surf dtoid with 
Rising (10+)
People you follow
I can't tell if they are dissatisfied with themselves for the game's less-than-perfect scores, or for reviewers for not liking their game more. It's kind of a big difference, as one makes sense, and the other doesn't.
I bet if the game was selling better, they wouldn't care about the reviews at all. What's Wii Play's metacritic average? A 5.6 or something?
I bet if the game was selling better, they wouldn't care about the reviews at all. What's Wii Play's metacritic average? A 5.6 or something?
"I bet if the game was selling better, they wouldn't care about the reviews at all. What's Wii Play's metacritic average? A 5.6 or something?"
Indeed. I don't know why people think reviews are *that* big of a deal when it comes to sales. Sure, they inform a certain demographic, but the idiots will buy anything with a cute rabbit on the front.
Indeed. I don't know why people think reviews are *that* big of a deal when it comes to sales. Sure, they inform a certain demographic, but the idiots will buy anything with a cute rabbit on the front.
I cannot believe developers put all their money on the goddamn manipulated scores of such a dumb site like Metacritic.
Hell, I can't people ANYBODY still puts faith on Metacritic for any reason except to be a troll.
Hell, I can't people ANYBODY still puts faith on Metacritic for any reason except to be a troll.
Well either way I liked the game I bought also because I wanted the motion plus. It's a fun game so far. I have no real complaints as of yet. Well I guess you can't please everyone.
I find it hard to care one way or the other, I don't agree with scores in the first place.
If you are part of a review system that gives scores though, you have to expect crap like this to result from it. People put the score above everything else and then you are left with nothing but numerical comparison to other reviews, your own and others', and a viewpoint from a school-grade perspective of anything below 90% being something your mother isn't getting excited over.
Not that I want to have the review score debate again, I know it is something you cannot change without throwing a ton of site interest out the window.
If you are part of a review system that gives scores though, you have to expect crap like this to result from it. People put the score above everything else and then you are left with nothing but numerical comparison to other reviews, your own and others', and a viewpoint from a school-grade perspective of anything below 90% being something your mother isn't getting excited over.
Not that I want to have the review score debate again, I know it is something you cannot change without throwing a ton of site interest out the window.
I read the Unfettered Skree blog and from what I can gather he read the reviews, read the scores and were a bit disappointed that the reviews seemed buoyant with praise but that the scores were somewhat lacklustre.
Even in the blog he admitted it might be his own ego skewing the prose to looking a lot more enthusiastic than the scores seem to indicate, so I think even he knows he could be barking up the wrong tree, but wanted to put his views out that scoring is a thorny issue, especially when there are sales and bonuses at stake.
I think your fight is noble, Jim, but you picked it with the wrong guy.
Even in the blog he admitted it might be his own ego skewing the prose to looking a lot more enthusiastic than the scores seem to indicate, so I think even he knows he could be barking up the wrong tree, but wanted to put his views out that scoring is a thorny issue, especially when there are sales and bonuses at stake.
I think your fight is noble, Jim, but you picked it with the wrong guy.
CaptainBus:
I disagree. He might be acting less of a cock about it than some developers, but it seems rather passive aggressive to be all "these people said our game was great, why did we only get eights?" Reading the full blog, he makes no real point, other than to say "Yeah, the reviews were decent, but I'm not that happy."
I disagree. He might be acting less of a cock about it than some developers, but it seems rather passive aggressive to be all "these people said our game was great, why did we only get eights?" Reading the full blog, he makes no real point, other than to say "Yeah, the reviews were decent, but I'm not that happy."
I wasn't interested in Red Steel 2 UNTIL I saw the reviews. Despite releasing some pretty excellent games, Ubisoft have been pretty dumb recently.
Considering that their haven't been many good games on the wii as of late I doubt this will be that big of a deal. I know I will be getting this still.
I generally feel negativity when scores around around 60 and below, what I care most is the review content anyway after all.
I think the reason devs and fanboys get tied up into knots over less than stellar review scores is that both groups understand that games are expensive and time consuming. In comparison, seeing a movie in a theatre costs $10-15 and takes up 2-3 hours of your time.
With numbers like these people are much more willing to take a chance on something that might not the quintessential example of the medium. But when the purchase in question costs $50-70 and will take somewhere around 7-100 hours to complete people are going to be much more careful.
With numbers like these people are much more willing to take a chance on something that might not the quintessential example of the medium. But when the purchase in question costs $50-70 and will take somewhere around 7-100 hours to complete people are going to be much more careful.
Perfect scores would cause and outrage
As you have proven Jim gamers only look at review scores and yell/complain about which score is higher or not high enough much like a penis
In conclusion Review scores are penises
As you have proven Jim gamers only look at review scores and yell/complain about which score is higher or not high enough much like a penis
In conclusion Review scores are penises
They do see the review scores translating to sales. They see the people nowadays as more discerning about the quality of the few games a year they spend their money on. That they'll either look to find games with +90% scores or ask their gaming friend for those types of recommendations.
I recon it might have more to do with the fact that high scores are thrown all over the place nowadays and that he just feels dissapointed that they don't get these.
I mean, Final Fantasy 13 got a whole lote more flak concerning issues in the game, but that game's got a metascore of 83. Heavy Rain, 87. Sonic & Sega Allstar Racing, 78.
I guess he feels too lightly rewarded for trying something completely different and unique (controls, setting) while being heavily punished for the faults the game does have.
All IMO offcourse.
I mean, Final Fantasy 13 got a whole lote more flak concerning issues in the game, but that game's got a metascore of 83. Heavy Rain, 87. Sonic & Sega Allstar Racing, 78.
I guess he feels too lightly rewarded for trying something completely different and unique (controls, setting) while being heavily punished for the faults the game does have.
All IMO offcourse.
@Blackfrag
If that was true, i would love to see top quality from everyone instead of doing generic products.
If that was true, i would love to see top quality from everyone instead of doing generic products.
It just sounds like creative conceit to me, which is a perfectly normal and even desirable thing. I mean, shouldn't perfectionism be a necessary trait in game developers? If I were designing a game (I don't, I contribute nothing useful to mankind, but if I did) I'd have every intention of making a 10/10 game, and anything less would be a bit of a disappointment. Why even make a game if you're willing to settle for 81%?
I don't think this is a concern. In fact, I think it's a good thing.
I don't think this is a concern. In fact, I think it's a good thing.
I'm not sure where this dev sits on the food chain but I'm pretty sure he just expected greatness out of a game that people find good. I'm disappointed that he isn't taking the little bit of criticism on these games and blogging about how those reviews didn't understand what he tried to present or something along those lines. Not sad face over an 80% rating.
I don't think its complaining, because the game is doing good review wise so far. Hell, any game that Jim's gives a 8.5 has to be right? I think its just the case of a few sited just didn't like it, so it takes the whole average down drastically. There are a whole lot more good reviews for the game, than bad ones!
Well, if they're not happy with the review, maybe they should have made a better game then. Harsh, but it really is that simple. I know some people hate review scores, but I appreciate them. Although the Metacritic score isn't always something you agree with, but it's usually in the right ballpark. Some people think review scores have a negative impact on gaming, but I think they're useful. They stimulate game sales by helping people avoid shovelware and purchasing the games that have the most marketing cash regardless of weak product. Reviews help good games that aren't getting enough attention, and make developers know that they can't expect to sell well by promoting their crap games ad nauseum.
Also, 81% is a good score. I'm think I'm going to get it for my girlfriend's Wii. At least someone will use the damn thing...
Also, 81% is a good score. I'm think I'm going to get it for my girlfriend's Wii. At least someone will use the damn thing...
First of all I don't believe Jason is complaining about the scores. They worked their asses off with Red Steel 2 and it turned out to be a truly great game. Pretty much all of the reviews sing it's praise and so one could see why being around 80% on metacritic would be puzzling. Then again reviews mean nothing and the game seems to be selling pretty well, being out of stock online and in stores in several cases. Jason's a really good guy and i don't think this is him just bitching and moaning at all.
I don't know why this is suprising when EA has totally reformed their company, openly admitting that their goal is to make grade A titles because they sell better.
I would love to say that review scores dont matter, but if something has an average score of, say, 7, and I am on the fence about buying it, I probably wont. 8 looks worse than a 9 by proximity, and I'd rather spend my money on a 9 than an 8 (or 7) because I know I'm statistically more likely to walk away with a sound investment.
Blame it on the economy, or a stiff competition, but not all of us can afford to play all the games we'd like to.
I would love to say that review scores dont matter, but if something has an average score of, say, 7, and I am on the fence about buying it, I probably wont. 8 looks worse than a 9 by proximity, and I'd rather spend my money on a 9 than an 8 (or 7) because I know I'm statistically more likely to walk away with a sound investment.
Blame it on the economy, or a stiff competition, but not all of us can afford to play all the games we'd like to.
I don't think he should be chided for being a tad disappointed. Anyone putting their all into something and believing it to be an incredible product, is *bound* to be disappointed.
There's a world of difference between him being disappointed with the scores, and actually thinking it should be scored higher. Once is acceptance, the other is arrogance. Can you really tell which scenario this is? The general tend-towards-negativity of many a forum online will indicate that it's more likely the latter, but then that's what cynics do. And it's those folks he's afraid might hinder purchases.
Personally, I think an 8 is a quality game.
There's a world of difference between him being disappointed with the scores, and actually thinking it should be scored higher. Once is acceptance, the other is arrogance. Can you really tell which scenario this is? The general tend-towards-negativity of many a forum online will indicate that it's more likely the latter, but then that's what cynics do. And it's those folks he's afraid might hinder purchases.
Personally, I think an 8 is a quality game.
red steel 2 is a fun game
having said that, i think they just want to push themselves as developers....as a creator i always think my stuff could be better, even if most of the people that heard/saw it say its good
now if theyre upset at meta-critic for the score, then they really need to push their games hardcore...i cant think of a ubisoft game that i would give a perfect 10.
having said that, i think they just want to push themselves as developers....as a creator i always think my stuff could be better, even if most of the people that heard/saw it say its good
now if theyre upset at meta-critic for the score, then they really need to push their games hardcore...i cant think of a ubisoft game that i would give a perfect 10.
@sandorasbox - it's pure, straight forward, by-the-numbers thinking that causes concern for those devs and pubs disappointed with an 8. If the general rule of thumb involved a little more personal thought and effort put into reading actual reviews, you're much more likely to walk away with a sound investment than watching the bottom line's value *only*.
Ubisoft need to shut up about everything. Also, Madworld got 81 (very generously IMHO). So if you take Metacritic score as sales forecast, good luck with that.
That guy's response is okay by me. From what I can gather, he's the creative director, which makes this his thing. It's an artist's response, not a corporate one. He doesn't represent Ubisoft any more than Michel Ancel does, or any more than Jim Sterling represents Destructoid.
Without wanting to speak for the guy, he seems mostly positive at the response, and if anything, I'd say he's contemplating why they didn't get higher scores, rather than complaining. "That is an amazing feeling." - Closing line of the blog. Seems pretty happy to me.
I'd also argue that a developer hoping for tens is not damaging; they're allowed that liberty since they're directly responsible for it. Personally, I don't give a rat's rosy ass about review scores, which is why I never talk about them. But even so, a developer that cares about public response is more valuable than one who couldn't care less.
Without wanting to speak for the guy, he seems mostly positive at the response, and if anything, I'd say he's contemplating why they didn't get higher scores, rather than complaining. "That is an amazing feeling." - Closing line of the blog. Seems pretty happy to me.
I'd also argue that a developer hoping for tens is not damaging; they're allowed that liberty since they're directly responsible for it. Personally, I don't give a rat's rosy ass about review scores, which is why I never talk about them. But even so, a developer that cares about public response is more valuable than one who couldn't care less.
I...don't see a problem here. He says the reviews were mixed and he wants to make the perfect game. What's your beef Steeling? He's not complaining that the game was reviewed poorly, hell he's not even blaming the reviewers like a lot of designers make the folly of doing. He's saying they're getting there but it needs to be better. They wanna rake in 9's and 10's. I get that scores shouldn't be a one stop shop for what to buy and not to buy but while there is a system in place to gauge critical response why not try to make the most of it and make the best game possible?
@mesonw
I totally understand, and while I usually know which games I want regardless of scores, since I consider myself to be pretty up to snuff on vidyagames, I'll almost always pick an 8 over a 7 if I am equally on the fence between two games. I don't think that can be helped.
Which is not to say that a score is by any means an indication of actual quality.
I totally understand, and while I usually know which games I want regardless of scores, since I consider myself to be pretty up to snuff on vidyagames, I'll almost always pick an 8 over a 7 if I am equally on the fence between two games. I don't think that can be helped.
Which is not to say that a score is by any means an indication of actual quality.
"nobody is satisfied unless they're being rewarded with 10/10 for everything"
And why not? Strive to be the best you can be. You're having a go at them because they say they want to improve, which is ridiculous.
Try harder, Jim. Unless of course you're happy to settle with such mediocrity.
And why not? Strive to be the best you can be. You're having a go at them because they say they want to improve, which is ridiculous.
Try harder, Jim. Unless of course you're happy to settle with such mediocrity.
@MesonW
It's an appealing thought that wisdom should be given to the prose rather than the numeric appraisal, but one that doesn't connect with publishers' beliefs about current consumer trends.
The view of some publishers is that most gamers don't have the time or inclination to paw over review literature and would rather just find out what games are out at the moment that are getting the top scores.
The runaway success stories of metacritic and gamerankings, and the publishers' placement of these metascores in such high regard that they're willing to act like total prats to make their score look good , are testament to publishers' beliefs that views such as sandorasbox's hold true.
That said, recent analysis by the Cowen Group shows that score is one of the least important factors in games purchase. More important is the genre and whether or not consumers enjoyed a previous iteration in the series, so perhaps Ubisoft should have been more concerned about the sense in putting "Red Steel" in the title.
It's an appealing thought that wisdom should be given to the prose rather than the numeric appraisal, but one that doesn't connect with publishers' beliefs about current consumer trends.
The view of some publishers is that most gamers don't have the time or inclination to paw over review literature and would rather just find out what games are out at the moment that are getting the top scores.
The runaway success stories of metacritic and gamerankings, and the publishers' placement of these metascores in such high regard that they're willing to act like total prats to make their score look good , are testament to publishers' beliefs that views such as sandorasbox's hold true.
That said, recent analysis by the Cowen Group shows that score is one of the least important factors in games purchase. More important is the genre and whether or not consumers enjoyed a previous iteration in the series, so perhaps Ubisoft should have been more concerned about the sense in putting "Red Steel" in the title.
well, maybe they should have made it better then it was instead of bitching after the fact.
these devs and publishers know if a game will be getting 10's and 8.5's well before the fact. but this is ubisoft we're talking about, the company that blames god of war for making prince of persia shitty.
these devs and publishers know if a game will be getting 10's and 8.5's well before the fact. but this is ubisoft we're talking about, the company that blames god of war for making prince of persia shitty.
@Qraze
No they blamed GoW for taking their audience and said they needed to work harder to win them over.
No they blamed GoW for taking their audience and said they needed to work harder to win them over.
I'd be happy if scores were removed from reviews completely, for one thing it would render metacritic obsolete and of course allow everybody to shut the fuck up.
CALkulon, you're reading too little into this, that's impressive. [10/10]
CALkulon, you're reading too little into this, that's impressive. [10/10]
@SquawkDerby
Why do you think Destructoid would trade integrity for extra pageviews? I wouldn't want any part in such a community, so if you honestly believe that, why hang around?
You dish out spite like a drunk heckler at a comedy club, then you make comments like: "Destructoid guys seem incapable of delivering any sort of news without some jab or some unnecessary personal commentary. I guess that is the nature of the internet now."
Physician, heal thyself.
Why do you think Destructoid would trade integrity for extra pageviews? I wouldn't want any part in such a community, so if you honestly believe that, why hang around?
You dish out spite like a drunk heckler at a comedy club, then you make comments like: "Destructoid guys seem incapable of delivering any sort of news without some jab or some unnecessary personal commentary. I guess that is the nature of the internet now."
Physician, heal thyself.
I've started intentionally avoiding metacritic scores and just reading reviews and getting opinions on the games I am interested in. I find that number, whatever it may be, just fucks things up.
I can see why from the developer's 81% isn't what they hoped for since apparently companies and games live and die by that number once the game comes out. However, 81%.....not bad at all and I think it shows an overall improvement on the original product. Guess that's not enough anymore which is lame.
I can see why from the developer's 81% isn't what they hoped for since apparently companies and games live and die by that number once the game comes out. However, 81%.....not bad at all and I think it shows an overall improvement on the original product. Guess that's not enough anymore which is lame.
follow
