Something went wrong. Try again later

Giant Bomb News

164 Comments

Worth Reading: 11/09/12

This week, we've got a controversial take on Halo 4, a web browser game that doesn't suck, a fan who's trying to remake Aliens vs. Predator, and your usual assortment of links to fill the weekend.

No Caption Provided

If all goes according to plan, I’ll pull the trigger on ordering parts for my computer over the weekend, and finally put into motion an idea I’ve been kicking around for a couple of years now. It’s been so, so long since I’ve built a PC, though, so I’ve forgotten...everything. I’ve heard your requests, too, and we’ll probably film putting it together and bringing it to life. Nothing can go wrong with that, right?

As mentioned in the last episode of Spookin’ With Scoops, where we played the first hour or so of System Shock 2, that feature will take a rest until the PC comes together, which means it probably won’t come back until after Thanksgiving. Even with a powerful PC, that doesn’t mean we’ll leave behind a return to Lone Survivor, System Shock 2, or even Friday the 13th and Clock Tower for SNES. It will, however, mean closing out episodes with Slender won’t look like a total trainwreck.

A few weeks away from horror will do my heart some good, too. You can only take so much.

Hey, You Should Play This

No Caption Provided

It’s early days for browser games, but Save the Day, a fast-paced action game in which players fly a helicopter and save people from imminent disaster, make a solid case for what’s possible when competent developers are in the drivers seat. It doesn’t have to be all exploitative free-to-play games that are more about wasting time than they are about learning and enjoying game mechanics. Let’s also remember Supergiant Games managed to port Bastion to Chrome’s app store on HTML5. It’ll be some time before we’re seeing a game like Bastion made from the ground up for a browser, but the potential audience is enormous, and it’s only a matter of time before someone makes a killing.

There are also two other games I’m going to link to below, and I’ll say nothing more about them.

And You Should Read These, Too

No Caption Provided

What do you want from your reviews? Do you want someone to reaffirm your preconceived notions about a game, or do you want to be challenged, and look at a game in a new light? Tom Chick’s review of Halo 4 would probably do a better job of accomplishing the latter if a score wasn’t attached, but the score is what made his review a lightning rod. Chick is used to being the industry’s punching bag, and publishing contradictory opinions is nothing new. I haven’t yet played Halo 4, so I can’t say whether or not I agree with his conclusions about the latest entry, but it’s a well articulated argument, and definitely an outlier from the general consensus. Does that make it wrong? (Hint: no.)

This is Halo 4. A shiny old dog without any new tricks. I got more out of the Halo 1 remake, which at least had the appeal of nostalgia. Playing through an updated version of the original Halo was at times tired or tedious. But it was also a reminder of the raw genius that launched the series. There is none of that in Halo 4, which is a drawn-out retread without any fresh perspective or energy, and furthermore missing a lot of what I need to pull me through a Halo game. Halo 4 demonstrates that if there’s one thing worse than more of the same, it’s less of the same.
No Caption Provided

Games have trouble keeping secrets these days, and whatever you think of Assassin’s Creed III, it’s admirable the company was able to keep a lid on a particularly cool twist that comes early in the game. If you haven’t played Assassin’s Creed III, you should not click this link, but if you have, Ars Technica has talked to Ubisoft about the process of keeping a secret over a three-year development cycle and huge amounts of marketing. Not easy!

May says he didn't even discuss the big reveal with his closest friends or family—he just "couldn't take the risk." While he could talk about [CENSORED] with other members of the development team, that didn't really relieve the stress. "All we would end up doing was riling ourselves up. We were on thisthing, and we were all having the same fears and anxious nervous anticipation. That didn't make it any easier."

If You Click It, It Will Play

I Don’t Know About This Kickstarter Thing, But These Projects Seem Pretty Cool

  • Elite is the latest classic trying to come back. Would be nice if they showed, uh, anything about it.
  • We need more physical spaces to show off video games. L.A. Game Space could be terrific.
  • Wait, is Distance a spiritual successor to San Francisco Rush?

The Latest Assassin's Creed is Out, And There Are Mixed Opinions

Valve Just Launched Greenlight, So Here’s Some Games That Don’t Look Terrible

  • Dark Rain looks awfully early, but an open world horror game with a day/night cycle? Yes.
  • Draw a Stickman has players getting involved by actually drawing objects into the world.
  • Sapience is a modern attempt to create a DOOM-style sci-fi RPG. Those are golden words.

Oh, And This Other Stuff

Patrick Klepek on Google+

164 Comments

Avatar image for pinmonkey
Pinmonkey

73

Forum Posts

132

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 12

Edited By Pinmonkey

Man those Kotaku comments on that Assasin's Creed 3 thing are the friggin' nadir of intelligence. "IF YOU JUMPED FROM THE VIEWPOINT AND MISSED THE HAY YOU JUST SUCK AT THE GAME!" No that means the game sucks, cause that should never happen. Thank you for existing, Giant Bomb and It's not dumb users.

Avatar image for satelliteoflove
SatelliteOfLove

1379

Forum Posts

2315

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 8

Edited By SatelliteOfLove

@Alorithin said:

Hating Tom Chick is nothing new. Glad to see more people join me.

"Tom Chick: When You Want Jeremy Parish But Not the Editor"

Avatar image for alorithin
Alorithin

143

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Alorithin

Hating Tom Chick is nothing new. Glad to see more people join me.

Avatar image for havokcxvii
HavokCXVII

20

Forum Posts

25

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 3

Edited By HavokCXVII

So uh, that review contains pretty big spoilers. Might want to put a warning to that effect for people who don't want huge plot events alluded to (spelled out, really) in a review. That's actually the only problem I have with the review as a pretty big Halo fan, that someone would have so little courtesy as to spoil major events from all over the game like that without a warning.

Avatar image for honkyjesus
honkyjesus

140

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

Edited By honkyjesus

Gaming media needs people like Tom Chick. We don't need clones like Stephen Totilo from Kotaku who are part of the problem talking about the problem

I am responsible for about fifty of the comments on the Halo 4 review page at Quarter To Three whatnot. It is mainly some butthurt fanboys and Microsoft Defense Force.

Eurogamer is apparently changing their policy on having reviews done at publisher's events, at times with unfinished games before them. A step in the right direction.

Avatar image for dystopiax
DystopiaX

5776

Forum Posts

416

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

Edited By DystopiaX

@Clonedzero said:

what kind of journalist or reviewer gives an extremely low score to a game simply because it didnt revolutionize the genre? the fuck kinda logic is that?

halo 4 is a sequel. its SUPPOSED to be like the earlier ones....thats what sequels are. "i liked that, i'd like more please".

giving a game a bad score because you think its BAD is fine. giving it a bad score cus it didnt redefine the genre or abandon its roots is insane.

ah well whatever, if the guy wants to troll to get page views, so be it. i just dont care about his opinion and will be sure not to take him seriously ever.

He didn't say it was more of the same, he said it was worse (Spartan Ops sucks, no firefight, anecdotes about how the story was terrible).

@Beb said:

@Zekhariah said:

Tom Chick's reviews are interesting. They are pure opinion (which might be the case for other sites), but Tom reviews games that he usually hates. It seems a bit odd, but Tom will write a review for pretty much every major release without any regard disliking that type of game in general.

Which is a bit like a movie review thing. Although I kind of think that sort of thing is pointlesss - maybe it brings in another viewpoint. But if you already hate Halo I'm not sure you need a review written by someone who also hates the series to decide if you want to purchase it.

Just read the Halo 4 review in question, and it seemed to me like he was saying that he actually liked Reach and ODST, but hates Halo 4.

His score does seem a bit unfair. In a 5 star system, I think he probably should have given it a 2/5, meaning he didn't like it, but that it works.

Of course, reviews are subjective, so if he thinks the game is an abomination that should not be played by anyone then I guess 1/5 was the right call. The problem with his apparent review approach is that it doesn't consider how anyone else might approach the game, which makes his reviews sort of useless when trying to decide if you want to buy a game or not, unless you are his clone.

I think it would have been more interesting if it were a longer, more thoughtful deconstruction of the game. There are a few interesting points and at least one bad one (rampancy), but as it stands it is too easy to write off as flame-bait.

In the link to the bottom of his FAQ he explained that he doesn't believe games should get above a 1/5 (his lowest score) just because they work- basically games don't get praise for not being broken. Therefore 1/5 is for games that are broken or games that he didn't like at all. I don't necessarily agree that the game is terrible but hey, it's his opinion.

@fmprodguy said:

How could you fall for leading more hits to an internet Troll?!

Hate, Love, or indifferent to the Halo franchise, or Halo 4, he gave it a 20... yes 20 out of 100.

Carnival Games, Fn Carnival Games didn't get a lower score FROM anyone than a 49!!!!

Naughty Bears, a semi broken game didn't get lower than a 43!

Plus it's not a well articulated point, his complaints would fairly apply to all Call of Duties since 4, Gears of War, New Super Mario, Mario, Zelda (well a little bit at least), and God of War. Oh Nos, they didn't reinvent the wheel when changing developers... and it still feels like the game who's name is on the box... I'll give it a 20!

The only reason to score a Tripple A game, for being like the game it is a sequel to, and that IS NOT broken, below the score of broken games and far far below the average is to get attention, hits, and start a flame war with the only goal to get more attention or hits to your site.

I own and love all three consoles, this is not about Halo, xbox360, PS3, Wii, fanboy-ism.... It's about calling out BS

Bummed you fell for the BS Patrick.

Only if you read the way he scores reviews games don't get passes for being just not broken, and he doesn't believe in inflating scores so that "bad" or "average" is just a 6 or 7 out of 10 like IGN does.

@Kerned said:

Hey everyone: read reviews, ignore the scores. It works every time.

It's funny that the community on this site listens to the editorial staff and takes many of their opinions as gospel, including that of "scores shouldn't matter", and parrot that proudly as they read review after review with a score they agree with, then find something like this and immediately go "THIS REVIEW SUCKS IT DIDN'T AGREE WITH ME THE SCORE WAS TOO LOW'.

Avatar image for dystopiax
DystopiaX

5776

Forum Posts

416

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

Edited By DystopiaX

@Giantstalker said:

What a piece of shit review by that Chick fellow. And he has the audacity to give it some kind of objective veneer, pathetic.

The real problem with games journalism is apparently gross incompetence. Dunno why it made it to Worth Reading, this site is light years above that tripe.

Basically you're saying "that review sucks because I disagree with it".

Interesting.

Avatar image for kerned
Kerned

1246

Forum Posts

2517

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

Edited By Kerned

Hey everyone: read reviews, ignore the scores. It works every time.

Avatar image for whitestripes09
Whitestripes09

985

Forum Posts

35

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

Edited By Whitestripes09

I really hate the argument that if a game sequel has no changes in it, it's automatically labeled as bad. People who watch movies hate it when a series goes in another direction and that's how I feel with games as well. How would people react if all of a sudden Gears of War was a first person shooter with the locust as the main protagonist People would go crazy saying that's not the way the game is supposed to be played. What kind of changes do people want in a Halo game that's not already changed? <.<

Avatar image for palaeomerus
Palaeomerus

379

Forum Posts

42

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 8

Edited By Palaeomerus

Tom Chick is not challenging to read nor does he make me think. He's merely a snarky empty contrarian with an old schtick. I take him and his antics about as seriously as I would something Andy Dick would do drunk.

Avatar image for dystopiax
DystopiaX

5776

Forum Posts

416

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

Edited By DystopiaX

@murisan said:

The content of QTR's review was fine, but do you really think the game deserves a 1/5, a 20/100, etc. from anyone? Wouldn't a one of five basically mean the game is broken and unplayable? Furthermore, QTR is on metacritic, and whatever anyone's stance is on the site, there's a precedent for docking developer bonuses if the aggregate score is below a certain level. I think this is a serious issue, and I think that that slapping a completely serviceable game with a 20% score that's aggregated on the site is just a dick move. I doubt Microsoft will have any issues with 343i since the game is selling like hotcakes, but I think Mr. Chick was being a bit of a dick with the numerical score. His written arguments hold water, but that score is silly.

A one out of five means whatever the reviewer says it means. If you read the dude's site he explains his ratings system in full. While IGN/Gamespot etc may consider a 1 (or 0, since he points out a 1 star is a lowest his rating goes) to be a broken game, he obviously just considers it to be one of no merit. That's why I don't get people complaining "HE RATED IT WRONG" when it's his own damn system.

In the Reviews FAQ he linked he points out that he's surprised Metacritic uses him too, but that's an issue separate from his review. When reviewing something you shouldn't think "oh these dudes aren't gonna get bonuses so I'll give this game a rating I don't think it deserves", it does the readers of the review and your scoring system a disservice. People would trust you less. That's why people make fun of IGN reviews, because they recognize that all their scores are extremely overinflated.

Plus H4 still has like a 90 on metacritic so I doubt that his review hurt them much.

Avatar image for dystopiax
DystopiaX

5776

Forum Posts

416

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

Edited By DystopiaX

@Fobwashed said:

I found that guy's 1 star Halo review due to a tweet by

"BenKucheraHalo 4 had a 90 on Metacritic the last time I checked. Then an outlet gave it a 20 percent score. Now it's at an 88. Seems legit, all around"

I found the site, deemed it not worth my time and just left assuming the guy/site was just doing it for clicks.

After Mr. K put it up here, I went ahead and read the review and while the guy makes some good points, giving the game a 1/5 still seems crazy. I read his link on how he reviews games which sort of explains that his reviews aren't objective and are just his opinion. All I have to say is that anyone that would give Halo 4 a 1/5 is not someone who's reviews I would take seriously.

He mentions that he doesn't use the 100 point scale because to most, 70% is average. On a 5 point scale, 2.5 being average, he is stating that Halo 4 is all the way on the lower end. Well below average. If you can play a game like Halo 4, and deem it that far below average and actually just plop it down in the shitty game category, something is very wrong.

Patrick is right in saying that his opinion isn't wrong because opinions on how much someone likes something can't be wrong. BUT! I can say that his opinion is so far from mine that it seems stupid to me. My opinion is that this guy can write and make valid points but he has no idea how to use his own 5 point scale. Basically, I won't be returning to that site.

Also, he mentions that he gave Journey a 2/5. That alone would have me steer clear of his opinions on games. Journey was fucking awesome.

So ignore the dumb number at the bottom of the review. That's why Jeff stated that he hates rating systems, and this guy does too. I thought he raised valid points about Halo 4, and most of the people who don't like his review hate it because "other people said it was good and I disagree with him"- much like you did with your little Journey comment at the end there.

The dude said he gave it a 1 star because it did nothing well and took out some game modes he liked. Sounds like a 1 to me.

Avatar image for zoozilla
zoozilla

1025

Forum Posts

25

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 4

Edited By zoozilla

Christ, that weird Japanese point-and-click web game may be the most disturbing thing I've witnessed all week.

Seriously, it freaked me out.

Avatar image for fobwashed
fobwashed

2818

Forum Posts

388

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 15

User Lists: 16

Edited By fobwashed

I found that guy's 1 star Halo review due to a tweet by

"BenKucheraHalo 4 had a 90 on Metacritic the last time I checked. Then an outlet gave it a 20 percent score. Now it's at an 88. Seems legit, all around"

I found the site, deemed it not worth my time and just left assuming the guy/site was just doing it for clicks.

After Mr. K put it up here, I went ahead and read the review and while the guy makes some good points, giving the game a 1/5 still seems crazy. I read his link on how he reviews games which sort of explains that his reviews aren't objective and are just his opinion. All I have to say is that anyone that would give Halo 4 a 1/5 is not someone who's reviews I would take seriously.

He mentions that he doesn't use the 100 point scale because to most, 70% is average. On a 5 point scale, 2.5 being average, he is stating that Halo 4 is all the way on the lower end. Well below average. If you can play a game like Halo 4, and deem it that far below average and actually just plop it down in the shitty game category, something is very wrong.

Patrick is right in saying that his opinion isn't wrong because opinions on how much someone likes something can't be wrong. BUT! I can say that his opinion is so far from mine that it seems stupid to me. My opinion is that this guy can write and make valid points but he has no idea how to use his own 5 point scale. Basically, I won't be returning to that site.

Also, he mentions that he gave Journey a 2/5. That alone would have me steer clear of his opinions on games. Journey was fucking awesome.

Avatar image for spicy_jasonator
spicy_jasonator

152

Forum Posts

35

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

Edited By spicy_jasonator

@fmprodguy said:

How could you fall for leading more hits to an internet Troll?!

Hate, Love, or indifferent to the Halo franchise, or Halo 4, he gave it a 20... yes 20 out of 100.

Carnival Games, Fn Carnival Games didn't get a lower score FROM anyone than a 49!!!!

Naughty Bears, a semi broken game didn't get lower than a 43!

Plus it's not a well articulated point, his complaints would fairly apply to all Call of Duties since 4, Gears of War, New Super Mario, Mario, Zelda (well a little bit at least), and God of War. Oh Nos, they didn't reinvent the wheel when changing developers... and it still feels like the game who's name is on the box... I'll give it a 20!

The only reason to score a Tripple A game, for being like the game it is a sequel to, and that IS NOT broken, below the score of broken games and far far below the average is to get attention, hits, and start a flame war with the only goal to get more attention or hits to your site.

I own and love all three consoles, this is not about Halo, xbox360, PS3, Wii, fanboy-ism.... It's about calling out BS

Bummed you fell for the BS Patrick.

Or maybe he's just using a 100 point rating system in a way that makes some amount of sense. What purpose is there to having a range of 100 points if even universally reviled games like Carnival Games and Naughty Bears get scores in the 40s. What does being AAA matter if you don't like the game?

You wouldn't expect a movie to get a decent rating just because it was big-budget, and I see no reason that should be true about video games either.

Avatar image for beb
Beb

298

Forum Posts

445

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

Edited By Beb

@Zekhariah said:

Tom Chick's reviews are interesting. They are pure opinion (which might be the case for other sites), but Tom reviews games that he usually hates. It seems a bit odd, but Tom will write a review for pretty much every major release without any regard disliking that type of game in general.

Which is a bit like a movie review thing. Although I kind of think that sort of thing is pointlesss - maybe it brings in another viewpoint. But if you already hate Halo I'm not sure you need a review written by someone who also hates the series to decide if you want to purchase it.

Just read the Halo 4 review in question, and it seemed to me like he was saying that he actually liked Reach and ODST, but hates Halo 4.

His score does seem a bit unfair. In a 5 star system, I think he probably should have given it a 2/5, meaning he didn't like it, but that it works.

Of course, reviews are subjective, so if he thinks the game is an abomination that should not be played by anyone then I guess 1/5 was the right call. The problem with his apparent review approach is that it doesn't consider how anyone else might approach the game, which makes his reviews sort of useless when trying to decide if you want to buy a game or not, unless you are his clone.

I think it would have been more interesting if it were a longer, more thoughtful deconstruction of the game. There are a few interesting points and at least one bad one (rampancy), but as it stands it is too easy to write off as flame-bait.

Avatar image for spike_kojima
Spike_Kojima

59

Forum Posts

14

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Spike_Kojima

Man it genuinely scares me when people get so worked up about other people opinions. I played Halo 4 and enjoyed it well enough . But I totally see where Chick is coming from here .

"That’s apparently a thing. Rampancy. An AI thing. It was better when Shodan and GlaDOS did it. Also, AIs have a lifespan, like replicants. Didn’t you know that? In case you didn’t, Halo 4 is telling you now. By the way, Halo 4 says, AIs have a life span." -Tom Chick

Oh.... Was rampancy never explained in the previous games ? I know what it is because I read Fall of Reach and listened to I luv bees ( and even after that this game assumed i knew stuff that I would never know unless i was chin deep in halo shit ) . But if rampancy was not explained allready in any of the games that's a fucking joke .

I'm a fan of the halo story and the fact that some of the shit Halo 4 breaks out goes right over my head is sad . I have no interest in multiplayer (dont even have live gold) and the campaign is all I'm ever about in the Halo games so the story problems really bum me out .

Avatar image for blazehedgehog
BlazeHedgehog

1286

Forum Posts

16034

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 30

User Lists: 3

Edited By BlazeHedgehog

Oh man Distance is by the Nitronic Rush guys. I AM ALL OVER THAT TEN TIMES OVER

Avatar image for timnoldzim
Timnoldzim

101

Forum Posts

616

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 3

Edited By Timnoldzim

The review is fantastic, but 1 star is too low. I don't know that site, so maybe they give out zeroes, but in most cases, 1 star is reserved for the absolute worst of the worst. The writing of the review sounds like it would fit closer to a 2/5.

Avatar image for fmprodguy
fmprodguy

57

Forum Posts

87

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 3

Edited By fmprodguy

How could you fall for leading more hits to an internet Troll?!

Hate, Love, or indifferent to the Halo franchise, or Halo 4, he gave it a 20... yes 20 out of 100.

Carnival Games, Fn Carnival Games didn't get a lower score FROM anyone than a 49!!!!

Naughty Bears, a semi broken game didn't get lower than a 43!

Plus it's not a well articulated point, his complaints would fairly apply to all Call of Duties since 4, Gears of War, New Super Mario, Mario, Zelda (well a little bit at least), and God of War. Oh Nos, they didn't reinvent the wheel when changing developers... and it still feels like the game who's name is on the box... I'll give it a 20!

The only reason to score a Tripple A game, for being like the game it is a sequel to, and that IS NOT broken, below the score of broken games and far far below the average is to get attention, hits, and start a flame war with the only goal to get more attention or hits to your site.

I own and love all three consoles, this is not about Halo, xbox360, PS3, Wii, fanboy-ism.... It's about calling out BS

Bummed you fell for the BS Patrick.

Avatar image for sooty
Sooty

8193

Forum Posts

306

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 3

Edited By Sooty

What are you talking about? There's a lot of good browser games, Bastion for one.

Avatar image for re_player1
RE_Player1

8074

Forum Posts

1047

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By RE_Player1

@King9999 said:

@Hailinel said:

It's funny how Totilo wrote that in-depth editorial on games journalism when Kotaku, the site he currently runs, is a shit show in terms of overall journalistic standards and integrity and employs some of the absolute worst journalists/columnists whose pieces I have ever had the displeasure of reading.

Agree 100%. It baffles me why any credible news site, developer or publisher even give those clowns the time of day.

Even sites like IGN which spout out garbage "new articles" and top ten lists every other hour are infinitely better than that shit hole Kotaku.

Avatar image for gaspower
GaspoweR

4904

Forum Posts

272

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 2

Edited By GaspoweR

Tom Chick has usually been the outlier and more often than not usually shares the opposite opinion.

Avatar image for zekhariah
Zekhariah

700

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

Edited By Zekhariah

Tom Chick's reviews are interesting. They are pure opinion (which might be the case for other sites), but Tom reviews games that he usually hates. It seems a bit odd, but Tom will write a review for pretty much every major release without any regard disliking that type of game in general.

Which is a bit like a movie review thing. Although I kind of think that sort of thing is pointlesss - maybe it brings in another viewpoint. But if you already hate Halo I'm not sure you need a review written by someone who also hates the series to decide if you want to purchase it.

Avatar image for nawls
Nawls

15

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Nawls

Tom Chick also claimed Deus Ex was "only 90% bad." He's a contrarian, and one I have never found challenging like Patrick hinted. Remember kids, opinions are scary.

Avatar image for clonedzero
Clonedzero

4206

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Clonedzero

what kind of journalist or reviewer gives an extremely low score to a game simply because it didnt revolutionize the genre? the fuck kinda logic is that?

halo 4 is a sequel. its SUPPOSED to be like the earlier ones....thats what sequels are. "i liked that, i'd like more please".

giving a game a bad score because you think its BAD is fine. giving it a bad score cus it didnt redefine the genre or abandon its roots is insane.

ah well whatever, if the guy wants to troll to get page views, so be it. i just dont care about his opinion and will be sure not to take him seriously ever.

Avatar image for recroulette
recroulette

5460

Forum Posts

13841

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 15

User Lists: 11

Edited By recroulette

I can only describe Sinistar's scream as the sound of an infinite number of galaxies simultaneously being destroyed.

Avatar image for giantstalker
Giantstalker

2401

Forum Posts

5787

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 15

User Lists: 2

Edited By Giantstalker

What a piece of shit review by that Chick fellow. And he has the audacity to give it some kind of objective veneer, pathetic.

The real problem with games journalism is apparently gross incompetence. Dunno why it made it to Worth Reading, this site is light years above that tripe.

Avatar image for king9999
King9999

663

Forum Posts

7

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 41

User Lists: 0

Edited By King9999

@Hailinel said:

It's funny how Totilo wrote that in-depth editorial on games journalism when Kotaku, the site he currently runs, is a shit show in terms of overall journalistic standards and integrity and employs some of the absolute worst journalists/columnists whose pieces I have ever had the displeasure of reading.

Agree 100%. It baffles me why any credible news site, developer or publisher even give those clowns the time of day.

Avatar image for dharmabum
DharmaBum

1740

Forum Posts

638

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 3

Edited By DharmaBum

I agree with Chick in that a game shouldn't automatically earn a minimum score because it's a functional piece of software or a lot of work went into it. He's scoring his honest experience with the game. This industry needs more outlier reviews beyond the 7-9 scale that offer valid criticism instead of there being a total echo chamber.

The comments on his site reveal the true problem - people (though it's most likely little kids) feeling the need to lash out offensively because they don't share the same opinion or want to be validated with their purchase. I'm a fan of the Halo series, but those people make me wish I had nothing in common with them.

@theanticitizen: how does what he wrote mean he knows nothing about Halo? He's making fun of how the story in 4 beats you over the head with the concept.

Avatar image for shadypingu
ShadyPingu

1857

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By ShadyPingu
It’s a narrative paper, rock, scissors in which orcs beat love, love beats nukes, and nukes beat orcs.

All right, Chick. I lol'd.

Avatar image for manhattan_project
manhattan_project

2336

Forum Posts

53

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

@chickdigger802 said:

@murisan: It all depends. GB reviews are written for the readers. Gertmann didn't really like MW3 yet he still reviewed it as 4/5. Chick's reviews are all 100% his opinion, one that doesn't give a fuck about other people and the norm. (I do find it dumb that a well polished game 'should' score 'something'. Reserving the lower end of the spectrum just for literally broken games is pretty silly. If Halo 4 is beautiful super polished, plays well, and you hate it, you should be able to give it a 1/10 or w/e, no?)

It is odd that it's on metacritic though. but /we.

What are talking about? Jeff has repeatedly stated reviews are solely their opinion based on their taste. Its like that so you can make decisions based on how your tastes relate to theirs. And he did like MW3, THATS WHY HE GAVE IT 4 STARS.

Avatar image for chickdigger802
chickdigger802

575

Forum Posts

38

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 2

Edited By chickdigger802

@murisan: It all depends. GB reviews are written for the readers. Gertmann didn't really like MW3 yet he still reviewed it as 4/5. Chick's reviews are all 100% his opinion, one that doesn't give a fuck about other people and the norm. (I do find it dumb that a well polished game 'should' score 'something'. Reserving the lower end of the spectrum just for literally broken games is pretty silly. If Halo 4 is beautiful super polished, plays well, and you hate it, you should be able to give it a 1/10 or w/e, no?)

It is odd that it's on metacritic though. but /we.

Avatar image for deactivated-5e60061752a57
deactivated-5e60061752a57

752

Forum Posts

96

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Acquire PC, play The Void. Incredibly atmospheric, tense, and strange.

Avatar image for lazyaza
Lazyaza

2584

Forum Posts

7938

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 27

User Lists: 43

Edited By Lazyaza

I completely agree with Tom Chick, everything I've seen heard and read about Halo 4 seems exactly as he described, just the same old Halo gameplay with barely a hint of anything new or worthwhile, a game so safe and paint by numbers I too would give it a 1/5 as it rightfully deserves.

Avatar image for werupenstein
Kidavenger

4417

Forum Posts

1553

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 90

User Lists: 33

Edited By Kidavenger

"An interesting analysis of the huge decisions facing Sony with its next machine."

This was an interesting read, but I think it's completely ignores everything that Sony did right this generation:

Blu ray won the format war, and this was largely due to the PS3 the same way that DVD was ushered in by the PS2; Blu ray will dominate the next gen, if Xbox ignores this... I honestly don't see how they can, and those licensing fees will be a huge win for Sony.

Sony managed to hold onto and increase the profile of most of their first party developers while Xbox lost most of their platform exclusives. There doesn't seem to be anything to look forward to exclusively on the next xbox the same way as when xbox had BioWare, Rare, Ltd. , Bungie going into last gen.

Maligning PS+ is silly, while it was too little too late for this console cycle, I don't think their is a single gamer out there that hasn't taken notice of it and writing off as a non factor for player's next console choice is completely blind.

Xbox didn't do anything to win the last gen, Sony gave it away; I wouldn't count on that happening again.

Avatar image for theanticitizen
theanticitizen

426

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

Edited By theanticitizen

@believer258: Oh yeah, I forgot about Marathon's AI rampancy. More proof that Chick doesn't know what he's talking about

Avatar image for siroptimusprime
SirOptimusPrime

2076

Forum Posts

13

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 3

Edited By SirOptimusPrime

I'll eventually chunk this out as usual, but I'm surprised you're actually excited for that Dark Rain thing.

"There's graphics and undeads, and it's, like, totally open and stuff!"

I still said 'yes' to it, but only because that looks better than half of the trash on Greenlight. Looks half decent, visually, as well.

Avatar image for hailinel
Hailinel

25785

Forum Posts

219681

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 28

Edited By Hailinel

It's funny how Totilo wrote that in-depth editorial on games journalism when Kotaku, the site he currently runs, is a shit show in terms of overall journalistic standards and integrity and employs some of the absolute worst journalists/columnists whose pieces I have ever had the displeasure of reading.

Avatar image for animasta
Animasta

14948

Forum Posts

3563

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 5

Edited By Animasta

@mrfluke said:

@murisan said:

The content of QTR's review was fine, but do you really think the game deserves a 1/5, a 20/100, etc. from anyone? Wouldn't a one of five basically mean the game is broken and unplayable? Furthermore, QTR is on metacritic, and whatever anyone's stance is on the site, there's a precedent for docking developer bonuses if the aggregate score is below a certain level. I think this is a serious issue, and I think that that slapping a completely serviceable game with a 20% score that's aggregated on the site is just a dick move. I doubt Microsoft will have any issues with 343i since the game is selling like hotcakes, but I think Mr. Chick was being a bit of a dick with the numerical score. His written arguments hold water, but that score is silly.

agreed, sure halo 4 has faults (really needed more exposition imo)

,but goddamm its not a 1/5, and id hate for this to dock their metacritic and possibly make 343 lose a bonus for the game that they worked years on and IS a quality product,

one review is not going to dock it that heavily get real.

and 343 is owned by microsoft so I doubt the bonus thing is accurate; the bonus thing was only involved with new vegas because Obsidian was not owned by Bethesda.

Avatar image for blacklagoon
BlackLagoon

2136

Forum Posts

106545

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

Edited By BlackLagoon

Ah, I was hoping the Uncharted: Golden Abyss postmortem at Gamasutra would have made it in. It's very interesting read.

Avatar image for moonshadow101
Moonshadow101

766

Forum Posts

1077

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

Edited By Moonshadow101

It would be nice if there was some room the disagree with that review without immediately being accused of being a blind fool drowning in confirmation bias.

Avatar image for thevideohustler
TheVideoHustler

412

Forum Posts

106

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

Edited By TheVideoHustler

I don't normally get involved in these things. But I really don't think that review was written very well. From a rhetorical standpoint. He used "furthermore" to many times, and very close together.

EDIT: Oh, and something. I feel like if someone was telling this to me, I would think they were an asshole.

Avatar image for efesell
Efesell

7509

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Efesell

That Kotaku article on AC3 seems to point out a lot of things that have always existed with AC but are only now considered problems.

Avatar image for mrfluke
mrfluke

6260

Forum Posts

-1

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

Edited By mrfluke

@murisan said:

The content of QTR's review was fine, but do you really think the game deserves a 1/5, a 20/100, etc. from anyone? Wouldn't a one of five basically mean the game is broken and unplayable? Furthermore, QTR is on metacritic, and whatever anyone's stance is on the site, there's a precedent for docking developer bonuses if the aggregate score is below a certain level. I think this is a serious issue, and I think that that slapping a completely serviceable game with a 20% score that's aggregated on the site is just a dick move. I doubt Microsoft will have any issues with 343i since the game is selling like hotcakes, but I think Mr. Chick was being a bit of a dick with the numerical score. His written arguments hold water, but that score is silly.

agreed, sure halo 4 has faults (really needed more exposition imo)

,but goddamm its not a 1/5, and id hate for this to dock their metacritic and possibly make 343 lose a bonus for the game that they worked years on and IS a quality product,

Avatar image for zombie2011
zombie2011

5628

Forum Posts

8742

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

Edited By zombie2011

That Halo 4 review is terrible, it's definitely there for page views. Even if you believe it to be more of the same or just not the type of game you personally enjoy, you have to step back and see the game for what it is and it's an incredibly well made game.

Avatar image for slashdance
SlashDance

1867

Forum Posts

1

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By SlashDance

I don't know what Europa is but it has a serious System Shock 2 vibe. On my radar !

Avatar image for clumsyninja1
clumsyninja1

856

Forum Posts

35

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 1

Edited By clumsyninja1

Love the AC3 articles...hated Connor loved Haytham

Avatar image for tamriilin
tamriilin

145

Forum Posts

42

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

Edited By tamriilin

F* YEAH SINISTAR!!

Avatar image for video_game_king
Video_Game_King

36563

Forum Posts

59080

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 54

User Lists: 14

Edited By Video_Game_King

@patrickklepek said:

Halo 4 demonstrates that if there’s one thing worse than more of the same, it’s less of the same.

*GROOOAAAAAAN*