Dr.Grass said:
|
indeed you did
“It appeared that there had even been demonstrations to thank Big Brother for raising the chocolate ration to twenty grams a week. And only yesterday, he reflected, it had been announced that the ration was to be reduced to twenty grams a week. Was it possible that they could swallow that, after only twenty-four hours? Yes, they swallowed it.”
- George Orwell, ‘1984’
David Jaffe is absolut right here, Reviews are nothing more than advertising nowadays. Publishers like Sony pay a lot and get 10/10 Scores ore worser 11/10 Scores the whole gaming journalism is a joke because ot that. In big Games deficiencies don't get mentioned, like in his example with the 10/10 Review Scores. I personally give a shit upon Review Scores nowadays since they are not more than advertising .
I am 100% with David Jaffe. He is one of few people who doesn't get blinded by flashy cinematic presentations and acknowledges the danger of how games more and more are turning into interactive movies.
| AbbathTheGrim said: The problem guys is that you cannot go against the cinetmatic experience. It is a form of fusing gameplay and story and points taken out of a game in such respect should be deducted if the game fails to deliver in what it tries to do. You cannot rate Uncharted down for something that it does not try to be, otherwise you are trying to make Uncharted to be another game that it isn't, an experience it isn't trying to be and that you are looking for. My main problem of the Eurogamer review is the lack of info in gameplay, the shooting mechanics, the way the levels are designed to allow that shooting aspect of the gameplay. Everything that guy said was an effort to direct things to his argument against the cinematic experience. I can fairly understand that there is people that want a focus in gameplay rather than taking time to tell a story, but for me it is the merging of those two that make a videogame an unforgettable experience and I do not recognize anyone as having the right to dismiss games that look for that experience as something less. I recently finshed Mario for the DS and it didn't impact me in any way as hard as any Uncharted did. To me a game that doesn't have a compelling story would never receive a 10, so that is a reason why I think I would never rate games if I were a reviewer. I haven't played Uncharted 3 so I will talk about U2. The gameplay is there, it is just that there is gameplay and more. I replayed Uncharted 2 several times to complete the trophies and in the last playthrough I did it skipping the cutscenes in order to save time and even then I had a blast playing the game and messing with the approaches I was given as options to fight enemies. This issue brings me back to a discussion the guys at EBC were having. They argued about the possible importance of knowing the background from which a reviewer comes from. The use of a review is to let people know if they would either enjoy a game or not and I think that different kinds of gamers should know where a reviewer stands in order to really understand where the reviewer is coming from and if his opinion would help them decide whether they will enjoy a game or not. I could see that this guy wasn't enthusiastic about the cinematic focus of Uncharted after reading and analizing the review, and my take on that guy's stance is that Uncharted 3 is so awesome that, even someone who doesn't enjoy such types of games that much, had to give it an 8. |
The point is that Uncharted rides on a well-crafted cinematic experience that overshadows a lacking gameplay.
A good review would expose the super directed and simplistic gameplay of Uncharted (and COD for that sake). Uncharted plays almost by itself, which the Eurogamer review pointed out perfectly.
what is the problem though,i thought there was room for all types of games from dancing with a motion controller to linear cinematic shooters,its just a cover shooter,which is probably a blast by all accounts,
some people enjoy linear cinematic games as they don't have the time or appetite for rpg/open world games,i thought there were lots of different types of games to choose from
personally i'd choose lara over drake anyday,but it won't stop me playing U3
Above & Beyond
Slimebeast said:
The point is that Uncharted rides on a well-crafted cinematic experience that overshadows a lacking gameplay. A good review would expose the super directed and simplistic gameplay of Uncharted (and COD for that sake). Uncharted plays almost by itself, which the Eurogamer review pointed out perfectly. |
There is no lacking gameplay in Uncharted. People who say so are being distracted by the way ND has decided to make little segments of what would be cutscenes into interactive secuences.
The fact that I can decide how to go pass guards by passing by or taking them down. The way I can choose to go guns blazing down on a crowd or go stealth on them and having to figure out how to do it, the order in which I must decide to take the enemies out of the way, those moments in which you need to figure out the path to keep going forward including puzzles.
You think the gameplay is lacking? That's fine. I say it doesn't.
Nintendo is selling their IPs to Microsoft and this is true because:
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=221391&page=1
Kasz216 said:
Nah, most of his crazy rants were directly from his blog... where he more or less sounds like a drunken frat person 80% of the time or so. This one actually looks like he just gave things a lot of thought and went out of his way to sound polite and intellegent. |
I kinda like his rants (sometimes anyway) it's refreshing to have someone actually speak his mind publically in the industry. Tho it would probably be better for his image if he filtered what he said and treated his personal blog like a PR outlet, I respect that he is brave (or stupid depending on your point of view) enough to speak his mind even tho I am sure some of his blog posts are actually drunken rants lol. But come to think about it that is probably a by product of my fondness of seeing behind the curtain.
@TheVoxelman on twitter
zarx said:
A game reviewer is meant to tell you what they think of the game and their experiance with it, if you just want to know what the developers set out to do then you can watch trailers play demos and read developer interviews. Movie games accomplish what they set out to do, that doesn't mean they deserve 9-10 review scores... |
But if you are a pretty large review site, you would think that they would give the Uncharted review to a fan of Uncharted type gameplay?
Munkeh111 said:
But if you are a pretty large review site, you would think that they would give the Uncharted review to a fan of Uncharted type gameplay? |
That would emply that they should be trying to keep fanboys who would buy the game no matter what happy. No as long as the review describes what the game is like people can decide whether the reviewers opnion matches their own. I mean it's not like the score should decide whether someone should buy the game, and it's not like the reviewer being critical of the type of gameplay will change what the reader likes right? Even if the review is critical, a fan of that type of gameplay could still come out of the review wanting to buy the game as they will know the issues raised wouldn't bother them.
@TheVoxelman on twitter
Ok, I'm very confused.
That was Jaffe in the OP right? And he wasn't being a complete ass? I did not think this was even possible.
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2026 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
