chinakat65

Raging Bull is one of my top 5 favorite films, so I'm sorry to say that your opinion is wrong and invalidated by my clearly superior opinion.

In all seriousness though, The Mermaid. I usually enjoy foreign language films, but I think in this case, the cultural differences were too great for me to enjoy it in any capacity. I found it utterly stupid to the point where I was amazed anyone found it funny (and this is coming from a guy who enjoyed Freddy Got Fingered.) There were native language speakers in the audience laughing a lot, and I was so confused, perplexed and baffled that I left after 20 minutes. Only time I ever walked out of a movie theater.

It was just way too weird of a film.

I would say that not finishing a game should be the exception, not the rule. In general, understanding how a game is paced from start to finish is critical to understanding the overall quality of the game. Imagine if a reviewer only played half of Recore; they would probably give it an enthusiastic recommendation since they did not know about the lackluster second half. The player who picked it up however, would probably feel ripped off. For most games, knowing how consistent the quality is all the way until the end is important.

However, I think there are times where I personally don't mind if a reviewer finishes a game or not (I never really care that much, I would just choose to go to another critic if I took issue):

1. Wolpaw's Law. If the first 2/3 of the game is utterly horrible, I do not care how the last 1/3 turns out, and I don't care if the reviewer knows either. It's totally okay for a reviewer to come to the conclusion that, based on what s/he's played so far, that it is not worth it, no matter how good the rest of the game could be.

2. Really large open world games where the plot is kind of inconsequential. I've never finished Skyrim's main quest. That being said, I have over 100 hours clocked in on that game. Have I played enough to write a meaningful review? I certainly think so. For Bethesda style games, I'm more concerned with how much time they clocked in, rather than if they "beat the game" or not. This is personal, of course. This also applies to MMOs; I do not expect critics to get to max level before writing a review. That could take forever.

3. Rereleases of old games that the reviewer has already played. I count Gamespot's review of the Crash Bandicoot N. Sane trilogy here. After playing half of a rerelease, a critic has a very good understanding of the sorts of changes that have been made, and what s/he thinks of them. If they already beat the original versions, then they already know how the pacing is, and how consistent the quality is, so I don't think its a big deal to beat the game all over again to deliver a valid verdict on the rerelease.

In general though, its a good idea to finish the game, as the quality can change drastically over the course of the entire experience.

I know this thread's a month old, but the topic seems fun so why not post?

Tony Hawk's Pro Skater (Dreamcast version):

• Gameplay - 10
• Graphics - 7
• Sound - 8
• Value - 7
• Tilt - 9

Overall: 8.8 The only real problem that I have with this game is the lack of content. In pretty much any other game, this sort of content deficit would be unacceptable, but here it's actual not bad because the core gameplay is so totally addictive. I have spent quite a bit of time going through the career mode this past year and from start to finish, the gameplay has been utterly brilliant. Definitely recommended.

Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas (Xbox version):

• Gameplay - 6
• Graphics - 3
• Sound - 7
• Value - 7
• Tilt - 5

Overall: 5.6 I don't like this game much. It's okay I guess, but I feel like I'm missing something with this one. It's strange, because I enjoy all of the other main series 3D GTA games a lot, but this one does not do it for me. For one thing, the pacing is really bad, especially after you leave Los Santos. Getting anywhere is simply a chore as the map is so damn big, but about half of the map is totally uninteresting (the forests and deserts.) Starting a mission in Las Venturas that has you drive to Los Santos, only to fail the mission because your partner AI didn't do what it was supposed to do, resulting in your death, only to force you to drive all the way back to the mission start point in another city and go to a gun store and go to a restaurant on the way to restock on weapons and replenish your health isn't fun to me, especially if the mission is particularly difficult. It also doesn't help that the visuals on the Xbox are just flat-out bad since its so bland and aliased. Also, the game may be huge and has a lot to do in it, but I didn't find a ton of it worthwhile or interesting. When the game doesn't force you to go everywhere around the world and do tedious stuff, it's fun, but there are also a lot of frustrating moments that drag the whole thing down. Ultimately, it's mediocre in my opinion, and there are tons of other open-world games that do this sort of thing way better.

Leisure Suit Larry: Magna Cum Laude (PC Version):

• Gameplay - 5
• Graphics - 6
• Sound - 7
• Value - 5
• Tilt - 8

Overall:6.3 It's short with no replay value, the gameplay is repetitive with no depth, and the audiovisual presentation hasn't aged the best. But man, is this game funny. Like, really funny. It was a blast to play through just because I wanted to get to the next in-game conversation, which were all well-written and voiced. It's not for everyone, and it takes getting past some mediocre gameplay to enjoy, but if you have a sexually immature sense of humor like myself, its worth playing through.

If I respect said critic's judgement usually, I want to know why they think the way that they do. For instance, I love the first Crysis game. I believe that it is one of the best first-person shooters ever made. However, I often hear people claim that the game is cold and merely average at best, with notable critics such as Jeff, as well Adam Sessler agreeing. I've played through the game several times over the years, and I just don't get it. In cases like these, I want to hear their reasons why, because I am genuinely curious.