Ratchet and Clank Team rips on Aaron Thomas (gamespot) Review

Boohoo we created a generic action platformer, with no online functions or splitsreen multiplayer and Gamespot reviewed it fairly :)Bazfrag

How ironic of you to talk about "generic" games and gamespot reviewing them fairly. So Warioware and PDZ were not generic and were very amazing, deserving of their scores eh? Makes sense to me.

Wow guys.Your taking 2 seconds out of a thirty minute podcast.

SW always takes stuff way out of context.

Sure, Insominac didn't need to bash a review of their game, but Aaron's review was not all that great either, they are right, how do you complain about too MUCH varity.

One of the reviews had sticked out to them which prompted the crew to say "If you hate variety, than you've got a problem.", "play more sports games", and "we will not mention the media outlet".

http://www.n4g.com/ps3/News-78986.aspx

Coming from a dev team that makes AAA titles, I dont blame them because Resistance Fall of Man and Ratchet And Clank Tools of Destruction deserve more credit and reason I point and say RFOM shouldve been AAA because of RFOM>>>>>>>>>PDZ, say what u like but its the honest truth.

squallff8_fan

I own both and i definatly think PDZ > Resistance

Highly-respected "Games" magazine just gave Ratchet a 6/10. I wonder what they'll have to say about that.Number_1_Gamer

Highly-respected "Games" magazine just gave Ratchet a 6/10. I wonder what they'll have to say about that.Number_1_Gamer

who cares. One of my favorite games for ps2 got a 7.3 (Front Mission 4) Didnt stop me from buying it, loving it, and playing it for days.Jowaa

[QUOTE="-Serpahim-"]

About you not caring, you act like you have to click on those 4-5 threads. Just dont click on them! By clicking on them and posting in them, you are helping to keep them bumped thus prolonging their life spans. So by coming in here and whining you are acutally making the situation worse. Ignore them and let people that care about them post in them. I mean, do you go into a stranger's house and complain about his furniture? Obviously not, because you are under no obligation to be in his house, therefore u are under no obligation to even look at his furniture. (and if you do walk into stranger's houses and complain about their furniture...u have issues :| )

Secondly I have sum things i would like clarification on. Are you saying that Its ok to discuss Insomniac's opinions because they are not paid to give opinions , but its not ok to discuss gamespots review because they are paid to review games?

iunderstand

I don't care if you want to discuss GameSpot's review, that's fine. Comments like Aaron Thomas is *** and needs to be fired or attacking his blog however is something else entirely. As well, in System Wars we have decided to use GameSpot's reviews to judge games. Arguing that GameRankings only counts when a game you were hyping flops on GS is sad. If you are using these forums, you already agree to use GameSpot's reviews when determining the gamescore.

Why should I care if there are threads talking about porn or threads talking about racism in System Wars? Well because it litters the forum and is unpleasant to the people posting.

What you said about people calling Aaron a ---- i agree but how is that any different from people calling insomniac cry babies or as Udsen so elequently put it "Insomniac is a bunch of hooting babies." Since you are taking the moral high ground, you should be condemning those guys too and telling them to discuss in a mature manner instead of name calling. And as for the whole flop thing, I think you are misunderstanding the whole arguement here. The majority of cows are not debating whether its a flop here. They are commenting on the fact that Lemmings are calling R&C a crap game due to the 7.5 review. We agreed on System Wars that the GS score was all that mattered when it came to seeing if a game flops or not, but no where did we say that ONLY GS scores mattered. So while its fact that the game flopped, its not fact that the game sucks. And the majority of reviews seem to think that its a great game and as you so clearly put it " They are professional reviewers that review games as objectively as possible and provide reasons for their scores." So its completely acceptable for people to use Gamerankings score to debate whether R&C is a good game, but no whether it flopped on GS. And to be honest, very few people are claiming that it didnt flop on GS. But many are claiming that the GS review was flawed and they should be allowed to discuss that.

As for your last little paragrah, all i have to say is that we have mods for a reason. They will take care of all the stuff they deem to be trash and unacceptable. Your job is thrive within the community not to fight crime (in a matter of speaking... :P ). If you really have a problem with this, PM or email a mod and ask them to do sumthing about it instead of Exacerbating the situation.

[QUOTE="BlueBarad"]They should've sent him a review guide. Stonin

lol.

The score here was a little on the low side but lets face it, the game isn't really all that now is it. The same applies to RFOM, it is a great game in its own way but at the time it released (a year after PDZ) it didn't bring anything new.

It hasn't brought anything new? Have you ever played Resistance?

[QUOTE="Ibacai"]I think people are taking this way to seriously and exaggeration is running rampant in here. Settle down folks, they didn't insult your mother.Bread_or_Decide

System Wars is like fox news. I've never seen such a blatant stretching of the facts. They grab one tiny element of the story and just run with it. Its unbelievable.

I wonder how many awesome games gamespot has ever created...oh right..none. I'll side with Insomniac and their 90% gameranking score for R&C. Thanks.

did you sing that tune for the higher scoring TP?

Just as the reviewer has the right to critique the video game; the developer(s) have the right to critique the review. I agree 100% with the response to the 'too much variety' claim; that was what really irritated me about the review. Apparently to him, having more ways to play is a bad thing.DementedDragon

That is what irritated me aswell. Since when is variaton a bad thing?

DV

I kinda doubt they actually give a ****. In the context of the full podcast they make two wisecracking comments and then move on to other things for 30 minutes or whatever. Like for instance how glad they are the majority really digged the game. Like many of us they just think Aaron's criticism was ridiculous. Identity crisis wut? He does have one valid complaint. but in most cases here on Gamespot, something like a difficulty issue does not affect the score to such a degree. See Devil May Cry 3 (RIP Greg). Ooh, I remember how the cows used to whine about that.

They're playing Uncharted...damn them.

InsaneBasura

Got it. I guess the podcast was important to hear. in that case, my apologies for whoever it was telling people to check out the podcast. I didn't realize it was related.

They should've sent him a review guide. BlueBarad

:lol:... I mean, R&C may have gotten an undeserved score, but the dev team shouldn't sit around whining about it...

What you said about people calling Aaron a ---- i agree but how is that any different from people calling insomniac cry babies or as Udsen so elequently put it "Insomniac is a bunch of hooting babies." Since you are taking the moral high ground, you should be condemning those guys too and telling them to discuss in a mature manner instead of name calling. And as for the whole flop thing, I think you are misunderstanding the whole arguement here. The majority of cows are not debating whether its a flop here. They are commenting on the fact that Lemmings are calling R&C a crap game due to the 7.5 review. We agreed on System Wars that the GS score was all that mattered when it came to seeing if a game flops or not, but no where did we say that ONLY GS scores mattered. So while its fact that the game flopped, its not fact that the game sucks. And the majority of reviews seem to think that its a great game and as you so clearly put it " They are professional reviewers that review games as objectively as possible and provide reasons for their scores." So its completely acceptable for people to use Gamerankings score to debate whether R&C is a good game, but no whether it flopped on GS. And to be honest, very few people are claiming that it didnt flop on GS. But many are claiming that the GS review was flawed and they should be allowed to discuss that.

As for your last little paragrah, all i have to say is that we have mods for a reason. They will take care of all the stuff they deem to be trash and unacceptable. Your job is thrive within the community not to fight crime (in a matter of speaking... :P ). If you really have a problem with this, PM or email a mod and ask them to do sumthing about it instead of Exacerbating the situation.

-Serpahim-

The difference between insulting Aaron Thomas for the review and calling Insomniac cry babies is that Aaron Thomas was simply doing his job and scored the game what he deemed fit. If someone were to attack an Insomniac developer in the same way because he had a certain issue with the game I would agree. Insomniac didn't need to make that podcast or make the comments they did.

I don't think anyone actually considers R&C a bad game, it got a good score GS. I've only seen a few instances where people actually called it a bad game and it was to rile up the other forum members. 7.5 is a good score, I've enjoyed many games that earned a score like that.

And honestly, I don't know what that paragraph evolved from but it's really irrelevant to this argument. That being said, I think this has gone on long enough. It's clear we disagree and no point in continuing this.

They should've sent him a review guide. BlueBarad

R&C: ToD is rather interesting to look at on gamerankings. In total, there are 29 reviews. Only one of them scored the game between 70% and 79%. That was gamespot. Only gamespot so far. The 28 other review sites gave the game a score of 80% or higher.

People seem to say that 85% and above would have been an acceptable score, however. Going by that rule, 25 review sites gave R&C a score of 85% or higher, whilst 4 did not. If you want to be even more strict, let's go by a minimum of 90%. 23 review sites gave R&C a score of 90% or higher, whilst 6 did not.

80% or higher = 28 (while 1 site gave a lower score)

85% or higher = 25 (while 4 sites gave a lower score)

90% or higher = 23 (while 6 sites gave a lower socre)

Gamespot seems to be quite in the minority with it's review score. Does R&C really suck? Whichever way you put it, the majority of review sites still say the game rocks. 28 vs. 1? 25 vs. 4? 23 vs. 6?