@ coolbeans, happydolphin, Zim, mike_intellivision

Too many great posts here to respond to, so I have to do it this way. You're all so right and said it quite well.

Though I haven't read the comments aimed AT the reviewer, I've read similar attacks before and it sounds like the guy just had enough. Sure, he's supposed to be a professional but how would YOU feel when people en masse attack your integrity when it's your job as a reviewer? Especially people that obviously have an agenda to discredit anyone that doesn't give a high score to a game OFTEN BEFORE THEY EVEN PLAY IT. While some of the statements he made were low blows (not all irrational fanboys are basement dwellers) that should've been avoided, I understand his frustration.

Jaffe, though, .... I'll never understand this man. I think he might be bi-polar or something. His response is one half completely rational professional and then suddenly switches to irrational internet troll-speak. I can't see why anyone would continue to be in business with this man. Even if he was extremely talented, he's too much of a loose cannon when it comes to public relations. He's like Kanye West's worse public moments but with 10 times more output and vulgarity.

We all have opinions, but I really just don't understand how someone could defend his actions here. Well, yeah I do but I'm not gonna go there ...

^^^^ These are the trolls the reviewer has to deal with everyday, how can you call someones Opinion garbage and write him off as biased? If I had to read stuff like this everyday I would be pissed too.

"Much as we all like to jump aboard the nostalgic retro train the simple fact is this: games are better now. Technology and design have come a long way, and I'm sick to death of developers (particularly those from the 90's) who feel content to just shove out the same old crap they always did. It's a particular issue I have with most of the AAA-shooter houses from the 90's. And they don't like me much either."

This is where the reviewer lost it. He came into the game already hating it. I think this is what Jaffe meant by 'agenda'.

I keep forgetting G4 is still around (and apparently relevant) because DirecTV hasn't provided that channel in years. But still, the game looks dated and the car mechanics are classic TM, which will also seem dated to some. A 3/5 isn't a horrible score and I think the sites giving it a 9/10 seem more bizarre. Still getting the game this Friday though becauseit's mindless fun and great to play with friends.

Now as for the reviewer and Jaffe, it seems they've each pulled a pussy muscle and just need to walk it off. Nothing out of the ordinary.

The reviewer is a dick.
Hope he gets fired.

You probably wrote this before reading my second post:

"This was not a less than perfect [score].

He blasted the game for being, basically, Twisted Metal.

He says there has been no evolution, yet points out that you can now change cars mid map, he also fails to point out how easy they've made the special ablities. Specials used to be left, right, up, or up,down,left,right, etc. Now, it's either up, down, left, or right, each activating a different special. They simplified the entire control mechanic, and even included a new sniping mechanic. The game is incredibly balanced to what it used to be where the best cars were almost always the biggest. Now, each vehicle size category has a unique way to play. No longer is it just, spawn camp the power missiles, or spawn camp the barrels. Each car has a unique way to play.

He blasts it for being pinball-like in the physics. That's the point. These are cars you're chasing, not people. If you can't bounce a car, or dislodge it, you're not going to catch it.

Yeah, no evolution indeed. The reviewer scored the game for being an old franchise. And he praises rage for it's modernity? Please, rage is not a good game. It's slow, and it's boring. There's no flavor or substance or style. It's sooo vanilla."

Have you even read the review? It boils down to "the game is great, but it's an old game and doesn't fit in this market anymore"

How would you treat a review that basically says New super mario bros is a really good game but the 2D style is just so old with mario it feels like a de-evolution and the addition of small features like co-op fall flat. The controls are difficult. Bumping into other characters and player is nothing short of excruciating. Fans of mario will enjoy this nostalgic throwback, but current gamers should stick to something a little more modern and refined.

Or howabout the same with kirby, or metroid, or mario party?

One thing it DOES fit with, is Duke Nukem Forever. However, it's not that the style didn't fit, it's that the game was Literally made 20 years ago.

This reviewer gave Twisted Metal ps3 and Duke Nukem Forever....the same score.

Now, on one hand Duke Nukem is a pile of shit, with lots of glitches, tacky 90's humor, and really shows its age. On the other hand, TM is really well made, and his only real beef, is that the last version came out in the early ps2 days. Believe it or not, Twisted Metal Black is still considered one of the very ebst games ever made on ps2. Suddenly, just because it's the same game (really, it's improved), then it deserves 30 points lower than TM:B.

Makes not a lick of sense.

What he's saying makes sense when you look at it from a gameplay and driving physics perspective. It looks like it plays like an N64 game, really.

Alot of the technological advancements for driving games weren't incorporated in it it seems, from the review and from the clip attached.

He didn't say the game didn't evolve. He simply said it didn't evolve enough. And since driving is an important part of the game, he was probably expecting advanced car physics to marry the combat aspect of the game, so as to get the ultimate next gen experience.

The way I understand it, he was dissappointed. Not many people can say that about NSMB. I owned it on DS and I can tell you it met all expectations. He was looking for more, and to him, the game did not deliver.

I understand why, after a reasonable review, he got frustrated with people going batshit over his work. After a while, enough is enough.

Please, do me a favor, and give me a theory on how one should handle driving in an area with ledges pitfalls and traps, surrounded by 15 other players shooting missiles at you.

Also, he says, "press the handbrake button and steer, the car spins in a circle"

First of all, the button is nowhere labeled as "handbrake", it's labeled as "quickturn", because it's both handbrake AND gas at the same time. Sorry, man, you don't even do the research, and then expect to be taken seriously. He ACTUALLY listed this as a downside t the game's realism, yet can't even get his facts straight.

EDIT: I just watched the video, and wow, seriously? You're just talking out of our ass. H8rs gunna h8.

No wonder the gaming industry isn't taken seriously, clowns on all sides whether developers, media and players all colliding. The madness over this review sums it up, G4 the ultimate circus of a media outlet vs gaming's equivalent of what someone rightfully put it Kanye West, all in all the lynch mob who initiated this chaos are watching with glee.

On one side we have a man crying because the bad people on the net have caused his blood pressure to rise when it comes with the territory causing Eugene Tackleberry to enter the battle with another of his PR specials

lol. Talking out of my ass. It's my opinion from what I saw.

Look, I'm not a dev, I don't know how they could've done it technically. But as a gamer, I see much more drifting, motion blur and just better driving motion. The driving physics just seemed outdated, I know exactly what he meant.

@quickturn. I told you I wasn't concerned with the game mechanics. I was really just looking at the driving physics. Maybe I wasn't being clear. You can now turn taking seriously mode back on.

luvers gonna luv! :B