Hilarious 'Review' from the Wall Street Journal

  • 200 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
#51 Edited by audioBusting (1488 posts) -

I felt embarassed reading that review. His other game review is not much better.

Also interesting to me is the ability for 12 humans to play cooperative six-on-six online games. What this means is that each player on the virtual ice is human-controlled. I am definitely going to try that out.

His column is more like a tumblr than a proper column.

edit:

I think it’s fair for players to demand the whole magilla
Magilla
#52 Edited by cmblasko (1176 posts) -

@MiniPato said:

@Captain_Felafel said:

"... I think it’s fair for players to demand the whole magilla – cutting-edge development, engrossing campaign gameplay, scads of downloadable content, a rich social media/community experience..."

'the fuck did I just read?

Clearly a businessman's idea of what games need. Or a flowchart''s interpretation.

EVERY game needs "cutting-edge development" as a bullet point. Is he seriously faulting the game for not having DLC on day 1, or did he not do the research to discover that there has already been DLC announced for the game months ago? What gamer is demanding that all games link up with the Facebooks and the Twitters? So many questions stemming from a single excerpt of this piece.

Lastly, why does it feel like this entire "review" is just a stealth advertisement for Black Ops 2? It's infuriating to me that this guy gets paid a more-than-likely handsome sum to write stuff like this.

#53 Posted by shinboy630 (1134 posts) -

Yes I know this is really funny and "games in mainstream media lolololol" and all that, but in the end this is just really bad journalism, and I think stuff like that should try to be prevented. Sure the comment section in particular is good for a few pretty good laughs, but this "review" will probably end up doing more harm to the game than it will good.

#54 Posted by Cirdain (3038 posts) -

@Captain_Felafel said:

'the fuck did I just read?

#55 Posted by golguin (3868 posts) -

It's the Wall Street Journal so the review seemed on par with everything else they do.

#56 Posted by laserbolts (5317 posts) -

I'm loving Borderlands 2 so far but it's pretty sad that this review is funnier than anything in this game so far. It would be ok if they weren't trying to be funny every chance they can but the humor in this game is beyond bad so far. I mean it actually says get ready to joy puke your face off on the box. I haven't seen humor this badly done since bulletstorm.

#57 Posted by PandaBear (1344 posts) -

Look at the comments. This thing is amazing haha what a trainwreck

#58 Posted by Sgtpierceface (616 posts) -

I'll say it. I didn't like the first Borderlands. I found it to be kind of boring. BUT, I am able to realize that I'm the problem, not the game. For one, I played it by myself, and two, I really don't give a shit about loot in games. People always say how addictive a game like Diablo is, but I never get invested because I don't care if my weapon is green or purple.

So I realize that Borderlands is awesome, but it's just not for me. Also, that guy is fucking insane.

#59 Edited by Random45 (1117 posts) -

Wow, I thought you were just saying that because he didn't like the game, but damn, he really is clueless. I have no interest in Borderlands, but I at least know what it's aiming for.

My god, reading further in, he is extremely clueless. Does he even know what he's freaking talking about? I can't decide whether this is funny or really sad.

#60 Posted by DoctorDanger99 (686 posts) -

@deox: NO. his biggest mistake was he knew nothing about video games and was paid to write a review about video games. itd be the exact same thing as if i was hired to film a instructional video of how a woman should deal with her period. it would be five minutes long and consist of me reading from the back of a box of Tampax.

i remember a interview with Hugh Jackman where they asked him if he was doing voice over work for a wolverine video game. he said he didnt think so. because he had said so many lines during shooting the movies that they would just pull lines from the film and put them in the game lol.

#61 Posted by Demoskinos (14722 posts) -

@Sgtpierceface said:

I'll say it. I didn't like the first Borderlands. I found it to be kind of boring. BUT, I am able to realize that I'm the problem, not the game. For one, I played it by myself, and two, I really don't give a shit about loot in games. People always say how addictive a game like Diablo is, but I never get invested because I don't care if my weapon is green or purple.

So I realize that Borderlands is awesome, but it's just not for me. Also, that guy is fucking insane.

Pretty much my sentiments exactly. I'll never touch Borderlands 2 because fuck that game but Its obviously a well made game even if I find it absolutely boring as shit.

#62 Posted by Ares42 (2611 posts) -

How many times did he compare it to COD ? =o

#63 Posted by The_Laughing_Man (13629 posts) -
@PandaBear said:

Look at the comments. This thing is amazing haha what a trainwreck

Wonder how long before they lock off the comments. 
#64 Posted by The_Laughing_Man (13629 posts) -

I just found a shotgun that shoots fireballs. Im gonna go burn shit. Have fun here. 

#65 Posted by MistaSparkle (2148 posts) -

LOL

#66 Posted by Genkkaku (735 posts) -

@Godzilla_Sushi said:

I don't mind negative reviews, only complete ignorance.

My sentiments exactly, If you don't understand the product don't review it just because..

@KoolAid said:

@MaxxS It does work! And this review really made me laugh. Seriously, wsj should tell this guy that review was awesome and have him write more! I want more unintenionally funny clueless game reviews! "the room" of video game reviews!

Give this fella' a try http://douglasville.patch.com/search/articles?cat=1998198912#/_utf8:%E2%98%83/type:articles/cat:1998198912/contributor:114174/page:1/_utf8:%E2%98%83 His reviews are particularly bad, his review for Dark Souls is beyond bad.. He talks himself up as a gamer at every chance but then fails to understand basic gameplay..

#67 Posted by DukesT3 (1901 posts) -

@Muerthoz said:

"There’s an extremely limited four-player cooperative mode, and if you have an Xbox Live Gold account, you can team up that way" I don't see XBOX Live Gold on the PSN Store. I guess no multiplayer for Playstation.

DAMMIT! got the wrong version.. =(

#68 Posted by DukesT3 (1901 posts) -

Wall Street Journal covering games is like Giant Bomb covering 19th century literature.

I'd love to see that happen.

#69 Posted by ripelivejam (3719 posts) -

not to go all out of proportion on this, but i think this review should just plain be deleted and redone by someone more competent. agree with the guy that this is just plain bad journalism (especially bad coming from a publication with the visibility of the Wall Street Journal).

#70 Posted by ripelivejam (3719 posts) -

@Demoskinos said:

@Sgtpierceface said:

I'll say it. I didn't like the first Borderlands. I found it to be kind of boring. BUT, I am able to realize that I'm the problem, not the game. For one, I played it by myself, and two, I really don't give a shit about loot in games. People always say how addictive a game like Diablo is, but I never get invested because I don't care if my weapon is green or purple.

So I realize that Borderlands is awesome, but it's just not for me. Also, that guy is fucking insane.

Pretty much my sentiments exactly. I'll never touch Borderlands 2 because fuck that game but Its obviously a well made game even if I find it absolutely boring as shit.

hey these are ALMOST reasonable comments (j/k)

#71 Posted by Marshermallow (213 posts) -

@ThePickle said:

Borderlands 2’s single-player campaign mode isn’t as good as what you’ll find in games like COD: Black Ops or the Medal of Honor series.

I also found this sentence hilarious!

#72 Posted by selbie (1878 posts) -

Portraits like a bank note...

...not narcissistic in the least. Not at all. Nope.

#73 Edited by JackSukeru (5908 posts) -
The game isn’t manga-like enough to be super-hip, so instead, it just feels cartoonish.

wtf? Bwahahahahahahaha!

#75 Posted by sickVisionz (1268 posts) -

@RockmanBionics: I think he was talking about the crummy opening "cinematic" that was like a motion comic with even less motion.

#76 Posted by Dagbiker (6957 posts) -

I cant wait to read his review of BLOPS.

#77 Posted by Daiphyer (1332 posts) -

Oh my God, this is gold. I fucking love this guy.

Make him do more video game reviews! VIDEO REVIEWS! OMG!

#78 Posted by JoeyRavn (4961 posts) -

I thought nothing could top that IGN reviewer lowering Darksiders II's score because its graphics weren't "on par" with God of War III's, but, man.

#79 Posted by EarlessShrimp (1632 posts) -

@steveurkel said:

I'm glad someone didn't like this piece of shit. The first game was terrible and this one is no worse. Yes I've played it. Maxed out graphics on a PC - it looks like shit, it plays like shit. First person shooters are fucking a thing of the past because this is the garbage people are interested in playing. This guy is not clueless, he is informed. He probably played good first person shooters (before half life ruined them). What a joke this game turned out to be. It is great that Jeff likes it because I like jeff but I don't care about other peoples opinions it is a bad game. I'm mad I wasted money on it because my friends convinced me to buy it hurr it will be fun yup it isnt. Surprise. Another shitty game from gearbox.

I suppose rise of the triad is "teh gr33t3st sh00ter of 4ll tiems?" But hey, you're entitled to hate the game as much as you want. However, I will say the he is most certainly not informed. He's making the worst faulty comparisons possible, and clearly didn't too much research before setting forth on the journey of this review.

#80 Posted by Eaxis (909 posts) -

This "review" is one of the worst things i've read in game reviews. He clearly isn't in touch with gaming.

#81 Posted by morrelloman (608 posts) -

At least the WSJ took the time to review it. Hopefully this shows what amazing popularity this game has generated despite being a RPG. But yeah "wait for Halo and COD" when they are completely different games is the icing on this fucktarded cake.

#82 Posted by Marcsman (3177 posts) -

I'm having a blast with my Gunnzerker so far. Fuck em if they don't get the joke.

#83 Posted by Deranged (1837 posts) -
At that price point, the first-person shooter, published by 2K Games, inevitably invites comparisons with the Halos and Call of Duty games already out and due to come in the next few weeks and months. Borderlands 2 falls short because it’s missing several key elements you need to have in a 2012 first-person shooter game – most notably, a rich multiplayer online mode

Wait what? I don't think he understands the purpose of RPG's...

What an idiot.

#84 Posted by RelentlessKnight (963 posts) -

when did Wall Street Journal start writing game reviews?

#85 Posted by kmdrkul (3476 posts) -

In a weird way, I think it's good to get a review from someone a bit more out of touch with the gaming industry. It provides perspective, and personally, just shows that the gaming community is a little too comfortable under the rock they're living.

#86 Posted by pweidman (2319 posts) -

Entertaining read. I think his takes are genuine, and his lack of experience and perspective gives it's own insights. It's fun to hear from people who aren't neck deep into gaming like most everyone here at GB.

#87 Posted by Toug (308 posts) -

There was this great blog going around the other day about "How Not To Write Comics Criticism" http://www.dylanmeconis.com/how-not-to-write-comics-criticism/ that this instantly reminded me of, dispite being about comics instead of games.

Particularly, #10 - "Poverty of Reference", is hard at play here. In which the criticism of the game is entirely based around a very narrow view of exactly what a "game" is supposed to be, in this case, thing he's read about a game that isn't out yet.

#88 Posted by WolfHazard (464 posts) -

After he compared the game to COD a third time I stopped being angry a d just realized he knows nothing about games. Lol I hope he reviews more games, it's actually hilarious. Also, I can't wait for christian soccer moms to come down on him for letting his 14 year old son play an M rated game. Not that I have issue with that, but I'm sure the audience who reads wsj will lol.

#89 Posted by SethPhotopoulos (5205 posts) -

When I played Dragon Age: Origins I was annoyed by the lack of guns and a first persona perspective. For $60 I would expect it to be like Halo or CoD right?

Online
#90 Posted by Corvak (971 posts) -

The Wall Street Journal should stick to covering business news.

#91 Posted by Peanut (953 posts) -

Hilarious read. Although reading through some of the comments in here of "Pfft! Borderlands!" makes me kinda sad that the series has already crossed over into that weird backlash territory. I don't really understand why it happens, but it's one of those really weird things about games these days that bugs me.

#92 Posted by oraknabo (1457 posts) -

I like the "Game Theory" title. This guy clearly spends a lot of time thinking about the mechanics of games.

#93 Posted by Dave_442 (52 posts) -

"I had to go back to Wikipedia descriptions of the original game to remember all the intricate twists and turns of the Borderlands backstory"

Haha. Guys hilarious!

#94 Posted by cmblasko (1176 posts) -

@kmdrkul said:

In a weird way, I think it's good to get a review from someone a bit more out of touch with the gaming industry. It provides perspective, and personally, just shows that the gaming community is a little too comfortable under the rock they're living.

Outside perspective is always a good thing, but this guy is just plain misinformed. The only criticism Gearbox could take from this review is "make it more like Call of Duty" which is not at all valid.

#95 Posted by ComradeKhan (687 posts) -

Now i know what it must have felt like for the teachers that had to read all the book reports i wrote about book that I never actually read. 

#96 Posted by WinterSnowblind (7614 posts) -

This reminds me of the pulled Gamespot review for Neverwinter Nights 2, which basically slammed the game for not being Oblivion.

Disliking a game because of flaws, or even just because it's not to your personal tastes is one thing, but disliking it because it's not something totally different is ridiculous. That's not a review.

#97 Posted by Vade (393 posts) -

I didn't like Borderlands at all. Paid 1€ in some funky GameStop preorder thingy and I'm not sure if I got a decent deal. Point is, if I had to play and review Borderlands 2 for a mass audience, it probably might look something like this.

#98 Posted by glyn (382 posts) -

Borderlands 2 falls short because it’s missing several key elements you need to have in a 2012 first-person shooter game – most notably, a rich multiplayer online mode.

LOL

#99 Posted by Largo6661 (333 posts) -

That's why I read all my review on giantbomb.

#100 Posted by JeanLuc (3577 posts) -

This guy's spends a lot of the review talking about what Borderlands 2 isn't, not what it is. A review should address what the game sets out to do, and how well did it do it. I'm also convinced this man has never played the original Boarderlands, even though he claims otherwise.

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.