• 86 results
  • 1
  • 2
#1 Edited by p4ddym1607 (995 posts) -

Well its the worst review I have ever read...
http://uk.pc.ign.com/articles/936/936295p1.html

Its for Worldwide Soccer Manager 2009 or as we in the UK would call it "Football Manager 2009".

I know most americans are uninterested in "soccer" but you should give this review a read or at least a glance.
Should be used as a "What not to do as a game reviewer" lesson when starting to review games.

Lasting Appeal - "This game is aimed at a very specific audience, and it’s inconceivable to me that anybody outside of that audience could play even an hour of this game before turning it off for good."


Summed it up for me.

Downright ignorant...





****UPDATE***** - IGN have removed the review and have posted an apology


US, December 5, 2008 - We missed the mark -- that's the only way to explain why we've pulled the U.S. review of Worldwide Soccer Manager 2009 off our site.


After seeing the community feedback and having more editors look at the title, we agree with the readers that our original review didn't give Worldwide Soccer Manager 2009 a fair shake. Unfortunately, our critical analysis of WWSM '09 focused more on what the author wanted it to be rather than what the product actually was. We review games at IGN based on their own merits, and agree that it was unreasonable to compare WWSM '09 with action-oriented sports titles like FIFA or Pro Evolution Soccer. Because of the unfair comparison, we have deemed the review unacceptable and have removed it from the site.


We extend our sincerest apologies to both SEGA and our readers for the mistake and confusion. Look for an updated and more accurate relation of IGN's view of WWSM '09 sometime in the near future.


Jeremy Dunham


Games Editorial Manager, IGN.com


#2 Posted by Fr0Br0 (3101 posts) -

Wow that's horrible. I don't think I could even stand 20 minutes of that game. Dude needs to get his facts straight...

#3 Posted by DualReaver (3882 posts) -

So, the game is for the audience that doesn't watch football?

#4 Posted by p4ddym1607 (995 posts) -
Fr0Br0 said:
"Wow that's horrible. I don't think I could even stand 20 minutes of that game. Dude needs to get his facts straight..."
Fair enough. But you dont give a great game a bad score because its so niche. Look at the IGN uk review. It gave sound and graphics low score but overall it gave it a 9.1.
#5 Posted by jakob187 (21763 posts) -
.....I'm sorry, I'm missing what the problem is here.  It's a soccer manager game, kind of like NFL Head Coach?  I don't like football much, so I have no interest in playing Head Coach at all.  I think most people that don't care for football aren't going to play Head Coach.
Seems like it would be the same way for this soccer manager thing.

So no problem that I see.

I mean, what....did you want IGN to give Cars, Sneak King, and Big Bumpin higher scores too?  I mean, THOSE are for niche audiences as well...
#6 Posted by p4ddym1607 (995 posts) -
jakob187 said:
"
.....I'm sorry, I'm missing what the problem is here.  It's a soccer manager game, kind of like NFL Head Coach?  I don't like football much, so I have no interest in playing Head Coach at all.  I think most people that don't care for football aren't going to play Head Coach.
Seems like it would be the same way for this soccer manager thing.

So no problem that I see.

I mean, what....did you want IGN to give Cars, Sneak King, and Big Bumpin higher scores too?  I mean, THOSE are for niche audiences as well...
"
You are really missing the point greatly.
#7 Edited by Dalai (7074 posts) -

Trust me, Sports Interactive rarely puts out a bad product... and this "reviewer" just doesn't get it.  FM2009 is not for me and most Americans because it's a sport I (and most Americans) have no interest in... but for one to say it's awesome for legitimate reasons and the other to say it sucks because it's too niche, I'm betting on awesome.

#8 Posted by p4ddym1607 (995 posts) -
p4ddym1607 said:
"jakob187 said:
"
.....I'm sorry, I'm missing what the problem is here.  It's a soccer manager game, kind of like NFL Head Coach?  I don't like football much, so I have no interest in playing Head Coach at all.  I think most people that don't care for football aren't going to play Head Coach.
Seems like it would be the same way for this soccer manager thing.

So no problem that I see.

I mean, what....did you want IGN to give Cars, Sneak King, and Big Bumpin higher scores too?  I mean, THOSE are for niche audiences as well...
"
You are really missing the point greatly."
He gave the game a terrible score (2.0) because he found it wouldnt appeal to anyone outside of who it was designed for. The game is made for football lovers. You wouldnt believe the detail of the game. The IGN UK review is very well written and the person writing it obviously understands what it is all about.
#9 Posted by samcotts (2258 posts) -

Wow, 2.0? IGN has been terrible for reviews in the last year or so anyway, but that's ridiculous.

#10 Posted by p4ddym1607 (995 posts) -
Dalai said:
"Trust me, Sports Interactive rarely puts out a bad product... and this "reviewer" just doesn't get it.  FM2009 is not for me and most American because it's a sport I (and most Americans) have no interest in... but for one to say it's awesome for legitimate reasons and the other to say it sucks because it's too niche, I'm betting on awesome."
Yea. I cant believe the "reviewers" ignorance. IGN US obviously didnt have anyone that could rightfully review this game. So they should have not reviewed it. Or said that the UK review is the one to read.
#11 Posted by p4ddym1607 (995 posts) -
samcotts said:
"Wow, 2.0? IGN has been terrible for reviews in the last year or so anyway, but that's ridiculous."
I know. Just looking at the metacritic page. A lot of 9s and 8s and then a 2.
#12 Posted by p4ddym1607 (995 posts) -

I wrote an email to ign explaining why they should remove it.

#13 Posted by Absurd (2934 posts) -

Wow, Thats like giving a puzzle game a 2 because it doesn't appeal to anyone who doesn't like puzzle games.

#14 Posted by EvilTwin (3324 posts) -

I'm not entirely sure I agree with you.  What would have been a better alternative?  Giving it to someone they know would have loved it so they could say "if you're into this kind of game it's great" vs. "if you're not into this kind of game it sucks."  That's the problem with really niche titles I guess.

#15 Posted by samcotts (2258 posts) -

The thing is, pretty much anyone who likes football can enjoy Football Manager 09, and that's anything but a niche audience. Football/soccer games probably sell more then any other in Europe, and I would imagine they sell moderately well else where too. The reviewer has no idea what he is talking about.

#16 Posted by EvilTwin (3324 posts) -
samcotts said:
"The thing is, pretty much anyone who likes football can enjoy Football Manager 09, and that's anything but a niche audience. Football/soccer games probably sell more then any other in Europe, and I would imagine they sell moderately well else where too. The reviewer has no idea what he is talking about."
Really?  Because I was under the impression these head coach/manager games were pretty niche, even for those who liked football (or American football as it were).
#17 Edited by ZenaxPure (2569 posts) -

Honestly they should of just not reviewed it. For some reason I don't see their normal user base being people that are actually even interested in the game. This is just a reason I love the philosophy behind giantbomb only reviewing stuff they know and care about (even though there is plenty more the userbase cares about that could be reviewed I guess, but that is only a minor thing.)

Online
#18 Posted by pause422 (6249 posts) -

No one should of reviewed something like this to begin with, but honestly, I disagree.

#19 Edited by jakob187 (21763 posts) -
p4ddym1607 said:
"He gave the game a terrible score (2.0) because he found it wouldnt appeal to anyone outside of who it was designed for. The game is made for football lovers."
p4ddym1607 said:
"The IGN UK review is very well written and the person writing it obviously understands what it is all about."
p4ddym1607 said:
"He gave the game a terrible score (2.0) because he found it wouldnt appeal to anyone outside of who it was designed for. The game is made for football lovers."
So basically, what you are saying is that the game was reviewed by a US site where the premise and appeal of the game is not necessarily understood, and he found it to be extremely boring and something he couldn't be interested in because he didn't really care much about soccer.  Meanwhile, a dood at a UK site reviewed the same game, digs "football", liked the game because he was able to get into it, and understood all of it.

Again...failing to see the problem.  Reviews are opinions, and in turn...a US dood gave a US review, while a UK dood gave a UK review.  Do you really want to hold it against the guy from the US that he couldn't get into the game and didn't understand it?  If anything, that tells me exactly how I might walk into that game:  little interest, might not understand it all, and could very easily see it as being a game for a niche audience...which you yourself even said "the game is made for football lovers".  That's a pretty niche audience if you ask me.

I'm sure it's a great game, but the fact is that it isn't a game for EVERYONE, and for anyone walking into the game that didn't understand it, it could very much have been an unplayable game.  So, I understand where the US IGN dood is coming from.  Is he right?  Probably not...but it's his opinion.
#20 Posted by TEAMHOLT (438 posts) -
EvilTwin said:
"I'm not entirely sure I agree with you.  What would have been a better alternative?  Giving it to someone they know would have loved it so they could say "if you're into this kind of game it's great" vs. "if you're not into this kind of game it sucks."  That's the problem with really niche titles I guess."
I see what you mean, but if you're interested in buying a game then whose opinion do you want to hear? Someone who lacks interest and is unable to judge it from a perspective similar to your own, or someone who is interested and can properly discern the game's value to someone such as yourself?
#21 Posted by Weltal (2276 posts) -

This summed it up for me.

"This game obviously aims to provide the deepest soccer simulation experience possible for the sport’s most passionate and informed fans, but it offers little to nothing that would appeal to a casual fan of the sport or to the average videogame enthusiast. The menus are complex and difficult to navigate, graphics are terrible, the sound is non-existent and there is no traditional gameplay to speak of."

Sounds like a fair judgment.
He even admits to his lack of ability to play the game as a  casual fan.

"Although the game's database of more than 350,000 real-life soccer players is certainly impressive, only the most diehard fans of the sport would be able to appreciate having such a massive pool of talent to sift through, and the casual fan would almost certainly find the task overwhelming – I did. "

So, a reviewer judged a game based on his opinion and experiences with it? Blasphemy! Don't reviewers know they need to review games based on other people's opinions and preferences?

#22 Posted by Milkman (17337 posts) -
Weltal said:
"This summed it up for me.

"This game obviously aims to provide the deepest soccer simulation experience possible for the sport’s most passionate and informed fans, but it offers little to nothing that would appeal to a casual fan of the sport or to the average videogame enthusiast. The menus are complex and difficult to navigate, graphics are terrible, the sound is non-existent and there is no traditional gameplay to speak of."

Sounds like a fair judgment.
He even admits to his lack of ability to play the game as a  casual fan.

"Although the game's database of more than 350,000 real-life soccer players is certainly impressive, only the most diehard fans of the sport would be able to appreciate having such a massive pool of talent to sift through, and the casual fan would almost certainly find the task overwhelming – I did. "

So, a reviewer judged a game based on his opinion and experiences with it? Blasphemy! Don't reviewers know they need to review games based on other people's opinions and preferences?"
This. Stop bitching and moaning. If you like the game, go play it.
#23 Posted by Geilerhose (8 posts) -

What summed it up for me was:

"I couldn’t imagine why anybody would prefer Worldwide Soccer Manager to FIFA 09 or Pro Evolution Soccer 2009."

And later:

"Gameplay
Yes, the depth of management in this game is impressive. But, it’s not impressive enough to make up for the fact that you aren’t actually playing soccer."

Dude wanted to play him some soccer, and that shittty game keept throwing numbers and names in his face.

That game was LUCKY to get a 2.0.

The challenge reviewing these games, is what point of view to review from. From a casual perspectiv or a more fanoriented one. I can se some teen magazin giving a simulation game for a review to guy that CLEARLY loves his FIFA, but I can't understand why a site, specificly created for reviewing games, would do that. Then I would at least like two points of view.

Some signal to send to the developer. You set out to make a complex simulation game, made one well, and did it so it appels to simulation fans....... 2.0 SUCKERS.

#24 Posted by p4ddym1607 (995 posts) -

And i thought it was just the reviewer that was ignorant...

Reviews are opinions. Fine. But a review has to be fair. How would you like it if you made a game and the reviewer said it was shit for all the wrong reasons. Saying that the graphics are terrible and sound are terrible when the game is not at all about that. Its fine to say that the graphics are shit and the sound sucks. But to say that is why the game is overall a bad game is terrible.

The biggest part of this game is the database of players and the detail of the stats for all these players and the teams. And the overall power you have to manipulate each little detail of the players, teams, leagues etc. Kudos to the reviewer because he pointed this out and said that this aspect is simply "mindboggling". The fact that the lack of sound and lack of graphical stimulus made the game drop to a 2.0 despite the fact that the game is not about the sound and graphical appeal.



#25 Posted by zitosilva (1841 posts) -

I'm divided in this... while I do agree the review is his opinion it seems he went a little to far in it. The score itself is a problem, it's way too low for the quantity of good qualities he presented, which is weird. And I'm not so sure if graphical and sound should be taken in consideration. It's true that it's not the point of the game, but the series has been existing long enough for something to be done about it and make the game somewhat more visual appealing.

And I'm also not so sure that the "niche" thing applys here... though there's certainly more fans of games such as FIFA and Winning Eleven, Soccer is the most popular sport in the world... I'm sure he'd be impressed by the average knowledge of players any European or South American would have about soccer players....

But, still, I don't know. I'm divided.

#26 Posted by EvilTwin (3324 posts) -

Well, as you'll notice on the closing comments, those scores aren't averaged into a final score.  Just because the graphics or sound are particularly bad, doesn't mean the reviewer even has to factor that into their final score.  If he thought the gameplay was amazing, he might have given it a great score despite his feelings on the technical issues.  Actually, go look at the UK review.  For the most part, the UK review agrees on graphics and sound, giving them a 3.0 and 1.0 respectively, despite the overall 9.1 score. 

Regardless of all this.  I would agree that the IGN rating system is pretty flawed.  I think a system like Giantbomb's or 1up/EGM's is much better for focusing the reader on the text as opposed to the score, and for being able to use the entire scale.  As opposed to the 1 to 10 system where it seems like only the top half is ever used anyways. 

#27 Posted by p4ddym1607 (995 posts) -
EvilTwin said:
"Well, as you'll notice on the closing comments, those scores aren't averaged into a final score.  Just because the graphics or sound are particularly bad, doesn't mean the reviewer even has to factor that into their final score.  If he thought the gameplay was amazing, he might have given it a great score despite his feelings on the technical issues.  Actually, go look at the UK review.  For the most part, the UK review agrees on graphics and sound, giving them a 3.0 and 1.0 respectively, despite the overall 9.1 score. 

Regardless of all this.  I would agree that the IGN rating system is pretty flawed.  I think a system like Giantbomb's or 1up/EGM's is much better for focusing the reader on the text as opposed to the score, and for being able to use the entire scale.  As opposed to the 1 to 10 system where it seems like only the top half is ever used anyways. "
I know its not an average but when I read the review i can only imagine that he is giving the sound and graphics way too much weight. All the important things a soccer management simulator needs to have, he touched on and said that the detail was mindboggling. That alone should be worth a pretty good score. 7 at the least.
#28 Posted by Dalai (7074 posts) -
EvilTwin said:
"Well, as you'll notice on the closing comments, those scores aren't averaged into a final score.  Just because the graphics or sound are particularly bad, doesn't mean the reviewer even has to factor that into their final score.  If he thought the gameplay was amazing, he might have given it a great score despite his feelings on the technical issues.  Actually, go look at the UK review.  For the most part, the UK review agrees on graphics and sound, giving them a 3.0 and 1.0 respectively, despite the overall 9.1 score. 

Regardless of all this.  I would agree that the IGN rating system is pretty flawed.  I think a system like Giantbomb's or 1up/EGM's is much better for focusing the reader on the text as opposed to the score, and for being able to use the entire scale.  As opposed to the 1 to 10 system where it seems like only the top half is ever used anyways. "
That has to be the biggest flaw in IGN's system.  I do like IGN in general and it's one of my main sources, but breaking down the reviews into specific categories can be confusing if the review score doesn't match the overall rating.  I have no problem with summarizing graphics, sound, etc., but I wouldn't attach a score to them in favor of an overall number.
#29 Posted by p4ddym1607 (995 posts) -
Dalai said:
"EvilTwin said:
"Well, as you'll notice on the closing comments, those scores aren't averaged into a final score.  Just because the graphics or sound are particularly bad, doesn't mean the reviewer even has to factor that into their final score.  If he thought the gameplay was amazing, he might have given it a great score despite his feelings on the technical issues.  Actually, go look at the UK review.  For the most part, the UK review agrees on graphics and sound, giving them a 3.0 and 1.0 respectively, despite the overall 9.1 score. 

Regardless of all this.  I would agree that the IGN rating system is pretty flawed.  I think a system like Giantbomb's or 1up/EGM's is much better for focusing the reader on the text as opposed to the score, and for being able to use the entire scale.  As opposed to the 1 to 10 system where it seems like only the top half is ever used anyways. "
That has to be the biggest flaw in IGN's system.  I do like IGN in general and it's one of my main sources, but breaking down the reviews into specific categories can be confusing if the review score doesn't match the overall rating.  I have no problem with summarizing graphics, sound, etc., but I wouldn't attach a score to them in favor of an overall number."
Totally agree. Review scores are vague enough without having to think of a number for each category. Especially when some games, graphics arent as important. It just confuses the reader further.
#30 Posted by Willy105 (4691 posts) -

Somebody fired IGN's content editor, because this isn't like IGN. This isn't like a professional review site either.

#31 Posted by p4ddym1607 (995 posts) -
Willy105 said:
"Somebody fired IGN's content editor, because this isn't like IGN. This isn't like a professional review site either."
Yea. Very badly written. I dont really read too many IGN reviews but i have started listeing to their podcasts. Mainly Podcast Beyond. All the guys on there seem very smart. Its a mixed bunch over there.

I have sent an email to IGN. I am hopeful that this review will be deleted.
#32 Posted by Weltal (2276 posts) -
p4ddym1607 said:
"And i thought it was just the reviewer that was ignorant...

Reviews are opinions. Fine. But a review has to be fair. How would you like it if you made a game and the reviewer said it was shit for all the wrong reasons. Saying that the graphics are terrible and sound are terrible when the game is not at all about that. Its fine to say that the graphics are shit and the sound sucks. But to say that is why the game is overall a bad game is terrible.

The biggest part of this game is the database of players and the detail of the stats for all these players and the teams. And the overall power you have to manipulate each little detail of the players, teams, leagues etc. Kudos to the reviewer because he pointed this out and said that this aspect is simply "mindboggling". The fact that the lack of sound and lack of graphical stimulus made the game drop to a 2.0 despite the fact that the game is not about the sound and graphical appeal.

"
When did he say the game was bad because of the graphics or the audio issues? He clearly makes a case for the fact that he, as in HIS OPINION, didn't like any aspect of the game. He was as fair as an opinion based review can be, he doesn't like management sims. Why is that so hard to comprehend, he is allowed to express an opinion of a game in a review and you are allowed to disagree and play the hell out of said game.

You seem to be taking issue not with the content of the review but rather the simple fact that he gave it a 2.0. Great, another score based complaint. Look, you know you like this type of game, you can read that article and see that it's a game you might enjoy but the reviewer didn't. Maybe he was a bad choice for this review but you can't simply snub up your nose and tell him he should have lied and just gone with whatever other reviews were saying rather than taking it from his perspective. That's worse than giving a game a low score because you didn't like it, that's simply giving in to people like you who think every reviewer needs to share your opinion or they are outright wrong.

It's not ignorance. It's called a difference of opinion.

#33 Posted by jakob187 (21763 posts) -

*ugh*  After dealing with all these idiot customers today, I just don't have it in me to argue anymore.  I understand your point of view, but you obviously won't listen to anyone else's, as you consider anyone against your point of view to be "ignorant"...and therefore, it's almost pointless to argue with someone that refuses to listen to both sides of an argument.

Tis the internet...
#34 Posted by TomA (2531 posts) -

All reviews should just be text,no number.

#35 Posted by gakon (1952 posts) -

I don't think this is a score issue... the review I read seemed like a really low score; dude didn't like this game at all.  But they really need someone else to review this game, and you can see that near the end of the review:

"However, if you're a big footie fan and big fan of sports simulation, you'll be extremely impressed with the depth of Worldwide Soccer Manager, which allows you to control just about every facet of your team and draw from a player pool that is simply mindboggling"

First off, whether this game is good or not, how qualified is this guy to review this type of game at all?  I don't know anything about IGN's staff, but I would assume they got their sports guy to review this game.  But this isn't a game for sports fans; well, it sort of is, but within the realm of sports games this is its own thing off to the side.  Find someone who knows the soccer sim genre; someone who knows what makes a game like this good or bad.

"This game obviously aims to provide the deepest soccer simulation experience possible for the sport’s most passionate and informed fans, but it offers little to nothing that would appeal to a casual fan of the sport or to the average videogame enthusiast."

No, it wouldn't, and so what?  This also reinforces the lack of knowledge this guy probably has about sports sim games.  "Well, it looks pretty complicated, but I don't like it."

"I couldn’t imagine why anybody would prefer Worldwide Soccer Manager to FIFA 09 or Pro Evolution Soccer 2009."


And, way to compare two types of sports games that are different.  Once again, you got your general sports guy to write a review on a type of sports games unfamiliar to him, and eventually a comparison to traditional sports games is brought up.

I get that this guy doesn't like the game; that's fine.  It's a niche genre like flight sims, or really just sims in general.  But that's not the review IGN readers want (I would hope), especially those who actually know what these games are all about.  And if you're not into sims, clearly this isn't the one that gets all the non-sim players into it, so why even cover this game in the first place if you don't have someone more qualified to do so?  I would have skipped right over this review, so I - and most people - don't have anything to gain by having the obvious pointed out to us: sim games are for sim fans.

#36 Posted by zitosilva (1841 posts) -
TomA said:
"

All reviews should just be text,no number.

"
Couldn't agree more with you.
#37 Edited by p4ddym1607 (995 posts) -
jakob187 said:
"*ugh*  After dealing with all these idiot customers today, I just don't have it in me to argue anymore.  I understand your point of view, but you obviously won't listen to anyone else's, as you consider anyone against your point of view to be "ignorant"...and therefore, it's almost pointless to argue with someone that refuses to listen to both sides of an argument.

Tis the internet...
"
There is no two sides. If you read the comments in the review itself you will see that all people condemn the review too. 74 comments all saying what a retard this reviewer is.
I am not listening to a side of an argument that involves accepting such a terrible review. You obviously havent read the review or else you would have seen how badly written it is, how his points are not fair and balanced. I mean he compared the game to Fifa and Pro Evo. Does that tell you something?

You yourself obviously dont understand what I am getting at. I am not condemning him from having an opinion. Read the UK review and then read the US review. If you have any inteligence then you will see what i am talking about.
#38 Posted by p4ddym1607 (995 posts) -

And what could be even worse than this guys review is the fact that IGN let this review go up. Surely they have standards.

#39 Posted by p4ddym1607 (995 posts) -

Quite disappointed in some of the responses to this topic. Thought everyone would agree that the review was terrible. I originally saw the topic on GameSpot forums and every single response was in agreement that the review is terrible.

#40 Posted by Weltal (2276 posts) -
p4ddym1607 said:
"Quite disappointed in some of the responses to this topic. Thought everyone would agree that the review was terrible. I originally saw the topic on GameSpot forums and every single response was in agreement that the review is terrible."
Yeah, don't you hate it when people disagree with you and don't simply line up behind you in agreement. Damn ignorant people.
#41 Posted by Red (5994 posts) -

You can't say that a review is terrible because someone puts their opinion in it though. You could say it's bad by mis-reporting facts or if it makes useless points or compares it to something it shouldn't of. 

#42 Posted by p4ddym1607 (995 posts) -
Red said:
"You can't say that a review is terrible because someone puts their opinion in it though. You could say it's bad by mis-reporting facts or if it makes useless points or compares it to something it shouldn't of. "
Didnt i point out why the review is terrible. Point by point.

Weltal
said:
Yeah, don't you hate it when people disagree with you and don't simply line up behind you in agreement. Damn ignorant people."
I hate when people disagree with facts. You obviously havent read the review. Its like reviewing Sim City and saying that it is crap because you would rather be driving around the city like in GTAIV. Damn ignorant people.
#43 Posted by p4ddym1607 (995 posts) -
Red said:
 or compares it to something it shouldn't of. "
Ha! You didnt read the review or you would know it does compare it to Fifa and Pro Evo. Uncomparable games!
#44 Posted by p4ddym1607 (995 posts) -

Heres my Gears of War 2 review:


This game is great in every way but the guys are kinda chunky. I mean they are really thick.

I am giving it a 2.0 because the guys are just too chunky to enjoy anything else.



That is as fair a review as this IGN guys review.
#45 Posted by StaticFalconar (4850 posts) -

In reading most of that, I can conclude this.


the single score is meaningless therefore we have metacritic.

The score overall is meaningless, therefore this is why one must read the review!!!!

But other than that I see no reason why the review should be taken down.

If any game was only gonna be reviewed by those that only love it and is part of the audience it caters to; then why any reviews at all?
This is why Metacritic or just reading a bunch of reviews in general are available since you can see from different perspectives who likes it and who doesn't.

At the end of the day, isn't that the purpose of the review?

The guy said why he didn't like it, and gave his stance. Now if the reader was in a similar stance or personality as the reviewer, he might feel that way as well. This why there is a term called "Mixed reviews", and "cult favorite".

#46 Edited by jakob187 (21763 posts) -
p4ddym1607 said:
"jakob187 said:
"*ugh*  After dealing with all these idiot customers today, I just don't have it in me to argue anymore.  I understand your point of view, but you obviously won't listen to anyone else's, as you consider anyone against your point of view to be "ignorant"...and therefore, it's almost pointless to argue with someone that refuses to listen to both sides of an argument.

Tis the internet...
"
There is no two sides. If you read the comments in the review itself you will see that all people condemn the review too. 74 comments all saying what a retard this reviewer is.
I am not listening to a side of an argument that involves accepting such a terrible review. You obviously havent read the review or else you would have seen how badly written it is, how his points are not fair and balanced. I mean he compared the game to Fifa and Pro Evo. Does that tell you something?

You yourself obviously dont understand what I am getting at. I am not condemning him from having an opinion. Read the UK review and then read the US review. If you have any inteligence then you will see what i am talking about."
*ugh*  Fine, I'll argue.  

Most people will absolutely follow the herd without thinking twice, whether it's something silly or serious.  Therefore, simply saying that 76 comments on IGN think the review is bad and Gamespot forums saying it's bad sounds to me like people just want to bitch for bitching's sake.  This is a herald franchise in England, apparently...and if that works for England, well good for them then.  Meanwhile, I think this reviewer looked at it from a COMPLETELY different standpoint than from the UK review.  The US reviewer was coming into the franchise for, what seems like, the first time.

It's funny that you mention that I didn't read the reviews for both, however.  The US review hit very much on the technical points...which hearing that there is no sound while I'm surfing through the menus...that already turned me off.  I don't want to sit and play a simulation game, personally, without at least SOMETHING to keep me from ripping my hair out through the menus.  The US review was also almost spot on with the Presentation, Sound, and Graphics scores...if you didn't notice...when you compare it to the UK review.  What's even funnier to me is the way you've taken a lot of the review out of context.  You say that he is COMPARING this game to FIFA 09 or Pro Evo 09?  Where was this so-called "comparison"?  Yeah, I saw the part in the Lasting Appeal section where he said that he doesn't understand why people would play this when they could play FIFA 09 or Pro Evo 09...but that's a COMPARISON?  No, that's him saying that he felt games like FIFA 09 and Pro Evo 09, where you are actually playing soccer, are far more fun and fulfilling to him than navigating through a shitload of menus.  I'm sure that this dood was FULLY aware that he was playing a simulation game.  I just think he got to the point where he realized he wasn't enjoying it at all, and in turn, he would rather be playing a game where he actually PLAYED soccer than surfing through menus.

He says very plainly in his review that the "incredibly complex menu system is very difficult to navigate, even with the on-screen help box directing you through the process", and then he points out that "unless you really enjoy clicking on menu buttons, you'll find your interaction with this game extremely disappointing".  This is the part where he is saddened that the game doesn't actually feature any form of real gameplay...but even then, it doesn't even necessarily need gameplay.  There could've very well been some interesting way to interact with the whole thing, but instead, it's all just clicking buttons...and to NO SOUND nonetheless.  I'm sorry, but me personally...if you are going to present me with a shitload of menus...I need something to fucking listen to at LEAST!  Seriously, NO sound?  *ugh*  Talk about droning on and on.

Hell, even in his paragraph before the Closing Comments, as well as IN the closing comments, you must've missed the parts where he said:

"If you're a big footie fan and big fan of sports simulation, you'll be extremely impressed with the depth of Worldwide Soccer Manager, which allows you to control just about every facet of your team and draw from a player pool that is simply mindboggling.  This game obviously aims to provide the deepest soccer simulation experience possible for the sport's most passionate and informed fans, but it offers little to nothing that would appeal to a casual fan of the sport or to the average videogame enthusiast."

I think that is a GREAT way of summing this up.  He plainly says that yes, fans of the franchise will fucking love it.  However, he reviewed it from more than just the aspect of someone who KNOWS the franchise.  He reviewed it from the aspect of a first-timer as well...and with that, he points out very plainly and bluntly that it is a game that is extremely complex, takes a long ass time to pick up and learn, and in turn...if you aren't a diehard football fan, then you aren't really going to get much out of the game.

Now, the 2.0 score...yeah, I'll say that might be a low blow.  The review, to me, reads more like a 5 or a 6 with the way that he worded the last two paragraphs alone.  However, the fact that people are calling this review bullshit simply because he didn't follow the same thing as the UK dood.  The UK review read like the kind of guy that has played the franchise forever and already KNOWS everything in it, and that's perfectly fine as well.  However, if I was a FAN of the series and a CONTINUING player, the UK dood would have the better review to me...but if I were someone that's never touched this franchise before and wanting something new to try out...man, Burk's review isn't necessarily a bad thing to have around.  I mean, it's not like Burk even just flat-out bitched and said "this game sucks BECAUSE it has menus".  He stated that the menu since was overly complex and difficult for first-time players to come into, EVEN WITH the help turned on!!!


So, maybe you need to stop thinking from the point of view of someone who KNOWS the series and start looking from the perspective of someone who has never touched it.  Personally, I'm glad to see that this dood didn't just review it based on the fact that it is a sim game.  He gave a very critical and objective review, just as much as the other guy in the UK review did.  I think, with both of these reviews combined (man, I want to say "I am Captain Planet" right there), you can get the full-on comprehensive review for the game.


  • Overly complex menu system that can be overwhelming to newcomers
  • Gigantic player pool and huge depth in the management of every detail and facet of your team
  • No sound is fucking annoying as shit
  • The overall presentation could've very well been focused on a little more
  • Football diehards will love it, and especially if you live in Europe (so it seems)
  • Casual or even moderate gamers may want to avoid it due to a HUGE learning curve that may detract from their overall experience

I mean, hell...I think that's a damn FAIR review for the game.

So stop your bitching, as well as everyone else.  The dood offered up an opinion, and at least he's willing to take the heat for it.  If you don't like the fact that he gave the game a bad review...then maybe you should tell Sports Interactive that their game could sell even MORE copies if they would make some changes in order to bring NEW people into the game...rather than just constantly relying on the same ol' fanbase over and over.

For my final rant...bitching about this review is like bitching about a Dynasty Warriors, Samurai Warriors, or Warriors Orochi review...or moreover, like bitching about a Romance of the Three Kingdoms review...and then those reviews saying "yep, nothing has changed really...don't like it".  Just because someone had a very poor experience with a game (which is essentially what a review is about - one's opinionated experience with a game) and gave it a bad review, that doesn't mean that it's the end-all, be-all of reviews.  Obviously, the "niche" audience has the game they wanted, but the fact that Burk was willing to take some flak and say "you know what, the game isn't honestly any different...and it's tough to pick up if you don't know anything about it"...I show that man some fucking respect for having some fucking balls!
#47 Posted by Weltal (2276 posts) -
p4ddym1607 said:
Weltal said:
Yeah, don't you hate it when people disagree with you and don't simply line up behind you in agreement. Damn ignorant people."
I hate when people disagree with facts. You obviously havent read the review. Its like reviewing Sim City and saying that it is crap because you would rather be driving around the city like in GTAIV. Damn ignorant people."
So whether or not a game is good is a fact now? Damn, I guess I understand why you're mad at this reviewer now. You liked the game but he didn't and sense he knows more about games and therefore the facts of your personal taste you feel conflicted by his statement that is a bad game. Let me set you free, a review is an opinion of a game. Nothing more.

I have read the review. Is it really that hard to believe people can read that review and come away with a different though process than your own? Your example doesn't cover this review, I guess in your hysteria you didn't realize he was making a comment about his distaste for the game and commenting on some better games in the football genre. Sorry, I guess you though he was drawling a parallel there within the football simulation field. Nope, he was just saying there are better games with which to spend your time. Perhaps you should read the review again?

But your right. He doesn't give a fair opinion (For example: One that matches your own) so lets take that sucker down! While we're at it, any other reviews you disagree with? A 9 that just should have been a 10? That damn pesky game that got an 8's when you KNOW they should have given it a 3? Lets just get all these grievances out in the open so we can rectify them as soon as possible!
#48 Posted by p4ddym1607 (995 posts) -
StaticFalconar said:
"In reading most of that, I can conclude this.


the single score is meaningless therefore we have metacritic.

The score overall is meaningless, therefore this is why one must read the review!!!!

But other than that I see no reason why the review should be taken down.

If any game was only gonna be reviewed by those that only love it and is part of the audience it caters to; then why any reviews at all?
This is why Metacritic or just reading a bunch of reviews in general are available since you can see from different perspectives who likes it and who doesn't.

At the end of the day, isn't that the purpose of the review?

The guy said why he didn't like it, and gave his stance. Now if the reader was in a similar stance or personality as the reviewer, he might feel that way as well. This why there is a term called "Mixed reviews", and "cult favorite"."
I have read reviews before where you can tell that the person doesnt really enjoy that type of gameplay. But they always point this out properly and professionally.

This game is an annual game and every single other review of this game has listed at  least some of the new features of this version compared to last years version. I mean to not even bother going on wikipedia and list some of the new features just shows you how much he cares about writing the review. Someone like that shouldnt be writing reviews. I could have wrote a better, more informed, and fairer review without even playing the game. Just going by the list of new features.
You shouldnt get someone to review a game they know nothing about and dont seem to care enough about to even look up wikipedia to find out what audience it is intended for. Could he not have concluded and said  "yes i dont like the game but millions do because of these reasons that still dont quite cut it for me". You are suppose to inform the reader in a way that conveys your opinion also. This review is basically "This game really is shit. I dont know how anyone could like this". What is the reader suppose to gain from reading this. So the purpose of the review is not just so some asshole can give you his opinion. It is a lot more than doing just that.

Each game in this series has sold millions of copies each. Its a top notch product and isnt just some game only a couple of people play or care about. To have someone come and just shit all over it and for that to be someone from IGN just saddens me. One of the biggest, if not the biggest review site on the net to publish such an unprofessional review is just ridiculous.
#49 Edited by jakob187 (21763 posts) -
p4ddym1607 said:
"Each game in this series has sold millions of copies each. Its a top notch product and isnt just some game only a couple of people play or care about. To have someone come and just shit all over it and for that to be someone from IGN just saddens me. One of the biggest, if not the biggest review site on the net to publish such an unprofessional review is just ridiculous."
So because it is part of a best-selling series that sells millions of copies each year, that gives it merit to automatically get a good review?

Because...ya know...Need for Speed sells millions of copies each year...and so does Dynasty Warriors...

Look, I'm not trying to say that the game is shit.  I just think you and a ton of other people are COMPLETELY blowing this review out of context just because he picked on your perennial favorite.  It's fucking stupid.  You know, the same upheaval would've come around if someone wrote a review for Metal Gear Solid 4 saying "well, it's not really about stealth anymore, you'll sit and watch a shitload of movies, the story is pretty much just as convoluted as past entries, and overall...I think there will be a ton of people that like it, but I just didn't find a very worthwhile package in it during my time with the game."  People would be in the SAME exact outrage...and you know what?  Every single thing that I listed off is FEATURED IN METAL GEAR SOLID 4...and that's not even including the clunky ass controls and the sometimes-iffy camera.  Nonetheless, reviewers somehow always manage to overlook that shit and just give it a perfect 10.

I remember back when I was reviewing at BonusStage, and we refused to give God of War anything higher than a 9.1, and people were FURIOUS with us about that shit.  Now, granted, it's not a 2.0...but regardless, everyone else was bitching because we didn't think it was perfect...and that we didn't think Halo 2 was perfect (that was a 9.0), but we did think that Resident Evil 4 on GC was perfect.  IT'S A FUCKING OPINION!  IT'S A REVIEW!!!  REVIEWS ARE OPINIONS!!!  It's so STUPID to think that one review is the end-all, be-all.  Jeff gave MK vs. DCU a 5-star review, and so many people took that to mean it was perfect!  NO!  If you were to give a range to the fifth star by basic logical standards, that would be a "score" of anywhere between 80 - 100.  Nonetheless, that's not what the 5-star means.  It means that this is a game you can spend $60 on and you won't feel like you wasted your money one bit.

Numbers are numbers.  In reading the text of these two reviews, I feel like both reviewers gave damn good reviews, both from very different spectrums that offer a varying opinion that I think is absolutely NECESSARY to make a fully informed decision on this game.  Just kissing the franchise's ass for basically not improving any seems to me like utter bullshit!  I mean, people don't kiss Madden's ass!!!
#50 Posted by p4ddym1607 (995 posts) -
jakob187 said:
"p4ddym1607 said:
"jakob187 said:
"*ugh*  After dealing with all these idiot customers today, I just don't have it in me to argue anymore.  I understand your point of view, but you obviously won't listen to anyone else's, as you consider anyone against your point of view to be "ignorant"...and therefore, it's almost pointless to argue with someone that refuses to listen to both sides of an argument.

Tis the internet...
"
There is no two sides. If you read the comments in the review itself you will see that all people condemn the review too. 74 comments all saying what a retard this reviewer is.
I am not listening to a side of an argument that involves accepting such a terrible review. You obviously havent read the review or else you would have seen how badly written it is, how his points are not fair and balanced. I mean he compared the game to Fifa and Pro Evo. Does that tell you something?

You yourself obviously dont understand what I am getting at. I am not condemning him from having an opinion. Read the UK review and then read the US review. If you have any inteligence then you will see what i am talking about."
*ugh*  Fine, I'll argue.  

Most people will absolutely follow the herd without thinking twice, whether it's something silly or serious.  Therefore, simply saying that 76 comments on IGN think the review is bad and Gamespot forums saying it's bad sounds to me like people just want to bitch for bitching's sake.  This is a herald franchise in England, apparently...and if that works for England, well good for them then.  Meanwhile, I think this reviewer looked at it from a COMPLETELY different standpoint than from the UK review.  The US reviewer was coming into the franchise for, what seems like, the first time.

It's funny that you mention that I didn't read the reviews for both, however.  The US review hit very much on the technical points...which hearing that there is no sound while I'm surfing through the menus...that already turned me off.  I don't want to sit and play a simulation game, personally, without at least SOMETHING to keep me from ripping my hair out through the menus.  The US review was also almost spot on with the Presentation, Sound, and Graphics scores...if you didn't notice...when you compare it to the UK review.  What's even funnier to me is the way you've taken a lot of the review out of context.  You say that he is COMPARING this game to FIFA 09 or Pro Evo 09?  Where was this so-called "comparison"?  Yeah, I saw the part in the Lasting Appeal section where he said that he doesn't understand why people would play this when they could play FIFA 09 or Pro Evo 09...but that's a COMPARISON?  No, that's him saying that he felt games like FIFA 09 and Pro Evo 09, where you are actually playing soccer, are far more fun and fulfilling to him than navigating through a shitload of menus.  I'm sure that this dood was FULLY aware that he was playing a simulation game.  I just think he got to the point where he realized he wasn't enjoying it at all, and in turn, he would rather be playing a game where he actually PLAYED soccer than surfing through menus.

He says very plainly in his review that the "incredibly complex menu system is very difficult to navigate, even with the on-screen help box directing you through the process", and then he points out that "unless you really enjoy clicking on menu buttons, you'll find your interaction with this game extremely disappointing".  This is the part where he is saddened that the game doesn't actually feature any form of real gameplay...but even then, it doesn't even necessarily need gameplay.  There could've very well been some interesting way to interact with the whole thing, but instead, it's all just clicking buttons...and to NO SOUND nonetheless.  I'm sorry, but me personally...if you are going to present me with a shitload of menus...I need something to fucking listen to at LEAST!  Seriously, NO sound?  *ugh*  Talk about droning on and on.

Hell, even in his paragraph before the Closing Comments, as well as IN the closing comments, you must've missed the parts where he said:

"If you're a big footie fan and big fan of sports simulation, you'll be extremely impressed with the depth of Worldwide Soccer Manager, which allows you to control just about every facet of your team and draw from a player pool that is simply mindboggling.  This game obviously aims to provide the deepest soccer simulation experience possible for the sport's most passionate and informed fans, but it offers little to nothing that would appeal to a casual fan of the sport or to the average videogame enthusiast."

I think that is a GREAT way of summing this up.  He plainly says that yes, fans of the franchise will fucking love it.  However, he reviewed it from more than just the aspect of someone who KNOWS the franchise.  He reviewed it from the aspect of a first-timer as well...and with that, he points out very plainly and bluntly that it is a game that is extremely complex, takes a long ass time to pick up and learn, and in turn...if you aren't a diehard football fan, then you aren't really going to get much out of the game.

Now, the 2.0 score...yeah, I'll say that might be a low blow.  The review, to me, reads more like a 5 or a 6 with the way that he worded the last two paragraphs alone.  However, the fact that people are calling this review bullshit simply because he didn't follow the same thing as the UK dood.  The UK review read like the kind of guy that has played the franchise forever and already KNOWS everything in it, and that's perfectly fine as well.  However, if I was a FAN of the series and a CONTINUING player, the UK dood would have the better review to me...but if I were someone that's never touched this franchise before and wanting something new to try out...man, Burk's review isn't necessarily a bad thing to have around.  I mean, it's not like Burk even just flat-out bitched and said "this game sucks BECAUSE it has menus".  He stated that the menu since was overly complex and difficult for first-time players to come into, EVEN WITH the help turned on!!!


So, maybe you need to stop thinking from the point of view of someone who KNOWS the series and start looking from the perspective of someone who has never touched it.  Personally, I'm glad to see that this dood didn't just review it based on the fact that it is a sim game.  He gave a very critical and objective review, just as much as the other guy in the UK review did.  I think, with both of these reviews combined (man, I want to say "I am Captain Planet" right there), you can get the full-on comprehensive review for the game.


  • Overly complex menu system that can be overwhelming to newcomers
  • Gigantic player pool and huge depth in the management of every detail and facet of your team
  • No sound is fucking annoying as shit
  • The overall presentation could've very well been focused on a little more
  • Football diehards will love it, and especially if you live in Europe (so it seems)
  • Casual or even moderate gamers may want to avoid it due to a HUGE learning curve that may detract from their overall experience

I mean, hell...I think that's a damn FAIR review for the game.

So stop your bitching, as well as everyone else.  The dood offered up an opinion, and at least he's willing to take the heat for it.  If you don't like the fact that he gave the game a bad review...then maybe you should tell Sports Interactive that their game could sell even MORE copies if they would make some changes in order to bring NEW people into the game...rather than just constantly relying on the same ol' fanbase over and over.

For my final rant...bitching about this review is like bitching about a Dynasty Warriors, Samurai Warriors, or Warriors Orochi review...or moreover, like bitching about a Romance of the Three Kingdoms review...and then those reviews saying "yep, nothing has changed really...don't like it".  Just because someone had a very poor experience with a game (which is essentially what a review is about - one's opinionated experience with a game) and gave it a bad review, that doesn't mean that it's the end-all, be-all of reviews.  Obviously, the "niche" audience has the game they wanted, but the fact that Burk was willing to take some flak and say "you know what, the game isn't honestly any different...and it's tough to pick up if you don't know anything about it"...I show that man some fucking respect for having some fucking balls!
"
Good read. Hey i am fine with a low score. I dont care about the score. As long as his review seems to equal the score. Like he gave it a 2 but he seemed to be so mindboggled about the detail and the "power" at your fingertips when playing this game. And that is what this game set out to do. It set out to create a tool in which you can control almost everything a manager in real life can control (Hence the fact that it is a simulator). You can fine a player 2 weeks wages for being an asshole, you can set your players to practice dribbling around cones at 12 pm on thursday morning (yes, you can).
And doing these things affects your players, opponenets etc. Its a very deep simulation. When reading through the review i was waiting for some anecdotal evidence of his frustration that obviously lead to a 2.0 score. Like he didnt seem to discuss how the game worked or anything. Like if i imagine myself as a person who has never seen the game before, and then read his review. All i am left thinking would be how shit that game is. "Hey it doesnt even have sound!" But because i have played it, i know that it is not to do with the sound or the graphics or anything. Its all about the simulation. And thats what you get. A really well thought out set of tools in which you can be a manager of a football team.

 And i just dont think that a game company that worked hard and succeeded in what they set out to do should be punished by a reviewer who didnt inform the readers very well, gave an unfair score even based on his writing it was unfairly low. I mean this is IGN. If this was some shitty unheard of game blog then i wouldnt really care. But it sucks because people will read this and just be turned off. Not like they might not have been anyway but at least give them a chance to understand the game. And then learn why you didnt like it and then be able to make an informed decision wether you would or wouldnt be interested in that game.