Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

Op Ed

Strategy Informer - Why we should play bad games.
So why should you play such awful titles? Let's take a look at Deadly Premonition. It's reception couldn't have been more mixed with IGN giving it 2/10 and calling it "terrible" while Destructoid awarded it a perfect 10/10 and described it as "simply stunning". Both reviews highlight similar flaws but the crucial difference lies in what each reviewer took away from their own experience. It shows that even in the most despicable games there are great ideas or gameplay elements to be appreciated, even if these are hidden beneath painful presentation or broken controls.

View
26 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 ] Older >

26. Re: Op Ed Nov 18, 2010, 15:37 PHJF
 
I was watching the GameTrailers Screed Brotherhood review the other day. The reviewer goes on a negativity spree for 9 minutes and in the end says "the series needs to evolve" before giving it 9/10.  
Avatar 17251
 
Steam + PSN: PHJF
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
25. Re: Op Ed Nov 17, 2010, 23:42 Prez
 
To my mind game reviews reached the height of idiocy around the time that Halo 3 was released. I read reviews that in effect said, "Well, it doesn't do anything new, and the graphics are pretty good and all, the multiplayer isn't anything special, but if we score it lower than everyone else we cease to be a cog in the hype machine, so here's a 10/10 score."

Meanwhile, it seems smaller titles are where "reputable" review entities can slag a game mercilessly without too much notice, and can keep their "average review score" somewhat reasonably in check, thereby making them look "hard-nosed and uncompromising".
 
Avatar 17185
 
“The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.”
- Mahatma Gandhi
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
24. Re: Op Ed Nov 17, 2010, 23:23 Jerykk
 
Playing "bad" games can be beneficial because many of those games try things that "good" games don't. Deadly Premonition had a lot of great ideas. Unfortunately, big publishers won't touch them. Instead, they'll just pump out Call of Duty 2012, which will then receive unanimous critical acclaim and sell 10 million units. Unfortunately, that won't make me any more motivated to actually play it. Conversely, if Deadly Premonition were released on PC, I'd definitely play that.  
Avatar 20715
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
23. Re: Op Ed Nov 17, 2010, 22:54 PHJF
 
double  
Avatar 17251
 
Steam + PSN: PHJF
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
22. Re: Op Ed Nov 17, 2010, 22:54 PHJF
 
If you price a game too low it becomes a bargain bin game, and isn't going to be equated to being a quality title or being full featured.

That is exactly where most games fall. If publishers released games with realistic expectations (and prices to match), however, they'd probably sell more units and end up coming out ahead. As it stands, $50-60 is far too large a gamble for the vast majority of games out there. I'm far more cautious about buying games and, as such, buy a lot fewer than I'd be otherwise inclined to.
 
Avatar 17251
 
Steam + PSN: PHJF
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
21. Re: Op Ed Nov 17, 2010, 21:04 PropheT
 
PHJF wrote on Nov 17, 2010, 18:50:
Really though, to take it further, why are all games priced exactly the same, and why have they ever been? Are some games not better or worth more than other games? Do some games not cost more to make than others? It's total horseshit. I guess idiot publishers are afraid that pricing their game lower will reveal they think it isn't, gasp, the best game evar. The standard practice now is to con sorry sod early adopters out of as much change as possible before retailers inevitably shove the shitty software into the bargain bin.

There has to be some kind of constant for pricing, though. If you price a game too low it becomes a bargain bin game, and isn't going to be equated to being a quality title or being full featured. At the same time, you can't price your new MMO box at $79 just because the development time for it was more than the single player game your company put out at $59.

As it is now, new games have a set price, and games that have been out for a few months can usually be judged on their quality just by looking at their release date and how much the sticker price has fallen since that time. I prefer the method now where better games have additional content that can be purchased later to give them more value, where people will be more inclined to pay it, rather than just costing more up front. It's not perfect, but it works for me.


If there's anything I take away from the article, it's to ignore review scores and play games that appeal to you. I'm not sure if that's what they were going for, though.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
20. Re: Op Ed Nov 17, 2010, 20:37 Verno
 
I agree with you, I would pay $150 for Demons Souls, I got that much and more enjoyment out of it. Conversely Gears of War I wouldn't pay more than $10 for. I don't know why games are priced equally, even things like movies aren't these days. There's a general guideline for stuff older than a year but beyond that prices can be all over the place for new movies. About the only moderating factor is big box retailers like Wal-Mart.

Actually if you think about it, a lot of that is starting in games too with DD services on the PC.
 
Avatar 51617
 
Playing: South Park, Dark Souls 2
Watching: Enemy, Network, Wer
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
19. Re: Op Ed Nov 17, 2010, 18:50 PHJF
 
Really though, to take it further, why are all games priced exactly the same, and why have they ever been? Are some games not better or worth more than other games? Do some games not cost more to make than others? It's total horseshit. I guess idiot publishers are afraid that pricing their game lower will reveal they think it isn't, gasp, the best game evar. The standard practice now is to con sorry sod early adopters out of as much change as possible before retailers inevitably shove the shitty software into the bargain bin.  
Avatar 17251
 
Steam + PSN: PHJF
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
18. Re: Op Ed Nov 17, 2010, 18:47 Prez
 
I'd venture to say that around a third of the games I've bought in the last 2 years scored in the 50's and 60's.

Here's a short list of games that scored badly but I really enjoyed:

Alone in the Dark
Dark Void
Alpha Protocol
Velvet Assassin
Necrovision
East India Company
Darkest of Days

Not one of those scored above an average 60 or so, yet I enjoyed each one enough to dedicate enough time to play them through thoroughly. Often more than once. Conversely, I played Halo Reach, which scored in the 90's, on a neighbor's 360 and was thoroughly underwhelmed.

I'm not sure if this says more about me as a gamer or about game reviews, but there it is.
 
Avatar 17185
 
“The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.”
- Mahatma Gandhi
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
17. Re: Op Ed Nov 17, 2010, 18:29 Bet
 
PHJF wrote on Nov 17, 2010, 16:11:
I don't mind playing bad games but I'm not fucking paying $60 for the privilege.
The true sticking point, right there.
 
Avatar 9253
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
16. Re: Op Ed Nov 17, 2010, 17:16 space captain
 
some people really struggle to make that copy deadline  
Go forth, and kill!
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
15. Re: Op Ed Nov 17, 2010, 17:12 derelict koan
 
JoeNapalm wrote on Nov 17, 2010, 10:52:
I mean, WTF? How much free time do you bloody have, man?

I think this is probably the key factor in determining game choice, I mean if you game on a toilet with a pizza delivery slot beside your desk you're far more likely to take a punt on crap.
 
www.derelictkoan.com - speculative psychosis in trilogy form
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
14. Re: Op Ed Nov 17, 2010, 16:11 PHJF
 
I don't mind playing bad games but I'm not fucking paying $60 for the privilege.  
Avatar 17251
 
Steam + PSN: PHJF
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
13. Re: Op Ed Nov 17, 2010, 14:06 rist3903
 
Play bad games to keep bad developers in business?  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
12. Re: Op Ed Nov 17, 2010, 13:47 Elf Shot The Food
 
The only people who should be playing bad games are game developers, so they can learn from the mistakes of others and not pass them on to consumers.

On the subject of Metacritic scores, I finished Wheelman over the weekend. Most of the reviews weren't too kind to it, but I thought it was decent dumb fun. I don't mind playing "bad" games like that every once in a while.

 
Avatar 13955
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
11. Re: Op Ed Nov 17, 2010, 13:22 Kxmode
 
skyguy wrote on Nov 17, 2010, 12:39:
kxmode wrote on Nov 17, 2010, 11:13:
InBlack wrote on Nov 17, 2010, 10:18:
NEVER TRUST SO-CALLED PROFESSIONAL REVIEWERS THEY ALL SUCK BALLS....

Are you suggesting that reviewers are untrustworthy because they're gay? Confused

Don't be prejudiced, women can be professional game reviewers too.

I stand corrected.
 
Avatar 18786
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
10. Re: Op Ed Nov 17, 2010, 13:15 ASeven
 
After the Gamespot debacle over the original Kane&Lynch I never trusted site reviewers anymore. Whenever I want to know if a game is good I go to the game's forums and other forums to read the opinions of the community.

I think the real high level of distrust over reviewers began with the Gamespot incident.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
9. Re: Op Ed Nov 17, 2010, 12:39 skyguy
 
kxmode wrote on Nov 17, 2010, 11:13:
InBlack wrote on Nov 17, 2010, 10:18:
NEVER TRUST SO-CALLED PROFESSIONAL REVIEWERS THEY ALL SUCK BALLS....

Are you suggesting that reviewers are untrustworthy because they're gay? Confused

Don't be prejudiced, women can be professional game reviewers too.
 
Avatar 22932
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
8. Re: Op Ed Nov 17, 2010, 12:32 Creston
 
Ehm, if someone gave a game that's that poor a 10/10, the only fucking thing it shows is that they got a fat sack full of cash for their review and should never again be taken seriously about anything, ever.

It shows that even in the most despicable games there are great ideas or gameplay elements to be appreciated, even if these are hidden beneath painful presentation or broken controls.

Yeah, I don't play games to be fucking irritated for hours on end just so that I can get to that one five minute nugget where you're like "Hmmm, this isn't too bad."

I play games to be entertained. I also read articles to be entertained, and Strategy Informer fails quite spectacularly on that front.

Creston
 
Avatar 15604
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
7. Re: Op Ed Nov 17, 2010, 11:13 Kxmode
 
InBlack wrote on Nov 17, 2010, 10:18:
NEVER TRUST SO-CALLED PROFESSIONAL REVIEWERS THEY ALL SUCK BALLS....

Are you suggesting that reviewers are untrustworthy because they're gay? Confused
 
Avatar 18786
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
26 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 ] Older >


footer

Blue's News logo