jumps in specific sequences", but I personally would not use this to degrade the overall review.

The Uncharted series, and many other modern video games, have moved away from the action happening via cutscenes to player controlled elements. Most series, even Uncharted, use quick time events to engage the player with the action, but it is outside the QTE's that really engage a player. For example, in Dead Space 2, when you and that huge monster fly out of the window and go into space, it is up to you during that entire segment to make the shots and save your life. Sure, it would have worked with a cutscene, but those segments made it all the more memorable and jaw-dropping for me, the player.

Keeping in Uncharted's mostly linear fashion, it does a good job at keeping you on track, as stated in Brad's review, and that is what the series is known for, one roller coaster thrill to the next. I would say if you wanted freedom, try out Fallout or many other Open World games.

A very good review on Parkin's behalf, but I am fully on board for more of the Uncharted experience to grab me by the hand and never let go.

@Napalm said:

@Winsord said:

I didn't take issue with Uncharted 3 not getting a perfect score or a 9/10, or whatever. 8/10 is still a great score, and that's perfectly fine. What I took issue with was his actual complaints; his reasoning for why he disliked it.

"As an expression of all that a video game could be, however, Uncharted 3 is narrow, focused and ultimately shallow. It is a majestic tribute to cinema, a movie game in the literal sense, and your enjoyment will be in precise step with your appreciation of that objective"

This just feels like a really weak knock to make against a game; "If you don't like what the game is trying to do, then you won't like this game".

A weak argument? Have you actually read that quote? He's basically saying the game is cinematic, but it is mechanically shallow and therefore, unfulfilling, in his opinion, (because people seem to forget this part). Seriously, that's one of the greatest review-specific quotes I've ever read. Absolutely true and in the end, it leaves the judgement ultimately to the reader if they'll enjoy that type of game.

How are you guys honestly not getting this?

Thank you for saving me the time of writing the very same thoughts down. I approve of this message.

Also, great job, Patrick. Love this type of content.

Jeff Gerstmann only gave Zelda 8.8!? RAGEEEEE!!!

I have to give it to you Patrick a very well written article, I like the air of debate you give to this topic. For the most part i agree with you but i don't know if i agree about that being the place for a review. Granted a lot of people will look at the score and flip but I'm fine with the score, his written review is worse in my opinion. I just don't think it is the place for a review to judge a game that way. I feel that it gives an unfair standard that other games are not being judged on. Also talking about design choices that work but the trick behind them may come to light upon farther plays or closer looks don't seem like fair negative points to state in a review.

I know its hard to hit that balance sometimes in a review with getting all your points across without sounding overly negative on a good game or blindly glowing on a great game. I understand everyone is human and sometimes you can't help when that balance gets broken and all you can do is at the end of the day feel like you did your readers justice. I just felt that as a review it was not very informative and more of a personal gaming critique on the game which is fine but not in a review. Do i different article or contrarian corner of some kind and i would be fine with that. It's not the place of a review to do that unless it is across the broad of all games being reviewed.

I'm not in favor of some of these comments saying that everything having to do with the linearity should essentially be given a pass because "it was made that way" or "that's the kind of game it is."

We don't see these comments in the movie industry. I'm sure the people reviewed Cannibal Holocaust knew what they were getting into just by the title, but they were still completely in their right to criticize the film's brutality.

Nice article, Mr. Klepek.

This is a really nice article, especially since I've been trying to decide what I want out of a review for years and still haven't come to a conclusion. It's funny because while reading, even though I totally accept and probably would agree with the criticism, my head still went "only an 8? huh.." - quite possibly because I'm really excited for the game since I loved the previous one so much.

On a side note, I think one of the weird problems is that many outlets have different viewpoints in reviews as well, which leads to readers expecting different things when they read a review somewhere else.

I can't believe that anybody would actually even need to read a review for Uncharted 3. Not because it was automatically going to be a great game, just because the types of gamers who are reading reviews on game sites probably already know what to expect from a game like Uncharted 3. It's sad that grown-assed people lose their shit over some dude they don't know giving their upcoming toy a "mediocre" 8/10.

Ha, I just learned about confirmation bias in my News Literacy course.

Now that was a well constructed, impressively written article. Well done.

Another good example is Arthur Giese over at Joystiqs review of Battlefeild 3 for the PC.

I never have understood why people get so angry at reviews than I read that people who read video game reviews see it more as purchasing affirmation than a actual critique or buyers guide.

I question the timing. Uncharted 3 is literally not out yet [in my region]. Even with UC3 most likely being very similar to UC2, it's very hard to know what to do with a critique for a game you can't play however much you'd want to. How about waiting a month so that at the very least the people who'd be interested in such an article (it it were 'just a review' we wouldn't have this discussion) would have a chance to play through the game?
 
More hits this way, I get it. Just so tired of having to be the cynic.

I really enjoyed reading that review. It is interesting to see different takes on games. I can totally see his point of view, and not just in uncharted, but in other games too. Thanks for this Klepek

Patrick : With this article, do you not feel that those who will really read it are largely those who'd agree with it?

I know I do.

@Still_I_Cry said:

Ha, I just learned about confirmation bias in my News Literacy course.

just as a curiosity but do you go to Stony Brook? News literacy is really big here

I think everybody is missing the point behind this 'outrage' and 'controversy' why would anybody assume the readers of reviews have sense? What ever would make you think that would be valid? You Have shit like transformers selling billions in tickets and then you get shocked when the masses are mostly at their basest functions?

I say reviews should be buy or don't buy. If somebody has the balls to do that they can avoid most of this craziness.

Scores are a wonky thing, enjoyment is not easily quantifiable by a person. People are very poor at doing such things. It's also why people tend to look back at things and see them wrong.

Keep up these articles I'd like to see more article that invoke thought and communication from the industry and consumers. I think the gaming press can do that role and that is what it should be used for.

Me, I don't care for scores I am not a lesser man. :E

people who get all riled up over a review have a tenuous grasp on reality, and like most people who seem like they might start rolling around in their own shit any second, i find it best to ignore them

While I understand where Patrick is coming from in this article I think he has picked a poor review and site to choose for it. The negative comments on the Eurogamer site were basically in 3 categories:-

1) How is Uncharted 3 an 8 out of 10 if Uncharted 2, which was praised for exactly the same things that 3 has been slightly criticised for, was given a 10 out of 10 on the exact same site?

2) Why does this get 8 out of 10 and Battlefield 3 9 out of 10 when Battlefield's single player was criticised strongly in the review? Could it be something to do with the obscene amount of Battlefield advertising that is on the site?

3) Why does Eurogamer give the game 8 out of 10 when everywhere else is giving it 9s & 10s (this is something that Eurogamer has done a lot).

Eurogamer has a site in general gone down hill and there is a running joke on the forums that games only get given scores of 8 or 4 unless they are frankly pretentious. Look at their recent reviews of GoW3 and Gunstringer as well as their very unprofessional review of Bodycount.

I totally agree that a lot of comments are fanboys getting upset that a reviewer didn't rave about the game in the way they expected but I think, in this case, the questioning is justifiable.

whatevs. cod is totes gunna mess up battlefail 3.

For mine, his main criticism of the game was that it 'keeps you on a set path and isn't that engaging' - most people complaining about the review seem to think that he wrote 'it's too similair to the other uncharted games'.

I think a bunch of commenters didn't read his review and just assumed his critique was due to a common complaint of sequels.

@Ares42 said:

@HellBrendy said:

Reminds me of what happened to the norwegian gamesite Gamer.no. Uncharted 2 got an 8/10 (wich is a good score, they are known to use the whole scale) but since everyone else gave it a 10 some readers got furious. We are talking bat shit crazy-furious.

Well, that was the same exact situation. The reviewer was criticizing the game for not being what he wanted it to be. He even started his review with a whole "I wanted male Tomb Raider, but what I got was Gears of War with climbing" argument. It's just not a good way to review games. I get it that it's their experience and I don't doubt for a second that they are earnest, but for a reader it's very uninformative. All you get out of it is "I wanted to buy a couch, but what I got was a chair", as a reader you're just left with the question "well, was the chair any good?".

If that was the problem with Gamer.no's review, I wouldn' say it's the exact same situation here. The point I feel Parkin is trying to convey is that Uncharted 3 first and foremost tries to be a movie, and is an exciting attempt at that, but that it fails to take advantage of the possibilities inherent in video games, which unlike movies are interactive. Instead of having the game react to the player's input, which must not necessarily mean non-linearity, it pushes the player along to experience the masterfully directed cinematic story.

When will people learn that a review is not about the score, likely preaching to the choir on this site. If you're using review scores to determine what to buy and not to buy then you're doing it wrong. As for the backlash for not giving the game a 9 or 10, I just say fuck the fanboys.

Great read, thanks Patrick.

@patrickklepek I saw this mentioned on your twitter. Very interesting website, I really enjoyed that review. I seldom see such artful use of language on gaming websites-or even tech ones. I don't have feelings for Uncharted one way or the other, but I do appreciate a good read.

Segueing from there, I appreciate most of your articles, Mr. Klepek. I love hearing about the creation of small time games, the difficulties regarding Metacritic and even elements such as this article, as it points me to another website or three I might enjoy. Since you joined I've enjoyed your articles more than a lot of the other content on GB, possibly because it's divergent views or themes. I guess that last bit makes sense, though, as the dedicated news worker. Before, I imagine they threw up news whenever able amidst their other tasks.

Thanks, and remember your spell check!

This is one of the reasons I like Jim Sterling's reviews. He may have some out there opinion on some games but in the end they are his opinions and that is what a review is. With his most infamous reviews(Assassins Creed ect) he brings up good points and criticism of the games. I may not agree with his opinion of the game but everyone is different. I can't stand this mentality of objectivity in reviews because there can really never be an objective review.

This is one of your best written articles yet, Patrick. And nary a mistake to be found!

@tater3698 said:

i find fanboyism to hurt judging a review. i looked at ign's review of uncharted 3 and greg miller gave it a perfect 10. from their podcast, i know hes an avid fan of the series and i find it hard to take that perfect score seriously with someone who is so vocal about loving that series and someone who has such a love for everything playstation and such distain for every other console that doesnt have the sony trademark on it. good job giant bomb for keeping all your reviews grounded and reliable

i don't know if that is really true and kind of goes with the topic at hand of confirmation bias. I feel both extremes are bad one way or the other and granted greg miller may have been overly growing but he could have easily given uncharted 2 a ten and a few other sites have given uncharted 3 a 10 so it does not seem to far out there. I won't debate on you tastes in reviews but everyone is a fan of something and it does not always mean the review will be unfair. To your point Jeff is a fanboy of mortal kombat so should i worry of him giving every mortal kombat game 5 stars?

@NipCrip66:

All of their points can be answered with "A different person with different standards and tastes reviewed Uncharted 3."

I would love to see more articles where journalists are able to call out internet/forum bullshit. Left unaccounted, this type of behaviour grows. Establishing a relationship where audience and writer understand each others intentions prevents people claiming things like writers are in the pockets of publishers, or articles are badly written for numerous reasons.

I refuse to respond to these posts, but leaving this behaviour untouched means idiots get away with idiotic actions and influence people.

Well written, interesting article. Thanks.

I agree with the sentiment of the reviewer, if not his actual "number" score. I get the limitations of something as hard scripted as Uncharted, but I've never had it break bad for me. Plus, the character, writing and voice work in the game is so superior to most everything else, creating actual likable characters, that I feel willing to let something like linearity pass.

Terrific article Patrick.

Another reviewer I would like to bring up is Tom Chick, who has earned some notoriety for giving reviews that don't line up with what others have done, Deus Ex and Starcraft 2 being the most notable. I respect his reviews on games, because he will break down what draws him into or distances him from a game he has played. He also reviews games from the viewpoint of judging the game itself and not so much he liked it. As a reviewer that also uses the full scale and doesn't rate games in the 7-10 bracket so often seen on other websites where scores all feel similar, he stands out.

My feelings about a game don't often match up with his, but he brings to attention things I might not consider about a game and gives me more information I would like about it.

You're mention of confirmation bias is spot on. I also think it's pretty important that we as consumers don't buy into the idea that these game companies represent us in any way. That someone who reviews or scores something we enjoyed or value, doesn't reflect on us at all, but that's something you learn over time.

At least it seems people are upset with what was actually written in the review, meaning they bothered to read it and didn't just get angry about an 8.

Pat doing his job.

And I think it is only a few reviewers get away being provocative for it's own sake. PPl. are still aware of them, and at least take it into account. Now many. like to use the word entitled. I'm deathly ill of that word myself, but that is how I would describe the mass mind of the Internet once it gets rolling. Don't like a review about your favorite anticipated games, feel free to accuse the reviewer of humping male donkeys, everyone else is saying something like that. . I'll never forget the 8.5 score for a Zelda game by Jeff on GS and the uproar it caused. It birthed a prejudice of my own about some games and the ppl. who play them, which is I know uncool...and more to the point, Uncharted 3 is definitely not one of them. So it doesn't change anything I see.

It's a damned shame these hues and outcries happen. Yes, they can be stoked by a developer or such. And with some developers or rather professionals working for them being held to some 9.0 Metacritic set point for bonuses, maybe even existence, you can see a struggle to even survive, and of course, sales. But in my mind in the end, it is how ppl. act, and how susceptible they are to what I would really call mob behavior, or at least having their prejudices supported though not necessarily proven. I'm afraid the net is a hard-core enabler of how poorly ppl. can act, especially when there is little accountacy. And it depresses me because it denies the salute and respect a reviewer, or anybody really, deserves for being honest and holding themselves to said accountancy.

Sucks.

Kill Screen is indeed fantastic. 
 
I also enjoy the WIT format used by rockpapershotgun. On a related note, the Battlefield 3 playthrough blog thingy currently up on RPS is great.

@ShadowConqueror said:

Jeff Gerstmann only gave Zelda 8.8!? RAGEEEEE!!!

Oh man, I remember that. I've never have seen so much rage towards a review like that one time. The days following that review were insane.

@patrickklepek said:

@OracleXIII said:

you're really trying to be this oh so professional, so pc, so down with the intellectual shit.. mr. big man journalist. but these, these are just ruining the quality of this once fine website.

I'm happy to hear how any of these additions to Giant Bomb are impacting the overall quality of the website, and I'm not being sarcastic whatsoever. If you have an actual grievance, feel fee to PM me with details. No one is forcing you to read every article on this website, and part of what I'm trying to do is expand the editorial coverage of the site overall.

Don't let him get to you Patrick. He's just jealous and mad because he wishes he had your awesome job. Keep these articles coming.

There is a way to combat it. Just keep doing what you're doing. The smarter audience will understand the review and dumber one's will just visit to bash the review. Either way you still get clicks.

The hobby of gaming has more drama than a random episode of General Hospital.

Seriously, it's better than WWE Attitude-era stuff sometimes. And you know what?

I eat it all up and ask for more. :)

But Kudos, Patrick.I admire you for trying to bring rational points and reasoned perspective into the spotlight. Almost a novelty nowdays.

Why should anyone be surprised that there is one? Every release with a high review score no matter what will automatically get a post here or somewhere proclaiming, "I don't get it?", or the popular, "Anyone else disappointed?". I always say if you think you can do better......

My opinion on reviewers i don't read, i don't care.

Good Article, thanks for this, people need to relax, these are games we are talking about.

Klepek keep up the great work.

Great writeup Patrick.

@Berserker976 said:

I think something that many people overlook when talking about this subject is that it involves people's tastes. I can't speak for anyone else, but my tastes are very personal things to me. So when you see something that questions, challenges, or seemingly belittles your taste, however justified, it is seen as a personal attack.

And that is the problem. You are entitled to you opinion and tastes, but since nothing is absolute, they are different to everybody else's opinions and tastes, so they are going to be challenged. Its the natural order, and if done properly, it should be taken as an opportunity to learn.

As far as you and your opinion is not belittled, you could came out of a conversation with your opinion changed or even strengthen. I am not getting personal here, but I think the capacity of having an intelligent conversation, when both sides get to express their position, without insulting or diminishing the other side is one of the most important social skills one can have.

That is the problem with many Internet forums, that people combine the impunity of anonymity with the anal retentiveness of taking any challenge to their mindset as the mental equivalent of someone pissing on their mother's grave...

OT: I believe Parkin has some pretty good points. But I don't think those were big issues in Uncharted 2 and don't expect them to bother me in Uncharted 3. In fact, I think Uncharted 2 scripted nature was less prominent than other games which, in turn, make me judge them with a worst light...

@McGhee_the_Insomniac said:

This really all about tribalism. Putting ourselves in a tribe and defending that tribe is in our genes. Any attack on the tribe becomes a personal attack. So when a fanboy sees what he perceives to be an attack he can't help but return it with more ferocity.

Why do you think sports are so popular?

You are right that 'tribes' are part of what is happening. It's pretty interesting when you step back and look out how people choose to define themselves at economic levels. When all you can afford to splurge on is food, groups define themselves in that realm with soda/beer. Once a group can waste money on clothes, then different clothing brands will be used to define them in that economic level and out 'class' those below them. Continue upwards with computers, games, cars, homes, etc.

I didn't read the review Patrick is talking about but I did read G4's review by A. Sessler in which he gave Unch 3 a 4/5. In all honesty I don't really care that he didn't give it a 5/5 but his complaints were about the "tacked on" multiplayer, and how it "lives in the shadow" of Uncharted 2. I understand that all reviews are individual opinions, but if your opinions tend to be constantly inconsistent then you just come off as a wishy-washy hypocrite.

The small bits of negativity around this game seem to be that the reviewer wanted something different than what the game gave them. If I walked into Thor expecting to see Natalie Portman's boobs, I'd probably be disappointed that all I got was a half naked Chris Hemsworth. Thankfully I went into the review expecting to be entertained, which I was.

@rts375 said:

@patrickklepek said:

@OracleXIII said:

you're really trying to be this oh so professional, so pc, so down with the intellectual shit.. mr. big man journalist. but these, these are just ruining the quality of this once fine website.

I'm happy to hear how any of these additions to Giant Bomb are impacting the overall quality of the website, and I'm not being sarcastic whatsoever. If you have an actual grievance, feel fee to PM me with details. No one is forcing you to read every article on this website, and part of what I'm trying to do is expand the editorial coverage of the site overall.

Don't let him get to you Patrick. He's just jealous and mad because he wishes he had your awesome job. Keep these articles coming.

I give the initial comment 0 stars out of 5. Nice article, Patrick.

While I haven't read the review (and now I'm going to comment on it anyway, how internetty of me), it sounds like an angle that might have been better suited for an article than a review, something without a number on the end of it.

What bothers me is the perception within gaming journalism, that readers want to hear about journalism's place in the gaming industry.

Get over it, people reacted to a number - I don't want to read about why it's futile me posting on this message board. Please focus on pieces of journalism about games. Not journalism, about journalism, about games.

Does Kill Screen use a scoring system? If not, then I am sorry, but don't call it a review. Call it an article, an opinion article, an editorial article, whatever, but don't call it a review.