CAGcast #115: The Beta is Not a Chicken

[quote name='Brad Bishop']Seems to me like it'd be good to allow someone to change their review.

For example, they may be really hyped up about a new game. They get home and play it and, "Wow! Ain't it great!" So they give it a top rating.

A week or two blows by the the game that was hyped just kind of dropped off. Like it went from being fun to just tedious.

So it'd be nice if they could go back and edit their rating.[/quote]

That seems like a bad idea.

Almost every game gets a "backlash" after being out for about 2 weeks.

Write your review, publish it, and stand-by your score.
If you cant get behind the score you gave the game then don't write a damn review.
 
I read a game review knowing that "this is something that someone else thinks." I go into it knowing that the things that I like are not always the most popular, and things that are popular, I might not like. I don't think a game should get a score in a review. Reducing a game to a score is just wrong. If the game reviewer is good enough at what they do, they shouldn't have to dispense Ritalin and metascores for people complaining about walls of text.

Edit:
I like Wombat's (Juanbot?) idea for the pulling of games, except... "rental" doesn't exactly apply to PC games. :(
 
Nice show guys.

I completely agree with Wombat with regards to the redundant questions. It seems like every other podcast has a user question relating to "Should I buy I 360?" or "Please justify my PS3 purchase!". :drool:

Also, for a rating system, I'd prefer a letter grade system rather than a numeric one, although I think the "buy, rent, skip" idea is a good one.
 
[quote name='Axion22']
I like Wombat's (Juanbot?) idea for the pulling of games, except... "rental" doesn't exactly apply to PC games. :([/QUOTE]

Juanbat is better. Because he actually exists.
batmanuel.jpg
 
Just started listening and so far amazing.

And yes CheapyD is correct that ALL xbox live arcade games must have a demo. As an Xbox Live Arcade Developer myself I can tell you that microsoft will not release your game without one.

Also everyone seemed to bring up Puzzle Quest being too expensive. I just bought it on my cell phone for $6 and it is pretty much amazing.
 
[quote name='misfit13b']Look at the front page of CAG. All of the prices there are in USD. The vendors we buy from and advertise here, they sell in USD. That's just the way things are.[/quote]Right now, CAG is just a site for US gamers because the vast majority of the content is specific to the US. With the introduction of CAG 2.0 and things like user reviews, official CAG reviews, trade lists and game collection management, there'll be a lot of content on the new site that will be relevant to all readers outside of the US.

[quote name='misfit13b']Final Fantasy fans aren't going to care whether CAG gave the game a score of "8" any more than they would if they gave it a target price of "$50". Fans are going to buy games they're fans of regardless of review scores or the format those reviews are in.[/quote]
Exactly. Which is why using a valuation instead of a traditional score is ineffective, because a Final Fantasy fan is more likely to pay full price (the equivalent to a maximum score) in a situation where they may have been inclined to score a game lower using a traditional scale.

[quote name='misfit13b']You know you like the game, what do you care what anyone else says?[/quote]
It was more a hypothetical situation to highlight how the valuation system becomes problematic as a means for rating a game. If I looked at Mr. Driller Online with my reviewers' hat on I know I'd rate it as average or below. However, using the valulation system I'd be giving it full marks since that's what I was willing to pay. There's a big discrepancy between the two.

[quote name='misfit13b']Just list the MSRP with the score.[/quote]
That doesn't help when you want to see a list of the top games in a particular genre, sorting by valuation in descending order.

[quote name='misfit13b']This last part makes no sense to me. Who is gonna pay $60 for a game with an MSRP of $40? Sorry to be so crude, but this is Cheap Ass Gamer, not Dumb Ass Gamer.[/quote]
Read the original post I was responding to. I think it was Jackal888's suggestion (in this thread at least) that you'd forget that the MSRP existed, and value the game at what you think it's worth. (In which case it'd be possible to value it at higher than the MSRP.)

[quote name='misfit13b']Are people selling Halo 1 for $60? If you can get the game for lower than recommended, that's what we call a *good deal*. That's the point. Game prices will always go down. We're trying to determine what is the *most* you should pay. Always try to get the lowest price regardless.[/quote]Here's an example that should make it easier to understand. Halo 3 comes out, and plenty of reviews are submitted giving the game an average valuation of $60. However, because most of the reviews were submitted shortly after the game's release, the average valuation doesn't decrease much over time. 5 years later, and the average valuation might be $55. Now, in your own words: "We're trying to determine what is the *most* you should pay.". Do you see how the data becomes less relevant over time, whereas a traditional score doesn't age?

[quote name='misfit13b']You don't have to play a game all the way through to get a feeling for how much it's worth. Hell, I can probably count the number of 360 games I've finished on one hand, but I know whether or not I'd recommend them to you, and how much I think you should pay should you be interested.[/quote]I agree, and I don't doubt that a lot of reviews will be submitted from people who haven't finished the game. But you can't deny that most reviews in the days immediately after a game's release will be from people who have bought the game, and are therefore more inclined to pay full price.

[quote name='misfit13b']Don't think I'm picking on you, or singling you out, you just made some interesting points to which I wanted to respond.[/quote]Don't be sorry, the whole point of this was to discuss options and figure out what'd be best for the new system. Keep the comments coming. ;)
 
[quote name='Bartex']for the CAG review system you should use what i like to call my ESRB review system

E - Eject it ([0-3] terrible game, not worth your time/money)
S - Steal it ([4-5] mediocre game)
R - Rent it ([6-7] good game)
B - Buy it ([8-10] awesome game, worth your time/money)[/quote]

I like it! So Assassins Creed would fall into the 6-7 range but the category classifications need to be solidified. Mediocre means that it doens't nothing new and is run of the mill. Any Rayman game in the last 3 years fits here. Yaris and Jumper would probably fall under the "Eject it" category. Just solidify the categories and I'm all for it.
 
[quote name='InuFaye']The Problem with the money scale is that an amount of money something is worth is different to every person. What is worth 20 dollars to me, might only be worth 10 dollars to someone else. [/quote]

That's also the problem with 1-10 scales, A-F scales and Rent it/buy it/trash it scales. A "trash it" to you might be a "must buy" for me, but then again, if I already knew that, then I wouldn't need a review.
People just want to know Cheapy and Wombat's opinion on what they would pay, or if they would pay or how they would rate a game. If they give Metal Gear Solid 4 a 2/trash it/$5, I'll still go buy it; I don't need a review for that. But if they give My Little Pony: Extreme BMX Hair Brush the Movie the Game a 10/Must Buy/$60, it'll peak my interest enough to check out a game I wasn't looking at before.
 
[quote name='John']*bunch of smart things*[/QUOTE]

Actually, when I first posted about this (last CAGcast thread), I was thinking along the lines of Cheapy/Wombat doing an Official CAG Review. One review per game = no averaging involved. They mention what they think things are worth (in dollar amounts) all the time, so why not catalog it somehow? It'd be easier than trying to remember which CAGcast Wombat talked about Game X in or whatever... Write a paragraph or two to go with the score (as we never live by score alone) and you're done.

Then this whole community aggregate rating stuff popped up, which is fine because:

a) it's already a part of CAG 2.0
b) people are in love with their own voices
c) whatever. ;)

I might be the exception, but personally, I don't go to gaming websites to find the quickly computed average of a community score. I'm looking for "the site's review". Right now, CAG doesn't have that. And since this particular website deals with saving money, why not use the unique angle?

All of this is probably moot anyways, as I'm pretty sure Cheapy has things all lined up already, and Wombat is already getting testy since we're not talking about him. (God forbid.)

So, who here is up for some Vegas 2? :D

m13b
 
About the white gamecube controller in Japan: I live in the UK, and I bought two white gamecube controllers around wii's launch. They come in wired and wireless. They're only sold in Game, a UK games store, and it has their logo on the packaging, so its probably a UK only thing.

They're no different to normal gamecube controllers. I would upload pics, but I'm too lazy =)
 
[quote name='misfit13b']

All of this is probably moot anyways, as I'm pretty sure Cheapy has things all lined up already, and Wombat is already getting testy since we're not talking about him. (God forbid.)

So, who here is up for some Vegas 2? :D

m13b[/QUOTE]

exactly
 
as far as a review system for games goes just do letter grades A to F

A= awesome
B= better than avg
C= coulda been better
D= dump in a box
F= fuck it

grade each game accordingly and under each grade list a few pros and cons the game may have kinda like how they did on that old g4 show. adding pros and cons allows people to see that issues you each have had with a game.
 
Is there a reason to play Terrorist Hunt in R6V2 much longer than it takes to get the achievements? It was fine for the hour it took to go through all of the levels with some CAGs on realistic to be done with it for good for me.
 
[quote name='lokizz']as far as a review system for games goes just do letter grades A to F

A= awesome
B= better than avg
C= coulda been better
D= dump in a box
F= fuck it

grade each game accordingly and under each grade list a few pros and cons the game may have kinda like how they did on that old g4 show. adding pros and cons allows people to see that issues you each have had with a game.[/quote]

It can easily be turned into numbers, which are a bad thing.

A= 100- 90
B= 89-80
C= 79-70
D=69-60
F= 59-50

It makes it a 7 being average.

Its no different then any other scale.
 
Concerning the problem with the ps3 and communication, am I the only one who thinks they should have packed in the Playstation eye with all PS3s? It has a built in mic, and some decent software for use with the camera. ugh, will they ever learn.
 
Still listening to the show but I wanted to chime in...

I really like the idea of instead of a numerical rating score letting CAGs say how much they think a game should cost. I think that it would be a very unique and fitting way for the Cheap Ass Community to value a game. If you just average out scores then you're no different then 100s of other sites.
 
I agree, $'s, for review scores. Its fitting with CAG lifestyle and unlike all other scales
P.S. ...uh, does anyone not love the CAGS on news song...
 
On MGS4 being $85:
I can't think of any other major game where they've ever said "okay people, this is the LAST ONE WE'LL EVER MAKE"
For me, I feel like this might be my last time I can nerd out on a Metal Gear game, so I want to be "that guy" that preorders the best version and waits outside of GameStop so I can be the first one to get it and take it home and have a MGS party at 930 in the morning. If square-enix said "This is the last Final Fantasy game we will ever make EVER! We are killing off all fantasies so there can never be another one" then I'm sure people would scramble to buy the $85 collectors pack of that too.
 
[quote name='misfit13b']Actually, when I first posted about this (last CAGcast thread), I was thinking along the lines of Cheapy/Wombat doing an Official CAG Review. One review per game = no averaging involved. They mention what they think things are worth (in dollar amounts) all the time, so why not catalog it somehow? It'd be easier than trying to remember which CAGcast Wombat talked about Game X in or whatever... Write a paragraph or two to go with the score (as we never live by score alone) and you're done.
m13b[/quote]

John/Misfit you do not understand my view on a CAG review.I did not think CheapyD was going for a traditional review to be added to Metacritic and their ilk. I was thinking that CAG would have its own way of keeping it focused on value. This is not a review site.

What CheapyD describes was an aggregate system, where each CAG gives a game a price and then his database says the percent of CAGs that feel the game has such price.Then that becomes the Perceived Value. Its more of a perceived value vs actual value.

The actual price for a game could be placed with a Perceived Value Price(PVP).This lets a user know what percentage of the CAGs feel the game is worth this much. CheapyD plays the virtual Stock market with games and this PVP system would be similar. I know there are fans of a game that will say its worth it no matter what. They will be balanced by people who are not interested in the game.

With "bad value" games as the game gets older and the price drops closer to the lower PVP people would know that at this price the game is a good value. They also can read the write up and see if they are interested.

With "good value" games you can see that the PVP is higher than the Actual price and you would know you are getting more bang for your bucks.It does not mean you will pay $60 for a $40 game. It will mean you are getting a good value.

PS-Wombat is the hardest working Wombat in the game industry!
 
[quote name='Jackal888']What CheapyD describes was an aggregate system, where each CAG gives a game a price and then his database says the percent of CAGs that feel the game has such price.Then that becomes the Perceived Value. Its more of a perceived value vs actual value.[/quote]
The same problems still apply (the ones listed in my last post) - and the fact that this system takes so much explaining probably isn't a good sign.

Here's the system I'm personally keen on:
- Both official CAG and user reviews would use a five option system (Great, Good, Average, Bad, Terrible)
- We'd be able to show people the best price for a new copy of the game by automatically scanning price data from the usual places (including latest sales data).
- We'd be able to show the used value (for trading and so on) based on data from user collections, trades on CAG, and things like time since launch/MSRP. We could use the same process to generate a perceived value on-the-fly, but this way the data would always be up to date.
 
On Metal Gear Solid 4 LE: While I happen to agree that spending $85 on a limited edition game is not worth it in my eyes, it was very funny to hear Wonbot basically call anyone who buys these games crazy. If I remember correctly, didn't Wonbot buy two copies of Oblivion?

Also glad to see that this version of the Wonbot was equipped with super back peddaling attachment. First 30 minutes of the show was Wonbot defending himself!
 
[quote name='Mr Unoriginal']On Metal Gear Solid 4 LE: While I happen to agree that spending $85 on a limited edition game is not worth it in my eyes, it was very funny to hear Wonbot basically call anyone who buys these games crazy. If I remember correctly, didn't Wonbot buy two copies of Oblivion?

Also glad to see that this version of the Wonbot was equipped with super back peddaling attachment. First 30 minutes of the show was Wonbot defending himself![/QUOTE]

Thats the first 30 minutes of every CAGcast, so welcome to the show first time listener ;)
 
I am a huge Metal Gear nerd. I am a Kojima fan to no end. I will not pay $85 for MGS4 LE. The value is not there. The box art is the most valuable thing in the package and they knew that would get us upset and tempted to buy the LE. Every other Metal Gear Solid Game has hand drawn box art.

I did think the art book was worth it but now that comes with the standard pre-order from Gamestop. I am happy to give them the extra $25 dollars worth in DLC for Metal Gear Online. That and the next Metal Gear Digital graphic novel is a day one purchase.
 
Glad to see my buddies in Decatur are going to cash in on the casual gaming success of the Wii.

Is Trogdor content a given?

Edit:

I also support a cash value for game ratings, it makes more sense since we are best value / budget oriented gaming community.

Full retail $55-$14 bargain bin, maybe even including a "don't even rent it" option for an abysmal failure.
 
Cheapy, that was fun sharing the Artie blow up experience with you LIVE on Gmail when it happened. i wish my Gmail chat worked at my job tho. the admins blocked it so i apologize. :(

btw, with a hard copy of a game, you can also sell it on ebay. the best place to get rid of a used game, imo.
 
Just steal Netflix's rating system and replace it with CAG related increments.

One star is avoid, Two is Rental, Three is Buy Cheap, Four is Buy for FULL price, and Five is for if you would kill someone to play it more/if they broke your copy.

Have a user wide score system and if someone votes too many games for 5 stars, they get banned from voting and labeled a fan boy.
 
Honestly, I prefer the phrasing system.

You can waffle around on points, and interpret them individually .. But when a reviewer says, 'Rent It', it's very clear what he means.

That would solidify a reviewer's opinion with him or herself, as well as convey it unequivocally to the reader.

Any matters of subjectiveness after that will simply be up to the reader, as it would have to be.
 
[quote name='John']The same problems still apply (the ones listed in my last post) - and the fact that this system takes so much explaining probably isn't a good sign.

[/quote]

The system is simple and only takes a lot of explaining to you and Misfit. You have to keep this site focused on price and value that is what CAG is all about. This is not a review site. On the user side it is simply:"Hey how much do you think this game is worth?". All the complexities take place on CheapyD's side. As a user I will see two numbers actual price and perceived price.
 
I'm all for the letter grades. Also, Cheapy and Wombat, expect my resume with game writing experience so I can write reviews for you. I've written for a number of sites (including GotFrag.com) and I think this site would be a great stepping st....place for me to get my voice heard.
 
[quote name='misfit13b']Actually, when I first posted about this (last CAGcast thread), I was thinking along the lines of Cheapy/Wombat doing an Official CAG Review. One review per game = no averaging involved. They mention what they think things are worth (in dollar amounts) all the time, so why not catalog it somehow? It'd be easier than trying to remember which CAGcast Wombat talked about Game X in or whatever... [/quote]


I was thinking that also.

I do like the idea of a "Buy it" "Rent It" "Avoid it" system with maybe a "buy it cheaper" option.
 
The first twenty minutes of the show seemed like "Thrash the 'Bat", which I didn't care for.

I have found myself increasingly agreeing with Wombat's positions as of late. With WiiFit, the Penny Arcade game, and now the MGS4 SE; he has repeatedly proved himself to be the consummate Cheap Ass Gamer. He seems concerned with the everyman's ability to afford games that are growing increasingly expensive. Are these three games collectively worth nearly $200?

Wombat, you've shown an unfailing ability to question publisher's motives; I don't see this type of criticism by any major game journalist/podcaster. Kudos to the hardest (working) man in the VG business!
 
[quote name='StealthSoul']
caglm5.gif


Gonna listen when I get home from school..[/quote]

Holy shit, that's hilarious!

I, too, enjoyed the "stupid bitch" comment. I almost dropped several hundred pounds on myself at the gym from laughing so hard.
 
I really like the idea of a "how much would you pay" system. At the same time, though, I think you'd have to have a more standard system as well, because I don't really think you could average everyone's "buy it" prices and have it be a really accurate representation of a game's quality. I think a buy it price kind of system would really set CAG apart from other sites, though, and it would be really relevant to what CAG is all about. I favor a star rating system, personally. I think, unlike 1-10 reviews, where people don't view a 5 or a C as average, people do view 2 1/2 or 3 stars as average. At least I do.

I'm really looking forward to CAG 2.0. It sounds like it'll be a lot like IGN, but... well, a hell of a lot better. I'm expecially looking forward to the collection aspect. I hope it will have a wishlist option, too? Assuming it will, it would be awesome if you could assign some sort of price point to your wishlist games, and then get some sort of notification if the game hits that price at stores CAG is affiliated with. I'm not sure if that would be possible, but it would be awesome ;)

And thanks to Wombat for answering my comic question :D I'll definitely be checking out some of those recommendations.
 
[quote name='John'] Right now, CAG is just a site for US gamers because the vast majority of the content is specific to the US. With the introduction of CAG 2.0 and things like user reviews, official CAG reviews, trade lists and game collection management, there'll be a lot of content on the new site that will be relevant to all readers outside of the US.
[/QUOTE]

A good point , I still think the site is going to remain focused on US pricing. They could add an option for users to convert to the currency of their region automatically.

[quote name='John'] Exactly. Which is why using a valuation instead of a traditional score is ineffective, because a Final Fantasy fan is more likely to pay full price (the equivalent to a maximum score) in a situation where they may have been inclined to score a game lower using a traditional scale.[/QUOTE]

I think this will be easily averaged out by the majority, as there are many people like myself who would rate that Final Fantasy game much lower. But it's really no different than the score inflation you see on all major franchises. I don't think people are any more likely to say a game is worth full price than they are to give it a perfect score if they are rabid fans.

[quote name='John'] That doesn't help when you want to see a list of the top games in a particular genre, sorting by valuation in descending order.[/QUOTE]

It would be no different than sorting games by price, they are both numbers. You would just sort by "games with the highest value in a genre."

[quote name='John'] Here's an example that should make it easier to understand. Halo 3 comes out, and plenty of reviews are submitted giving the game an average valuation of $60. However, because most of the reviews were submitted shortly after the game's release, the average valuation doesn't decrease much over time. 5 years later, and the average valuation might be $55. Now, in your own words: "We're trying to determine what is the *most* you should pay.". Do you see how the data becomes less relevant over time, whereas a traditional score doesn't age? [/QUOTE]

I understand your point, Rez for example is now a downloadable game and probably not worth the same $50 as when it was first released on the ps2 (to most people). But this is easily resolved by weighting the ratings such that the most recent games carry more weight than the ratings when a game was first released.

[quote name='John'] I agree, and I don't doubt that a lot of reviews will be submitted from people who haven't finished the game. But you can't deny that most reviews in the days immediately after a game's release will be from people who have bought the game, and are therefore more inclined to pay full price.[/QUOTE]

I think you would have the same problem with scored ratings, again I think this can be fixed by having the most recent scores hold more weight.

[quote name='John'] Don't be sorry, the whole point of this was to discuss options and figure out what'd be best for the new system. Keep the comments coming. ;) [/QUOTE]

There is no denying that the value rating has problems, you have brought up a lot of problems that would need to be addressed. However I still think think the value of a game integrates best into the CAG philosophy of never paying more for a game than it's worth. One of the first responses to any deal thread is, "how much is this game worth" and the value system provides an immediate answer. There are a million review sites, all of them have some sort of ratings varation, be it score, letter grade buy/rent/avoid etc. Why have CAG be like every other site. The value rating is something unique to CAG that is a perfect fit for what Cheapassgamer is all about. Wombat and Cheapy already rate games using this, Dark Sector was a perfect example last week, it is a natural CAG response to rate a game based on its price.
 
Great Episode!

If you're doing reviews now you might want to have some kind of bounty you could put out on reviews for example:
MGS4 Review $3
Before Release +$2
Included Original Gameplay Footage +$2
Full Video Review +$2


If you don't want to pay money you could pay in coupon codes or some kind of "fun" money like the geek gold on Board Game Geek. In fact that site has a pretty robust review / photo system you might want to take a look at...


If it's too much trouble to decide what qualifies as a worthy review you might be able to do some kind of peer review system.

Make sure there's a buy the game link in every review so you get paid!

Final suggestion let CAGs set their own bounties on reviews if they so choose.
 
Rating system suggestion: it's a 10 point rating system:
1-5 '$'s going from average ($) to perfect ($$$$$) (pronounced 'Spends' or 'Buys' pr you could just call them CAGs and use the cents sign (the c with a line through it)
and 1-5 fuck's (pronouncd Shaq Fus) from below average (fuck) to total crap (fuckfuckfuckfuckfuck)

So basically if you like a game it gets $$$, or if you really hate a game it gets fuckfuckfuck.

ie.
10 = $$$$$
9 = $$$$
8 = $$$
7 = $$
6 = $
5 = fuck
4 = fuckfuck
3 = fuckfuckfuck
2 = fuckfuckfuckfuck
1 = fuckfuckfuckfuckfuck

Convoluted, but I really want to get the ShaqFu's in there because it's such an integral part of CAG culture. It sort of keeps the idea that anything above a 5 may be worth something to someone and could even correlate to $10 worth of fun.

--------


Omigod, Wombat is critical to the show, he's mostly great, but Womb if you could get over the 'love to hear the sound of your own voice' thing while on the air, I would gnash my teeth just a little more. And Womb, get over yourself. You're just not the hardest working guy in anything. If you were the hardest working guy in video games, believe me you wouldn't have any time to play all these games and read all those comics and waste all that time. Justice will be served when your child pops out, when having 2 hours to play games a day will be absolute luxury. Having kids redefines busy.

And holy crap I hate the comic book chat, it is the only thing that makes me want to turn off the Cagcast, it's so awful I want to stick sharp objects in my ears and twist them around. This is a video game and life podcast, but hearing Wombat nerd off about comic books is the opposite of why I listen to this show religeously. It's been a pain pill I've had to swallow as a fan.

And BTW Womb, I have name suggestions for you. If it's a boy consider Arnold, Willis or Mr. Drummond. And if it's a girl, consider Blair, Jo or Tootie. Oh, wait, didn't you say it was going to be a girl?

And a final note to the show- I would love to hear more sound effects and sound bites. Wombat needs to be the new Fred! And more theme songs for the parts of the shows. Cags on News song is great.

I'll take drugged out stupid fat Artie any day over Jackie.
 
[quote name='Jackal888']The system is simple and only takes a lot of explaining to you and Misfit. You have to keep this site focused on price and value that is what CAG is all about. This is not a review site. On the user side it is simply:"Hey how much do you think this game is worth?". All the complexities take place on CheapyD's side. As a user I will see two numbers actual price and perceived price.[/quote]
"The system is simple" if you ignore all the problems with it, which is exactly what you're doing. I realize it would be nice to be able to say a game is worth this or that, but it isn't practical to use valuation as a replacement for scoring. You're just going from a very simple system using "Buy It"/"Rent It"/"Avoid It" as the three options, to a 1-60 scale (or whatever the upper limit is). Furthermore, you could argue that the whole concept of the system is redundant when you consider that every single benefit it offers can be generated on-the-fly using the data we already have. We can generate a perceived value based on rating and MSRP, and what's more it'll remain accurate as the MSRP will be updated over time.

[quote name='msdmoney']A good point , I still think the site is going to remain focused on US pricing. They could add an option for users to convert to the currency of their region automatically.[/quote]
That wouldn't work, unfortunately. Game prices vary a lot in places like the UK and Australia, so the perceived values would be far too low when converted.

[quote name='msdmoney']It would be no different than sorting games by price, they are both numbers. You would just sort by "games with the highest value in a genre."[/quote]
Right, but it would be different to sorting games by a 1-10 rating. Let's say we wanted to see the top rated puzzle games by the CAG community. Puzzle Quest for the Xbox Live Arcade would be further down the list than Puzzle Quest for the PSP, because it'd have a lower perceived value - even though they're basically the same game. (With the XBLA version costing less, people would give it a lower value.) It would be like using a 1-10 scale but saying an XBLA game can't score higher than a 5.

[quote name='msdmoney']I understand your point, Rez for example is now a downloadable game and probably not worth the same $50 as when it was first released on the ps2 (to most people). But this is easily resolved by weighting the ratings such that the most recent games carry more weight than the ratings when a game was first released.[/quote]
The problem there is that the majority of reviews for a game will be within the first 6 months after release. (When the game still has the highest perceived value.) So, we'd have to do a *lot* of weighting (close to the point of disregarding the old scores altogether) to make the average perceived value effective.

[quote name='msdmoney']There is no denying that the value rating has problems, you have brought up a lot of problems that would need to be addressed. However I still think think the value of a game integrates best into the CAG philosophy of never paying more for a game than it's worth.[/quote]
I agree - I think it's really important that we show how much a game is worth, both new and used. Right now on CAG 2.0, the way we're doing that is by using data from past trades, wishlists, live store data (from various sites), currently available deals, average rating, MSRP and time since launch. We could even combine that with an area on the game information page that lets you submit what you think a game is worth, and then use that data for the perceived value - that would work great because we wouldn't be replacing the rating system, just adding to it.
 
That Wiimote microsoft thing is a joke, they think they can just cast in because they can make a motion control controller, well Microsoft, it's not going to happen, that isn't why the wii is so popular

I liked the idea of the great, good, average, poor, terrible, rating scale. The whole 1-10 makes things way to picky and often results in a 7-9 scale as you guys said. And the buy it, rent it, pass it, scale is too simple. You should go with something in between. And even if people just look at the score, they are getting a more accurate judgment than a number or someone telling them to go buy a game.
 
Good show guys.

I will be buying the MGS LE. Why? Because I am a huge fan of Metal Gear Solid, and you get some cool stuff with it. I think I maybe have two or three LE of other games, so it's not like I'm buying up every single LE that comes out. I am a cheap ass gamer, but sometimes it's ok to pay more for one of your favorite series. If you're a huge fan of the series you won't feel a lot of guilt for buying it. The price is steep, but there are always 10% coupons floating around to drop down the price a bit.

I agree that Sony should have bundled the system with a mic. For a game like COD it seems like everyone has one, but for Warhawk (that came with a mic) hardly anyone talks. That's kinda weird.

The problem with Stanglehold is that the online SUCKED. I don't know how it was on 360, but for PS3 it was a complete lag fest. They should have fixed the online before throwing out more maps. At the very least they should have been free. I don't know anyone who would pay for those maps, yet alone play them. Considering how quick the game dropped in price, I don't think it was a hot seller. They should have done the people who bought the game a solid and maybe just put out a few of the maps for free and just scrap the rest.

Wombat, sorry to say but I have to kill your comic book dream. I used to be a big reader when I was a youngin, so I know where you're coming from, but this is a gaming podcast. You guys barely have enough time to get through all the news and answer CAGbag questions. Adding a comic book section would be just too much.
 
In regards to the Wii's success (as discussed during the discussion of Microsoft's possible Wiimote knockoff), I think an important thing to consider as a factor of that is the DS's tremendous success before the Wii arrived. The DS really opened up that market, not the Wii, and the Wii is capitalizing on a market that, because of the DS, was now ready for a home console. If the Wii hadn't had the DS acting as precursor, I remain skeptical that it would've the same magnitude of success it has had. I think the DS played a larger role in the Wii's success than most give it credit for.

And that's to say nothing of the fact that the DS really brought Nintendo back into the limelight as a strong brand-name. While they were moderately well-known for the Gamecube and the GBA in the casual gamer area, the DS really raised their profile back to the average consumer. It's been their renaissance.

Also, damn you Wombat, because just as you said you needed to coin a new term for the Wiimote knockoff, I shouted "Threemote," only to have you suggest it five seconds later. Grr.
 
Even before it was brought up, I was thinking a money scale would be most fitting for CAG, but at this point I don't really care how Cheapy does it. However, I would recommend a conclusion system where some questions are answered succinctly. For example:

How many hours of gameplay did you get out of this?
Simple question that could be answered "I'm still hooked"
Is a rental worthwhile?
Maybe it's a game that the average gamer won't beat in a week, so renting is difficult? Or it's a game that is better bought and played on a whim?
What's the best way to play?
A good question to consider for those games that may focus on co-op, or have something unlockable which is what makes it worthwhile
How quickly will it fall in price?
Definately a big question for CAGs. Longer games (like RPGs) tend to stay at $60 longer, as do games that are primarily played online. There are definately other market-related questions that a CAG reviewer should consider.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top