1-Up: "Deduct one point from Warhawk review, if it's over $30"

[quote name='jer7583']Go off the deep end much? EGM doesn't even allow companies to pay their airfaire to fly out to see a game. I was defending 1up. Nowhere in my incoherent ramblings did I mention Xbox. You, however, managed to criticize a game based on "what you've heard" because that's obviously reliable. Grow up.

And which part of my signature should I change? My 360 gamercard, or the image I made of a PS2 exclusive game that I love? fucking forum kids, I'm going to go play brave story, on my PSP, because I HATE SONY SO MUCH, obviously.

also, on a lighter note, Van Damme made you a little Fairy Van Damme, so you wouldn't be such a sourpuss.
vandam.gif
[/QUOTE]


No, you didn't defend 1up.com. You came in here to bash me becuz we all know how obsessed you are with me. And FYI, i would much rather read from people on forums about a game rather than an inflated review from 1up/EGM. IGN, Games For Windows and even Gamespot gave the game in the range of 6.

[quote name='FriskyTanuki']What a conspiracy! Sony should've paid 1up more for that 7.5 they gave MotorStorm.[/QUOTE]

Not when MS already paying them :p. BTW, I would have given Motorstorm a 7 because the game offers no offline co-op and its not really that great of a game.
 
What the hell has happened... why can't we just get straight up reviews... if its good, then rate it good, if its bad then rate it bad. That's why I said, if I think a game is going to be good, then buy it, I'm not going to let any reviewer talk me out of a game. Most of us have been around games as long, or even longer than some of these reviewers.
 
[quote name='gokou36']Not when MS already paying them :p. BTW, I would have given Motorstorm a 7 because the game offers no offline co-op and its not really that great of a game.[/quote]
I didn't think about them being paid off to lower the scores! So who paid 1up to lower Wii scores? What happens when Sony pays 1up to raise a score and MS pays to lower that same score?
 
[quote name='zewone']The person who gave Shadowrun in EGM an 8/10 doesn't even work for EGM (as a full time gig) and is actually a CAG.[/QUOTE]
Someone should punch that guy in the face.
 
[quote name='Ugamer_X']Someone should punch that guy in the face.[/QUOTE]
I'm making a trip out there this weekend.

I'll ask him if he wants to grab a bite to eat, luring him into a false sense of security, then when he shows up, BAM!, right in the kisser.

Punk, beardless bitch.
 
gokou's got some paranoid delusions going on there. Everyone's paying off everybody, 1up doesn't know how to rate things, they obviously just take the money, give some back, run it through a paper shredder, have a confetti party, then run some numbers through a bingo machine and mash some buttons in InDesign to create a magazine via luck.

Those damn dirty apes don't have a clue. INTERNET FORUMS ARE TEH SERIOUS BIDNESS.

Dude somehow cannot understand that there's an icicle's chance in hell that the dude at EGM somehow actually really enjoyed the game and is in the minority. You know there are quite a few CAGs who did enjoy shadowrun.

You can't say a word about it anyway because you said you never played the game and are going off of others' opinions. We obviously should trust gokou, though, over someone who's played the game extensively and been hired to write about it. You're real easy to rile up, you know that?
 
[quote name='jer7583']gokou's got some paranoid delusions going on there. Everyone's paying off everybody, 1up doesn't know how to rate things, they obviously just take the money, give some back, run it through a paper shredder, have a confetti party, then run some numbers through a bingo machine and mash some buttons in InDesign to create a magazine via luck.

Those damn dirty apes don't have a clue. INTERNET FORUMS ARE TEH SERIOUS BIDNESS.[/QUOTE]

Dude somehow cannot understand that there's an icicle's chance in hell that the dude at EGM somehow actually really enjoyed the game and is in the minority. You know there are quite a few CAGs who did enjoy shadowrun. You can't say a word about it anyway because you admittedly never played the game and are going off of others' opinions. We obviously should trust gokou, though, over someone who's played the game extensively and been hired to write about it. You're real easy to rile up, you know that?
 
[quote name='FriskyTanuki']Of course price should be a factor to any review, because it's one part of the total package that affects the gamer's enjoyment of the game. If a game is overpriced for the amount of content it offers, it shouldn't be given a higher score disregarding any problems with that issue since it affects the game's appeal. It should be noted within the review itself and not just lowered without any explanation.[/QUOTE]

Agreed.

Personally I'd rather see a game given a price value as a score than a 1-10 number. CheapyD mentioned something like this as well on the recent Cagcast about wishing there was a scale of Buy/Rent/Ignore for reviews. I'd rather see a monetary value placed on a game, because in the end I just really want to know, if I spend X amount of money on this game will I feel ripped off. It would be great if there was something like this on CAG since I know there'd be very few games CAGers would feel are worth full price.

But yeah, if you're docking a game for the price for the amount of content, at least mention it in the review (like Calling All Cars, etc)
 
I blame Joystiq for gokou's maddness. Back I used to read them, they posted a story about videogame review scores avereging in the 7's and they said that reviewers are most likely getting paid off. I wonder what joystiq would think of wine review scores.
  • 95-100 Classic: a great wine
  • 90-94 Outstanding: a wine of superior character and style
  • 85-89 Very good: a wine with special qualities
  • 80-84 Good: a solid, well-made wine
  • 75-79 Mediocre: a drinkable wine that may have minor flaws
  • 50-74 Not recommended
So are wine reviewers getting paid off to give wine high scores? Absolutly not. This is the way they review wine. (It's not that different from game reviews actually.) No gaming site or mag has ever said they review on a bell curve.

Link
 
[quote name='SpreadTheWord']I blame Joystiq for gokou's maddness. Back I used to read them, they posted a story about videogame review scores avereging in the 7's and they said that reviewers are most likely getting paid off. I wonder what joystiq would think of wine review scores.
  • 95-100 Classic: a great wine
  • 90-94 Outstanding: a wine of superior character and style
  • 85-89 Very good: a wine with special qualities
  • 80-84 Good: a solid, well-made wine
  • 75-79 Mediocre: a drinkable wine that may have minor flaws
  • 50-74 Not recommended
So are wine reviewers getting paid off to give wine high scores? Absolutly not. This is the way they review wine. (It's not that different from game reviews actually.) No gaming site or mag has ever said they review on a bell curve.

Link
[/QUOTE]


I've seen this same arguement made but with comparrison to school grades.

Wine and videogames are not the same and should not be graded as such. Compare videogame review scores with the scores critics from media which is more similar to videogames, such as movies and software, and critics of such are much harsher than videogames. What's the purpose of having a 1-10 scale when generally 5-10 make up the majority of reviews with numbers lower only used to indicate the level of how broken the game is?

Besides, PR reps at many of these companies get bonuses if a game recieves a higher gamerankings average, and these people generally control who should recieve review copies of games and ad revenue.
 
[quote name='DarkNessBear']Oh god, is it really?

Man...[/quote]

Yep, 360 & PS3 versions are $100. Wii & PS2 versions are $90. Activision is just raising the price, cause they know people will pay the extra $20 for what basically will be a expansion pack.
 
Prices should be part of the review, but not necessarily used to change a score. Not a whole point, for fuck's sake. Lower the 'Value' part of the review for it being overpriced, but don't lower the final score down a whole point because you think it's overpriced.
 
I believe that with the whole scoring issues, 5 is the average, baseline, what every game should accomplish. Lower indicates an increasing level of brokenness and unplayability, higher indicates an increasing level of quality and addictiveness.

Most games get the basics right, and as such qualify to at least be average, and at least recieve a 5.
 
[quote name='whiptcracker']Wine and videogames are not the same and should not be graded as such. Compare videogame review scores with the scores critics from media which is more similar to videogames, such as movies and software, and critics of such are much harsher than videogames.[/quote]

My point is that there are different ways that thing get reviewed. Videogame review scores have been going down in recent years and I think that is for the better. But if someone starts using a bell curve to rate games it will be incomparable to the rest of the videogame review landscape.

Look at the thread that shows the EGM reviews for Lair. There are complaints that EGM is just trying to flex their new "tougher" review scores.

7 is average right now for games. People understand that. You can't just make a sweeping change and have 5 as the average. These things take time.
 
[quote name='jer7583']I believe that with the whole scoring issues, 5 is the average, baseline, what every game should accomplish. Lower indicates an increasing level of brokenness and unplayability, higher indicates an increasing level of quality and addictiveness.

Most games get the basics right, and as such qualify to at least be average, and at least recieve a 5.[/QUOTE]

I hate that scale because people automatically juxtapose that to their scale at school where a 7 would be average. There just has to be a better way.
 
so what if this game gets a 9, then gets dropped to an 8. does gokou dissipate into the air, or what? ;)
 
[quote name='munch']I hate that scale because people automatically juxtapose that to their scale at school where a 7 would be average. There just has to be a better way.[/QUOTE]

Well, I think you'd have to agree that most games are a little above average. Most games today do get the basics right like controls, camera, loading, no major glitches, etc.
 
Well, I'm actually fine with the score being effected, even by more than a point. Let's be honest, we have differnent expectations for games at differnet prices (how many people here right, I don't think that's a $50 game, but once it hits $20, I'll grab it).

As others mentioned also, if a game is released at $5-$10, it should be judged on a more lenient scale than other games (many people enjoyed the BK games at $4, but put them at $50, I doubt anyone would have bought them).

So, overall, I have no issue with a game being judged with price as a criteria.
 
[quote name='SpreadTheWord']My point is that there are different ways that thing get reviewed. Videogame review scores have been going down in recent years and I think that is for the better. But if someone starts using a bell curve to rate games it will be incomparable to the rest of the videogame review landscape.

Look at the thread that shows the EGM reviews for Lair. There are complaints that EGM is just trying to flex their new "tougher" review scores.

7 is average right now for games. People understand that. You can't just make a sweeping change and have 5 as the average. These things take time.[/QUOTE]

Agreed on all of that. I think I was just misunderstanding your previous statement.
 
[quote name='CocheseUGA']Prices should be part of the review, but not necessarily used to change a score. Not a whole point, for fuck's sake. Lower the 'Value' part of the review for it being overpriced, but don't lower the final score down a whole point because you think it's overpriced.[/quote]
That's because the EGM writers had to write their reviews before they knew the price, so what they wrote about it and scored it initially was based on an assumption that may not be correct, which isn't a good way to do it. They don't really have the option to wait since they want the reviews to go out near the game's release and have some relevance.

[quote name='whiptcracker']Agreed.

Personally I'd rather see a game given a price value as a score than a 1-10 number. CheapyD mentioned something like this as well on the recent Cagcast about wishing there was a scale of Buy/Rent/Ignore for reviews. I'd rather see a monetary value placed on a game, because in the end I just really want to know, if I spend X amount of money on this game will I feel ripped off. It would be great if there was something like this on CAG since I know there'd be very few games CAGers would feel are worth full price.

But yeah, if you're docking a game for the price for the amount of content, at least mention it in the review (like Calling All Cars, etc)[/quote]
It's funny that you mentioned that because that's pretty much what we do over at Gamer 2.0, as along with a normal score (with value factoring in), we give a suggestion of Buy it, Rent it, or Skip it to the game to help readers find out if the game's worth a purchase or not. I hope that didn't come off as sounding like spam.
 
Regarding the whole reviews being based on price, let's use a more accurate comparison.

Sega Genesis Collection is available on the PS2 and PSP. When released the PS2 version was (and still is) $20. You get an assload of AWESOME oldies, including some games either being compiled for the first time outside of the Genesis or coming to the US for the first time for just $20. Awesome stuff, no? So naturally, you'd rate the PSP the same thing...right? Wrong. PSP version had NO DIFFERENCES between itself and the PS2 version. No upgrades, no exclusive titles, nothing. It was a portable version. But that's not a problem. That's a great thing. The problem lied in its price. It was OVER $20. Why would you pay more for a game that's no different from the home version?

That is where a lower review would come in. Reviews are about the games entirely, not just the gameplay.
 
[quote name='jer7583']gokou's got some paranoid delusions going on there. Everyone's paying off everybody, 1up doesn't know how to rate things, they obviously just take the money, give some back, run it through a paper shredder, have a confetti party, then run some numbers through a bingo machine and mash some buttons in InDesign to create a magazine via luck.

Those damn dirty apes don't have a clue. INTERNET FORUMS ARE TEH SERIOUS BIDNESS.

Dude somehow cannot understand that there's an icicle's chance in hell that the dude at EGM somehow actually really enjoyed the game and is in the minority. You know there are quite a few CAGs who did enjoy shadowrun.

You can't say a word about it anyway because you said you never played the game and are going off of others' opinions. We obviously should trust gokou, though, over someone who's played the game extensively and been hired to write about it. You're real easy to rile up, you know that?[/QUOTE]


God, you're so predictable AND stupid at the same time. Did YOU play the game? If not, you should stfu as well. Just because 1 site gave the game a high score does not mean the game is good. And my other point was, there is no way this game would be a 9/10, therefore they are hypocrites and did not deduct any points for Shadowrun.

You better go tell every PS3 forums about EGM/1up not biased towards the PS3, and you'll be amazed at what the answer you'll get is. Oh and stop following me in threads trying to start shit with me, this will be my last post regarding you. If you have a problem with me, ignore my post, PM me and I will give you my address so we can duke it out, or just stfu if you don't have the balls.
 
1-up is full of it. I agree that it's up to the consumer to decide if the game is worth the price. It's fine if they mention the MSRP in the review (in fact, I encourage it) But it shouldn't affect the overall score of the game. Isn't the score supposed to be a rating of how good a game is?

YES! It's the whole point!

So....what happens 9 months from now when the game can be found in stores for $30 with the headset, or maybe even $20 without (it could happen :lol:)? Does it suddenly "earn" a 10/10 and become a AAA game?

EDIT: Done.
funny_cat_pictures_pc_6.jpg


Also, here's another point: Say I make a shitty game. Like REAALLLY fuckin' shitty, but I release it for free. According to 1-up, what score does it deserve? 4? 5? Even though it hurts to play, does it deserve a few points because "Hey, at least it's a good value"?
 
I didn't bother reading all the BS in this thread, but as somebody who personally proxied himself into Sony's beta, WARHAWK IS fuckING WORTH IT.



I'm still getting the retail package though. I like the box.
 
MSRP should be a factor, but not the only issue.

Reviews have always been subjective.

If anything, all that they're guilty of is not including a sentance after the "subtract yadda yadda if it's yadda bucks" saying "however, give back the point after the inevitable price drop a few months after release".
 
The fact that price drops happen goes without saying, though. If you're reading the review a year later and they mention the price being too high, anyone with any sense is going to realize that complaint isn't relevant anymore. And as for free games, another thing that goes without saying- it's free, but we're telling you if it's worth your time. Free doesn't automatically mean quality.

Seeing that guitar hero 3 price I would automatically not recommend it to people in a review because the demand needs to drop to bring that price down. Same deal with the PSP FF remakes. Same deal with Shadowrun.

Warhawk looks like hot fire but the trend of $60 multiplayer experiences cannot be validated. Thankfully shadowrun bombed and Microsoft may have learned a lesson.

Also, regardless of quality, shouldn't we be seeing a discount on these online purchases, since it costs the publisher less? Even if it was just a $5-10 discount because they don't have to package it, ship it, or pay the middlemen involved, it'd be a good thing. I bought the shivering isles, but only because I did get a discount on the MS points used to buy it.

And to gokou- You obviously did not take the Van Damme fairy to heart, because you're still full of angst. Try not being a teenager and get back to me on that.
 
[quote name='gokou36']Just because 1 site gave the game a high score does not mean the game is good.[/QUOTE]
It also doesn't mean that the game is bad. Believe it or not, people have differing opinions, and you might, MAYBE, just be in the minority! Case in point: I can't stand Halo because I think it's boring as fuck, but I'm fine with acknowledging that most people don't feel that way.

[quote name='gokou36']And my other point was, there is no way this game would be a 9/10, therefore they are hypocrites and did not deduct any points for Shadowrun.[/QUOTE]
I love how the logic within this sentence doesn't even hold up within itself. How is it possible to get a 9/10 without deducting any points? :D

[quote name='gokou36']You better go tell every PS3 forums about EGM/1up not biased towards the PS3, and you'll be amazed at what the answer you'll get is.[/QUOTE]
If it wasn't for the fact that it'd derail this thread, I'd ask for evidence of this bias. Considering how paranoid you seem (nice word choice, jer7583), I'm sure you've got a lot of it.
 
Let me say one thing.

At least EGM uses a 1 to 10 scale and not the kind GamePro uses (1 to 5). THEN maybe the complaints would seem fitting.
 
This thing about pricing in the reviews is really starting to piss me off.First it was Shadowrun, now Warhawk, hmmmmm.......so basically the wii is the best console, followed by the 360 and then the ps3, cause we are taking into consideration price, right?
 
[quote name='hcamacho']This thing about pricing in the reviews is really starting to piss me off.First it was Shadowrun, now Warhawk, hmmmmm.......so basically the wii is the best console, followed by the 360 and then the ps3, cause we are taking into consideration price, right?[/quote]
Again, take games like the two PSP Final Fantasy releases. Both games are readily available on the GBA and PlayStation at much more reasonable prices as pack ins. The PSP versions don't really offer much of anything that you won't get with the previous two versions. Plus they're sold for $30 EACH when the other two versions have them together.

Why should one have to pay $30 PER GAME when they've received little to no updates and have already been ported over to high hell? Not to mention, the GBA and PS version at least lets you play either of your choice at a cheaper price. Considering FF2 is seen as the black sheep of the earlier titles, you at least get the choice of being able to only play FF on the GBA and PS versions, whereas if you're gonna want only one, you're gonna be pay at least DOUBLE for it on PSP.

If a game's been ported to death or the quality of game REALLY doesn't match the price (like 600 Wii Points for Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles on NES instead of 500), then rating a game with the price in mind as well is perfectly fine.
 
[quote name='Gothic Walrus']It also doesn't mean that the game is bad. Believe it or not, people have differing opinions, and you might, MAYBE, just be in the minority! Case in point: I can't stand Halo because I think it's boring as fuck, but I'm fine with acknowledging that most people don't feel that way.[/QUOTE]

And it also doesn't mean the game is *good* when most sites gave it an average score. Your example is really retarded, are you saying Shadowrun is as popular as Halo now and that everyone who dislikes it is in the minority?

[quote name='Gothic Walrus']I love how the logic within this sentence doesn't even hold up within itself. How is it possible to get a 9/10 without deducting any points? :D [/QUOTE]

The logic is, there is no way on earth this game is remotely close to a 10/10. They did *not* deduct any points to Shadowrun because its a multiplayer only game. Maybe you should *read* the whole thread on this instead of trying to be funny.


[quote name='Tsukento']Again, take games like the two PSP Final Fantasy releases. Both games are readily available on the GBA and PlayStation at much more reasonable prices as pack ins. The PSP versions don't really offer much of anything that you won't get with the previous two versions. Plus they're sold for $30 EACH when the other two versions have them together.

Why should one have to pay $30 PER GAME when they've received little to no updates and have already been ported over to high hell? Not to mention, the GBA and PS version at least lets you play either of your choice at a cheaper price. Considering FF2 is seen as the black sheep of the earlier titles, you at least get the choice of being able to only play FF on the GBA and PS versions, whereas if you're gonna want only one, you're gonna be pay at least DOUBLE for it on PSP.

If a game's been ported to death or the quality of game REALLY doesn't match the price (like 600 Wii Points for Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles on NES instead of 500), then rating a game with the price in mind as well is perfectly fine.[/QUOTE]


Its been stated already by others in this thread that reviews should be based on Gameplay and not the price. Price shouldn't be a factor, because a shitty game at a low price will still be a shitty game.
 
The real question is, if it takes 30 minutes of your life to watch an episode of dragon ball z, do you take the bottle of sleeping pills, or kick the chair?
 
[quote name='gokou36']blah blah blah[/QUOTE]
I just figured out what the problem is - I was talking about game rankings, the subject of the thread. You, however, appear to be hellbent on discussing Shadowrun, which isn't even the topic of this thread. Every one of your posts has been on the topic of 1-Up taking money from Microsoft, something that can't be proven or even supported by you. I'd suggest that nobody continue that argument, because it sure as hell isn't doing anything productive.

Anyway, to get us back on topic, a point that (I don't think) has been made yet: reviews are based off of a game's initial state, which includes any bugs or errors that have yet to be patched. Since those can affect a game's score, it seems to me that its initial value should be fair game as well.

On the other hand, I don't think it's fair to try and quantify price. It'd be fine to say that a game is a good deal (or a rip-off) and to use that to help justify your score, but value is also one of the only components of a game that can change. Graphics and sound will be the same in five years, but price won't be, and using that as an important component of grading a game isn't fair.
 
[quote name='jer7583']The real question is, if it takes 30 minutes of your life to watch an episode of dragon ball z, do you take the bottle of sleeping pills, or kick the chair?[/QUOTE]


just a simple castration will do.
 
[quote name='sying']Sorry, I lost any respect for the 1up network aloooong time ago[/QUOTE]

Funny, I lost all respect for Sony a good long while ago.

Judging by Sony's actions, I guess no less than 39.99. Which is a damn shame as I'm not getting it unless it's under 30 or it gets perfect 10s.
 
[quote name='-Never4ever-']Funny, I lost all respect for Sony a good long while ago.

Judging by Sony's actions, I guess no less than 39.99. Which is a damn shame as I'm not getting it unless it's under 30 or it gets perfect 10s.[/QUOTE]
It was announced as $39.99 for the PSN version and $59.99 for the retail.
 
I would have suggested $10 less on everything, but whatever. In fact, that statement right there about sums up my view on Game Software pricing in general.
 
[quote name='zewone']It was announced as $39.99 for the PSN version and $59.99 for the retail.[/QUOTE]

Wasn't exactly around when this announcement came about. Guess I'll pass on the PSN version, although I might just get the retail copy. Not at full price, mind you, probably when I can find it for around $40.
 
[quote name='jer7583']The real question is, if it takes 30 minutes of your life to watch an episode of dragon ball z, do you take the bottle of sleeping pills, or kick the chair?[/quote]

Alright guys, that's enough. No more fighting. jer and gokou - both of you. Calling people out telling them you want to duke it out over a game. It's stupid. Just let it go or the thread will be locked.
 
[quote name='Trakan']Alright guys, that's enough. No more fighting. jer and gokou - both of you. Calling people out telling them you want to duke it out over a game. It's stupid. Just let it go or the thread will be locked.[/QUOTE]
It was him making fun of Dragon Ball that crossed the line right? ;)
 
I love these forums. And I wish I could play warhawk. Problem is, no broadband, and no PS3!

Locking this thread wouldn't be the worst thing to happen today.
 
[quote name='-Never4ever-']Funny, I lost all respect for Sony a good long while ago.

Judging by Sony's actions, I guess no less than 39.99. Which is a damn shame as I'm not getting it unless it's under 30 or it gets perfect 10s.[/QUOTE]


you'll have to accept that games are more expensive this gen. last gen, it would've been $29.99. $39.99 is the new $29.99. at least its not full price like that one online only game on the 360.
 
Shadowrun doesn't make any damn sense. Warhawk looks 10x better. I think with Shadowrun they were just trying to cut their losses and make back what they could. That was a mess.
 
[quote name='Apossum']you'll have to accept that games are more expensive this gen. last gen, it would've been $29.99. $39.99 is the new $29.99. at least its not full price like that one online only game on the 360.[/quote]
It is, but it comes with a Mic, which I guess balances it out.

Don't think I'm on M$s side either. Shadowrun is a fucking train wreck. A glorified XBLA game that somehow became the flagship for Live on PC. That's one game I won't touch until it's at $29.99 or less.

Hopefully they release a demo for Warhawk, as it badly needs it (now more than ever, with the crazy ass price setup).
 
[quote name='jer7583']I would have suggested $10 less on everything, but whatever. In fact, that statement right there about sums up my view on Game Software pricing in general.[/QUOTE]

Ferrari's are overpriced so are you going to steal one of them too?
 
[quote name='rodeojones903']Ferrari's are overpriced so are you going to steal one of them too?[/QUOTE]
I'm not sure where he implied he was going to pirate any games?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top