@Meowayne: I have heard that of the second, third and fourth, but have not played them. Also haven't played a Metal Gear or a Final Fantasy after VI. I thought if Portal had been a bit longer and flushed out a bit more character out of the protagonist I would have liked it a whole lot more. As far as Braid, I was so hyped up before playing it that I came away from the story with a resounding "meh."
Everyone who is saying "Mass Effect 2" in this thread disappoints me. That game has the story of, at best, a B-level summer action movie. It took film around 50 years to finally start coming up with great stories, and I think games are heading in the right direction. There will still be your Call of Duties like there are your A-Team movies, but there is no big budget game-comparisons to a film like "Moon."
@drakattack: First of all, as someone who is also a games enthusiast and freelance journalist, I have no idea where you got these grand ideas that video reviews are something sacred. A written review is supposed to be your final and full opinion of a game, and unless you have a tight word count you should be able to address everything you like and didn't like. Thus a video review is nothing more than a way to present this written review in another medium. If you want editorializing of the subject, look no further than the Bombcast, in which the four guys will frequently talk about their opinions of the game in a more free-form way. Second of all, I don't know what they taught you in your journalism classes, but being an elitist and throwing in lines with charged language like "Let me explain why again more clearly, since the internet is even more dense than I previously assumed " and this (also maybe one of the most classy lines ever written) "Ryan, if you ever read this, remember that you are a five star chef and while most of your restaurant is filled with pallet (it's spelled palate) ignorant (it would be palate-ignorant, which is still not what you meant to say because this means they are ignorant to what a palate is) fools who are more than happy to eat any crap you cook up for them, there is always someone sitting alone in the back who knows your true skill and expects your finest dish every time (this sentence runs on longer than the Mississippi)" are not the best ways to get your point across. Third of all even if this was a "drop" in quality as you say it was, it just means they probably wanted to get a Mario video review up for increased traffic because people don't like to read. That's why our industry is falling apart. Lastly I apologize in advance for any spelling or grammatical mistakes, I'm a bit loopy on Oxycontin as my wisdom teeth were removed not 10 hours ago.
I was going to post in this thread but I cannot legitimately think of 5 games with "great" stories. The only ones that come to mind are the first three Ace Attorney games. There is set-up in the first game that is delivered upon in the third game, and it really pays off (even when it goes bat-shit insane).
As an amateur critic I've discussed this idea of having an "expert" on a game/series/what-have-you reviewing the latest installment, and my idea is as follows:
While you do get the additional perspective/history that someone new to the series might not have, the majority of the reviews you see coming from "experts" on the game are either highly positive or very negative. They feel like they have to qualify their review based on their expertise, either having the opinion "this did not live up to the prequel... 2/10" or "this was way better than the prequel... 10/10." While a critic should take the series' history into consideration in a review, a game should not be judged solely on it's predecessors or competitors. This is how you get a less-biased opinion in a review because THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A REVIEWER WITHOUT BIAS. You cannot be unbiased when it is your job to review something.
As for your title, the review is written very well. It is not bad, you just do not agree with it. There is a difference. I could see if the review was poorly written, but this is just not the case.
@Al3xand. Or like when you said that you'll only have ads for "good" games, I guess when/if we see an ad on here we won't need to read a review, eh?
This is part of the problem. Reviews are meant to be read not for the score, but for the reviewers criticisms, good or bad. It's up to the reader to make his/her own opinions from it.
If a reviewer says something along the lines of "I didn't like this game because it has too much of X and not enough Y. 7/10" You may love X and hate Y, and in turn love the game. So in turn, the review has given you a chance to make your own opinion of it.
I agree with some of your points, but personal attacks are not the way to achieve your point.
Log in to comment