Bodhesatva said:
Why don't movie critics give extra scores for a movie having awesome special effects? That's where most of the money is spent on those big budget blockbuster movies.
|
This is a very very good point. Obviously film and games are different but the films that critically do well are not films that have spent millions on special effects. Films with good stories and emersive atmosphere are generally the Oscar winners.
I don't think it is a question of growing up as such but more that the games industry needs to understand that good graphics don't make a good game. Same as good special effects don't make a good film. The difference is when a film is crap people are honest about it, if you look at reviews for just the Oscar films this year you see some have scores like 80%, in the film world that is very high. But if a game gets an 80% score it is generally considered poor.
So i think games reviewers need to get back to basics, tell it like it is. But i think the thing they need to do the most is make multiple reviews. I.e get 3 people to say their opinions and scores, then with those 3 scores work out the average from that. But a problem is that today review sites/magazines are not as legit as they once were. pressure/bribes from studios can influence reviews.
It is like reading a book/magazine, you don't give the book high scores because it has a nice cover. It is what is inside that matters.








