Insomniac: *Aaron Thomas Shouldn't Have Reviewed Ratchet & Clank*

[QUOTE="XTy"]Did you play it and beat it? Probably not, so you wouldn't really know what a fair score for it is.Forza_2

7.5 out of 10

75.0%
Site Profile Play UK


72 out of 100

72.0%
Site Profile Gamecritics


7 out of 10

70.0%
Site Profile gamesTM


6 out of 10

60.0%

Yeah, lol. GS has been relegated to these top sites. The Average is all that im talking about. Shall I dig up poor reviews on Perfect Dark, Halo, etc.

He didn't play it, therefore his response is desired. 7.5 is good until you play it and realize the game may be better than that, but they had the SPORTS REVIEWER playing it. GS messed up.

Wait, so Gamespot gave a bad review to an Eidos game (K&L) and everyone sided with Gamespot...but when they gave a bad review to an Insomnia game (R&C), people are siding with Insomnia?Planeforger

Well, it's not so much GS the entitiy, it's the reviewers people are siding with.
Kane =JEff.

Ratchet = Aaron.

GS merely messed up by alllowing Aaron to review a game that he clearly had no place even playing.

[QUOTE="XTy"]8.9 > 7.5.

That is a very bad comparison.

Forza_2

I did. You don't get it.

YOu consider the bottomline, an 8.9 "Slamming HALO". LOL.

They may have dished out harsh words for Halo for being repetitive, but their score doesn't reflect that.

Aaron however failed completely.

Im sorry, I don't want Sports Gamers playing any of my games and reviewing them, that's crazy. GS messed by allowing that...AND I DON"T EVEN LIKE RATCHET!

So it seems that they still haven't accepted the score after all. They should be quiet and make more games than to worry about one score.FireEmblem_Man

just because they commented on ones review doesnt mean they were worried about it. imo

DEVELOPERS>REVIEWERS

I did. You don't get it.XTy

all I hear is "WAAAAAAAAAAAH!" Seriously Insomniac, your one of the best Developers. You dont need to stoop to this. Just get Resistence 2 done for me please.

If I had a shovelware game reviewed by someone of the correct target market, it would get a 10 out of 10. If I give a slow, turn-base, strategy RPG to someone that likes action and fast pace, the game will get a low score.

You can't choose the reviewer, and it is best that way. You need a reviewer that is experienced in all game genres and styles that can distinguish market appeals. Overall a game can suck, but some of those games deserve a low score for the overall picture of gaming, yet deserve a high score for the specific target market.

Try having a horror game being reviewed by the stereotypical soccer mom and see the score on it.

Maybe Insomniac should write up a manual on how to review Ratchet & Clank F:ToD.

TC is obviously on the side of Gamespot, but seriously, do you think Aaron Thomas is the only reviewer out there good and clever enough to see the "real" Ratchet and Clank? Every other reviewer was somehow tricked into believing it was an 8.5+ game except for him? That's hugely insulting to everyone that isn't Aaron Thomas.

The real question is: have any of you bashing R&C and/or siding with Aaron Thomas actually played Ratchet and Clank? I'm guessing no, you haven't.

Did anyone read the review, or just look at the number? numba1234

thats the problem. i dont care about the score but the review made no sense. it was just stupid. too much variety isnt a negative no one likes repetitiveness. it was just a false reason to dog on the game

Developers shouldn't complain about reviews of their games....it's sad really. Not everyone is going to like your product.

Insomniac should just put this matter behind them entirely...
MoldOnHold

LOL the Gametrailers editors ASKED THEM ABOUT IT. They didn't come to them and say "hey, let us complain". Fanboys don't even bother to check out a link before dropping some a-durrr reply.

[QUOTE="XTy"]I did. You don't get it.Forza_2

Don't tell me what to do. Do us a favor, as you have been the one trolling this entire thread.

The thread is about Aaron Thomas and whether he should have reviewed Ratchet. This thread also covers what Insomniac feels about it.

I don't let PLUMBERS Write prescription's for my grandma, because I don't think they are qualified. Aaron obviously wasn't qualified either.

That's what I think. I agree with Insomniac, and i don't even play their games.

Do us a faovr and stop posting, you obviously think developers have no opinions and don't like it when they express frusteration at poor reviews,something Aaron Thomas provided with his Ratchet review.

"Uh...Too much variety, I play sports games, 7.5. Thank you come again. Gamespot pay me please."

The real question is: have any of you bashing R&C and/or siding with Aaron Thomas actually played Ratchet and Clank? I'm guessing no, you haven't.

excelR83

I have played R&C F:ToD. I have beaten it too. Overall, the game is last generation play style with next generation graphics. You play a level, beat it, unlock a new level. Eventually you do return to revisit an old level as part of the level progression, but the main reason to return to old levels is to collect items.

I would not rate the game any higher than 7 out of 10 on a non-pessimistic scale. It is above average, but it is not among the greatest.

Aaron rated it low compared to the average score , that is all I can say objectively. I think the Insomniacshave every right to be upset about a low score and the poorly written review, but they are acting in a childish manner about the whole situation imo.

Nike_Air

still whinning about the gs`s score.....? yikesDante2710

Sheesh, are they really worrying about one review? Especially when the GS editorial team stands behind the review, and many people (including me) think it had many valid criticisms of the game.Funkyhamster

Developers shouldn't complain about reviews of their games....it's sad really. Not everyone is going to like your product.

Insomniac should just put this matter behind them entirely...
MoldOnHold

None of you watched the video in the link. Not one.

It seems alot of people here didn't even watch the episode. He wasn't complaining about the review score, he just said a sports reviewer shouldn't be reviewing a platformer. Silenthps

But this guy gets it.

Besides that, as I said, THEY WERE ASKED TO BE ON THE SHOW, probably because everyone knows about the controversy that review created. It's not like they made a video at their own studio whining about the review.

Anti-PS3 fanboys are the strangest breed of creature I've ever encountered.

[QUOTE="XTy"]Did you play it and beat it? Probably not, so you wouldn't really know what a fair score for it is.Forza_2

7.5 out of 10

75.0%
Site Profile Play UK


72 out of 100

72.0%
Site Profile Gamecritics


7 out of 10

70.0%
Site Profile gamesTM


6 out of 10

60.0%

Funny because you forget to mention that 40 out of the 63 reviews on metacritic gave it a 9 or higher. And only 5 gave it lower than an 8. Of course 1 being Gamespot.

TC is obviously on the side of Gamespot, but seriously, do you think Aaron Thomas is the only reviewer out there good and clever enough to see the "real" Ratchet and Clank? Every other reviewer was somehow tricked into believing it was an 8.5+ game except for him? That's hugely insulting to everyone that isn't Aaron Thomas.

The real question is: have any of you bashing R&C and/or siding with Aaron Thomas actually played Ratchet and Clank? I'm guessing no, you haven't.

excelR83

That would be a pretty accurate guess. My whole beef is finding out today, even though Im a lem, that gs is having nonqualified reviewers play different genres. GS doesn't have a second reviewer like GI, or three reviewers like EGM, they rely HEAVILY on the one reviewer.

SO they put a sports guy on a platformer...and surprise, surprise, he gave it a 7.5.

How many other games have been reviewed in such a fashion? This could explain the PD0 review.They need to have MORE THAN ONE REVIEW for problems like this and others (PD0, KANE, Ratchet, etc.)

[QUOTE="Forza_2"]

[QUOTE="XTy"]Did you play it and beat it? Probably not, so you wouldn't really know what a fair score for it is.CajunShooter

7.5 out of 10

75.0%
Site Profile Play UK


72 out of 100

72.0%
Site Profile Gamecritics


7 out of 10

70.0%
Site Profile gamesTM


6 out of 10

60.0%

Funny because you forget to mention that 40 out of the 63 reviews on metacritic gave it a 9 or higher. And only 5 gave it lower than an 8. Of course 1 being Gamespot.

Yeah, it's called cherry picking, that's EXACTLY what I noticed!

Furthermore, who knows if Aaron beat it...for that matter where he did or not, he wasn't qualified to review it...read the review for more reasons why.

Funny because you forget to mention that 40 out of the 63 reviews on metacritic gave it a 9 or higher. And only 5 gave it lower than an 8. Of course 1 being Gamespot.CajunShooter

The point (VERY clearly) was never to downplay the game.

[QUOTE="excelR83"]

The real question is: have any of you bashing R&C and/or siding with Aaron Thomas actually played Ratchet and Clank? I'm guessing no, you haven't.

lightningbugx

I have played R&C F:ToD. I have beaten it too. Overall, the game is last generation play style with next generation graphics. You play a level, beat it, unlock a new level. Eventually you do return to revisit an old level as part of the level progression, but the main reason to return to old levels is to collect items.

I would not rate the game any higher than 7 out of 10 on a non-pessimistic scale. It is above average, but it is not among the greatest.

okay, that seems fair. However, how many other games are "Last Generation Play styles with new graphics?"

I betcha we can all think of some right now, SOME MEGA BLOCKBUSTERS, that get great reviews...right?

That isn't good enough a complaint.

However, its nice that you did beat it, and that's fair. That's more than we know Aaron Thomas did.

it seems insomniac convinced themselves that Ratchet & Clank score of 7.5 at GS was due to Aaron Thomans' dislike to the platformer genre.

http://www.gametrailers.com/bonusround.php?ep=18&pt=1

so which side you're on; the journalist/editor, or the developer/publisher?

Mystery_Writer

Well insomniac has some ligitimate arguemets like that he said it has too much varity which for a platformer is almost imposible and that gamespot put someone that rates sports games on a platformer. If you have played this game you will know that it is way more than 7.5. i would give it an 8.5

Jeff Gerstmann should've reviewed the game, in fact. He reviewed every single other Ratchet game before that and so why someone else has to suddenly review Tools of Destruction is beyond my knowledge.

I am pretty certain that if Jeff Gerstmann were to review it, he would give it somewhere between an 8.5 to a 9.0

Of course I'm not whining either, what's done is done but I'm just a little curious as to how some things work at Gamespot.

[QUOTE="Silenthps"]It seems alot of people here didn't even watch the episode. He wasn't complaining about the review score, he just said a sports reviewer shouldn't be reviewing a platformer. excelR83

But this guy gets it.

Besides that, as I said, THEY WERE ASKED TO BE ON THE SHOW, probably because everyone knows about the controversy that review created. It's not like they made a video at their own studio whining about the review.

Anti-PS3 fanboys are the strangest breed of creature I've ever encountered.

So what if the guy is a sport reviewer. That does not mean that he only like sports game. I sure he did enjoy R&C, as 7.5 is a good score. Insomniac are just wasting their time, and they should get over it.

okay, that seems fair. However, how many other games are "Last Generation Play styles with new graphics?"

I betcha we can all think of some right now, SOME MEGA BLOCKBUSTERS, that get great reviews...right?

That isn't good enough a complaint.

However, its nice that you did beat it, and that's fair. That's more than we know Aaron Thomas did.

XTy

Too many games are last generation or 2 generations ago playstyle with new graphics. It is easy to hide the true playstyle of the game behind the curtain of graphics. Such tactics would cause some kid playing a game for the first time to give it a 10. You hear all about the better physics, which really is the games are having more physics, not better. It is sad when someone calls a building falling as great graphics abilities when that building is only a background item that does not affect gameplay except for show.

You can complain about a sports reviewer reviewing a platform game. But would you want your game reviewed by an 8 year old that knows nothing about reviewing? Then you have to go into explaining the scale of 1 to 10. I am not pessimistic, and my scale of 1 to 10 refers to average being 5. And my 5 seems like a 7 on GS, so I would rate R&C higher when converting to scale expectations.

excuses excuses, it sucks the end, they should stop their damage control and focus to make rachet a better game.-wii60-

Make it better? :lol: :lol:

AAHAHAHAHA! Make it better than what? What was your favorite part of R&C? That one level where you do that one thing? Yeah, that's what I thought.

In order to judge something comparatively, you need to actually have a reference point.

Roger Sobchak to Donnie from The Big Lebowski: "Shut the **** up, Donnie, you're out of your element".

Without having played Tools of Destruction...

1. The complaint about variety isn't necessarily wrong. The complaint wouldn't be so much with the variety but with the de-emphasis of the strong core gameplay to focus on weak secondary gameplay. Sonic Adventure 2 was pretty much the perfect example of this, where the effort to expand the gameplay hurt it majorly.

2. Anyone using the ''last gen gameplay with next gen graphics'' line needs to stop.

3. I hope that the notion that GameSpot backs the review has to do with GameSpot agreeing with the review. If their was a consensus of agreement that R&C was a 7.5 game and Aaron was simply the guy who typed up the review then there's no problem. If there wasn't any agreement and Aaron just went lone wolf for the review with GameSpot backing him up because he's one of their own or because the last thing they need is to have another reviewer thrown under the bus then Schneider's point is entirely valid.

I am on the gamer side and i THink the game rocks

I just hope Insomniac takes some stuff out of Resistance so there's not too much variety, one gun is good and just DM, nothing more. white_sox

Also, they should take out ALternate firing. Too much variety is a terrible thing.

it seems insomniac convinced themselves that Ratchet & Clank score of 7.5 at GS was due to Aaron Thomans' dislike to the platformer genre.

http://www.gametrailers.com/bonusround.php?ep=18&pt=1

so which side you're on; the journalist/editor, or the developer/publisher?

Mystery_Writer

Ratchet is mediocre, so i am with the reviewer

Well they kind of got a point, if a reviewer dislikes certain type of games don't let him review that genre... I hate Racing-Fighting games, and love rpgs and fps, it's bound that I will be more biased toward my favourite genres compared to racing-fighting games which I can't stand.

Hey, respect the guys opinion. Be glad he gave buyers a different take on the game and view.

I love the game but it is always nice to have a variety of opinions to fall onto.

They should be quiet and make more games than to worry about one score.FireEmblem_Man

They make a game every single year.:|

2006 - Resistance: Fall of Man

2007 - Ratchet & Clank Future: Tools of Destruction

2008 - Resistance 2

And that's just for PS3.

What more games do you want?

Too many people see this as crying. The insomniac didn't even bring the issue up. It was the interviewer that mentioned the gamespot review. Also I can understand devs sometimes not being happy with reviews. If you make a painting, and someone disses it for weird reasons that you don't understand, are you going to say "yeah, that's probably true"? While game devs have a job to do well, reviewers should also do that. Also his point about the choice of reviewer and the comment he made was pretty fair.

This is not the only time such a thing happens too. There's many times a review is just far too critical about small things in a game while other games are forgiven for such things. Also it's always interviewers wanting devs to say it, because people want to read it. Same thing was with shadowrun. I think the devs had a point that shadowrun was given a low score for the wrong reasons. The only response you'll get from forums is "cry more", but can you imagine how frustrating it would be to work on a project full time for a few years, and some very important review site disses it for really weird reasons while other games get away with it?

Too many people see this as crying. The insomniac didn't even bring the issue up. It was the interviewer that mentioned the gamespot review. Also I can understand devs sometimes not being happy with reviews. If you make a painting, and someone disses it for weird reasons that you don't understand, are you going to say "yeah, that's probably true"? While game devs have a job to do well, reviewers should also do that. Also his point about the choice of reviewer and the comment he made was pretty fair.

This is not the only time such a thing happens too. There's many times a review is just far too critical about small things in a game while other games are forgiven for such things. Also it's always interviewers wanting devs to say it, because people want to read it. Same thing was with shadowrun. I think the devs had a point that shadowrun was given a low score for the wrong reasons. The only response you'll get from forums is "cry more", but can you imagine how frustrating it would be to work on a project full time for a few years, and some very important review site disses it for really weird reasons while other games get away with it?

11Marcel

So true. I applaud your comment.

[QUOTE="MoldOnHold"]Developers shouldn't complain about reviews of their games....it's sad really. Not everyone is going to like your product.

Insomniac should just put this matter behind them entirely...
excelR83

LOL the Gametrailers editors ASKED THEM ABOUT IT. They didn't come to them and say "hey, let us complain". Fanboys don't even bother to check out a link before dropping some a-durrr reply.

Secondly , the reason they asked them is because everyone knows they were publicly upset by it and they kept whining about it. You have to know the other circumstances surrounding it to fully understand it.I watched the link , but I also listen to their Full Moon Podcastand I read the NeoGaf boards where jstevenson (from Insomniac) posts and I see and hear what they say. This just adds to it when they complain about Aaron only reviewing sports games or whatever when they don't even know what the hell theyare even talking about. They don't know his background in this industry at all. I am NOT siding with Aaron's review of the game (appears to be poorly done) , I just had enough with Insomniac because they are wrong on this issue because they are just slinging poo. When asked about it , they didn't have to stoop to that level yet again.

Finally , I still love Insomniac ...... everyone makes mistakes.

it seems insomniac convinced themselves that Ratchet & Clank score of 7.5 at GS was due to Aaron Thomans' dislike to the platformer genre.

http://www.gametrailers.com/bonusround.php?ep=18&pt=1

so which side you're on; the journalist/editor, or the developer/publisher?

Mystery_Writer

It's about time they just got over it, mediocre game from a mediocre series.

I can totally see how INsomniac came to their opinion/conclusion. AT does review most of the sports games.

However...

AT has mentioned in several blog posts how much he is enjoying SMG, a platformer. He has also made reference to several other non-sports games which he plays and enjoys.

Also, as was pointed out at the time of Jeff's dismissal, reviews are based upon a concensus. While one person does the play testing and writes the review, all reviews are disccussed amongst the team and signed off on by the entire editorial staff. If this had been a case of one dude just not "getting it" because he likes sports games, Gerstmann wouldn't have let the review go through. They all agreed. Doesn't mean you have to.

Im with everyone against GS, there true side is being revealed months ago and lemmings are blind yet, even if they are not biased, the moment I saw the reviewer profile and what games he reviewed, it is obviously wrong, someone who loves sports is mostly not into other genres and vice verse.

Im with the developers here, and he didn't whine, anyone say this kinda of thing didn't click on the link.

is its just big headed american devs Like Jaffe Factor 5 or These guys. that get upset over one bad review.....

Lol they must think they are the top of the top. They are far from it.

Are thet still crying about a game that almost no one is still playing?

R&C left my PS3 more then two months ago for goodness sake? Its over why is Insomniac still crying?

It was a visually stunning game that was FAR to easy, and once I beat once and fiddled around with a partial replay I had no interest in coming back to it, 7.5 may have been too hard on it, but the 9.0+ that it was getting were WAY to high as per usual the reality laid somewhere in the middle.

Are thet still crying about a game that almost no one is still playing?

R&C left my PS3 more then two months ago for goodness sake? Its over why is Insomniac still crying?

It was a visually stunning game that was FAR to easy, and once I beat once and fiddled around with a partial replay I had no interest in coming back to it, 7.5 may have been too hard on it, but the 9.0+ that it was getting were WAY to high as per usual the reality laid somewhere in the middle.

cosmostein77

they didnt even bring up the topic, GT did. So when the issue was brought up, of course they would defend their title, the devs worked hard for it. Developers have a right to complain since they work thei asses off for gamers like us except for the KAne&Lynch devs who just work for money alone(yes, all devs want money but some think about the gamers too).