Escobahr's forum posts

Avatar image for Escobahr
Escobahr

133

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#1 Escobahr
Member since 2007 • 133 Posts

i stopped reading when he said bioshock gameplay was broken. every single fps uses the exact same controls so does bioshock except instead of theL button being grenades then its plasmids. and running around with a wrench? i sure as hell would never even attempt to hit a big daddy with a wrench! maybe in the tutorial level where theres like 1 enemy but once i got my pistol im shooting.pointless customization? how is faster firing shotgun and more damage pointless? how is explosive bullets vs normal pointless? made it a crap load easier to kill people thats for sure.

this guy doesnt even point out whats broken. he just says it was cobbled together from crap and needs to be given a 4. you just think hes a good reviewer because hes going against the crowd which is normally right. hes just an attention whore who needs to be fired right now.

im_different

feeling hyperbolic lately??

read again. he didnt state any of these games were crap or deserved a 4....just not deserving of a perfect score.

Avatar image for Escobahr
Escobahr

133

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#2 Escobahr
Member since 2007 • 133 Posts
[QUOTE="Escobahr"][QUOTE="BearEatsMan"]

No, he just comes out and picks a part minor flaws in this year's outstanding games.

minor flaws? lackluster gameplay, a multiplayer game thats online is almost rendered unplayable, a camera system that has real issues. these are minor flaws?
actually minor flaws are longer than usual load times or pop in....stuff like that.

Guess what, a lot of places arn't like GS where 100% means BEST GAME EVAR NOT IMPROVEMENTS NEEDED. Some places a 100% is the same as a AAA here.

Dude, nothing can be perfect. You can always find flaws in movies, games, art, ect. People giving games 100%s is just their way of communicating that they thought these were really stellar games.

so if nothing can ever be perfect...why give it a perfect sore? your argument is null and void when you claim that " aperfect score isnt a perfect score"
just remember that when game companies use these 10/10 scroes to advertise....they dont usually include the context of the score.

How bout looking at what these incredible titles did well, instead of finding reasons to pick it apart?

well thats allready been done by the reviewers who were supposed review the game as a whole, not just score the parts they liked.

BearEatsMan

You totally missed the point. My arguement is not null. Just because a reviewer gave something a 100%, on what ever sscale they use, does NOT mean they thought the could not be improved apon.

but again this begs my question....why score it perfectly? why not a 9 or a 9.5 or even a 9.6
a 9.6 means damn near close to being perfect...just not .....so whats the issue with thats? for the life of me ill never get why people are so fired up to defend misdefining a score. 10/10 means perfect. go to the street and ask someone what a 10/10 means.

Reviewers that hand out 100%s on a normal basis are just trying to say "Look, we really thought this gamethat got a 100%was awesome and we'd think you'd like it."

a 9.0 or a 9.5 says the same thing

But then hardasses have to come out and say "NOES NOES NONONONO. NO GAME IS PERFECT IN TEH HISTROY OF GAMING. THAT MEANS YOU CANT GIVE OUT 100%s!!!!11111"

i disagree. youcan give a game a score of ten. but.....if after playin a game you can point out laws large enough they couldnt be overlooked..then it doesnt deserve a ten.

No one cares dude, reviewers can give out scores they like. And some reviewers give out 100%s to games they thought we really good. Otherwards 100% DOES NOT HAVE TO = PERFECT

And BTW, good reviewers really focus on what games do well. Bad ones will point out the flaws and won't talk about what the game did well.

i want a review that focuses on the good and the bad and then scores the game properly...

Avatar image for Escobahr
Escobahr

133

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#3 Escobahr
Member since 2007 • 133 Posts

No, he just comes out and picks a part minor flaws in this year's outstanding games.

minor flaws? lackluster gameplay, a multiplayer game thats online is almost rendered unplayable, a camera system that has real issues. these are minor flaws?
actually minor flaws are longer than usual load times or pop in....stuff like that.

Guess what, a lot of places arn't like GS where 100% means BEST GAME EVAR NOT IMPROVEMENTS NEEDED. Some places a 100% is the same as a AAA here.

Dude, nothing can be perfect. You can always find flaws in movies, games, art, ect. People giving games 100%s is just their way of communicating that they thought these were really stellar games.

so if nothing can ever be perfect...why give it a perfect sore? your argument is null and void when you claim that " aperfect score isnt a perfect score"
just remember that when game companies use these 10/10 scroes to advertise....they dont usually include the context of the score.

How bout looking at what these incredible titles did well, instead of finding reasons to pick it apart?

well thats allready been done by the reviewers who were supposed review the game as a whole, not just score the parts they liked.

BearEatsMan
Avatar image for Escobahr
Escobahr

133

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#4 Escobahr
Member since 2007 • 133 Posts

well eh actually has a point.........

you on the other hand just disagre with him...for whatever reason we dont know....becasue you dont elaborate. you just do the ole' comment driveby that SW is famous for...

Avatar image for Escobahr
Escobahr

133

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#5 Escobahr
Member since 2007 • 133 Posts

That's because 10 doesn't mean perfect.Zhengi

well a 9.9 isnt perfect....but a 10/10 is actually perfect. when game publishers buys ad space in a magazine and claims it was given a 10/10 by so and so gamesite....arent they saying they got a perfect score? they arent gonna say "hey we got a 10/10 but thre was still some issues" and for this reason alone, is why editors need to put more weiht behind the perfect score

to say a 10 out of 10 doesnt mean perfect....souds a bit silly.

Avatar image for Escobahr
Escobahr

133

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#6 Escobahr
Member since 2007 • 133 Posts

this guy is dead on about perfect game scores this year!
and please read through to the end...he really illustrates why throwing out perfect tens is actually a detrement to gamers and game buying public!

Posted 11-27-07
Written by: Chris Jensen

"Have no fear of perfection - you'll never reach it." --Salvador Dali

I haven't made any official tabulation, but I suspect this year has seen more perfect scores for imperfect games than ever before. Either this is the best year ever for the industry or, more likely, the game "journalism" community is proving itself overly susceptible to hype. It's no wonder really, as the industry is sparing no expense in jetting writers to parties and events in an attempt to sway opinion. Far more critical than the subtle payola that occurs in this business is the sheer amount of critics who really don't know their ass from a hole in the ground.

BIOSHOCK
BioShock is a great-looking game that happens to have top-notch sound-effects and a decent story, but the gameplay is beyond fundamentally flawed. It comes across as cobbled together from a pile of disparate parts, an opinion that is backed up by the supplemental DVD that discusses the making of the game. One designer after another explains how the game shifted gears many times throughout its creation, abandoned some ideas and shoe-horned others. What you were left with was a sweet-looking adventure with broken gameplay, redundant tasks and pointless "customization" of weapons when all you have to do is run around with a wrench. Yet, despite a list of flaws, some of which are quite serious, BioShock was critic-proof, as if every single reviewer was scared to say the truth for fear of receiving a mountain of hate-email.

Who thought BioShock was perfect and incapable of improvement?

Eurogamer

Game Informer

1UP

Gamespy

Games Radar

GamePro

GameDaily

Yahoo! Games

Game Revolution

G4TV

GameTap

...and about 15 other sources, each of which generates revenue through advertising money that comes straight from the industry they are supposed to be critical of.

HALF-LIFE ORANGE BOX
The Orange Box might be a great value on the 360, but Team Fortress II has a ton of problems in the multiplayer department that, two patches later, still leave it floundering. You'll find insufferable lag in the majority of games, a horrible lobby system and an inability to easily play with friends, which is quite shocking given the "team" aspect of the game. Yet, despite these severe issues, The Orange Box led a parade of perfect scores. Suprisingly, even some of the more jaded and critical of our editorial staff here fell under its spell. But who are the rest of the culprits? Unsurprisingly, the same gaggle of places that thought BioShock was a flawless diamond:

Yahoo! Games

Eurogamer

GameTap

GameDaily

GameSpy

1UP

GamePro

G4TV

HALO3
Halo 3 is yet another seemingly critic-proof game that could do no wrong, despite the fact the graphics are average, the story is thin, the gameplay doesn't innovate and it feels like something I played in the 90s when it was called Unreal Tournament. A perfect game? Hardly. It has a great replay system that is rendered pointless with the omission of even minor editing capabilities and while the ability to design custom game types is nifty, there is no way to play them with people who aren't on your friends list. There isn't a single aspect of Halo 3 that rises to the level of perfection, unless you count the marketing. Which sites/magazines were incapable of finding a single flaw? An unsurprising list:

GamePro

GameSpy

Eurogamer

Games Radar

1UP

GameTap

G4TV

Edge Magazine

..and tons of others.

SUPER MARIO GALAXY
We get it. People like new Mario games. But was Super Mario Galaxy really perfect? No. Despite being a solid platformer with great graphics, Nintendo still can't seem to fix the biggest issue with 3D platformers: the camera. You'll frequently find yourself failing a level or being otherwise hampered for a camera that thinks a wall is a lot more interesting for you to look at than Mario himself. Even with a camera system at times was nothing short of game-breaking, plenty of sites found absolutely nothing wrong with Super Mario Galaxy, and it's on track to be one of the highest scored games of all time. Who must have played a different build than we did:

GamePro

GameTap

Gamespy

Yahoo! Games

Play Magazine

G4TV

Eurogamer

Edge Magazine

...and a lot more.

Once upon a time, game reviews had teeth. Magazines like Computer Gaming World wielded their power effectively and honestly, but as the industry grew and the money began to flow, the power shifted. PR companies quickly learned how to sway opinion, withholding access to those who didn't play along, offering up subtle threats for low review scores and throwing exclusive parties. It reminds me of the White House Press Corp, who gets to travel on Air Force One and and follow the President's every move until they ask a tough question and find their access revoked. Those of us who have been tasked with using our experience and understanding of the industry to better inform the public have been seriously compromised to the point where nothing we say can be trusted.

The worst part of this growing debacle is that by tossing around perfect scores we ensure the industry won't mature and evolve. Unless critics clearly and fairly indicate the flaws we see, and score accordingly, we render ourselves moot and untrustworthy. It's time we so-called journalists and critics reclaim our integrity...and do our job.

this guy says it perfectly...

Avatar image for Escobahr
Escobahr

133

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#7 Escobahr
Member since 2007 • 133 Posts
bizzump
Avatar image for Escobahr
Escobahr

133

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#8 Escobahr
Member since 2007 • 133 Posts

http://loot-ninja.com/2007/11/26/editorial-why-is-the-gaming-community-filled-with-so-much-hate/


It's been going on a for a while, but it's been getting worse lately. The gaming community in general is a giant bunch of haters. Whether it's fanboys and console wars, different opinions on a game, there's always someone around to start some drama. Seriously, what's the deal here?

It's bad enough that gamers have a nasty stigma attached with older generations and those that just generally don't get our hobby, but why do we need to turn on ourselves? The hatred in the community became increasingly apparent with reviews showing up for Assassin's Creed. Some reviewers praised the game, while others just didn't get it and gave low scores. While this caused an uproar with those with high expectations for the game, where it really hit a new low was with the flame-fests that ensued. Gamers who didn't agree on both sides of the table came out of the woodwork to voice their opinions. This is something we here at Loot Ninja encourage, because a good debate never hurt anyone. But those opinions aren't usual debate; they're nothing short of violent and degrading to both the game and the reviewer. Now, this is just one recent example, but digging through internet archives will easily turn up other cases of these flame-fests.

And it's not just in game reviews. Saying anything these days that another gamer doesn't agree with will get you flamed. Why can't there be normal human discussions between gamers these days? These flame-fests are one of the biggest detractions to online gaming for those not entrenched in the community already. Personally, I've had a few friends want to play online, but don't want the hassle of being called racist names or cursed at just for playing the game the way it should be played.

Maybe it's the anonymity that gamers feel online. If the person on the other end can't see you, maybe some people feel like it doesn't matter what they say. The same is true for online forums or chat areas. If people can't see you or actually speak to you, you might think you can say whatever you want. But this really isn't how it should be. Do we all want to turn into the Comic Book Store Guy from The Simpsons? Do we, as a gaming community, want to be branded as a group of people who cannot engage in good conversation? Is it that hard to just grow up a little bit? In my opinion, it's not that hard to do. But I guess only time will tell.

amen

Avatar image for Escobahr
Escobahr

133

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#9 Escobahr
Member since 2007 • 133 Posts

I think it depends, some days I see a lot of Wii bashing and other days I see a lot of PS3 praise. It really varies.kayn83

well singing praise isnt the same.

for isntance this isnt a fanboy thread--
" wow my systems games are really cool"
"my system has some great games coming out"
"my system has some great games"

on the other hand this is a fanboys thread
"dood you system is gonna f4ilz!"
"this system has no AAA's.....the flopz!"
"how does it f33l to have the system floppz"
your system failz"

Avatar image for Escobahr
Escobahr

133

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#10 Escobahr
Member since 2007 • 133 Posts

why is it ....or does it seem, that there are far more 360 fanboys in system wars?

i mean its painfully obvious when you look at the percentage of posts, that it seems theres like 4 360 fanboy to every PS3 fanboy.

what is it about 360 owners that make them so rabid, or better yet what is it about rabid personalities that attract them towards the 360?

i own boh so i have no dog in the hunt...

was wondering.