@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
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.
Log in to comment