racketboy.com

isiolia wrote:Usually more a matter of finding like-minded people. Games are subjective.

Yes. I should have said that I agree, and that's partly my point. But in my experience, it's even subjective over the years. Put in Tail Concerto last night and am very sure that ten years ago I would have hated it and found it cloying...not that it's great, but I now appreciate the game and what it is doing, and even grudglingly admire it FOR it's annoying aspects...where I would not have before.

J T wrote:I am.

Ha!

vic oakland wrote:Your point about Sonic R reminds me of something I've never understood about how people play Maximo.

I was never good enough at platformers to attempt to play Maximo straight through, so I developed an approach of playing every level without caring about losing my lives and powerups and really taking the time to discover every enemy and secret on every level.

Then I'd go back and play the level as near to perfect as I could with my main game save and kept on building a "perfect game."

It turned out to be quite fun. I'm probably playing the game wrong, but I can't imaging playing Maximo any other way. Exploration first with a care-free powered up Maximo, then attempting a perfect play through level-by-level.

Saves on a lot of the !

Maximo frustrated the hell out of me for the very same reason you mentioned. Your strategy sounds like a good one. I should give it a try.


I definitely agree that games are subjective and that playing them years from your initial play through or from its release could give any person a different perspective on a game. People change over time and so do their perspectives. For example, when I initially played Mario Kart Wii six months ago, I had fun, but didn't enjoy it as much as Mario Kart 64, probably because I played MK64 with friends first, then played the single player mode. However, six months on and I've enjoyed MKW more this time around. Further, I put MK64 on after a session of MKW and found it almost unplayable. I had great fun with it over a decade ago, and I still believe it has some of the better courses in the series, but nowadays I can't stand the sub-par frame-rate and twitchy controls.

I'd say the best judge is anyone but a bought-and-paid-for commercial game reviewer. I got sick of reading those a long time ago. Somebody who plays five hours of a given game and then extrapolates the experience for their review? No thanks. Somebody who rushed through from beginning to end in record time to spit something out to meet press time? No thanks.

I think the only person who can judge is yourself. Thank goodness for things like demos, review aggregates, etc etc etc. I've been gaming my entire life, and some of the biggest most loved heavyweights (such as Final Fantasy VII or Zelda: OoT) are some of the games I enjoy the least. Every person's taste is different, and while there may be a majority on some titles, there can never be a single answer that rings true for every person.

I've said before I think it's best for genre fans to review the genres they specialize in. They know the ins-and-outs of what makes their favorite game-type good or bad. They understand better what people who have similar tastes want to hear about.

I don't think a hardcore fan of a specific game is a good person to listen to however, as they may know more about it than anybody else but they're also likely to hype it up and brush off bad aspects.

The way professional reviews are handled now, which is to say for the general audience, pretty much dooms any game that's part of a niche genre to continued obscurity.

Gunstar Green wrote:I've said before I think it's best for genre fans to review the genres they specialize in. They know the ins-and-outs of what makes their favorite game-type good or bad. They understand better what people who have similar tastes want to hear about.

I don't think a hardcore fan of a specific game is a good person to listen to however, as they may know more about it than anybody else but they're also likely to hype it up and brush off bad aspects.

The way professional reviews are handled now, which is to say for the general audience, pretty much dooms any game that's part of a niche genre to continued obscurity.

This is often true, but there are problems with reading reviews from genre experts as well. While they usually know the ins-and-outs of the genre and can provide a detailed analysis of a game, they are sometimes too committed to their genre tropes and don't like games that really break the mold beyond their comfort level.

On the flipside of this, they also can be to-cool-for-school when it comes to mainstream releases and they feel compelled to diss the mainstream releases to highlight their love for the more niche titles that you may have missed. Case in point: RPGamer.com, which is normally an excellent source for RPG reviews, didn't even put Skyrim in their best RPG of 2011 awards and instead gave that honor to Bastion (with 2nd going to Skyward Sword and 3rd going to Radiant Historia). Now, I really like Bastion, but Skyrim could shout it off the table easily. I think they just didn't want to be like every other reviewer that put Skyrim in their top spot for 2011. The Witcher 2 was another fairly obvious choice that got snubbed, but I think that had more to do with it being a PC exclusive at the time since they focus on consoles primarily.

That being said, here are a few good genre-specific sources for reviews:

http://www.rpgamer.com/

http://www.adventuregamers.com/

http://www.shmups.com/

J T wrote: Case in point: RPGamer.com, which is normally an excellent source for RPG reviews, didn't even put Skyrim in their best RPG of 2011 awards and instead gave that honor to Bastion (with 2nd going to Skyward Sword and 3rd going to Radiant Historia).

WTF

Menegrothx wrote:

J T wrote: Case in point: RPGamer.com, which is normally an excellent source for RPG reviews, didn't even put Skyrim in their best RPG of 2011 awards and instead gave that honor to Bastion (with 2nd going to Skyward Sword and 3rd going to Radiant Historia).

WTF

A Zelda game? On a rpg site? Over Skyrim? Remind me to NEVER visit that site

As far as the topic goes, there is no best judge of a game. I absorb info from many different places when I'm interested in a game. Forums, professional reviews, youtube videos, etc. If after everything I learn, I find myself interested in a game. I'll check it out. I never really know if I'll like the game until I play it though, and it's rather common for my opinion of a game to actually change during the course of me paying it. I might love the game at first, and hate it by the time I finish it or vice versa.

I think the best approach for the average gamer is renting. Whether it's Blockbuster or Gamefly, just rent whatever catches your interest. Other people's opinions be damned, just play the game for yourself and form your own opinion. In college, they always stressed the importance of critical thinking skills, which you don't develop by letting other people's opinions inform your decisions. You have to be able to experience things yourself and form your own opinions of them. For this reason, sometimes I hate the whole profession of video game criticism or review writing, because many, many, easily influenced gamers decide what they will or won't buy, or will or won't play based on review scores. Metacritic influences so many gaming decisions in the gaming community

Go to your average review site and look at the comments section of a review for a particular game. Often you'll find lots of people agreeing with reviewer's opinion of the game, despite NEVER HAVING PLAYED IT! So one of those people will go and tell their friends that the game sucks, just because some stranger on the internet told them so

When I was a kid, I went to a local video rental place and just grabbed any game that interested me. I hadn't yet fallen into that trap of letting magazine reviews determine what I play, and I had a lot of fun experiences with games that have since faded away into obscurity

J T wrote:
This is often true, but there are problems with reading reviews from genre experts as well. While they usually know the ins-and-outs of the genre and can provide a detailed analysis of a game, they are sometimes too committed to their genre tropes and don't like games that really break the mold beyond their comfort level.

On the flipside of this, they also can be to-cool-for-school when it comes to mainstream releases and they feel compelled to diss the mainstream releases to highlight their love for the more niche titles that you may have missed. Case in point: RPGamer.com, which is normally an excellent source for RPG reviews, didn't even put Skyrim in their best RPG of 2011 awards and instead gave that honor to Bastion (with 2nd going to Skyward Sword and 3rd going to Radiant Historia). Now, I really like Bastion, but Skyrim could shout it off the table easily. I think they just didn't want to be like every other reviewer that put Skyrim in their top spot for 2011. The Witcher 2 was another fairly obvious choice that got snubbed, but I think that had more to do with it being a PC exclusive at the time since they focus on consoles primarily.

This is very true. Genre experts sometimes have a very elitist mindset and it's something you have to be aware of as a reader.

I do think that they're a good starting point though, and the ultimate solution is to check multiple sources from different gaming backgrounds since no one person shares every point of view.

Menegrothx wrote:

J T wrote: Case in point: RPGamer.com, which is normally an excellent source for RPG reviews, didn't even put Skyrim in their best RPG of 2011 awards and instead gave that honor to Bastion (with 2nd going to Skyward Sword and 3rd going to Radiant Historia).

WTF

Actually, I'd agree with Bastion and Radiant Historia being in there -- Bastion did something very unique and different, and it is a total blast to play. I loved the narrator from the get-go, and kept imagining how hilarious it would be to have other games I enjoy narrated. Skyward Sword I completely don't understand, not on an RPG level or even a passably good game level. Stinking pile from beginning to end, and deserves to be forgotten, not lauded.

Maybe Skyrim can win something ...for longest WRPG? ...for more slobbering blinded fans than your average Call of Duty game? Skyrim has some of the worst failures of the genre dressed up in a pretty coat of paint -- just like Oblivion. It's not that it isn't an entertaining game if you can work around the irritations -- it's that for a game to be so highly lauded, I don't think it should have so many irritations. The "best" RPG should literally be the best in every way at the time the awards are shovelled out -- and in comparison to other more creative games, it wasn't the best, and I'm glad that even a community dedicated solely to RPGs was able to see that. (..but they chose Skyward Sword which sort of negates that. )

Just because the vast majority of people voicing their opinions can get sucked in by the gloss, glitz and glam doesn't necessarily make a good game. It just makes the game well marketed to the right people.

Guess I'm just not the best judge.