CAGcast #84: The Rail Not Taken

Interactive Ads ftw!

OR better yet.. Youtube Ad's.. we all know how great of a Youtuber cheapy is.
 
[quote name='Wombat']I big steaming pile of nothing, my name isn't Steven.[/quote]

Mine is. He can have a hug, if he wants one.
 
Good show, but after last week’s huge announcement, this one seemed pretty low key by comparison.

I think ads would be okay. You guys deserve to get paid for what you do. Just keep them short and keep them relevant. I don’t want to hear you pimping domain name registration services, car wax, or douche. Work them into the regular show as discussions (making sure you clearly indicate when you have been paid to discuss a certain product) or, even better, as contests, and I don’t think too many people will complain.

“Buy It, Rent It, Skip It” reviews are shit. If you have a problem with the numbers, read the text above it. Don’t dumb down reviews simply because some people are too lazy to read. And if you must rely on numbers alone, at least use an aggregator like Game Rankings or Metacritic to get a better overall sense of sentiment about the game.

I find your lack of Picross knowledge disturbing. You should both check the game out, especially given the $20 price point. I think you will be pleasantly surprised.

Same goes for Strikers Charged, which features a surprising amount of depth. As Io and others have noted, playing the AI (which is frustratingly good) and playing folks online (who can range from embarrassingly bad – like me – to crazy skilled) are two completely different experiences. Sure, it’d be nice to talk to folks (especially CAGs) as you play them online, but it’s a fun and unique experience all the same. Also, co-op (which you can do online or in tournaments) is really fun with friends and significant others.
 
[quote name='kyogensho']I would guess Stewart/Stuart.

The following link proves absolutely nothing at all. Or does it?[/QUOTE]


nope, wombat has a film/media degree
 
[quote name='CheapyD']My USA Wii just arrived from play-asia...less than 48 hours after ordering.[/QUOTE]
Wow, that was extremely fast.

In regards to Wombat:

His name is Robert Paulson.
 
I agree with the ratings this really the problem with ratings thing really ratings on most games get scewed cause they dont want to use all the numbers really a perfect game should be a 10 and the worse possible game should be a 1. Really a 5-6 should be an ok and a 7-8 should be good and 8-9 should be great. On the low end 2-4 should be varying degrees of suck.
 
Great show guys! A few thoughts.......if you guys make more money with ads then go for it. You guys provide an excellent podcast and should be rewarded. Metroid should be worth every penny that us WII cost ya! As far as your baby name Cheapy, I think that you and your wife should think of a hybrid jewish/tokyo name that way both families would be happy :)
 
I have actually read some individual reports of the systems that are coming back from the repairs are newer systems(I hope this is the case). Maybe we will start to see some more news on this before to long. I think they are tring the ulitmate in quiet recall one unit at a time but I agree I would like to know there are no faulty systems on shelves.
 
[quote name='zewone']Wow, that was extremely fast.

In regards to Wombat:

His name is Robert Paulson.[/QUOTE]

I do know Rob Paulson
 
My library actually caries all the Halo novels. Never checked them out, but they seem to have a few copies of each. I get most of my DVDs there, and actually grabbed Shadow of the Colossus(PS2) this week as well. Ours is pretty advanced, as they even offer free home delivery.

Sadly no Mass Effect yet.
 
[quote name='zewone']Wow, that was extremely fast.

In regards to Wombat:

His name is Robert Paulson.[/quote]

haha wombats really meatloaf :D
 
I'm all for a “Buy It, Rent It, Skip It" rating system because it represents the bottom line. You can have all the 9.3s and 6.8s and 7.9s and 8.4s you want, but ultimately you're either going to “Buy It, Rent It, Skip It."

NWR uses a similar system for Wii VC games. 'Recommended, Recommended for Fans, Not Recommended.'
 
[quote name='CheapyD']My USA Wii just arrived from play-asia...less than 48 hours after ordering.[/QUOTE]

IF you paid me $450 or whatever it was I would have had it there that quick too. ;)
 
is.. Cosmo . btw, sony sent me a survey for singstar and asked for 3 frequently visited websites. Of course cheapassgamer was numero uno, bam.
 
[quote name='rogueweapon']is.. Cosmo . btw, sony sent me a survey for singstar and asked for 3 frequently visited websites. Of course cheapassgamer was numero uno, bam.[/quote]

hey, me too :)
 
[quote name='trip1eX']I'm all for a “Buy It, Rent It, Skip It" rating system because it represents the bottom line. You can have all the 9.3s and 6.8s and 7.9s and 8.4s you want, but ultimately you're either going to “Buy It, Rent It, Skip It."[/QUOTE]
Yes, but the reviewer's idea of what to buy, what to rent, and what to skip is not going to be the same as every consumer.

A consumer should be able to decide that it's only worth it to him to buy games of 9.0 or higher quality, and the reviews should let him do that effectively.
 
Scores should be removed completely from reviews. That was it forces the consumer to actually read the review and decide based on what is written, how they want to approach the game. Do they want to rent it, buy it, or fuck it. This forces the people that make judgments on a game based on score to actually give a shit and research a bit. See what makes it a worthwhile or not worthwhile game.
 
[quote name='PyroGamer']Yes, but the reviewer's idea of what to buy, what to rent, and what to skip is not going to be the same as every consumer.

A consumer should be able to decide that it's only worth it to him to buy games of 9.0 or higher quality, and the reviews should let him do that effectively.[/quote]
Reviews are not forceful demands, but suggestions. The readers have always had the powers to decide whether they're convinced that they want the game or not from reading the review.

[quote name='AshesofWake']Scores should be removed completely from reviews. That was it forces the consumer to actually read the review and decide based on what is written, how they want to approach the game. Do they want to rent it, buy it, or fuck it. This forces the people that make judgments on a game based on score to actually give a shit and research a bit. See what makes it a worthwhile or not worthwhile game.[/quote]
It's been done and the readers can't handle it.
 
[quote name='FriskyTanuki']
It's been done and the readers can't handle it.[/QUOTE]


sucks for them then, they'll enjoy using their own personal judgment based on whatever they know instead of listening to someone else, oh noes! using brain so evil...
 
[quote name='AshesofWake']sucks for them then, they'll enjoy using their own personal judgment based on whatever they know instead of listening to someone else, oh noes! using brain so evil...[/QUOTE]
What?

"sucks for them"??? The WHOLE POINT of reviews is for THE READER'S BENEFIT. Reviews aren't some sacred institution that we have a moral obligation to keep in the "perfect" format, they are made for one reason only: to serve the reader.

"Sucks for them"? If it "sucks for them" than IT SUCKS. Period. How could it "suck" for anything else? It's sole purpose is "for them". If it sucks for them, then it simply SUCKS.


2nd:

"they'll enjoy using their own personal judgment based on whatever they know instead of listening to someone else"

WHAT??? Then what's the point of the revie? If it's not to "listen to someone else", then what IS the point?

And where does this information of "whatever they know" come from? If it's not from "listening to someone else", then it has to be from playing the game themselves (or watching it played), in which case you either own the game, or you are subject to perhaps a non-objective video representation of the game (so in a sense, you are still "listening to someone else")



Reviews are meant to objectively rate the QUALITY of a game.

Telling someone to "buy it", "rent it" or "skip it" does NOTHING to address the OBJECTIVE QUALITY of the game.

A five star scale, a 1-10 system, something objective and simply is the best way to objectively rate a game, compare it with other games, and make a simple, unequivocal statement on the QUALITY of the title.
 
[quote name='PyroGamer']What?

"sucks for them"??? The WHOLE POINT of reviews is for THE READER'S BENEFIT. Reviews aren't some sacred institution that we have a moral obligation to keep in the "perfect" format, they are made for one reason only: to serve the reader.

"Sucks for them"? If it "sucks for them" than IT SUCKS. Period. How could it "suck" for anything else? It's sole purpose is "for them". If it sucks for them, then it simply SUCKS.


2nd:

"they'll enjoy using their own personal judgment based on whatever they know instead of listening to someone else"

WHAT??? Then what's the point of the revie? If it's not to "listen to someone else", then what IS the point?

And where does this information of "whatever they know" come from? If it's not from "listening to someone else", then it has to be from playing the game themselves (or watching it played), in which case you either own the game, or you are subject to perhaps a non-objective video representation of the game (so in a sense, you are still "listening to someone else")



Reviews are meant to objectively rate the QUALITY of a game.

Telling someone to "buy it", "rent it" or "skip it" does NOTHING to address the OBJECTIVE QUALITY of the game.

A five star scale, a 1-10 system, something objective and simply is the best way to objectively rate a game, compare it with other games, and make a simple, unequivocal statement on the QUALITY of the title.[/QUOTE]


the problem is the majority of individuals don't read the review and base their entire judgment on just the number at the end. I know I've done it in the past and I know that a majority in general do this. Of course not everybody does it. removing a score and making someone read the actual review is the only wat i can think of an individual basing an opinion on content rather than a simplififed number,

Reviews shouldn't have a buy it, rent it, skip it, attitude attached to them. Every person's view is different in what constitutes a game that is worth it to them. For example, Condemned for Xbox 360. I would put down $60 for this game just like I did at launch even after going through it about 4 times. To me it's worth buying and not only worth just buying it's worth the $60. But I also see posted a bunch of places and even comments from my friends that there is no way in hell worth $60 and not even worth buying, just renting. The game got an 8.7 on IGN. What does that even mean without any content attached to it? How can a simplified scoring system determine this? A review based on what the game should represent without a "score" or even maybe a verdict would be much better off.

Regarding the information elsewhere someone can get, they can get it from watching videos of gameplay online, so far gameplay videos have been a very good representation of gameplay mechanics for the most part. On top of that, word of mouth from people that have played a game. And even further, just simple previews of a game. I guess my main point is that anybody that takes a numerical value to heart and bases their entire decision on just that deserved to be shafted if the game isn't what they wanted it to be because they didn't read the review. HENCE "sucks for them" I know someone that bought the Darkness by just seeing it got a 9 something on IGN. Didn't even read what the review said, never watched a single video of the game or anything. And now they wish they just should have rented it. Obviously a stupid a move, but that's just one example. That's why i think removing a numerical value or even a verdict would help people, since that's what reviews are supposed to do. It would force people to read and determine a purchase based on the content, again. It's there money though, so i guess more power to people that do that...
 
A great show guys, a real 180 from last weeks (sans Cheapy's big announcement).

It's disappointing to hear that the new Railfan is not so great. Granted I don't own a PS3 at the moment, but I too enjoy these fun little simulator type games that have disappeared over the last decade. I am waiting for the next Aerobiz (airline simulator) game myself... but I'm sure the Dept of Homeland Security would ban it from being sold here to stop terrorists or something.

I think another thing you guys talked about which was right on was the fact that, like the Forza Motorsport Nissan-sponsored cars, I will download anything that is labeled/branded/painted/etc with logos and crap if it means it's free... and I have no doubt that the other CAGs are in agreement here. (And unrelated to this rant, 50pts/car with no bundles was absolutely the way to go). But I think what annoys me is when I'm doing a terrorist hunt in the Calypso Casino on R6:Vegas, and there's a massive poster for the 300 DVD coming out (July 31st! On HD-DVD and Blu-Ray!).

Companies go on and on saying how the advertisements reduce the cost to the consumer... but then again... Rainbow 6 Vegas retailed at $59.99, so I'm not exactly sure what "discount" I got from these ads. It's even worse on next-gen games that are missing features/content/modes that the previous-gen systems have for the same game (I'm looking at you EA). You're paying a premium, for better graphics but worse gameplay/features, but you also get lambasted with these ads which are frequently updated via XBox Live (thanks, I really appreciate that "update").

Whatever, if game publishers want to tell me I'm receiving some benefit for ads, I want to see it, either in FREE downloadable content (sponsored by whoever) or a price cut in retail. Otherwise, it's not really a discount to anyone... just a bonus to the game producers.
 
[quote name='AshesofWake']the problem is the majority of individuals don't read the review and base their entire judgment on just the number at the end
.....
removing a score and making someone read the actual review is the only wat i can think of an individual basing an opinion on content rather than a simplififed number, [/QUOTE]
Why? If people don't like reading reviews, just like looking at the scores, what's wrong with that? It's their business.

Just because you have some idea of how people should go about spending their money doesn't mean scores should be removed because it's "the only wat" to get everyone to do things your perfect and right way.


And for the record, the last game I bought because of a review score was NEVER.
 
[quote name='PyroGamer']Why? If people don't like reading reviews, just like looking at the scores, what's wrong with that? It's their business.

.[/QUOTE]





if the whole point of the review is to benefit the gamer, then not relying on the score and reading the review will totally benefit a gamer, going off what you stated

[quote name='pyrogamer']]The WHOLE POINT of reviews is for THE READER'S BENEFIT. [/quote]
 
[quote name='PyroGamer']Why? If people don't like reading reviews, just like looking at the scores, what's wrong with that? It's their business.

Just because you have some idea of how people should go about spending their money doesn't mean scores should be removed because it's "the only wat" to get everyone to do things your perfect and right way.


And for the record, the last game I bought because of a review score was NEVER.[/quote]
I would agree with Pyro here on the issue of scores. It gives people a way to quickly skim through reviews, and if you are the kind of person that is interested in researching a game thoroughly before a purchase you will do that research despite the existance of a score or not. It simply provides a course for another type of reader.

For me, I thought scoreless reviews were superior, but then I found that I actually dont like reading reviews anyway. Usually I already have opinions of games based on previews and hype, and if a score breaks from my expectation I will read the review to find out why.

That being said, a 100 point scale is useless, go 10 or 2 or nothing.
 
Damn. I was hoping that Wombat's name was Saul, a true NYC Jew-name.

Guess it's probably Stewart, then.


I still don't understand why CheapyD bought that American Wii. All he does is poo-poo everything on it (probably rightly so). What a huge waste of money. Then again, he is a "kept man," whose rich wife can afford it. :D
 
[quote name='orko60']Damn. I was hoping that Wombat's name was Saul, a true NYC Jew-name.

Guess it's probably Stewart, then.


I still don't understand why CheapyD bought that American Wii. All he does is poo-poo everything on it (probably rightly so). What a huge waste of money. Then again, he is a "kept man," whose rich wife can afford it. :D[/QUOTE]

Nah, man, he's going to play Metroid 3 and LIKE it - especially since his 360 will probably die for good right around when Bioshock (and Metroid) comes out ;).
 
[quote name='io']Nah, man, he's going to play Metroid 3 and LIKE it - especially since his 360 will probably die for good right around when Bioshock (and Metroid) comes out ;).[/quote]

And Strikers Charged, so he can get schooled in the CAG tournament by Courageous, just like the rest of us. ;)
 
[quote name='kyogensho']I would agree with Pyro here on the issue of scores. It gives people a way to quickly skim through reviews, and if you are the kind of person that is interested in researching a game thoroughly before a purchase you will do that research despite the existance of a score or not. It simply provides a course for another type of reader.[/quote]Totally agree.

For me, I thought scoreless reviews were superior, but then I found that I actually dont like reading reviews anyway. Usually I already have opinions of games based on previews and hype, and if a score breaks from my expectation I will read the review to find out why.
Click to expand...
Double agreed. Same way with me. Really, scores should give an overview of the review itself.

That being said, a 100 point scale is useless, go 10 or 2 or nothing.
Click to expand...
Agree on absolutely EVERYTHING here.

You end up with scores like "9.6" and "9.7" and it makes absolutely no sense, and then there's confliction between scores and such.

I like GameInformers 20-point scale (0-10, and .5 in between), but I'd like even more a simple "5-star" system, with perhaps 10 points (0-5 and .5 in between).

It's easy to differentiate between a 2 star game and a 3 star game, but a 4.7 and a 4.9? Just gets riddiculous.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top