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

GameFront - Duke Nukem Forever and Jim Rednerís Balls of Squeal.
The really contentious part of Rednerís argument, however, is the fact that developers should be let off the hook because they ďpoured thousands of irreplaceable hoursĒ into a game. This is an argument that Iíve seen many times before, that a reviewer needs to consider the feelings of the people who made it. Iíd say thatís the last thing a reviewer needs to think about when assessing a game. Like it or not, a reviewer isnít there to protect developers from feeling sad. This is not pre-school, where everybody gets a star and no child is left behind. This is the realm of business conducted by adults, and if youíre going to turn on the waterworks when your game is trashed, you should not be in an industry where art is produced for public consumption. Itís simply not the place for little princesses made of eggshells.

Joystick Division - Marketing Campaigns Are Doomsday Machines. Thanks Digg.
Duke Nukem Forever is the brightest, recent example of this horribly hilarious phenomenon, but it was preceded by two other first person shooters which enticed us to waste our money this year: Homefront and Brink. Together they form a Trifecta of Terrible. Behold the power of the marketing machine, and tremble.

View
5. Re: Duke Nukem Forever and Jim Rednerís Balls of Squeal. Jun 22, 2011, 11:04 nin
 
Ratty wrote on Jun 22, 2011, 11:00:
Prez wrote on Jun 22, 2011, 10:00:
To be fair, he was pointing out the "thousands of irreplaceable hours" to illustrate why games deserve to have reviews that are thorough, truthful, professional, and fair; not how most are today.
Sorry, no dice. What a boring web world we'd live in if all game reviews were professional, cordial, sensitive, loving, and only gave out criticism in the gentlest most constructive way possible. I am a gamer, it's an important part of my life and wasting 60 bucks on a really bad game makes me mad. Enjoying a clever, catty review is how I vent. And the meaner it is the better I feel.


Well, I think there's a difference between reviewing a game honestly and the mob mentality that you sometimes see.

My problem here is, after 14 years, I would expect a great product. And everything I've seen, from my own demo impressions to reviews, says otherwise. It looks like Randy just pushed this out so they could work on another DN game later.

So, in this case at least, I kind of feel like DNF earned the savage response it got.


 
http://www.nin.com/pub/tension/
Previous Post Next Post Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
    Date Subject Author
  1. Jun 22, 10:00 Duke Nukem Forever and Jim Rednerís Balls of Squeal. Prez
  2. Jun 22, 11:00  Re: Duke Nukem Forever and Jim Rednerís Balls of Squeal. Ratty
>> 5. Jun 22, 11:04   Re: Duke Nukem Forever and Jim Rednerís Balls of Squeal. nin
  10. Jun 22, 11:57   Re: Duke Nukem Forever and Jim Rednerís Balls of Squeal. Prez
  3. Jun 22, 11:02  Re: Duke Nukem Forever and Jim Rednerís Balls of Squeal. space captain
  7. Jun 22, 11:42   Re: Duke Nukem Forever and Jim Rednerís Balls of Squeal. Beamer
  8. Jun 22, 11:53    Re: Duke Nukem Forever and Jim Rednerís Balls of Squeal. space captain
  11. Jun 22, 11:58     Re: Duke Nukem Forever and Jim Rednerís Balls of Squeal. Beamer
  12. Jun 22, 12:07      Re: Duke Nukem Forever and Jim Rednerís Balls of Squeal. space captain
  13. Jun 22, 12:13       Re: Duke Nukem Forever and Jim Rednerís Balls of Squeal. Prez
  27. Jun 22, 14:46       Re: Duke Nukem Forever and Jim Rednerís Balls of Squeal. maleitch
  28. Jun 22, 14:59        Re: Duke Nukem Forever and Jim Rednerís Balls of Squeal. space captain
  29. Jun 22, 15:12         Re: Duke Nukem Forever and Jim Rednerís Balls of Squeal. ^Drag0n^
  30. Jun 22, 15:22    Re: Duke Nukem Forever and Jim Rednerís Balls of Squeal. Cutter
  32. Jun 22, 15:33     Re: Duke Nukem Forever and Jim Rednerís Balls of Squeal. Tumbler
  34. Jun 22, 15:38      Re: Duke Nukem Forever and Jim Rednerís Balls of Squeal. nin
  35. Jun 22, 16:09     Re: Duke Nukem Forever and Jim Rednerís Balls of Squeal. Beamer
  36. Jun 22, 16:21      Re: Duke Nukem Forever and Jim Rednerís Balls of Squeal. Tumbler
  37. Jun 22, 16:39       Re: Duke Nukem Forever and Jim Rednerís Balls of Squeal. Beamer
  4. Jun 22, 11:04  Re: Duke Nukem Forever and Jim Rednerís Balls of Squeal. Shataan
  6. Jun 22, 11:20 Re: Op Ed Domgrief
  9. Jun 22, 11:55 Re: Op Ed spindoctor
  14. Jun 22, 12:17 Re: Op Ed Creston
  15. Jun 22, 12:33 Re: Op Ed Verno
  16. Jun 22, 12:37  Re: Op Ed Creston
  25. Jun 22, 14:23   Re: Op Ed jacobvandy
  26. Jun 22, 14:29    Re: Op Ed DNForever
  17. Jun 22, 12:46 Re: Op Ed Tumbler
  18. Jun 22, 13:01 Duke Nukem is a No-Win Scenario ^Drag0n^
  19. Jun 22, 13:21 Re: Op Ed Ruffiana
  20. Jun 22, 13:30  Re: Op Ed Tumbler
  21. Jun 22, 13:42   Re: Op Ed Beamer
  22. Jun 22, 13:56    Re: Op Ed Bhruic
  23. Jun 22, 13:59     Re: Op Ed Beamer
  24. Jun 22, 14:22     Re: Op Ed Tumbler
  31. Jun 22, 15:27     Re: Op Ed Prez
  33. Jun 22, 15:34 Re: Op Ed Verno
  38. Jun 22, 16:43 Re: Op Ed Acleacius
  39. Jun 22, 16:47  Re: Op Ed Beamer
  40. Jun 22, 17:04   Re: Op Ed Prez
  41. Jun 22, 17:13    Re: Op Ed Creston
  42. Jun 22, 17:15     Re: Op Ed Beamer
  43. Jun 22, 17:26      Re: Op Ed Prez
  44. Jun 22, 17:42       Re: Op Ed Beamer
  51. Jun 22, 18:54        Re: Op Ed Prez
  53. Jun 22, 19:08         Re: Op Ed Beamer
  58. Jun 22, 21:00          Re: Op Ed Jerykk
  60. Jun 22, 21:59           Re: Op Ed Beamer
  62. Jun 22, 22:44            Re: Op Ed Jerykk
  64. Jun 22, 23:34             Re: Op Ed Beamer
  54. Jun 22, 19:19         Re: Op Ed space captain
  55. Jun 22, 19:33          Re: Op Ed Prez
  56. Jun 22, 20:19           Re: Op Ed space captain
  57. Jun 22, 20:41            Re: Op Ed ^Drag0n^
  59. Jun 22, 21:09             Re: Op Ed space captain
  61. Jun 22, 22:21              Re: Op Ed ^Drag0n^
  63. Jun 22, 22:58               Re: Op Ed space captain
  45. Jun 22, 17:50       Re: Op Ed ^Drag0n^
  47. Jun 22, 17:58        Re: Op Ed CJ_Parker
  48. Jun 22, 18:02         Re: Op Ed ^Drag0n^
  52. Jun 22, 19:07        Re: Op Ed Beamer
  46. Jun 22, 17:57       Re: Op Ed Tumbler
  49. Jun 22, 18:07        Re: Op Ed ^Drag0n^
  50. Jun 22, 18:26         Re: Op Ed Cutter
  65. Jun 23, 06:04 Re: Op Ed jacobvandy
  66. Jun 23, 08:54  Re: Op Ed Prez
  67. Jun 23, 12:00  Re: Op Ed ^Drag0n^


footer

Blue's News logo