I mean, it's one thing to show some story stuff instead of gameplay, but showing story stuff and then talking without cease over it serves no purpose at all.
I really don't understand this criticism but see it often. Literally, the majority of their job is talking over video games. If you want to experience the game or its cutscenes without someone talking over them then you should think about buying the game or looking it up without commentary. I'm sure that stuff is on youtube by now.
I really want to ask all of the people that think someone else should have reviewed this game what emphasis they place on reviews.
Do you use them for purchasing advice? To reaffirm your own opinion?
To confirm or deny your preconceived notions? As a measure for your or someone else's taste?
And then ask how Dan reviewing this the way he did affect your emphasis?
What import does Dan reviewing this game have on the way you use reviews?
Did Dan give you enough information to form your own opinion?
Are you looking at Dan's reviews in a vacuum?
Do you realize that we will hear the other staffs opinion on the game on the podcast like we usually do?
Why is it so important to you that this review be as unbiased as possible?
Do you have that with other games/reviews or was it something about this one?
Is this really as big a deal as you're making it out to be?
I think we put too much emphasis on reviews and it is exactly the reason why we should be rethinking them. Discussions on the podcast or in quick looks are a lot more valuable than reviews usually are. It is easier to remove yourself from something that is written than something being talked about in communion or played right in front of you. Some of us look at non-objective reviews objectively and it's quite frankly a backward way of thinking. Maybe we need to think why we are here in the first place.
@trevorsmagicbin: I tend to agree but GB's comment section is a lot more friendly when compared to most if not all other outlets. Just take a peek at Gamespot's comment section on any review. It's not pretty.
No surprise Waypoint is down on it. Not a big fan of that site.
I don't agree with everything they say but that doesn't mean I don't like them. They are good dudes with a unique take on things. A lot of people don't like how social/political they are but I happen to align with them on a lot of that stuff so it works for me. I get how it doesn't for the people that are just in it for the games though and that's fair enough.
I feel like if they just named the Shadow Wr stuff what it really is- endgame content, most of the non-story related criticisms go away. Attacking the game for having extra stuff to make sure players are sated at the end of the game (a big criticism of the first game) feels like giving Destiny 2 a three star review because the raid and story sucks.
I feel like that's actually a really good comparison, and why there's a push back against the 'internet groupthink negativity' about this game. Almost all reviews talk about how it is a lot of fun, but the story and endgame are bad and not fun if you're not in for that, which describes Destiny 2 just as well. But that game doesn't have a negative campaign around it by the fans, so everyone is in live with it.
The problem with SoW is the same problems it has throughout, the story isn't the worst thing in the world but is far from great or even good in my opinion. I wouldn't call it atrocious but it is rote. Second, The mission design is boring and does not take advantage of SoW's strengths which without a doubt are its systems. The gameplay is good but does not make up for the boring scenarios the story missions put you in. On top of that when SoW gives you the good stuff in its campaign it repeats it over and over and over again sucking all the enjoyment I had out of those systems long before the game was even done extending to the endgame and beyond.
Destiny 2's story is totally okay. I wouldn't call it a great story but it's certainly way better compared to SoW's. That's my opinion but I don't think that's a crazy thing to say. Also, Destiny 2's gameplay is fantastic and is enough to carry it throughout the good and bad of its campaign and beyond. The large problem Destiny has is its lack of endgame content and how it handles loot (to put it simply). I don't think these games are comparable because they don't miss in the same ways as you claim.
If you like the game that's cool but claiming there is a hate campaign against it and your the only one that gets it? It's nice to have a high opinion of yourself and think you're special but in my case at least I have finished the game and largely agree with public opinion. Destiny is a 4 star game for me and SoW is a 3. I guess that makes me a sheep to you but whatever.
Yeah, I get the feeling people are making assumptions. South Park does poke both ways. Centrist viewpoints I guess. They don't conform to what one group of people say is not allowed to have jokes made about. This does not make them out of touch, it just means they have a differing opinion.
These days people are getting extremely pissed off about differing opinions. South Park is funny until it calls out some bullshit you do, then it's just them being out of touch.
Comedy has been like this since the inception of it. Everything is funny and a good laugh and people shouldn't take it so seriously, until the thing you really care about is put on the chopping block. Then all of a sudden a line as been crossed and it's apparently not okay and you hate the comedian all of a sudden.
Your not wrong on the whole but I think there is some nuance to be had here. In a social environment where everyone is backed into there respective corners having a huge pop culture show more or less stay the course makes it feel out of touch. South Park has always been a show to push buttons no matter what side you're on but lately just seems to be geared towards let's make pc liberal snowflakes mad or let's make right-wing fundamentalists mad but leans to the former more often than not. Thier satire doesn't feel biting anymore much of their commentary feels empty and out of place in a time where people want things to make strong bold statements. South Park can be a show that's as bold and in your face as it's always been and still have important things to say no matter the political side it falls on. They just refuse to bring it there because maybe they don't have anything to say. Which is fine but again, feels out of place with not only with what the show used to be but the times we're in now.
@bersi: I've only seen Gamespot, IGN, and polygons reviews and Waypoint talked about it on yesterdays podcast. Some of them were pretty positive but I mostly got a middling to straight negative feelings with the latter two publications. Feelings seem mixed as far as I've seen.
fatalbanana's comments