Game Reviews

View : : :
2.
 
Re: No subject
Oct 8, 2003, 15:30
2.
Re: No subject Oct 8, 2003, 15:30
Oct 8, 2003, 15:30
 
Apparently ,it is extraordinarily difficult for a game review site to act like it's possible to buy more than one game a year, as evidenced by the "if you buy one game this year, make sure it's (xxxxx)" and "(yyyyy) is a lackluster game, easily overshadowed by (xxxxx)".

It would be much more useful to everyone involved if review sites would simply judge the game on it's own merits, rather than try and compare them to other games, mudsling, or belittle people who enjoy that type of game.

The past year or two has seen this repeated over and over -- we had it for The Sims series, and Postal 2, both best-sellers, and both relatively good games, if you didn't compare them to an unreasonable and atypical example (such as Doom3 or Half-Life2), and we see it in these relatively overlooked games like Chaser. Meanwhile, at the same time, very average games such as the Halo PC port get relegated to Godlike status.

It's very confusing to see this discongruity, and is ultimately self-defeating to the game industry as a whole. Crappy and average games with good PR get heralded over attempts at innovative titles (such as Chaser), or titles that may pose a more unusual "taste" (looking at Postal 2 here). And the poor people who like the "non-stereotypical game" get "yet another stupid expansion pack" (The Sims series).

It's no wonder that the same boring crap continues to be pumped out year after year. We lie to each other and ourselves over what makes a game good or fun, then play them anyway.

Date
Subject
Author
1.
Oct 8, 2003Oct 8 2003
 2.
Oct 8, 2003Oct 8 2003
 Re: No subject
3.
Oct 8, 2003Oct 8 2003
4.
Oct 8, 2003Oct 8 2003
   Chrome
5.
Oct 8, 2003Oct 8 2003
6.
Oct 9, 2003Oct 9 2003
7.
Oct 9, 2003Oct 9 2003