dgSean

@TaliciaDragonsong said:

I'm subscribed to this game mag here in Holland and what I like is that they have a pretty big cast of writers, each with their own interest and often they are paired with the games that suit them so you will really read things that matter.

A reviewer plays Darksiders, they draw the comparison to Zelda, This particular reviewer doesn't care for Zelda games, and therefore now has a bad overall opinion of the game. Sure, it's a bad fit, ideally you don't want this guy reviewing this game because he doesn't really like this style of game and may struggle to be objective about certain points. There are people like this reviewer who were interested in the game from the flashy marketing and have the same opinion of Zelda games. The reviewer's opinion is still valid, I feel it would be up to the reviewer to qualify why he doesn't like this game based on it's similarities to another game that he didn't like, but there is still a reason for the review to exist. Similarly @Wrighteous86 mentioned, he's a big Zelda fan, and as a result was underwhelmed. Again, a perfectly reasonable opinion, and he even qualified it to the point that other people who have similar extensive zelda background may appreciate hearing if they're on the fence about the game.

I'm with you though Talicia, Darksiders is one of my favorite games this generation. I often compared it to comfort food, in that it takes a lot of good parts from a lot of games that I've enjoyed (and even some I didn't), it all comes together in very familiar and satisfying way, just like a good comfort food should.

I guess it comes back to knowing the reviewer, and not taking anyone's opinion at face value if you haven't seen a body of work. If a reviewer takes the time to write the piece, you can be sure that the things they wrote matter to them (I agree with you that the 'it's kiddy' gripe is uninformative, but as long as it's not the only thing they said about the game then it's probably ok to mention it in passing), now whether or not that reviewers opinion matters to you is a different story all together. There are lots of reviewers that I completely skip because they write things like you've mentioned.

I agree with you entirely on the 'stealing' thing, rereading my comment I don't think it comes off as I intended it to. I don't think it should ever be held against them for simply implementing a mechanic similar to another game as long as it fits what they're trying to do (I'm looking at you AC:Revelations tower defense); it's true in any industry not just gaming, that if you're not learning from advances of your competitors, then you're missing opportunities to make your own product better (not that I want every game to be exactly the same either). Of course if it is done poorly they're going to get called out on it, but it doesn't have to be the end of the conversation. I'll use Sleeping Dogs again as example because it's fresh in my mind, the combat resembled the Arkham games, with the counter focused, rock paper scissors enemy types. It simply wasn't as deep, and it wasn't as fluid. The same can be said about the traversal mechanics. Never-the-less I had a decent time playing through the game; I'd caution people interested in it if they were specifically looking forward to the h2h combat, or the foot chase sequences that were prevalent in its marketing, they're not as tight as they might be expecting, but it's still a good enough time, I don't feel like I wasted my money on the game. 'Stealing' is a harsh word for it, but it can be very effective way to give a reader a frame of reference for things that can be difficult to explain when you're already dealing with some arbitrary word limit for a review targetting a gamer audience with the reputation of short attention spans (myself included). You're absolutely right in that it shouldn't automatically be held against the game as a fault.

Afterthought - geez I'm sorry, I didn't intend to be throwing novels at you, I always find this to be an interesting topic and I'm naturally long winded.

@Wrighteous86 said:

Darksiders does some interesting things with tone and story, but calling it "mature" is ridiculous, and I don't think THAT is what anyone wants from Zelda. Self-serious Zelda maybe, but not bloody, brooding, hulking Zelda.

Fair, maybe "mature", would have been more appropriate to use than simply mature. Of course no one wants to see Link as a hulking ball of hate, you couldn't just throw a Link skin on War and call it a day, that is not what I'm suggesting. It certainly scratched the mature Zelda game itch for me though, I can't imagine I'm completely alone on that.

My comments were don't directed at you specifically, I apologize if you somehow felt called out on the hate thing (I consider hate and underwhelmed very different things), I didn't see your previous post on the subject (still haven't) if there was one. I however will refer to my previous comment, and infer that you and I are simply looking for different things in games, and that's ok.

It seems to me a lot of people take the wrong approach to reviews in general, they think that every review on every site should be the same every time (ie they get upset when the scores don't match up every review the read). For me it has always been about the reviewer not the site they represent. I go out of my way to find reviews by people who have demonstrated over time similar tastes to mine. I'll always read reviews by (or listen to opinions of) Mr. Davis, because you can tell he wants to like video games and comes in with an optimistic approach, I feel I'm the same way. On the other hand, I read Mr. Gerstmann's work but I take it with a grain of salt knowing that we've disagreed on some things. This is certainly not supposed to be a knock or disrespectful in anyway we're just different people looking for different things in games. The sooner people start to get that (this day will never come), we might stop seeing people blowing up over review scores (for the record, I hate scores, read the words).

It's hard in video games because in a lot of cases we're not talking about sitting down for a couple hours to do the leg work for a review like they do in the movie industry, so you can't always get someone who's opinion you trust writing a review for a game that you're interested in. I like using the movies as a comparison because there is a wide range of people who do the reviews. Consider this, I have so little in common with a geriatric reviewer who has spent nearly his entirely life watching movies for a living, how could I possibly believe that my opinion of a film will be anywhere near his. And while the differences in video game reviewers isn't as drastic as in movie industry the concept is the same.

To the Darksiders points; my thing with the whole 'stealing' of mechanics from other games is that if you want me to take it seriously, you need to be as good or better as the game you're 'stealing' from otherwise I find it feels cheap. I think Darksiders was successful in that, and I loved it for it. An example of a game that didn't do that in my humble opinion, was Sleeping Dogs, you could tell what they were trying to do, but they didn't quite get there. I was floored by how much hate it got for 'stealing' from Zelda, especially when people had been crying for a mature Zelda title forever. And while Darksiders 2 didn't really feel like another Darksiders game, it did continue the tradition of taking mechanics and making it their own, ie Death's traversals look like they were lifted entirely from Prince of Persia, and executed well enough in my eyes as a PoP fan, to make it one of my favorite aspects of the game.

I don't necessarily agree with all of your opinions @TaliciaDragonsong , but you're certainly entitled to them, and it certainly made for an entertaining read, keep up the good work and fighting a good fight, we'll get to reasonable gaming communities someday... maybe ;)

I'm console agnostic, I grab them all because I hate missing out on exclusives. At this point there is more than enough Sony exclusives in the back catalog to justify the cost of the console IMHO.

It's pretty obvious to me that Live is worth the money if you do a lot of online gaming, I think you get what you pay for (it works really well), provided you can deal with the community. I can't deal with the maturity level (so much random unwarranted hate that I'd rather not play then listen to it) most of the time so I avoid it. As a result I always feel like I'm throwing that money away. I keep the sub active on the off chance of getting into a coop with people I know aren't annoying, but really I should be doing monthlies when the opportunity arises.

I buy a lot of games for full price at launch so a lot of the free stuff that comes up for PS+ I already have, even still I feel like I'm getting my money's worth on launch day discounts on downloadable titles, and the odd free title that I passed on on launch. But the online components can be cumbersome since it's not standardized like it is for Live, this is especially painful if you're used to the xbox experience.

I guess that would put my recommendation at definitely get a ps3 and ps+, but get the multiplayer focused games on xbox and live sub while you're still playing those games :)

I don't think the end of the cycle thing is a valid point against this deal at all. The people most likely to benefit from payment model are likely the same folks who will struggle to get in on launch day pricing for a console/games/accessories anyway. If history repeats the ps3/360 will still be viable for a while after the next round of consoles come out, and I'm sure there will be a few worth while games that trickle out after that as well, on top of that, these are the same people that generally have a back log of great old games to play because more often than not they don't buy new or wait for the price drops. If they're getting their first 360 now, regardless of new games coming out after the fact, you mean to tell me there isn't years worth of games in the library (that can be acquired cheaply) for them to play?

I think it's a good move, it's going to be interesting to see how it works out. Even for people like me with a good job, few responsibilities, and a spendy gaming habit, this sort of model would have resulted in far less bruises from the significant other the last time around, and if they offer it on the next round of consoles I'd more than likely get in on it.

(as an aside; trying to float the kinect installbase numbers?)

Sorry for drumming up an old thread! I stumbled this post and couldn't help but chime in.

I recently (within the last month) replayed Chrono Trigger for the first time since the 90s and I had a blast it's such a good game. It made me think, "hey, if Chrono Trigger stood the test of time as well as it did, maybe some of the other SNES RPGs I loved will too". I immediately thought Earthbound, I absolutely looooooved that game. I remember reading about it in Nintendo Power and being excited for it to come out. I'm about 11 hours into the game at this point and I can tell you it doesn't hold up nearly as well as Chrono Trigger did. For all the charm that Earthbound has, and as original as it was when it came out, and how lovable the characters are; the gameplay is lackluster at best. Everything from the inventory management, the lack of information presented to the player, and a battle system that favors more levels over strategy makes Earthbound pretty boring and outright tedious for someone who has played any number of RPGs. Knowing what I know now, I would have a very hard time recommending that anyone over the age of 14 (arbitrary number) go back and play this game, whereas I could still highly recommend Chrono Trigger to any JRPG fan who may have missed it or someone who just feels like playing a classic.

This thread has a deeper story than Rage did... it is a very satisfying shooter though, man iD knows how to make a rewarding shotgun.... The setting feels borderlands, but the rpg elements are pretty weak, some very limited crafting, and a sort of stupid inventory, and the fact that there are quests, and dungeons (sort of). The characters in borderlands were interesting, the ones in rage are totally forgetable.

I found it really fun when I was shooting stuff though. My advice, wait for a steam sale or the bargin bin, you'll get your money's worth.

It is a hell of a lot easier to go a couple days w/o your credit card to get the number changed than it is to recover from identity theft.... don't be dumb...

Quests are cool and all but this one blew up my laptop...  

I absolutely loved the story telling in indigo prophecy, it was definitely a one of a kinda experience.. I would play this game based on that alone, but it seems they've evolved on that quite a bit, I'm really looking forward to it.  
 
It's definitely not going to be for everyone though...