• 60 results
  • 1
  • 2
#1 Posted by sometimesavowel (158 posts) -

But with that out of the way, is there a good reason why Alex was the one to review Beyond: Two Souls when he said on Bombin' The A.M. that he wasn't a fan of Heavy Rain? I don't mean to make this point as someone quantifying the quality of either - as I haven't played either - but to me this feels like asking someone to review Skyrim when he wasn't a fan of Fallout 3, or like asking me what I think of Miley Cyrus's album when I'm not a huge fan of pop music.

I just think that if Brad had done this review, I would have been able to get a sense of "is this game better than Heavy Rain? If not, why?" Instead, I get a 3-star review for a game claiming in the subtitle to be better than a 4-star review and that's very confusing.

#2 Edited by EchoEcho (840 posts) -

I don't think your analogies hold up. There's a difference between disliking an entire genre of music and being asked to review an album from that genre, and not liking a particular artist's previous album and being asked to review their next one. Did Alex just dislike Heavy Rain, or does he dislike all narrative-heavy, "interactive drama"-style games? I'm guessing it's closer to the former. Also, I personally know someone who strongly disliked Fallout 3 while enjoying Oblivion and Skyrim; you might have wanted to say "open-world RPGs" instead of a specific game.

#3 Edited by Milkman (17841 posts) -

It's not that confusing. The Heavy Rain and Beyond reviews were written by two different people. They're not meant to be compared.

#4 Posted by spankingaddict (2814 posts) -

The Giant Bomb staff does a lot of odd stuff . The reviews aren't important to them it seems .

Maybe since Alex didn't care for Beyond like he did for Heavy Rain , that's a good sign for David Cage fans ?

#5 Edited by AMyggen (4482 posts) -

Does this discussion need to come up every time GB gives a mediocre review to a game some people are prepared to love?

#6 Posted by Kevin_Cogneto (1320 posts) -
#7 Posted by JZ (2343 posts) -

Took you long enough

#8 Posted by Animasta (14820 posts) -

@amyggen said:

Does this discussion need to come up every time GB gives a mediocre review to a game some people are prepared to love?

yes

#9 Edited by csl316 (10669 posts) -

Well, Alex backed up his claims in a logical manner. Made a case for the way he felt. Instead of looking solely at stars, just read the damn...

Oh, who am I kidding.

#10 Posted by Morningstar (2321 posts) -

I agree to a certain extent, but to be honest I don't really care. It's just a review.

#11 Posted by spraynardtatum (4038 posts) -

Alex was OP for the review.

#12 Edited by ll_Exile_ll (2060 posts) -

I feel like there is a lot that tied to this game around the internet. Just look at a lot the dismissive comments in many of the reviews saying "it's not a game". I thought Alex's review seemed fine, but I think this game is going to suffer critically from a lot reviewers taking a traditionalist perspective about what being a game actually means, and whether the game's limited interactivity should or does have any bearing on it's overall quality.

The Walking Dead avoided that divisiveness primarily because of the extremely high quality of its writing (which seems a more debatable aspect of Beyond) and because it focused on decisions as the core means of interactivity (whereas Beyond apparently doesn't have many at all). I think if more reviewers looked at Beyond as an interactive film rather than a video game, the reviews wouldn't be as all over the place as they are.

I understand some people want their video games to be games, but I think there is room in the industry for this kind of semi interactive narrative. Asura's Wrath was one of my favorite games of last year, and that game gives the player pretty much zero control over anything. Your actions literally do nothing (other than determine your grade), but I found it to be one of the most engaging narrative experiences I've had in while.

#13 Posted by Hunkulese (2968 posts) -

If you look hard enough you can probably find someone else on the Internet that reviewed the game.

#14 Posted by CaLe (4217 posts) -

Maybe no one else wanted to review it? It seems to me like you wanted it to get a better score, for whatever reason.

#15 Posted by Mcfart (1847 posts) -

Yeah well, he played Heavy Rain, so that's enough. Instead of hunting out someone who loves QTE's, nonsensical storytelling, and Ellen Page's ass, maybe they should just use a reviewer who tries to be objective. Alex does say that the game sucks if you don't like QTE's..... but if you LOVE QTEs, then add 2 stars on to his score.

#16 Edited by EXTomar (5027 posts) -

Is there something wrong about the opinion of someone who is "Not A Fan Of A Genre"? Those who are "anti-fans" have just a valid observation about what doesn't work as a "super fans" who notices everything that does work.

#17 Posted by joshwent (2729 posts) -

...is there a good reason why Alex was the one to review Beyond: Two Souls...

Duh, who else is qualified to talk about "Cage" for a whole review?

Really though, aside from not liking Quantic Dreams' previous games, what about Alex's review makes you think that he didn't approach it with an open mind, or was unfairly biased because of his preferences.

#18 Posted by AMyggen (4482 posts) -

@ll_exile_ll: Negative reviews of Beyond seem to focus far more on the writing than the gameplay.

#19 Posted by Dizzmotron (38 posts) -

@extomar said:

Is there something wrong about the opinion of someone who is "Not A Fan Of A Genre"? Those who are "anti-fans" have just a valid observation about what doesn't work as a "super fans" who notices everything that does work.

I think the problem that people seem to be trying to get at is that it doesn't help to say, "I am not a fan of that style of game and this game didn't change my mind". It would be more helpful to have someone who is a fan of the genre tell people if it is a good or bad entry into said genre. At least, I think that's what they're trying to say.

#20 Posted by coaxmetal (1714 posts) -

But do you really get it?

#21 Edited by RenegadeDoppelganger (440 posts) -

Look man, we all know what this is. You like B:TS, or you want to like it and are upset because Alex did not like it.

Does your enjoyment of this game hinge on it getting at least 4 stars and Alex Navarro sharing your enthusiasm for it?

#22 Posted by shivermetimbers (888 posts) -

Perhaps try reading the review and see whether or not his opinions on David Cage's style of game match yours.

#23 Edited by Brendan (8687 posts) -

Don't movie reviewers always review films even if they didn't like a precious directors work? I don't see anything wrong with that, and I don't see anything wrong with Alex reviewing this game.

#24 Posted by SlashDance (1863 posts) -

Alex is the movie guy, it makes sense to have him review Beyond. I don't mean that in a "it's not a game it's a movie durrr dur durrrrr" kind of way, but it is a game that lives or dies by its story so I'm glad Alex reviewed it.

He also reviewed The Walkind Dead and gave it 5 stars, so I doubt he has any problem with the genre.

#25 Posted by Zomgfruitbunnies (992 posts) -

Review scores are dumb.

#26 Posted by MildMolasses (3189 posts) -

Look man, we all know what this is. You like B:TS, or you want to like it and are upset because Alex did not like it.

Does your enjoyment of this game hinge on it getting

at least

4 stars and Alex Navarro sharing your enthusiasm for it?

Gamers love nothing more than confirmation bias!

#27 Posted by Nekroskop (2831 posts) -

I see no reason to get butthurt over Alex's review. He explained the score perfectly. The problem is when you let your own agenda and feelings into the mix, which is very popular in today's gamingpress.(Which he didn't)

#28 Posted by MattyFTM (14599 posts) -

The reason Alex reviewed it is probably because he wanted to review it and had the time to review it, whereas the others either didn't want to review it, didn't have time to review it, or both.

Alex wrote a good review that summed up the good and the bad points of the game. If you're the kind of person who loves the good points and doesn't mind the bad - you know you'll probably love the game. It you're the type of person who isn't thrilled about the good points, and the bad parts sound terrible - the game isn't for you. The review has served it's purpose of advising peoples purchasing decisions, and it makes no difference that Alex wrote it.

Moderator
#29 Posted by wemibelec90 (2087 posts) -

Optimally, you get one of two reviews from an outlet: the review from someone who isn't the biggest fan of a genre or developer or the review from someone who really enjoys that genre or developer. Both are interesting to read and useful for different reasons by different people. I have no problem with GB giving the review to someone who didn't care much for Heavy Rain as it can provide a more diverse opinion. Reading reviews from a bunch of yes-men who have gush over a certain genre or developer gets a bit tired and doesn't bring interesting criticism to the table.

#30 Posted by RonGalaxy (3585 posts) -

Alex reviewed the game because his job is to review games; he's a critic. Doesnt matter what his past opinions are, he shouldnt be prohibited from reviewing ANYTHING. Its almost like you're saying people who are guaranteed to give a positive review are the only ones that should be allowed to review.

#31 Edited by Ravelle (1662 posts) -

Let it be reviewed by someone that likes the sort of thing you get positive bias.

Let it be reviewed by someome who doesn't like the sort of thing you get negative bias.

It doesn't matter eitherway.

#32 Posted by wjb (1758 posts) -

Never understood the "needs to be a fan" argument unless it's a highly specialized genre like sports. Even then, what difference does it make?

#33 Edited by hermes (1731 posts) -

In some way, I understand your point. I read the review and throughout it, I was thinking "this doesn't sound like a 3 stars game"... The writing seems more enthusiastic about the game that the score let it out to be.

However, for someone that admitted not being a big fan of the genre and the creator's body of work, he approached it with a very open mind. He never dismissed it without justification and never reduced it to a "I don't get it, so it sucks..." This is not like Jeff trying to review a soccer game, as you can at least see him trying.

There are two extremes to the situation you bring: either its someone that dislikes the genre with a passion (and will crush it simply because it exists), or someone that loves the genre with a passion (and will praise it simply because it exists). Neither of those add to the discussion; and Alex wasn't neither of them.

#34 Edited by Humanity (11428 posts) -

The review reads a lot like a 4 star game but we end up with a 3 star score and a recommendation to play it if you're into that sort of thing - which just proves that the scoring system would do a lot better if we got rid of stars entirely and moved into completely unrestrained opinion-piece style of reviewing that guys like Alex and Patrick seem to be advocating.

#35 Posted by ProfessorEss (7674 posts) -

@humanity said:

The review reads a lot like a 4 star game but we end up with a 3 star score and a recommendation to play it if you're into that sort of thing - which just proves that the scoring system would do a lot better if we got rid of stars entirely and moved into completely unrestrained opinion-piece style of reviewing that guys like Alex and Patrick seem to be advocating.

It's funny because you, someone who seems interested, reads this as a 4 that got a 3 while I, someone not interested, reads this as a 2 that was given a 3.

#36 Posted by Oldirtybearon (5190 posts) -

I think the only true answer is to stop reading reviews and cultivate your own tastes. You'll find more enjoyable experiences that way. It also cuts out a lot of the baggage associated with game reviews and the circle jerk often found within that community.

#37 Posted by wallee321 (126 posts) -

I skimmed over Alex's review and looked at a couple other reviews around the net. His review, initially (I'll have to go back and read fully), seems fine to me. The gist of it that I got was that does some things are well and other things poorly, but Alex enjoyed the experience even if it was flawed; if you liked previous Cage games and are interested in this game, then check it out.

I've been looking forward to this game and sure it would of been nice if it was getting +80 across the internet, but it seems to deliver what I was looking forward to. I'll enjoy this game, and would like to see more different or non-traditional type games get the AAA treatment.

#38 Posted by sometimesavowel (158 posts) -

okay um...to the people claiming I'm butthurt: I'm not even a Playstation gamer. Been Xbox since day 1. I'm just questioning the logic of how the review was assigned, which is being pretty sufficiently explained by everyone else.

#39 Posted by Demoskinos (16202 posts) -

Reviews dont matter to me at all. Ninja Gaiden 3 got a 2/10 or some ridiculous low score from IGN that did not stop me from not only buying the PS3 version but also pre-ordering the Special Edition on 360 as well.

I know if Im going to like something. That being said, I see how OP has a point I think reviews of a sports game would be way more valuable as a piece of writing if the person writing it was well versed in understanding the nuances of the sport he is covering. I would be awful at reviewing RTS games but I could really get into reviewing a character action game like DmC because I know that genre so well. Now hey, Alex's opinion is his own and how Jeff assigns reviews is entirely up to him cause he is the boss but as OP pointed out I think either Patrick or Brad would have been better suited to more thoroughly dissect the game. Now had this been a wrestling game? Alex is your guy for sure.

I dont really care about the review myself one way or the other I was walking out of work today with a copy regardless of reviews because my hands on with the demo impressed me so much however I do think there are people who are more apt at writing about particular genres. Alex is a fine writer though so Im sure what he did write is a fine review.

#40 Posted by Ramone (3071 posts) -

@humanity said:

The review reads a lot like a 4 star game but we end up with a 3 star score and a recommendation to play it if you're into that sort of thing - which just proves that the scoring system would do a lot better if we got rid of stars entirely and moved into completely unrestrained opinion-piece style of reviewing that guys like Alex and Patrick seem to be advocating.

While I agree for the most part that that is the sort of direction the site should go in, it's never going to happen while Jeff is in charge. He is firmly entrenched in the "reviews as reviews not criticism" mindset and scores are a vital part of that.

#41 Edited by Humanity (11428 posts) -

@professoress: I'm actually somewhat indifferent as the trouble of getting my PS3 back from my brothers apartment to my apartment and hooking it up, outweighs my desire to experience the story, and possibly have the ability to make virtual Ellen Page blow a dood for money.

But what you're saying further illustrates my point about scoring reviews in the first place.

@ramone: I'm fine with scores, but only when reviews are done in a very dry and objective manner. This of course opens up the whole can of worms where people endlessly argue that a review could never be objective and no one ever wins in that situation. Alas, Patrick and Alex both talked on the morning show how reviews are increasingly becoming opinion pieces heavily influenced by the authors disposition and everyone should get used to that because it's the future of gaming journalism - and I'm completely ok with that, but an actual score has no place in that situation.

#42 Posted by Vinny_Says (5909 posts) -

I don't see how that makes a difference. It's not like Beyond is supposed to be a sequel to Heavy Rain. Just because you like one game by a studio doesn't mean you'll like all of them and same goes for the opposite.

Games should stand on their own merits, I mean at some point there was a game from a genre that was good enough that made you want to play more of this type of stuff, you're not just born with a love for JRPGs or racing games or whatever.

There's also the weird fringe cases, such as Vinny's situation. Just because he liked BF3 does that mean he now has to review every military shooter from now on? Who's opinion would you trust more regarding BF4? Jeff, who's played hundreds of FPS over his lifetime or Vinny who's played a massive amount of BF3?

There are people out there who loved Fallout 3 and dislike Oblivion or Skyrim I'm sure of it.

#43 Edited by JasonR86 (10003 posts) -

lol

#44 Posted by Snail (8770 posts) -

I just think that if Brad had done this review, I would have been able to get a sense of "is this game better than Heavy Rain? If not, why?" Instead, I get a 3-star review for a game claiming in the subtitle to be better than a 4-star review and that's very confusing.

This is your problem. I think if you read the review, you should find Alex effectively and eloquently places this game in the context of David Cage's previous endeavors: where it improves, where it still falters. Alex is a great reviewer and I think this is one fine addition to his repertoire.

My advice to you: don't give a fuck about the score. That shouldn't provide any enlightenment over whether or not this game is "better" than Heavy Rain. Here's why:

  • Star ratings are of relative value, rather than absolute;
  • Heavy Rain's rating on Giant Bomb was attributed by a different person;
  • Standards for video-games have changed in four years, or however long it's been since Heavy Rain.

The fact that you're so attached to the star rating speaks volumes about your complaints, in my opinion.

#45 Posted by TheManWithNoPlan (6271 posts) -

I really don't think it ultimately matters whether or not another person on the site would've reviewed the game differently. Brad reviewed Heavy Rain and Alex reviewed Beyond. Two different reviews, two different people and two different opinions. They're not really comparable other than both games being developed by the same studio.

#46 Edited by chiablo (1032 posts) -

Reviews are the opinion of the person reviewing it. Quick Looks are a much better indicator of whether or not you should buy a game since you can actually watch the game get played. I hope Vinny is in the driving seat for the QL of this one, it'll be a fun ride for everyone.

#47 Posted by Evilsbane (5018 posts) -

@echoecho said:

Also, I personally know someone who strongly disliked Fallout 3 while enjoying Oblivion and Skyrim; you might have wanted to say "open-world RPGs" instead of a specific game.

I had my cousin Literally just buy Fallout 3 and Skyrim, he could not stand Fallout fell in love with Skyrim.

#48 Posted by Abendlaender (2984 posts) -

Since when do you have to be a fan of the games you review?

Online
#49 Posted by Video_Game_King (36566 posts) -

Like it would be a better review if he was a fan?

#50 Edited by McLargepants (427 posts) -

Okay, so it would have been either Alex reviews it or probably nobody does. Patrick might play it, but it sounds like he wasn't goo goo over Heavy Rain either. Personally, I think Jeff would/will have some great opinions on this one. Or you could look at all the reviews coming out today that say basically the same thing Alex does, the gameplay is as fine as any David Cage game, but also like the other ones the story isn't very good.