Sonic Lost World Reviews

[Carbuncle]

I'm not sucking up to the critics, I just hate this attitude that game critics are paid off by game corporations. It is simply a conspiracy theory, sorry. I have yet to see any hard evidence that gaming critics are paid off by game corporations. 

 

And in regard to what you just said

 

When a man tells the world he was fired for giving a game an average score despite the publisher in question buying out paid advertising space for said game, it doesn't lend credence to the argument that this never happens.
 

 

That sounds more like the review company was at fault than the publisher. It was the review company that would have fired him anyway.

 

 

No they are not like you and me because, unlike you and me, they exist within a professional environment saturated in mass media influences and opportunities. This is not an equatable situation to Average Joe on Message Board giving his opinion.
 

 

That's true, but they are still humans like you and me. It's not like they are spacemen off the planet Mars who are nothing alike us.

 

 

Where did anyone say that all positive reviews are corporately influenced?
 

 

Well you can't start to pick and choose which reviews are the result of bribery. 'Ooh look, this review is clearly the result of a bribe because I like the game and the reviewer didn't'. 

 

It doesn't work like that.

 

If reviewers are influenced by bribery, you could bet that virtually all reviews would have some element of bribery in them.

 

So you actually believe a review is unmitigated fact and the average person's opinion is not? Didn't you just argue that reviewers are "just like you and me?" Besides, how do you reconcile this belief with mixed reviews? A game can't be amazing and trash at the same time if this is the case.

 

 

Of course I don't think reviews are unmitigated fact. As I said, a critic is paid to simply give their opinion. However, the majority of critics had the same problems: poor controls, cheap level design e.t.c. It's also a problem I had with the game and many fans judging by the various forums and people I have talked to personally.

 

The problems the critics had with the game are legitimate is the point I am putting across.

 

Also, whilst the game has had some amazing and terrible reviews, the majority of the reviews have been roughly average (5/10 - 6/10). The game hasn't really had that much of a mixed reception.

 

 

My particular argument is that "with the journalism industry saturated in so much bullshit and controversy, particularly with in-game trailers or entire demos coming out that were not actually representative of the gameplay and graphical fidelity of the final product (see: Halo 3 and Colonial Marines), it is not inherently conspiratorial to give credence to the idea that gameplay footage will sometimes played in such a way to demonstrate a point and thus be potentially misleading." You call that laziness and incompetence. I call it dishonesty. Either way, it shouldn't be done, not just for Sonic games but for any title. If the controls are genuinely horrible, you wouldn't need to deliberate die to showcase this. The game should speak for itself.
 

 

So does this insistence in sucking up to them. I haven't even played Lost World, nor do I care much for it, but I can't look at those gifs posted and convince myself that they are an honest demonstration of a flaw on part of the game, even if the game's controls are flawed. The player deliberately turned around and died in that gif with the crumbling platform. You can just fucking look at it and tell.

 

 

The problem with misleading trailers and previews is on the game developers, not the journalists. They simply report on what they see. They aren't in legion with the developers  to fool everyone.

 

The controls in Lost World are the kind where they kick in unexpectedly and you can't simply force them to happen. Thus, I can understand why the reviewer would fake their own death to try to demonstrate the point when you consider they will have a ton of other work that needs to be done besides this Lost World review. It's lazy and pretty incompetent, but it's not dishonest. Dishonest would suggest that the reviewer is making up that the controls screw him over. Yes, perhaps the controls did not screw him over in that gif (and I too admit it's probably faked), but he's trying to show what the game can do with the small time he has to get a review together for Lost World. As I said, it's laziness and incompetence rather than dishonesty.

Edited October 20, 2013 by Carbuncle

[Autosaver]

 

I'm not sucking up to the critics, I just hate this attitude that game critics are paid off by game corporations. It is simply a conspiracy theory, sorry. I have yet to see any hard evidence that gaming critics are paid off by game corporations.

 

http://www.computerandvideogames.com/311363/video-games-review-scandal-metacritic-uncovers-drops-crooked-publication/
 

 

That sounds more like the review company was at fault than the publisher. It was the review company that would have fired him anyway.

When the review blasts a game that the publisher poured so much money on at the review company, it's quite obvious what will happen. They're going to pull funding and vow to never support Gamespot again. Gamespot thus loses money and then fires a worker as a consequence. It's not rocket science.

 

 

Journalism is and will always be pretty shitty.

[Kuzu]

This is generally the reason I don't watch reviews anymore, and just prefer to read them because the second a piece of footage showing the player doing less than amazing in a video review, suddenly that reviewer is put under a microscope. And this sadly only happens to professional reviewers too, if this was someone like SomeCallMeJohnny, I bet there wouldn't be this much of an uproar.

 

In fact, I think this video best sums up what we're going through now: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ko1sklmOR9E

Edited October 20, 2013 by Dark Yakuzu

[Carbuncle]

 

 

http://www.computerandvideogames.com/311363/video-games-review-scandal-metacritic-uncovers-drops-crooked-publication/

 

When the review blasts a game that the publisher poured so much money on at the review company, it's quite obvious what will happen. They're going to pull funding and vow to never support Gamespot again. Gamespot thus loses money and then fires a worker as a consequence. It's not rocket science.

 

 

Journalism is and will always be pretty shitty.

 

 

Well the reviewer was found out and very heavily punished.

 

I think this is a good indication of why this practice would be rare.

Edited October 20, 2013 by Carbuncle

[Nepenthe]

I'm not sucking up to the critics, I just hate this attitude that game critics are paid off by game corporations. It is simply a conspiracy theory, sorry. I have yet to see any hard evidence that gaming critics are paid off by game corporations.

Aside from documented firings and people in the industry coming forth saying that reviews are sometimes corporately influenced- all horse's mouth stuff- what proof would you like? 

 

That sounds more like the review company was at fault than the publisher. It was the review company that would have fired him anyway.

The review company had a deal with the publisher and the publisher wasn't happy with the subsequent review. The fact that the reviewing outlet fired Mr. Gerstmann doesn't somehow waive away a tangible association between reviewing outlet and publisher, because it is the very deal with the publisher that caused Mr. Gerstmann to get fired. This is the point.

 

That's true, but they are still humans like you and me. It's not like they are spacemen off the planet Mars who are nothing alike us.

Exactly; they're human and thus prone to being subjected to flawed practices.

 

Well you can't start to pick and choose which reviews are the result of bribery. 'Ooh look, this review is clearly the result of a bribe because I like the game and the reviewer didn't'.

 

It doesn't work like that.

If reviewers are influenced by bribery, you could bet that virtually all reviews would have some element of bribery in them.

 

I don't have an opinion on Lost World because I haven't played it. In fact, I've been cynical about the game the whole time. So what are you talking about? This idea you have that every single review in the industry must be influenced by outside sources or none of them can be is not logically sound because A.) it doesn't take into account either smaller reviewing outlets and indie publishers who are not going to be passing gobs upon gobs of money and merchandise around, B.) B and C tier games no one really cares about, and C.) It doesn't take into account the fact that bribing for a number is not the only form of dishonesty in the reviewing industry we're talking about. In fact, it's not the thing we're talking about here at all! We're talking about a reviewer who used awful footage to illustrate a point in a dishonest manner. Even if the point is sound, you are completely ignoring the fact that the footage was blatantly manufactured.

 

Of course I don't think reviews are unmitigated fact. As I said, a critic is paid to simply give their opinion. However, the majority of critics had the same problems: poor controls, cheap level design e.t.c. It's also a problem I had with the game and many fans judging by the various forums and people I have talked to personally.

 

The problems the critics had with the game are legitimate is the point I am putting across.

It's fine if the game has problems that are being pointed out. What's not fine is shitty footage of the game in an effort to demonstrate that point. Either show me where the controls start crapping out genuinely so I'm actually aware of what I'm getting into or don't do it at all.

 

The controls in Lost World are the kind where they kick in unexpectedly and you can't simply force them to happen. Thus, I can understand why the reviewer would fake their own death to try to demonstrate the point when you consider they will have a ton of other work that needs to be done besides this Lost World review. It's lazy and pretty incompetent, but it's not dishonest. Dishonest would suggest that the reviewer is making up that the controls screw him over. Yes, perhaps the controls did not screw him over in that gif (and I too admit it's probably faked), but he's trying to show what the game can do with the small time he has to get a review together for Lost World. As I said, it's laziness and incompetence rather than dishonesty.

I'm ignoring the convenient bullshit excuses of "Oh, it's a crapshoot when the controls will work and when they won't so they couldn't catch an issue properly" or "Poor baby has so much work he can't do his job of properly reviewing a five-hour game." The footage in relationship to the complaint is dishonest because it is not demonstrative of the problem he's detailing. That's all there is to it. The controls don't magically cause you to decide to go backwards off a falling platform.

[Narukami07]

Necropenthe, you deserve so much reward for getting straight to the heart.

 

I honestly believe fan reception is much more honest and forward to the point than general reviewers these days.

Edited October 20, 2013 by Narukami07

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

I've been skeptical of the Gaming Media ever since they defended Mass Effect 3 for their bullshit endings and DmC and disrespecting fans over their disappointment in those titles. 

 

Even if you don't believe in their being a conspiracy, there is definitely something sketchy as fuck in the industry.

[Kuzu]

Not saying Reviews aren't filled with dishonesty, but I still read them to keep myself honest about my own views of the game and to see if any thing they list shows up in my experiences.

[Dejimon11]

I've been skeptical of the Gaming Media ever since they defended Mass Effect 3 for their bullshit endings and DmC and disrespecting fans over their disappointment in those titles. 

 

Even if you don't believe in their being a conspiracy, there is definitely something sketchy as fuck in the industry.

Yeah there are some games that get good reviews even though they really don't deserve the score *looks at paper mario sticker star*. Anyways even if Lost World got great reviews people still would of looked for something to complain about the dumbest things to hate a game

[Nepenthe]

It's not a requirement to mind reviews to keep yourself "honest" about your views of the game. If you enjoy something within the moment of playing it, then no one else's subjective experience is even relevant to that. That's ultimately what's honest. You can hash out the details of "why" you gain enjoyment from something, but aside from arguing about it on the Internet, the honesty of your opinion is how you felt when you yourself sat down and played that game. 

[Kuzu]

When I said "honest" I mean speaking more in terms of discussing the quality of the game and not so much my enjoyment of it; my enjoyment of the game is just that, my enjoyment and nobody else has a right to tell me otherwise.

[Jovahexeon Jax Joranvexeon]

I honestly don't trust IGN as far as I can throw them. I mean, these are the guys who not only praised Sonic 4 Episode 1 as "new, fresh, and Sonic's big return" but they are also are the jackasses who gave Unleashed the infamous Hiliary Goldstein treatment, rated Unleashed below 06, bashed Generations taking off points for the mere inclusion of Sonic's friends, and so on.

 

I never let gaming journalism ever really influence me, but I go out of my way, not to give a flying fuck of what IGN says for GOOD reason.

Edited October 20, 2013 by Jovahexeon

[Dejimon11]

If it was just IGN criticizing the game then I wouldn't worry but if it's every reviewer giving the game the same criticism then you know that there's a problem

[Jovahexeon Jax Joranvexeon]

If it was just IGN criticizing the game then I wouldn't worry but if it's every reviewer giving the game the same criticism then you know that there's a problem

But see, here's the problem, reviews have been mixed "up and down and all around" for this game. Now it does sound like the controls might be an issue, but the general consensus I've gotten is no where close to everything that IGN's spouting.

[Dejimon11]

Really not even gamespot and game informer?

[Jovahexeon Jax Joranvexeon]

Really not even gamespot and game informer?

I meant as a whole of the gaming media not just those other two. Although yes, we could say that IGN's review is on par with Game Informer and Gamespot! *snicker* Can't say that it would do wonders for their credibility though.

Edited October 20, 2013 by Jovahexeon

[Lady Soniko]

I'm looking at these reviews and... I'm not getting what they mean about "bad controls"

 

The controls in this game aren't "bad" they're "different" from previous instalments, outright calling them bad is ignorant when the controls are finely tuned to what you need them for, they're tight and responsive and they do the job more than they ever will need to.

 

I honestly don't get why people are lambasting the controls in this game, there is seriously nothing wrong with them besides maybe not being quite finely tuned as the 3DS controls I've been hearing, but entirely writing off the game or telling people to avoid it because "controls aren't very good" is an outright lie, and I will personally challenge anyone who disagrees otherwise.

 

The controls are solid, fluent and flow perfectly with what the game sets before you, the only time I will outright say the controls are horrendous is when using the wisps, because fuck the forced motion controls on Asteroid and Eagle, otherwise writing a game off for something entirely optional as the wisp's garbage controls and collectively including Sonic's gameplay into it is down right ignorant and completely false.

[LoiLoi17]

Just gonna leave this here..

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6tvQE0-hcFo

[Gabz Girl]

I don't know what to believe about the controls. They're certainly not the best controls in a Sonic game, in fact I think they're worse than Sonic Unleashed! Am I playing like crap or what?

 

Not to mention I already died about 50 times and I got quite a few game overs already! I'm so frustrated right now because while I love this game's story and level design and overall presentation the controls are just ridiculous!! Is this the hardest Sonic game yet? Oh shit and I'm not even at Lava Mountain yet! T_T

[SilentDoom]

I don't know what to believe about the controls. They're certainly not the best controls in a Sonic game, in fact I think they're worse than Sonic Unleashed! Am I playing like crap or what?

 

Not to mention I already died about 50 times and I got quite a few game overs already! I'm so frustrated right now because while I love this game's story and level design and overall presentation the controls are just ridiculous!! Is this the hardest Sonic game yet? Oh shit and I'm not even at Lava Mountain yet! T_T

 

I don't think this is a control issue but rather a design issue.  Level's are often constructed around bottomless pits or have very precise platforming segments.  The controls are in no way worse than Unleashed's.  If you put Unleashed Sonic in this kind of level design any sane person would rage quit the game.  The platforming would be almost impossible and unbearably frustrating even to the most patient of players.  Heck the same could be said about Colours and Generations Sonic.  Low speed control in that game is vastly inferior to that of Lost World, and mid air control is basically non existent.  

 

I am really, really struggling to see how the controls of this game can be perceived as atrocious even when trying to look at this objectively.  I can see the various level design flaws, moments of frustration that people would have (I personally had significantly fewer than a number of people, but that's because I regard myself as quite a patient gamer when it comes to these sorts of games and usually blame myself for these sorts of issues as opposed to the game), the fact that the game may feel sluggish to some people comparative to past Sonic games but poor controls is something I simply cannot see.

[Autosaver]

The controls in this game aren't "bad" they're "different" from previous instalments,

I'm having a huge feeling that people are trying to play this game like Sonic Generations and epically failing.

 

"What do you mean I can't just boost through this?!"

[Vectorman]

Saw this video that makes so much sense.

[Narukami07]

Dayum.

[Sami]

I'm having a huge feeling that people are trying to play this game like Sonic Generations and epically failing.

 

"What do you mean I can't just boost through this?!"

 

People barely knew how to do that either.

 

"What do you mean I have to hold the button?"

 

Also it's worth noting that "IGN" is not a single entity. Maybe the person who previewed it is different from the person who reviewed it. Just saying.

[Narukami07]

This would be more ironic of it where Hilary Goldstein reviewing Lost World on IGN instead. I could see everything blowing up harder if that were the case.

Edited October 21, 2013 by Narukami07