August 2008 EGM - Rumor Mill & Review Scores - New One-Man Review System

FriskyTanuki

FriskyTanuki

CAGiversary!
Feedback
36 (100%)
In the Rest of the Issue

-:360::ps3: Big UFC 2009 preview.
-:wii: Preview of a Japanese WiiWare game about popping bubble wrap
-Feature on Great Moments in Videogame Lawsuits
-:ds: Shuffle Away preview, a dungeon crawler from Mistwalker/Artoon
-Feature on the speedrun culture
-:pc: Feature on big upcoming PC RTS games
-:ps3::360: Star Wars: The Force Unleashed preview
-:ps3::360::ds: Lord of the Rings: Conquest preview
-:wii: Strong Bad WiiWare preview
-Feature on great GTAIV online modes inside of the Free Mode.
-:wii: Boom Blox Afterthoughts
-:ps3::360: GH: World Tour preview
-Feature on the lesser-hyped games that could hit big at E3
-:ps3: Huge 10 page cover story on Killzone 2

Rumor Mill

-Activision is building a new fancy plastic peripheral (think Guitar Hero) for the next Tony Hawk game. Neversoft is also not making this game.
-Kratos will be in Soul Calibur IV. Also mentions that there are more secret character, but nothing to really be shocked by.
-The first episode of the GTAIV DLC will star a biker character.
-Microsoft is going to allow third-party manufacturers to make Xbox 360-compatible hardware.

Q-Tips

-Q Entertainment's working on a new game for the PSN, maybe another version of Rez?
-Look for more experimental PSN stuff to come out later this year, like a bizarrely awesome music visualizer.
-Both the PS3 and 360 will be getting hefty price cuts this fall.

Reviews
-Features a new one-man review system, expect three-man reviews for big games

:wii:We Love Golf! - B
:wii:Final Fantasy Fables: Chocobo's Dungeon - B+

:ps3::360: Battlefield: Bad Company - B
:ps3::360: Civilization Revolution - B+, A-, A-
:ps3::360: Top Spin 3 - C+

:ps3: SingStar - B+
:ps3: Haze - D+ - Shame of the Month
:ps3: Metal Gear Solid 4 - A-, A-, A

:360: Supreme Commander - C
:360: Spectral Force 3 - B-
:360: Don King Presents: Prizefighter - D+ - Shame of the Month
:360: Ninja Gaiden II - B-, B, B+

:ds: Final Fantasy IV - B
:ds: Harvest Moon: Island of Happiness - B

:psp: Hot Shots Golf: Open Tee 2 - B-

Download Roundup

:360: Penny Arcade Adventures: Episode One - B
:wii: Lost Winds - B
:360: Roogoo - A-
:ps3: Echochrome - B

In the Next Issue - September 08

:ps3::360: Bayonetta Cover Story?
:ps3::360: Midnight Club: LA Preview
:ps3::360: Skate 2 Preview
:ps3::360: SCIV Review
:ps3::360::wii: Madden 09 Review
:ps3::360: Brother in Arms: Hell's Highway Review
:ps3::360: Mercenaries 2: World in Flames Review

Feel free to ask for more details on reviews or previews and I'll see what I can do.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='FriskyTanuki']
-Kratos will be in Soul Calibur IV. Also mentions that there are more secret character, but nothing to really be shocked by.
[/quote]
I'm not sure how they could shock anyone now... first Star Wars characters and now Kratos? what secret character could they shock us with? Cheapy D?
 
EGM's review "system" keeps getting worse and worse. First stupid letter grades and now only 1 review per game for most titles. Well, they have until Dec 2029 to improve, as that's when my subscription ends.
 
It took them that long to review MGS4 and LostWinds? Huh. The reviews of Chocobo's Dungeon and the latest Harvest Moon are pretty encouraging, though (was planning on picking up the former and was sort of interested in the latter).

The first two rumors are ones I've heard elsewhere, in part. Is it just me or are they usually better about publishing fresh rumors?
 
[quote name='blueshinra']The first two rumors are ones I've heard elsewhere, in part. Is it just me or are they usually better about publishing fresh rumors?[/quote]
I have also heard them elsewhere. But the source for the Kratos rumor always seemed to be EGM. And I think I heard that Tony Hawk rumor on the Giantbomb podcast.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='bmarquardt']EGM's review "system" keeps getting worse and worse. First stupid letter grades and now only 1 review per game for most titles. Well, they have until Dec 2029 to improve, as that's when my subscription ends.[/QUOTE]

Honestly, I think it's a good thing. The 3 reviews you get for smaller games are worthless, because the author only has time to give you 1 to 2 lines that tell you anything about whether or not a game is good. With one review, you can say a lot more, so it's actually semi-useful to read those now.
 
1up posted the third-party 360 and Kratos in SCIV rumors and the first part of the Tony Hawk rumor (the peripheral) was from the big Activision/Microsoft marketing leak while Jeff Gerstmann mentioned the Neversoft part on Giant Bombcast, but that part hasn't really made the internet rounds all that much.
 
The ones I've heard before are the Kratos in SCIV and the Neversoft bit; fairly sure I heard the latter on 1UP Yours. Even if EGM/1UP are the sources for the rumors, I could've sworn they were better about not mentioning them until they were in the magazine *shrug*
 
[quote name='Chacrana']Honestly, I think it's a good thing. The 3 reviews you get for smaller games are worthless, because the author only has time to give you 1 to 2 lines that tell you anything about whether or not a game is good. With one review, you can say a lot more, so it's actually semi-useful to read those now.[/QUOTE]


Not really. There's more than one or two lones now, but it isn't much more for non-big name games. Battlefield: Bad Company review barely even touched on the single player portion on the game, which actually was something DICE did focus on.

Odd that they have multipage previews of some games, then when the game is released it only gets a paragraph or two.
 
I'm kind of mixed on the one review per game. On the one hand I like getting a bit more detail, on the other I like getting multiple opinions on every game.

But kind of moot for me since they'll still do three reviews for big games and those are mostly all I buy anyway.
 
I'd buy the game that put Cheapy in as a character. Those would be some awsome special moves. The Cheapy Attack! The Penny Pincher Punch! The Cheap-o-du-ken! Yes, I am at work and bored out of mind.
 
[quote name='Otherguy676']I'd buy the game that put Cheapy in as a character. Those would be some awsome special moves. The Cheapy Attack! The Penny Pincher Punch! The Cheap-o-du-ken! Yes, I am at work and bored out of mind.[/quote]
It does have a create-a-character mode, so you could certainly try to make Cheapy in the game.
 
The only thing EGM had left going for it was multiple people reviewing a single game to get three different perspectives. Now they are completely in the shitter.
 
A feature on PC RTS games?

Did I miss an announcement where EGM is going to start doing limited PC gaming coverage or something?

Not that I mind at all. I was pissed when Games for Windows was shut down; hopefully EGM does expand into PC territory a little bit.
 
[quote name='Chacrana']Honestly, I think it's a good thing. The 3 reviews you get for smaller games are worthless, because the author only has time to give you 1 to 2 lines that tell you anything about whether or not a game is good. With one review, you can say a lot more, so it's actually semi-useful to read those now.[/quote]
I would rather get more than one opinion. I personally don't care much about detail if their review is clear on why the game is good and why it might be bad. Straight-forward. Why do you need detail if you're playing the game later anyways?
 
[quote name='Littlefields']I would rather get more than one opinion. I personally don't care much about detail if their review is clear on why the game is good and why it might be bad. Straight-forward. Why do you need detail if you're playing the game later anyways?[/QUOTE]

That's the thing though - their reviews usually aren't clear about why the game is good or bad in those tiny chunks of text that they had. And yeah, it's nice to get more than one opinion, but that's where gamerankings comes in... I'd rather get 1 well-developed opinion in EGM and scour the internet for more than 3 useless blurbs.
 
[quote name='captainfrizo']A feature on PC RTS games?

Did I miss an announcement where EGM is going to start doing limited PC gaming coverage or something?

Not that I mind at all. I was pissed when Games for Windows was shut down; hopefully EGM does expand into PC territory a little bit.[/quote]
No announcement, but it definitely is a result of the GFW closure. Jeff Green wrote this one and it'll probably be his column for now.
 
only thing I really liked that I heard in the rumors was the GTAIV biker thing... not because I like biker stuff, but I just like the idea of not only playing Nico.
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']The editorial in this issue announced that they'd start having limited PC gaming coverage.[/quote]
Not much of an announcement if it's in the same issue.

Shane on 1up Yours said more about the other unlockable characters in Soul Calibur IV, which is that they're designed by anime/manga artists and that they're pretty much clones of existing SC characters.
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']The editorial in this issue announced that they'd start having limited PC gaming coverage.[/QUOTE]

The funny thing is, if you've been reading EGM for years then you know this is about the third or fourth time they've tried this. It always just slowly fades away.
 
[quote name='62t']wow some of the game they reviewed had been out since may.[/QUOTE]

No kidding, this issue felt more behind then normal. One of the few times i've bought and completely beaten a game before they reviewed it.
 
EGM has been in a downward spiral of late. Been changing a lot of stuff with no regard to the long term effects. IMO Game Informer has passed it in terms of quality
 
[quote name='Chacrana']That's the thing though - their reviews usually aren't clear about why the game is good or bad in those tiny chunks of text that they had. And yeah, it's nice to get more than one opinion, but that's where gamerankings comes in... I'd rather get 1 well-developed opinion in EGM and scour the internet for more than 3 useless blurbs.[/quote]

Ryan Scott (or was it Milkie?) said in the editoral why they changed and it makes a lot of sense.

also keep in mind they do say that they will have a 3-person review for the bigger games, so where they would have 2 pages dedicated to the review anyways, still have a threesome.
 
Moving to a one-person review is a good thing, no question. It's the first good thing they've done with their reviews (or maybe the first good thing they've done at all) since they all decided it was time to not take anything seriously somewhere in the XBox/Gamecube/PS2 era. Each game has a miniscule amount of space devoted to it to begin with, at least now the reviewer can actually talk about the game without having to stop for the next guy.

If I want differing opinions and jabs at other people reviewing the same title they don't agree with, I'll look at a message board. No shortage of those.
 
[quote name='coolsteel']No kidding, this issue felt more behind then normal. One of the few times i've bought and completely beaten a game before they reviewed it.[/QUOTE]

I'd rather them take their time and not rush to be first with a review. For example, with the MGS4 review, I appreciate that they waited until they could give a complete review.
 
[quote name='captainfrizo']A feature on PC RTS games?

Did I miss an announcement where EGM is going to start doing limited PC gaming coverage or something?

Not that I mind at all. I was pissed when Games for Windows was shut down; hopefully EGM does expand into PC territory a little bit.[/quote]

shut down? ohh is that why I stoped getting my free subscription for them
 
Eww, why did they give the "reviews we didn't have time for" space to the Downloadable Games? PA deserves more then a three-line-ish review.
 
Roogoo beat Echochrome and Lost Winds? Seriously? Did they grade them based on how long they took to download or something?
 
[quote name='msdmoney']I'd rather them take their time and not rush to be first with a review. For example, with the MGS4 review, I appreciate that they waited until they could give a complete review.[/QUOTE]

Can't say I liked the MGS4 review, it was a pretty negative review that completely didn't match the score given. Problem is i'm almost positive readers were supposed to combine it with the "discussion" from the previous issue to get the full review.
 
The Killzone 2 feature was good, looks like the game is coming along nicely. Also confirmed that the release was purely a marketing decision, saying "It will also give us time to polish the livingi daylights out of it" Which is all that KZ1 needed to be a great game. So I have high hopes for this one now.
 
I liked having the 3 person reviews. What I didn't like was the fact they would comment on the other reviews. It would have been better if the three people didn't see each others reviews until it went to print.
 
[quote name='coolsteel']Can't say I liked the MGS4 review, it was a pretty negative review that completely didn't match the score given. Problem is i'm almost positive readers were supposed to combine it with the "discussion" from the previous issue to get the full review.[/QUOTE]

I agree. They over scored it as they all mostly said the game kind of fell apart in the later half with way too many cutscenes, not enough gameplay, and the gameplay never being as good as the early stages.

Should have been straight B's not A's based on what they wrote. Almost makes me wonder if they were just afraid to buck the trend and not give it A's since they'd get bashed to hell by fanboys saying they were just holding a grudge do to the Konami embargo "scandal" that blow up on the net after the last issue.
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']I agree. They over scored it as they all mostly said the game kind of fell apart in the later half with way too many cutscenes, not enough gameplay, and the gameplay never being as good as the early stages.

Should have been straight B's not A's based on what they wrote. Almost makes me wonder if they were just afraid to buck the trend and not give it A's since they'd get bashed to hell by fanboys saying they were just holding a grudge do to the Konami embargo "scandal" that blow up on the net after the last issue.[/QUOTE]

That is what i'm thinking, they were scared to death to just give it a B or C which had it been any other game i'm sure it would have gotten based on that review.
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']I agree. They over scored it as they all mostly said the game kind of fell apart in the later half with way too many cutscenes, not enough gameplay, and the gameplay never being as good as the early stages.

Should have been straight B's not A's based on what they wrote. Almost makes me wonder if they were just afraid to buck the trend and not give it A's since they'd get bashed to hell by fanboys saying they were just holding a grudge do to the Konami embargo "scandal" that blow up on the net after the last issue.[/quote]
It's probably because you see the negatives as more severe than they do.
 
[quote name='FriskyTanuki']It's probably because you see the negatives as more severe than they do.[/QUOTE]

Or they didn't clearly explain why the negatives they mentioned didn't effect their overall impression of the game.
 
[quote name='coolsteel']Can't say I liked the MGS4 review, it was a pretty negative review that completely didn't match the score given. Problem is i'm almost positive readers were supposed to combine it with the "discussion" from the previous issue to get the full review.[/QUOTE]

My comment had nothing to do with whether or not somebody agreed with or liked the MGS4 review, I was just referring to the dissmissal of late reviews.
 
Or they do.

In Jeremy's conclusion paragraph: "It's a great game (no question), with an intricate story and some brilliant stealth action backed up by tremendous production values. But, freed of continuity's constraints, it could have been more than merely great." That's not a B or C review.

In Matt's conclusion paragraph: "In some ways, MGS4 is the RE4 of the series: It removes some of the franchise's notable complexities and comes up with another cut-scene-heavy story centered on a virus. But most importantly, it feels like an overhaul without losing the fun details and epic feel that have always made the series work."
 
[quote name='FriskyTanuki']Or they do.

In Jeremy's conclusion paragraph: "It's a great game (no question), with an intricate story and some brilliant stealth action backed up by tremendous production values. But, freed of continuity's constraints, it could have been more than merely great." That's not a B or C review.
[/QUOTE]

There I disagree. If a game could've been more than what it was, then it isn't a game that deserves a perfect or near perfect grade. If an A is a great game with flaws then we're running out of letters for a near perfect game.
 
[quote name='FriskyTanuki']A+ is perfect, A- is a great score.[/QUOTE]

That leaves a lot of letters to determine how bad a game is, but only a + or - to seperate the great from the nearly flawless.

This is why I prefer scoreless reviews. Though I'm interested in seeing the future CAG scoring via how much the reviewer is willing to pay for a game.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top