By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Final Fantasy XIII-2 gets 5.4 on Gamrreview - how is that possible?

Tagged games:

Runa216 on 05 February 2012

Well that was a lot of fun to read.

First, let me clarify some things:

1 - No, I was not asked to do the review. When I mentioned 'shitpile' in an edited post (yes, I did say that, no it was not an acceptable descriptor), it was simply that nobody else on the team wanted to review it because Final Fantasy XIII was a huge disappointment. as I said, I was the only one interested in playing XIII-2; I stated in the review that one stain on an otherwise exemplary record was not enough to deter me.

2 - While I hated FFXIII, the promises made and the pre-release material made me think that a lot of the issues would be fixed, so I was actually legitimately excited to give this game a shot. I went in with a hopeful yet open mind, and make no mistake, I was blown away by the opening 5 hours, and I was thoroughly enjoying the first half of the game.

3 - I did not give it a low score to get hits or to troll, I gave it that score because that's what my impression was. I didn't actually decide on a score until I'd written the review and took some time to reflect on my overall experience. The second half of the game disappointed me so much that had I not taken the time to balance out the score with the things I did like, it'd have likely gotten a 3 or 4....but I remembered all the things I liked and how much I enjoyed the first half and it balanced out to a 5.

As a reviewer it is my job to explain what you can expect with the game, the features, the gameplay, the mechanics, value, graphics, etc. There are many things that need to be considered when writing a review, and laying out the expectations is half of the review, the other half is weighing the good and the bad. Being truly objective with something like this is near impossible, but it's a reviewer's job to give the community an idea of what to expect by chronicling their own experiences and opinions.

And as a reader, you should all learn how to filter out what you read and weight what I've said against your own values. I didn't like the battle system and my review reflected that, but if you liked XIII's battle system, it really shouldn't be too hard to figure out that my criticism of that aspect of the game is not important to you. On the flipside, others who felt the same way I did about XIII's battle system could very well take what I say to heart as something they likely wouldn't enjoy. I laid out all my chips so people knew where I was coming from (didn't like 13, felt it had some flaws, wanted to give it a chance, etc), so it shouldn't be hard to compare my review with your own values and come to a logical conclusion based on that.

Personally, I think this review would have been much better without a score to accompany it because then you could form your own opinion instead of using that as a gauge, since not everyone has an identical meaning for numbers. I, for instance, feel a 5 is decent, not good but not bad either, pretty neutral. Others (and most in gaming journalism for that matter) feel that 'decent' is a 6 or 7. I think that, since the good was balanced out with the bad (with a slight err towards positive thanks to the pretty graphics and added features), a 5.4 is precisely correct in basically every way.

Again, if I Was letting my bias get the better of me, I'd have been much harsher, instead I delivered a review that was equally positive and negative.

If anyone wants me to elaborate on how I came to my score, I'd be glad to explain in great detail what went into deciding the numbers for each category and how I weighed each category to get my final score.



My Console Library:

PS5, Switch, XSX

PS4, PS3, PS2, PS1, WiiU, Wii, GCN, N64 SNES, XBO, 360

3DS, DS, GBA, Vita, PSP, Android

Around the Network
Wagram on 05 February 2012

Runa ask the team to eliminate the damn scores. They suckkkkkkkkkkk.



Runa216 on 05 February 2012
arcelonious said:

I think that the written portion of the review is ok, although it's pretty obvious how much the reviewer hated XIII and wanted to hate XIII-2. Regardless, the problem is how the reviewer adheres (or does not adhere) to their review system methodology.

For example, under gamrReview's methodology, a score between 5-5.9 is:

"Mediocre. These games are bland and ordinary. They barely make adequate status, and will likely not be particularly enjoyable if at all. Note that we do not expect the “average” game to fall into this range. Ideally most people are making games that are at least good, and the majority of games do not need to be scored in this range or below."

If the review score was in the 7 (or hell, even the 6 range), then it would match the methodology given by gamrReview, but a 5.4 just doesn't seem to match the game, especially considering that many have enjoyed it thus far.

Beyond the score, it's also important to note that while reviews are opinions, they are supposed to reflect how the reviewer believes other gamers would recieve a particular game, which is evident in the methodology (in the methodology, terms like "most people" are used).  Thus, even if the reviewer hates a particular game, they have to review a game based on how he or she perceives others would recieve it.  Generability is one of the major factors that separate a well-written review from a mere opinion piece, and if you can't write a review under that notion, then you really shouldn't be writing an official review.

I have no problem with a heavily-biased individual reviewing a game that he or she hates, as long as that reviewer abides by the methodology given by their review system.  When reviewers don't follow their site's own methodology, it's hard to take those reviewers seriously.

 

I read each and every post in this thread just now, and this was the only response that criticised my score in a remotely respectable way.  Kudos.  



My Console Library:

PS5, Switch, XSX

PS4, PS3, PS2, PS1, WiiU, Wii, GCN, N64 SNES, XBO, 360

3DS, DS, GBA, Vita, PSP, Android

Shinobi-san on 05 February 2012
Runa216 said:
arcelonious said:

I think that the written portion of the review is ok, although it's pretty obvious how much the reviewer hated XIII and wanted to hate XIII-2. Regardless, the problem is how the reviewer adheres (or does not adhere) to their review system methodology.

For example, under gamrReview's methodology, a score between 5-5.9 is:

"Mediocre. These games are bland and ordinary. They barely make adequate status, and will likely not be particularly enjoyable if at all. Note that we do not expect the “average” game to fall into this range. Ideally most people are making games that are at least good, and the majority of games do not need to be scored in this range or below."

If the review score was in the 7 (or hell, even the 6 range), then it would match the methodology given by gamrReview, but a 5.4 just doesn't seem to match the game, especially considering that many have enjoyed it thus far.

Beyond the score, it's also important to note that while reviews are opinions, they are supposed to reflect how the reviewer believes other gamers would recieve a particular game, which is evident in the methodology (in the methodology, terms like "most people" are used).  Thus, even if the reviewer hates a particular game, they have to review a game based on how he or she perceives others would recieve it.  Generability is one of the major factors that separate a well-written review from a mere opinion piece, and if you can't write a review under that notion, then you really shouldn't be writing an official review.

I have no problem with a heavily-biased individual reviewing a game that he or she hates, as long as that reviewer abides by the methodology given by their review system.  When reviewers don't follow their site's own methodology, it's hard to take those reviewers seriously.

 

I read each and every post in this thread just now, and this was the only response that criticised my score in a remotely respectable way.  Kudos.  

err ya...

I didnt disrespect you at all in my response.



Intel Core i7 3770K [3.5GHz]|MSI Big Bang Z77 Mpower|Corsair Vengeance DDR3-1866 2 x 4GB|MSI GeForce GTX 560 ti Twin Frozr 2|OCZ Vertex 4 128GB|Corsair HX750|Cooler Master CM 690II Advanced|

teigaga on 05 February 2012
Michelasso said:
Rainbird said:
mantlepiecek said:
I think it's unfair that the person who hated FF XIII so much was asked to review its sequel.

How so? He's a fan of the series in general, and Square promised that many of the things wrong with FFXIII would be fixed in the sequel. It also seems that for the first five hours or so, Square had in fact got it right and then everything went south.

The score seems a little harsh from where I'm sitting, but I don't think it seems unjustified.

The important thing to note is the little text below the score that says "Mediocre". FFXIII-2 is not a terrible game, it's simply average, with the high points being balanced out by the low points, going by the review.

I think the reviewer would be better working in a factory. It is a fact now: whatever SE will do with the Final Fantasy games there will always be some retarded bashing it for a reason or another. FF XIII-2 adds many elements that were missing in FF XIII and still I read reviews putting it down for those same elements. This is an extract of few points I have read around:

 

  • FF XIII is missing the cities!!
  • Come on FF XIII-2 towns are so 20 years old.
  • FF XIII is too linear!
  • FF XIII-2 story is disrupted (sure it is. You can jump from a place/time to another now, you moron!)
  • There are too many cutscenes in FF XIII
  • There are not enough cutscenes in FF XIII-2
  • FF XIII-2 music is best ever (IGN)
  • FF XIII-2 music makes me throw out (some other jerk)
  • FF XIII-2 story doesn't really end (but that doesn't seem to be an issue with Assassin's creed)
  • FF XIII-2 has long loading times (yeah. Streaming out directly from the BR disc. Skyrim, which has a mandatory full install is awful on that and many other sides, and it still gets above 90/100 in this very same site).
Seriously, FF reviews are becoming the joke of the videogame industry. I think the fairest FF XIII-2 review has been the one from IGN (as it often happens). It's an 8/10, with many pros and some cons. At least it doesn't go down to 1 fps, then freezing the PS3 like Skyrim does!!

 

You've taken supposed abstracts from various reviews (no quotes) and are complaining that they contradict each other? Has it ever occured to you that most aspects of a game are subjective and thus opinion will vary amongst reviewers. Some people may find the cutscenes excessive, others may find them too few; you will find disparity amongst all game receptions. And comparing it to skyrim is pointless, they are very different titles, with different redeeming factor which make them enjoyable.

"Seriously, FF reviews are becoming the joke of the videogame industry". This is a gross exaggeration, Both XIII and XIII-2 have a metacritic average of 80, which sits nicely with your favoured IGN score. Most of the negativity towards recent titles comes from polarised fans and the association of the mediocre spin off titles.

I wish all the fans of the recent titles would stop feeling sorry for themselves and just be happy that they enjoy the games. I liked XIII and enjoyed the XIII-2 demo, i just wish all games were reviewed as honestly as these titles are.



Around the Network
Zim on 05 February 2012
oniyide said:
Seriously well done to the reviewer. Reading reviews of the original FF-13 was ludicrous. Pointing out HUGE flaws but then still slapping it with a high score. This reviewer points out the good and bad things and gives a score that can be justified.

To be fair, they have been doing that for other reviews as well


Sorry Oniyide I'm not entirely sure which point you are referring to. Are you saying they have been doing that for other reviews for pointing out huge flaws but still giving big scores or pointing out the good and bad then giving a justifiable score? 

If it's the first then the problem wouldn't be this review but rather the other reviews that were the issue. If it's the second then that's great =D 



Turkish says and I'm allowed to quote that: Uncharted 3 and God Of War 3 look better than Unreal Engine 4 games will or the tech demo does. Also the Naughty Dog PS3 ENGINE PLAYS better than the UE4 ENGINE.

Shinobi-san on 05 February 2012
Runa216 said:
Well that was a lot of fun to read.

First, let me clarify some things:

1 - No, I was not asked to do the review. When I mentioned 'shitpile' in an edited post (yes, I did say that, no it was not an acceptable descriptor), it was simply that nobody else on the team wanted to review it because Final Fantasy XIII was a huge disappointment. as I said, I was the only one interested in playing XIII-2; I stated in the review that one stain on an otherwise exemplary record was not enough to deter me.

2 - While I hated FFXIII, the promises made and the pre-release material made me think that a lot of the issues would be fixed, so I was actually legitimately excited to give this game a shot. I went in with a hopeful yet open mind, and make no mistake, I was blown away by the opening 5 hours, and I was thoroughly enjoying the first half of the game.

3 - I did not give it a low score to get hits or to troll, I gave it that score because that's what my impression was. I didn't actually decide on a score until I'd written the review and took some time to reflect on my overall experience. The second half of the game disappointed me so much that had I not taken the time to balance out the score with the things I did like, it'd have likely gotten a 3 or 4....but I remembered all the things I liked and how much I enjoyed the first half and it balanced out to a 5.

As a reviewer it is my job to explain what you can expect with the game, the features, the gameplay, the mechanics, value, graphics, etc. There are many things that need to be considered when writing a review, and laying out the expectations is half of the review, the other half is weighing the good and the bad. Being truly objective with something like this is near impossible, but it's a reviewer's job to give the community an idea of what to expect by chronicling their own experiences and opinions.

And as a reader, you should all learn how to filter out what you read and weight what I've said against your own values. I didn't like the battle system and my review reflected that, but if you liked XIII's battle system, it really shouldn't be too hard to figure out that my criticism of that aspect of the game is not important to you. On the flipside, others who felt the same way I did about XIII's battle system could very well take what I say to heart as something they likely wouldn't enjoy. I laid out all my chips so people knew where I was coming from (didn't like 13, felt it had some flaws, wanted to give it a chance, etc), so it shouldn't be hard to compare my review with your own values and come to a logical conclusion based on that.

Personally, I think this review would have been much better without a score to accompany it because then you could form your own opinion instead of using that as a gauge, since not everyone has an identical meaning for numbers. I, for instance, feel a 5 is decent, not good but not bad either, pretty neutral. Others (and most in gaming journalism for that matter) feel that 'decent' is a 6 or 7. I think that, since the good was balanced out with the bad (with a slight err towards positive thanks to the pretty graphics and added features), a 5.4 is precisely correct in basically every way.

Again, if I Was letting my bias get the better of me, I'd have been much harsher, instead I delivered a review that was equally positive and negative.

If anyone wants me to elaborate on how I came to my score, I'd be glad to explain in great detail what went into deciding the numbers for each category and how I weighed each category to get my final score.

Do you mean you feel a mediocre score is decent? Or that 5 respresents a decent game?



Intel Core i7 3770K [3.5GHz]|MSI Big Bang Z77 Mpower|Corsair Vengeance DDR3-1866 2 x 4GB|MSI GeForce GTX 560 ti Twin Frozr 2|OCZ Vertex 4 128GB|Corsair HX750|Cooler Master CM 690II Advanced|

Shinobi-san on 05 February 2012
teigaga said:
Shinobi-san said:
arcelonious said:

I think that the written portion of the review is ok, although it's pretty obvious how much the reviewer hated XIII and wanted to hate XIII-2. Regardless, the problem is how the reviewer adheres (or does not adhere) to their review system methodology.
For example, under gamrReview's methodology, a score between 5-5.9 is:

"Mediocre. These games are bland and ordinary. They barely make adequate status, and will likely not be particularly enjoyable if at all. Note that we do not expect the “average” game to fall into this range. Ideally most people are making games that are at least good, and the majority of games do not need to be scored in this range or below."

If the review score was in the 7 (or hell, even the 6 range), then it would match the methodology given by gamrReview, but a 5.4 just doesn't seem to match the game, especially considering that many have enjoyed it thus far.

Beyond the score, it's also important to note that while reviews are opinions, they are supposed to reflect how the reviewer believes other gamers would recieve a particular game, which is evident in the methodology (in the methodology, terms like "most people" are used).  Thus, even if the reviewer hates a particular game, they have to review a game based on how he or she perceives others would recieve it.  Generability is one of the major factors that separate a well-written review from a mere opinion piece, and if you can't write a review under that notion, then you really shouldn't be writing an official review.

I have no problem with a heavily-biased individual reviewing a game that he or she hates, as long as that reviewer abides by the methodology given by their review system.  When reviewers don't follow their site's own methodology, it's hard to take those reviewers seriously.

 

That hit the nail on the head for me. I dont have an issue with the review or even the score, but its the meaning that the VGChartz review metric gives to the score, which has most people thinking WTF.

5.0-5.9 – Mediocre. These games are bland and ordinary. They barely make adequate status, and will likely not be particularly enjoyable if at all. Note that we do not expect the “average” game to fall into this range. Ideally most people are making games that are at least good, and the majority of games do not need to be scored in this range or below.

Sorry to highlight the exact same line as you arcelonious but its such an important point. Based on the review id say this is an average game, the reviewer might have used a lot of harsh words, but its stil reads as average with redeeming factors. Not to forget that this is in fact a JRPG with a dedicated fanbase, it is also a sequel to quite a popular game. So this needs to be noted as well.

I would say that the review fits perfectly in the above score range...

6.0-6.9 – Decent. These games are usually not particularly memorable, and only have a couple of redeeming features that keep them from being truly mediocre. Some people may enjoy them, but they don’t excel in any way.

Most important point there is that some people may enjoy them (most probably the few million people that like ff13. Based on the score and the explanation the runa gave the game, he is basically saying no1 should be buying this game, not even ff13 fans, let alone ff fans. Which cant be right.

You cant review a game in complete isolation of external factors and you definately need to adhere to the review metric outlined by the site. Which i think is the issue here. And this is what people mean by uniformity...at the very least mark to the same metric.

I Agree that the tone of the review leans closer towards the 6.0-6.9 according to the sites metric description. But i think your interpretation of the portion which reads " Some people may enjoy them"  is too literal. I would assume that judgement to be made on the merits of the game itself/ its redeeming factors  and not on series popularity or similar external factors. Otherwise that would essentially equate to popular titles never scoring below a 6 because the existing fan base may find enjoy in it,  in which case that description should be removed from the metric system. Even still i think the review was positive enough to assume that some be people may enjoy it, just disagree with the external factors being taken into account.

Its not about popularity, but understanding what the game tries to do, who its doing it for and is it doing right? This is especially important with JRPGS as they can be very polarising. I myself hated absolutely hated FF13...but if i were to score the game seriously i would give it a decent score 6+ because i can see who the game caters for....and many people enjoyed FF13.

You must remember this is not a personal review by the author for his own sake. This is a review for a website for the community to read, so that they can get an idea of the game what is about and how "good" it is. This is why the website has the metric with descriptions in the first place. Otherwise they would maybe just have the numbers and maybe one word description. But the site actually goes in detail explaining the numbers, which gives reviewers a nice guideline to base scores on.

And this is not a pardon for for popular games. But based on this review which reads average and given the fact that it has a audience already established from the first prequel...this statement "Some people may like it" comes into play here and i believe thats exactly why its there for games like this. If the game failed horrible on all accounts then that statement becomes less important but since it didnt (based on the review) these words should be taken into account.



Intel Core i7 3770K [3.5GHz]|MSI Big Bang Z77 Mpower|Corsair Vengeance DDR3-1866 2 x 4GB|MSI GeForce GTX 560 ti Twin Frozr 2|OCZ Vertex 4 128GB|Corsair HX750|Cooler Master CM 690II Advanced|

Wagram on 05 February 2012

If you're complaining that JRPGs have too many cutscenes, you are playing the wrong genre.



2000cc on 05 February 2012
Wagram said:
If you're complaining that JRPGs have too many cutscenes, you are playing the wrong genre.


I couldnt agree more, XIII-2 is reasonably moderate with cutscenes by comparison to most games in the genre too. It'd be like me playing a shooter & complaining there was too much shooting involved. There are certain critiques which really cannot reasonably be raised.



PLAYSTATION NATION LADY OF JRPGS

Favourite Games of 2013 1.Tomb Raider(PS3) 2.Atelier Ayesha(PS3) 3.Virtues Last Reward (Vita)