Jump to content


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 05/23/2018 in Posts

  1. 5 points
  2. 3 points
    Mr Loopone

    Number Ratings in Reviews

    When I was young as in 20 years ago when magazines such as the Official PlayStation Magazine, N64 Magazine and NOM were around, I used the ratings systems in magazines as a rough guide and anything about 6/10 or 60% meant that the game was good and the higher the score, the better the game was. I also did read the summaries and much of the time the actual text as well because not every game was to my tastes or had some issues. It sort of make sense to a young person because of the price of games at the time and not every game got a demo back then nevermind now where you are lucky to even see one. It happens to be that many of the games that were purchased are now considered classics by people. Not every game followed this path though like I bought Cruis'n USA because I liked the arcade game despite the game itself got low scores. Most of the time, the low scores were reserved for broken games or just bad games however it also affected a few series too. The Mega Man series was negatively reviewed at the time. Now though the number system doesn't really make sense. What's the difference between a 8 or a 9? Exactly and that's subjective. It doesn't tell you much about the game itself. All it is saying that buy the game because of the score, not because of the game itself. It's like here's a few screenshots, a video or two, go buy it! What if you don't like the game? The movie industry has the same problem with this system with its stars and Rotten Tomatoes score causing some criticism. Books too to a smaller scale but that has a completely different issue that's just as corrupt (famous writer opinion). Even if you removed the scoring system, there are still problems with reviews. For the past 10 years or so that the reviews are getting less and less detailed in general, many reviews that used to be throwaway in magazines are getting closer to the standard and places like Metacritic for example are encouraging one line or extremely short reviews. Taking one random example, Eurogamer used to have about 3 pages worth of a review during the 6th generation and might have compared another version but now its just one page and many review sites don't even have second opinions either. The major problem with the rating system is that it focuses on popularity both good and bad rather than overall, there are also many games that either don't get a review or very niche places take the challenge. It means that many of what are considered underrated games, games people missed out because they weren't reviewed and people weren't willing to try them. Even then the problem with reviews, rating system or no rating system is the element of bias from the reviewer no matter whether its a magazine, website, Steam or on Youtube. Like something? Positive review. Don't like something? Negative review. Someone who likes one genre might not like another genre. A fan is most likely either going to praise the series no matter what or go into some detail some more. Seriously many of the reviews on Steam are jokes. Also another thing regarding reviews is that apart from perhaps the odd PC review or somewhere like Digital Foundry, they don't go into the technical details very much. A game might be described as groundbreaking but its not a pleasure to play if it is constantly crashing, slowdown/bad framerate drops, wiping progress or annoying bugs. Battlefield 4 is a good example regarding this where reviews glanced the big issues that the game got, some that still aren't fixed to this day or the LEGO games in general. Reviews in general just need a big shake up, not just removing the score system but changing the way that they are reviewed.
  3. 3 points

    Number Ratings in Reviews

    While Jim doesn’t do numbered reviews anymore, which I find myself appreciating as it gets rid of a lot of problems, this video he made I think does a great job highlighting some of said problems and why numbered reviews and the perception and reaction from consumers regarding them can be ridiculous. This doesn’t even bring up his other “controversial” personal reviews that differed from the crowd regarding games like Assassins Creed 2, Sonic Colors, and of course Breath of the Wild. It’s no wonder he just simply dropped the number system straight up. People just seemed to look at that and not the words
  4. 2 points

    What is Next for 2d Sonic?

    Just Mania 2 , that's all we need. That's all the world needs. Seriously , I really hope Mania 2 is on the cards they did such a good job with the first one how could they not want to do more?
  5. 2 points

    Number Ratings in Reviews

    Long stroy short staring at the number should not replace the full opinion. The fact that most "worst games ever" have 40% rating, makes me wonder why we even have lower numbers. For games that send your personal data to government? I find number rating useful in two situations 1 when reviewer is bad at expressing his opinion 2 when he praised two products more-less equally and I wonder witch of them he liked more. With that said, first one means review is probably of little worth, while second is a trap. What do you like more, playing good RPG or good shooter? Eating pizza or ice cream? Some experience are hard to compare.
  6. 1 point

    What is Next for 2d Sonic?

    Mania 2 will likely happen, though we might get a Mania ++ as well. Due to its status as a Mania 2, it comes with all of Mania’s own baggage (link to Forces, link to the next modern game, returning stages (though reduced in number), silly tone, etc), but with a higher budget and likely a bigger team (Prope? Artoon? Even Dimps?). Worst case scenario has Sanzaru do more milequetoast 2D Sonic. Dimps games aren’t forgotten by the developers, but fade further from the general public’s mind, and that of the fandom. Mania 3 follows suit.
  7. 1 point

    What is Next for 2d Sonic?

    Mania 2 definitely is the way to go. Maybe even Mania 3 and we'll have an awesome "trilogy" like Sonic 1-3. After Mania 3 I don't mind, let them do whatever. You know Mania 2 can flop if it's not done by the og team.
  8. 1 point
    Tsundere is something shadow has never been, it implies he secretly cares. Most of the time, he actually doesn't. He got shit do It is though? Its like spiderman one more day, and the clone saga. It is, they just stopped talking about because everyone thought it was the worst. But those occurred, and brought characters into the fold had narratives that effected them. I got that point, that's not a reason to give him a new story like the person said. I see this argument often, with multiple characters, in multiple mediums over my life. Its a shit argument. Just give them another story, I've been reading batman getting over his parents dying for like... most of my fucking life.And they add new dynamics and new things for him to deal with to keep it interesting. Heck if you read the comics... they already did it with shadow in the comics, it caused one of the best characterizations of knuckles , funnily enough. If you can write a damn story , you can write a damn story. He can do new shit and have new experiences, like other characters. And people in real life. Your point literally means nothing. Especially when they already did it with shadow in the comics, all you are indicating is your lack of imagination. Because its a thing that already got done, it already happened. And it could hapen again. Not at all, his perspective is interesting and it would be interesting to see him go out and do shit. Come back when you actually have a point. Because your point is , as of currently " I lack imagination " If you directed sonic, it would end at one.
  9. 1 point

    Regarding dark themes in Sonic

    I think the difference you're looking for here is grisly. I think you could classify SatAM/Archie as darker than the main games, while they're still not grisly. I also really don't agree that SatAM was just AoSTH with better visuals and a slightly darker Robotnik. AoSTH was primarily a show of the slapstick daily adventures variety, and Robotnik in it was incredibly incompetent, goofy, and just kind of downright embarrassing. He was meant to be that way, for sure, but comparatively...? SatAM was more story/narrative driven than completely episodic, a bit more subtle and less slapsticky and Robotnik was downright menacing (lest we not forget, he doesn't see a heart, sir!) - I definitely get the vibe of a very oppressive environment that a group of people on the outskirts of corrupt society is trying to win back from SatAM - AoSTH just kind of seems to be meant to be Looney Tunes but Sonic.
  10. 1 point
    So the usual answer of "if sega can do several competent things in succession "
  • Create New...

Important Information

You must read and accept our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy to continue using this website. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.