Space Giraffe (XBLA) - OUT NOW! *400 points*
- Thread starter Sporadic
- Start date
CappyCobra
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 1 (100%)
I Hope to 
ing lord that they replaced the cow moos and the sheep baahing in the final rev. If not, my neighbors are going to think I'm, sodomizing Ol' MacDonald's farm! Not to mention the moo is ing LOUD & quite annoying. Other than that, for 400 pts, I can't complain much.
ing lord that they replaced the cow moos and the sheep baahing in the final rev. If not, my neighbors are going to think I'm, sodomizing Ol' MacDonald's farm! Not to mention the moo is ing LOUD & quite annoying. Other than that, for 400 pts, I can't complain much.[quote name='CappyCobra']I Hope to ing lord that they replaced the cow moos and the sheep baahing in the final rev. If not, my neighbors are going to think I'm, sodomizing Ol' MacDonald's farm! Not to mention the moo is ing LOUD & quite annoying. Other than that, for 400 pts, I can't complain much.[/QUOTE]
Well that's the fun part.
ing lord that they replaced the cow moos and the sheep baahing in the final rev. If not, my neighbors are going to think I'm, sodomizing Ol' MacDonald's farm! Not to mention the moo is ing LOUD & quite annoying. Other than that, for 400 pts, I can't complain much.[/QUOTE]Well that's the fun part.
thrustbucket
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 7 (100%)
[quote name='porieux']Where are you guys getting to try this game early?[/QUOTE]
Most likely Xnet.
Most likely Xnet.
Space Giraffe's achievement list has been leaked.
"Boi Bumbá" = get the BM up to x9 in one bull run.
"Mine's A 99" = Max out lives and BM both at x9.
"Great Green Arkleseizure" = Get more than 20 sneeze bonuses leaving a level.
"Professor of Giraffeology" = Score over 10 million on the Tutorial level.
"I Adore My 64" = Complete level 64 without losing a life (during the level, not during the whole game!)
"Klepto-Giraffe" = Collect 20 powerups without missing one.
"Girafa Caprichoso" = End 5 consecutive levels with BM x9.
"Girafa Garantido" = Don't lose a life for 16 levels.
"Pod Preserver" = Complete 16 levels without using jump.
"ERROR_SUCCESS" = Finish level 100.
"Long-Necked Long March" = Finish level 100, having started on level 1.
"Ewige Blumenkraft" - Keep the very first flower to grow on a level alive until the end of the level.
[quote name='thrustbucket']Most likely Xnet.[/QUOTE]
I thought that was called ParnerNet?
"Boi Bumbá" = get the BM up to x9 in one bull run.
"Mine's A 99" = Max out lives and BM both at x9.
"Great Green Arkleseizure" = Get more than 20 sneeze bonuses leaving a level.
"Professor of Giraffeology" = Score over 10 million on the Tutorial level.
"I Adore My 64" = Complete level 64 without losing a life (during the level, not during the whole game!)
"Klepto-Giraffe" = Collect 20 powerups without missing one.
"Girafa Caprichoso" = End 5 consecutive levels with BM x9.
"Girafa Garantido" = Don't lose a life for 16 levels.
"Pod Preserver" = Complete 16 levels without using jump.
"ERROR_SUCCESS" = Finish level 100.
"Long-Necked Long March" = Finish level 100, having started on level 1.
"Ewige Blumenkraft" - Keep the very first flower to grow on a level alive until the end of the level.
[quote name='thrustbucket']Most likely Xnet.[/QUOTE]
I thought that was called ParnerNet?
at my work they have 360 Devkits and they release all of the XBLA games after they're announced for developers to try out and see whats new.
Space Giraffe sucks, I'll put it bluntly, it blows.
OXM just gave it a 2.0 to even add to my argument.
To further prove that it blows. Do yourself a favor and get Hexic 2 and save your points for SPF II HD, cause both of those are amazing.
Space Giraffe sucks, I'll put it bluntly, it blows.
OXM just gave it a 2.0 to even add to my argument.
To further prove that it blows. Do yourself a favor and get Hexic 2 and save your points for SPF II HD, cause both of those are amazing.
[quote name='Maynard']at my work they have 360 Devkits and they release all of the XBLA games after they're announced for developers to try out and see whats new.
Space Giraffe sucks, I'll put it bluntly, it blows.
OXM just gave it a 2.0 to even add to my argument.
To further prove that it blows. Do yourself a favor and get Hexic 2 and save your points for SPF II HD, cause both of those are amazing.[/QUOTE]
So because you don't like it and OXM is being their typical retarded selves, I can no longer be hyped for it?
off
- edit I've played Hexic 2 and it blows. Therefore you shouldn't like it because I think the colors are drab and they screwed up the gameplay.
Space Giraffe sucks, I'll put it bluntly, it blows.
OXM just gave it a 2.0 to even add to my argument.
To further prove that it blows. Do yourself a favor and get Hexic 2 and save your points for SPF II HD, cause both of those are amazing.[/QUOTE]
So because you don't like it and OXM is being their typical retarded selves, I can no longer be hyped for it?
off- edit I've played Hexic 2 and it blows. Therefore you shouldn't like it because I think the colors are drab and they screwed up the gameplay.
RelentlessRolento
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 48 (100%)
I'm 100% with sparodic on this...
I think people need to realize this game isn't entirely for people who are very much into reality games vs abstract.
I think people need to realize this game isn't entirely for people who are very much into reality games vs abstract.
[quote name='Sporadic']So because you don't like it and OXM is being their typical retarded selves, I can no longer be hyped for it?
off
- edit I've played Hexic 2 and it blows. Therefore you shouldn't like it because I think the colors are drab and they screwed up the gameplay.[/quote]
I agree that Hexic 2 colors are definately drab and I do hate that part about it, but it is still a great game if you enjoyed the first. I am not too sure why your wet salty, sandy vag is so hot for this game, but I am just telling you that I played it and it sucks ass. Soon a lot of people will agree with me after they play it. Trust me.
off- edit I've played Hexic 2 and it blows. Therefore you shouldn't like it because I think the colors are drab and they screwed up the gameplay.[/quote]
I agree that Hexic 2 colors are definately drab and I do hate that part about it, but it is still a great game if you enjoyed the first. I am not too sure why your wet salty, sandy vag is so hot for this game, but I am just telling you that I played it and it sucks ass. Soon a lot of people will agree with me after they play it. Trust me.
[quote name='Maynard']I am not too sure why your wet salty, sandy vag is so hot for this game, but I am just telling you that I played it and it sucks ass. Soon a lot of people will agree with me after they play it. Trust me.[/QUOTE]
I don't know why you are so hellbent to rain on my parade.
I've seen the first ten minutes of it in video form, I dig Tempest 2000 and from what I have seen so far, this is my type of game. I honestly don't give a damn what you or OXM or anybody else think about it.
Don't like the game? Cool, I had no problem with your original post until you had to be a dick about it a second time. Let people make up their own minds, don't just jump on OXM's bandwagon.
I don't know why you are so hellbent to rain on my parade.
I've seen the first ten minutes of it in video form, I dig Tempest 2000 and from what I have seen so far, this is my type of game. I honestly don't give a damn what you or OXM or anybody else think about it.
Don't like the game? Cool, I had no problem with your original post until you had to be a dick about it a second time. Let people make up their own minds, don't just jump on OXM's bandwagon.
A
Apossum
Guest
this doesn't seem like the kind of game I'd want to know a reviewer's opinion about...
just saying it's unique, people should try the demo. there are a lot of games that would sound bad on paper but are actually quite fun. then there are games that kick ass, but people just don't get...
just saying it's unique, people should try the demo. there are a lot of games that would sound bad on paper but are actually quite fun. then there are games that kick ass, but people just don't get...
[quote name='tenzor']I think I read somewhere that the latest issue of OXM magazine gave this game a 2.0 out of 10. Kind of wondering now about the game, but I'll wait for more reviews and won't just judge based on one review.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, I finally found out at another forum what their beef was
[quote name='Doctor Zero']
In the new OXM, they give Space Giraffe a 2.0. They get frustrated because "You'll frequently die because you couldn't pick out the pulsating assassin from the warped playfield floating over the throbbing LSD nightmare that is the background, which makes this game uniquely aggravating."
And that seems to be their only complaint other than "sophomoric sound effects."
Seems a little harsh.
[/quote]
Oh and Jeff himself posted a little something to explain "sneezing and flowers" to somebody.
[quote name='stinky ox']
Enemy shot juggling.
All enemy shots can be shot in turn by the player's shots. Shooting an enemy shot pushes it away from the player, towards the far edge of the surface. It is possible (and desirable) to shoot enemy shots away so that they actually leave the surface entirely and float out into the space beyond the surface.
When a level ends all enemy shots still active become harmless to the player, and as the player passes each one it explodes with a "sneeze" sound effect and a bonus is awarded to the player. The bonus awarded depends on how long that enemy shot has been "alive".
Enemy shots pushed off the surface and out into free space will, over time, turn around and drift back towards the surface, eventually re-entering the surface from the far edge, sometimes at considerably more speed than they were originally fired. The player should keep an eye out for such returning shots (their re-entry to the surface is signalled by a 'dog bark' audio cue). These can be avoided or, better still, shot away again. The more times a shot is "juggled" in this way, the more points will be awarded when the level ends and the remaining active shots are converted into sneeze bonuses.
Flowers.
These are born at the far edge of the surface and grow up towards the player. Usually the player can shoot them with successive shots pushing the growth back away from the player. Flowers will grow to a specific height, wait for a certain amount of time, and then the head of the flower will come off, flying up towards the player, eventually passing "above" the player and off into space before disappearing.
Detached flower heads cannot be shot and are a collision hazard to the player. Detached flower heads cannot be bulled.
Shooting down flowers adds to the Power Zone. It is a handy technique to "cultivate" a Flower, shooting it occasionally to keep it from growing to full height and firing off its head. The player can keep shooting it for a bit of extra Power Zone as necessary.
Depending on the level rules, the amount that a flower recedes when shot may vary (on some levels it can be zero).
Depending on the level rules, the height to which a flower can grow may vary. The maximum height may be *above* the near edge, in which case the flower stalk is a deadly obstruction hazard to the player. The stalk cannot be bulled through; any contact is fatal to the player. The player may use Jump Pods to jump above the flower and shoot it back down below the near edge in such a case, or may simply wait for the flower to "mature". the stalk hazard disappears once the flower head comes off.
Once a flower has grown to maximum height, the stalk turns from green to white. By observing this the player can see when the head will come off - when the stalk is fully white.
Flowers may be removed by shooting them right down to the far edge of the surface. Shooting arriving flowers early before they have a chance to grow yields a 1000 point bonus.
Some flowers on levels 81 and above have an extra attack when shot.
[/quote]
Yeah, I finally found out at another forum what their beef was
[quote name='Doctor Zero']
In the new OXM, they give Space Giraffe a 2.0. They get frustrated because "You'll frequently die because you couldn't pick out the pulsating assassin from the warped playfield floating over the throbbing LSD nightmare that is the background, which makes this game uniquely aggravating."
And that seems to be their only complaint other than "sophomoric sound effects."
Seems a little harsh.
[/quote]
Oh and Jeff himself posted a little something to explain "sneezing and flowers" to somebody.
[quote name='stinky ox']
Enemy shot juggling.
All enemy shots can be shot in turn by the player's shots. Shooting an enemy shot pushes it away from the player, towards the far edge of the surface. It is possible (and desirable) to shoot enemy shots away so that they actually leave the surface entirely and float out into the space beyond the surface.
When a level ends all enemy shots still active become harmless to the player, and as the player passes each one it explodes with a "sneeze" sound effect and a bonus is awarded to the player. The bonus awarded depends on how long that enemy shot has been "alive".
Enemy shots pushed off the surface and out into free space will, over time, turn around and drift back towards the surface, eventually re-entering the surface from the far edge, sometimes at considerably more speed than they were originally fired. The player should keep an eye out for such returning shots (their re-entry to the surface is signalled by a 'dog bark' audio cue). These can be avoided or, better still, shot away again. The more times a shot is "juggled" in this way, the more points will be awarded when the level ends and the remaining active shots are converted into sneeze bonuses.
Flowers.
These are born at the far edge of the surface and grow up towards the player. Usually the player can shoot them with successive shots pushing the growth back away from the player. Flowers will grow to a specific height, wait for a certain amount of time, and then the head of the flower will come off, flying up towards the player, eventually passing "above" the player and off into space before disappearing.
Detached flower heads cannot be shot and are a collision hazard to the player. Detached flower heads cannot be bulled.
Shooting down flowers adds to the Power Zone. It is a handy technique to "cultivate" a Flower, shooting it occasionally to keep it from growing to full height and firing off its head. The player can keep shooting it for a bit of extra Power Zone as necessary.
Depending on the level rules, the amount that a flower recedes when shot may vary (on some levels it can be zero).
Depending on the level rules, the height to which a flower can grow may vary. The maximum height may be *above* the near edge, in which case the flower stalk is a deadly obstruction hazard to the player. The stalk cannot be bulled through; any contact is fatal to the player. The player may use Jump Pods to jump above the flower and shoot it back down below the near edge in such a case, or may simply wait for the flower to "mature". the stalk hazard disappears once the flower head comes off.
Once a flower has grown to maximum height, the stalk turns from green to white. By observing this the player can see when the head will come off - when the stalk is fully white.
Flowers may be removed by shooting them right down to the far edge of the surface. Shooting arriving flowers early before they have a chance to grow yields a 1000 point bonus.
Some flowers on levels 81 and above have an extra attack when shot.
[/quote]
thrustbucket
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 7 (100%)
I absolutely loved Tempest 2000. It was THE reason to own a Jaguar.
Maynard, are you saying that if all I want is to play tempest with a few twists, this game still sucks?
Maynard, are you saying that if all I want is to play tempest with a few twists, this game still sucks?
lordxixor101
CAGiversary!
The 2 out of 10 scares me, but I can't see not getting this either. Since hearing of the concept, I had this down as a purchase. As always, I will download the demo. If the demo is worth anything, I'll get the game.
That is, after I get my 360 back from Microsoft here.
That is, after I get my 360 back from Microsoft here.
Jeff commented about the OXM review over at SA
[quote name='stinky ox']
I would just like to say that that score by OXM is just about the most extraordinary example of egregiouswittery I have ever seen. It is so far off the mark that I'm almost inclined to believe it could be a deliberate attempt at sabotage, although I hope it is just profound incompetence.
I've watched a lot of people learning to play SG over the last few months, and pretty much nobody's had a bad thing to say about it. Provided you get past the first few minutes to orientate yourself to the style and how it works, you're fine. I can only guess whatevertard did that hatchet job at OXM never bothered to even do that.
Having se4n the reactions of a lot of players I know I'm not that far off the mark that Goldening Axe is three and a half times better than SG.
I was speaking to the editor of Edge the other day and they're really enjoying it over there. So just ignore this retard at OXM and play the damn game for yourselves.
's sake, there's some idiots around.
[/quote]
:bow:
[quote name='stinky ox']
I would just like to say that that score by OXM is just about the most extraordinary example of egregious
wittery I have ever seen. It is so far off the mark that I'm almost inclined to believe it could be a deliberate attempt at sabotage, although I hope it is just profound incompetence.I've watched a lot of people learning to play SG over the last few months, and pretty much nobody's had a bad thing to say about it. Provided you get past the first few minutes to orientate yourself to the style and how it works, you're fine. I can only guess whatever
tard did that hatchet job at OXM never bothered to even do that.Having se4n the reactions of a lot of players I know I'm not that far off the mark that Golden
ing Axe is three and a half times better than SG.I was speaking to the editor of Edge the other day and they're really enjoying it over there. So just ignore this retard at OXM and play the damn game for yourselves.
's sake, there's some idiots around.[/quote]
:bow:
uglyteradon
CAGiversary!
Hopefully it will hit in the next few weeks, 400 points would be a great price.
RelentlessRolento
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 48 (100%)
way to go Jeff... I'm slowly liking him more and more each day I know and see him more.
Noodle Pirate!
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 74 (99%)
haha
I played the demo of golden axe since it use to be one of my favorite games back in the day. It did NOT age well. I can't imagine sg getting a lower score then Golden Axe.
I'm guessing the reviewer sucks at tempest, hates techno music, has epilepsy, or is still pissed he got handed SG instead of Bioshock to play through/review.
I played the demo of golden axe since it use to be one of my favorite games back in the day. It did NOT age well. I can't imagine sg getting a lower score then Golden Axe.
I'm guessing the reviewer sucks at tempest, hates techno music, has epilepsy, or is still pissed he got handed SG instead of Bioshock to play through/review.
RelentlessRolento
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 48 (100%)
[quote name='porieux']The problem is that the magazine editorss think that clueless kids want to read reviews written by clueless kids.
Even clueless kids deserve better than that...[/QUOTE]
it's like "Don't bite the hand that dosn't know how to feed."
Even clueless kids deserve better than that...[/QUOTE]
it's like "Don't bite the hand that dosn't know how to feed."
[quote name='zewone']This is the guy who made the game?
He pulled a David Jaffe.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, that was actually Jeff Minter (aka Stinky Ox) himself
He also posted a reply on the comment section of his blog.
http://stinkygoat.livejournal.com/109728.html
He's usually a very chill guy but I guess hearing the "bad" news right after going through certification hell, he just decided to vent.
He pulled a David Jaffe.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, that was actually Jeff Minter (aka Stinky Ox) himself
He also posted a reply on the comment section of his blog.
OXM obviously see fit to employ an incompetent,
That score is either abject incompetence or deliberate vendetta (although I can't see any reason for the latter except random cuntery). It certainly makes no sense in respect of what the game actually is.
The fact is a load of people from various positions in the games boz have seen and played SG prior to launch and not one of them has come even close to such a negative appraisal of the game. It's been pretty much all good. This OXM crap is a glaring anomaly. Someone's either a complete
http://stinkygoat.livejournal.com/109728.html
He's usually a very chill guy but I guess hearing the "bad" news right after going through certification hell, he just decided to vent.
Detective Stinky Ox solves the mystery of the shitty OXM reviewer.
Hilarious.
[quote name='stinky ox']
Basically we solved the mystery of the OXM reviewer - he is just a spectacularly crap gamer. I'll copy some of the stuff from my own forum here:
OK, I found him on the Partnernet leaderboards. Come to think of it I remember having seen his entries before because they were a bit unusual.
He's on as "OXM Dan" and he has NO achievements at all for Space Giraffe. It's really pretty hard to play SG for any length of time and get no achievements whatsoever; there are a few that are given out fairly easily by way of encouragement. Genius-boy here has managed to get none at all.
His score in interesting because it shows that he got 6.7 million at a maximum level of 31. To have such a small score for level 31 is pretty extraordinary. It basically means that the player must have just been scraping through one level at a time, just barely pushing the start level and accompanying start bonus over the threshold each time, and stubbornly refusing to actually play on earlier levels and actually, y'know, learn something. It's a truly horrible way to play, a combination of idiocy and brute force that is spectacularly unrewarding.
A good player should be scoring 40 or 50 million by level 30. I'm looking at the leaderboard now, Jimaroid's level 30 score is 57 mill. "JoeQA" obviously playing the game correctly got 51 mill by level 31. I have a level *17* score that is 64 million (and that's the very point of SG; learning how to score efficiently is part of the skill and the pleasure of it).
In short, the leaderboards show that OXM Dan was playing the game in about the most shit way possible, and being absolutely crap at it. The leaderboards also show a lot of other people playing the game rather well, so we know it's not the game at fault here.
Basically he was just rubbish.
He's forced himself up into higher levels of the game where he plainly hasn't had the skills to be. A sensible player would be playing through earlier levels, learning and settling in and beginning to carry a decent restart position and accompanying bonus through the game. He's just blindly blundered his way up to levels where he doesn't belong, learning-all in the process, and his score is therefore shit.
It's really odd, like he's approached the game as if it were a bush of thorns to be flailed through rather than a playground in which to acquire skills and have fun. Getting to higher levels by brute force is pretty empty if you don't have the ability to get a decent score there or the skills to enjoy it. Goat forbid you should play a few games from the start and actually learn some skillz :/.
Just to test I had a quick little go starting at level 1. It took about 8 minutes to get to the end of level 5 where I had just over 7 million points.
So as you can see 6.7 million and level 31 stood out as a pretty unusual kind of score to see on the LB. I'd noticed it before and thought it odd.
[/quote]
Check and mate
Hilarious.
[quote name='stinky ox']
Basically we solved the mystery of the OXM reviewer - he is just a spectacularly crap gamer. I'll copy some of the stuff from my own forum here:
OK, I found him on the Partnernet leaderboards. Come to think of it I remember having seen his entries before because they were a bit unusual.
He's on as "OXM Dan" and he has NO achievements at all for Space Giraffe. It's really pretty hard to play SG for any length of time and get no achievements whatsoever; there are a few that are given out fairly easily by way of encouragement. Genius-boy here has managed to get none at all.
His score in interesting because it shows that he got 6.7 million at a maximum level of 31. To have such a small score for level 31 is pretty extraordinary. It basically means that the player must have just been scraping through one level at a time, just barely pushing the start level and accompanying start bonus over the threshold each time, and stubbornly refusing to actually play on earlier levels and actually, y'know, learn something. It's a truly horrible way to play, a combination of idiocy and brute force that is spectacularly unrewarding.
A good player should be scoring 40 or 50 million by level 30. I'm looking at the leaderboard now, Jimaroid's level 30 score is 57 mill. "JoeQA" obviously playing the game correctly got 51 mill by level 31. I have a level *17* score that is 64 million (and that's the very point of SG; learning how to score efficiently is part of the skill and the pleasure of it).
In short, the leaderboards show that OXM Dan was playing the game in about the most shit way possible, and being absolutely crap at it. The leaderboards also show a lot of other people playing the game rather well, so we know it's not the game at fault here.
Basically he was just rubbish.
He's forced himself up into higher levels of the game where he plainly hasn't had the skills to be. A sensible player would be playing through earlier levels, learning and settling in and beginning to carry a decent restart position and accompanying bonus through the game. He's just blindly blundered his way up to levels where he doesn't belong, learning
-all in the process, and his score is therefore shit. It's really odd, like he's approached the game as if it were a bush of thorns to be flailed through rather than a playground in which to acquire skills and have fun. Getting to higher levels by brute force is pretty empty if you don't have the ability to get a decent score there or the skills to enjoy it. Goat forbid you should play a few games from the start and actually learn some skillz :/.
Just to test I had a quick little go starting at level 1. It took about 8 minutes to get to the end of level 5 where I had just over 7 million points.
So as you can see 6.7 million and level 31 stood out as a pretty unusual kind of score to see on the LB. I'd noticed it before and thought it odd.
[/quote]
Check and mate 
PyroGamer
Banned
lol @ Jaffe syndrome
Though I have to say, if the reviewer's only complaint was "it's too easy to die", and from the reviewer's scores, he obviously sucks balls at the game... then yes, I fully approve of bashing the reviewer.
Plus, he's from OXM, so yeah, I fully approve bashing him as hard as possible.
EDIT: I have to wonder what the point of reviews for XBLA games is when you can download theing demo and see the game for yourself.
I mean, if the magazine needs to print a remedial review for a demo that isn't representative of the game... well then, you know... maybe.
Though I have to say, if the reviewer's only complaint was "it's too easy to die", and from the reviewer's scores, he obviously sucks balls at the game... then yes, I fully approve of bashing the reviewer.
Plus, he's from OXM, so yeah, I fully approve bashing him as hard as possible.
EDIT: I have to wonder what the point of reviews for XBLA games is when you can download the
ing demo and see the game for yourself.I mean, if the magazine needs to print a remedial review for a demo that isn't representative of the game... well then, you know... maybe.
RelentlessRolento
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 48 (100%)
Jeff ripped Dan's balls.. awesome.
[quote name='RelentlessRolento']Jeff ripped Dan's balls.. awesome.[/QUOTE]
Insanely awesome.
And Jeff followed up on that too.
[quote name='stinky ox']FishBulb posted:
Seriously I mean, I understand you worked on the game by yourself or whatever, but you're being a bit over reactive to a negative review in a magazine, the game will speak for itself when it comes out.
-------------
Nah, reviewer indifference results in a mediocre score, I can deal with that, not everyone likes my particular style and I don't claim to be magically appealing to everyone on the planet.
However 2/10 is the guy basically saying that the game is incompetent. If you look at the scores of all games reviewed by OXM then a score of 2/10 means that effectively they are saying that SG is the *worst game ever made for the xbox 360*. And to my mind if you are going to make that kind of accusation you'd better be coming from Godly territory when you do.
We checked the guy's credentials and it's not the game that's incompetent, it's just this guy getting the arse about a game he's shit at. The game *will* speak for itself, and it'll make that guy look like the enormous shitcock that he evidently is when real, actual, competent people begin to give their opinions about it.
We're just pointing it out ahead of time.
[/quote]
Insanely awesome.
And Jeff followed up on that too.
[quote name='stinky ox']FishBulb posted:
Seriously I mean, I understand you worked on the game by yourself or whatever, but you're being a bit over reactive to a negative review in a magazine, the game will speak for itself when it comes out.
-------------
Nah, reviewer indifference results in a mediocre score, I can deal with that, not everyone likes my particular style and I don't claim to be magically appealing to everyone on the planet.
However 2/10 is the guy basically saying that the game is incompetent. If you look at the scores of all games reviewed by OXM then a score of 2/10 means that effectively they are saying that SG is the *worst game ever made for the xbox 360*. And to my mind if you are going to make that kind of accusation you'd better be coming from Godly territory when you do.
We checked the guy's credentials and it's not the game that's incompetent, it's just this guy getting the arse about a game he's shit at. The game *will* speak for itself, and it'll make that guy look like the enormous shitcock that he evidently is when real, actual, competent people begin to give their opinions about it.
We're just pointing it out ahead of time.
[/quote]
Noodle Pirate!
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 74 (99%)
It's really too bad that the negative review will make some people skip the game entirely after seeing such a low score. Why bother to DL the demo when a game mag rated it as the worst 360 game ever?
If oxm want to appear competent, they should get another person to re-review the game in the next issue. Low score is one thing, but a low score from someone who sucked at the game is another. I think Jeff has reasonable grounds to be pissed.
If oxm want to appear competent, they should get another person to re-review the game in the next issue. Low score is one thing, but a low score from someone who sucked at the game is another. I think Jeff has reasonable grounds to be pissed.
thrustbucket
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 7 (100%)
I think enough video has been released of this game that everyone should already know what to expect from it. Seriously, whoever downloads the trial and says "I was so excited for this game, but it wasn't what I thought it would be" we should all lynch them and kill their sister.
[quote name='Noodle Pirate!']It's really too bad that the negative review will make some people skip the game entirely after seeing such a low score. Why bother to DL the demo when a game mag rated it as the worst 360 game ever?
If oxm want to appear competent, they should get another person to re-review the game in the next issue. Low score is one thing, but a low score from someone who sucked at the game is another. I think Jeff has reasonable grounds to be pissed.[/quote]
Is anyone else shocked that a reviewer of this level in an officially sanctioned magazine can get away with writing such a pathetic review when its blatantly obvious he didn't have aing clue how to play it (0 achievements, one of the lowest scores on the parternet leaderboard....etc....)
He should be fired, and write an apology in the editorial.
If oxm want to appear competent, they should get another person to re-review the game in the next issue. Low score is one thing, but a low score from someone who sucked at the game is another. I think Jeff has reasonable grounds to be pissed.[/quote]
Is anyone else shocked that a reviewer of this level in an officially sanctioned magazine can get away with writing such a pathetic review when its blatantly obvious he didn't have a
ing clue how to play it (0 achievements, one of the lowest scores on the parternet leaderboard....etc....)He should be fired, and write an apology in the editorial.
[quote name='axel000']Is anyone else shocked that a reviewer of this level in an officially sanctioned magazine can get away with writing such a pathetic review when its blatantly obvious he didn't have a ing clue how to play it (0 achievements, one of the lowest scores on the parternet leaderboard....etc....)
He should be fired, and write an apology in the editorial.[/QUOTE]
Not really.
Reviewers do hacket jobs like this all the time to little games.
Hell I remember when EGM gave Deathrow a 4.5 because "
it's rugby with cursing "
ing clue how to play it (0 achievements, one of the lowest scores on the parternet leaderboard....etc....)He should be fired, and write an apology in the editorial.[/QUOTE]
Not really.
Reviewers do hacket jobs like this all the time to little games.
Hell I remember when EGM gave Deathrow a 4.5 because "
it's rugby with cursing "
Noodle Pirate!
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 74 (99%)
[quote name='Sporadic']Not really.
Reviewers do hacket jobs like this all the time to little games.
Hell I remember when EGM gave Deathrow a 4.5 because " it's rugby with cursing "[/quote]
Lol rugby with cursing.
"Pros" get paid to play it for an hour or two and write some filler "review" of a game when anyone could have written the same crap from watching a demo for 20 minutes.
I dont think any other industry allows that kind of "journalism".
I dont think any book reviewer or movie critic could get away with reading or watching the first 10 minutes of something, and then writing an unbiased review of it, and expect anyone to value thier opinion.
I would rather read an amateur review by someone who put some time into it and pointed out details then someone who played it for an hour and got the game for free.
Reviewers do hacket jobs like this all the time to little games.
Hell I remember when EGM gave Deathrow a 4.5 because "
it's rugby with cursing "[/quote]Lol rugby with cursing.
"Pros" get paid to play it for an hour or two and write some filler "review" of a game when anyone could have written the same crap from watching a demo for 20 minutes.
I dont think any other industry allows that kind of "journalism".
I dont think any book reviewer or movie critic could get away with reading or watching the first 10 minutes of something, and then writing an unbiased review of it, and expect anyone to value thier opinion.
I would rather read an amateur review by someone who put some time into it and pointed out details then someone who played it for an hour and got the game for free.
Here's another view from a well known UK journalist that helped test the game (foreword by Jeff M).....
http://www.yakyak.org/viewtopic.php?t=66821
is this thing on? - Yak
August 18, 2007 on 1:05 pm | In Uncategorized | No Comments hi, Yak here }. So in the days leading up to the launch of SG we’re going to be blogging here with various bits of information plus our own thoughts and whatever odds and sods cross our minds as we lead up to unleashing the beast. It’s been a long journey but one that we think is well worth it and we trust that on a Wednesday not far from now you’ll be agreeing with us.
One of the things I want to do is pass on some of the comments we’ve had about the game from other people who have played it already. We’ve shown it to people here and there and also it’s been played pretty exhaustively by our testers.
A word about our testers is needed, I think - since a lot of what they say about the game is very positive, you might think that they are just uncritical yesmen in the employ of Llamasoft and bound to toe the company line. In fact nothing could be farther from the truth. We chose testers who were *likely* to be critical. If there are problems with a game, be they program bugs or flaws in the actual game design, then you want testers who are not afraid to point such things out so that they can be fixed before release. Testers who only give good news would be pretty useless.
That’s why we chose people like Andy Lowe, whose comments you’ll see in this blog. He’s a professional journalist and critic and also an excellent gamer (he was the first person apart from me to actually complete Space Giraffe and when he did his score was actually better than mine (for a few days };-) )). If he were to tell us that things were wrong we’d have to listen very carefully to what he had to say.
ANyway you’ll hear more about the test team and more about the game from them as we go on. For now here’s an amusing little snapshot of the history of the test process, as captured in the thread titles of the postings in the Space Giraffe testers’ forum }.
. So in the days leading up to the launch of SG we’re going to be blogging here with various bits of information plus our own thoughts and whatever odds and sods cross our minds as we lead up to unleashing the beast. It’s been a long journey but one that we think is well worth it and we trust that on a Wednesday not far from now you’ll be agreeing with us.One of the things I want to do is pass on some of the comments we’ve had about the game from other people who have played it already. We’ve shown it to people here and there and also it’s been played pretty exhaustively by our testers.
A word about our testers is needed, I think - since a lot of what they say about the game is very positive, you might think that they are just uncritical yesmen in the employ of Llamasoft and bound to toe the company line. In fact nothing could be farther from the truth. We chose testers who were *likely* to be critical. If there are problems with a game, be they program bugs or flaws in the actual game design, then you want testers who are not afraid to point such things out so that they can be fixed before release. Testers who only give good news would be pretty useless.
That’s why we chose people like Andy Lowe, whose comments you’ll see in this blog. He’s a professional journalist and critic and also an excellent gamer (he was the first person apart from me to actually complete Space Giraffe and when he did his score was actually better than mine (for a few days };-) )). If he were to tell us that things were wrong we’d have to listen very carefully to what he had to say.
ANyway you’ll hear more about the test team and more about the game from them as we go on. For now here’s an amusing little snapshot of the history of the test process, as captured in the thread titles of the postings in the Space Giraffe testers’ forum }
.http://www.yakyak.org/viewtopic.php?t=66821
None of our testers were paid by Llamasoft; their participation was purely voluntary and their help was given just because they wanted to help us do a good job of finishing the game. We’re really grateful for that help.
In the meantime to wet your whistle here’s a quick review / preview from Edge and Total Film writer Andy Lowe:
Space Giraffe Launch Blog - Gaz
August 16, 2007 on 1:09 pm | In Uncategorized | No Comments Welcome to the Space Giraffe Launch Blog! We’re now very close to Llamasoft’s latest emission through the auspices of XBOX Live Arcade. So if you’ve an XBOX 360 and you’re all hooked up to that there internet you’re in a for a real treat for a mere 400 XBLA points! Over the next few days you can expect this blog to be chock full of all manner of Space Giraffe info.
There’s a 100 levels to play through, a rogues gallery of nasties bound to test your gaming skills and it’s here you’ll be able to find out what you need to succeed straight from the yak’s mouth, he’ll be along soon
There’s a 100 levels to play through, a rogues gallery of nasties bound to test your gaming skills and it’s here you’ll be able to find out what you need to succeed straight from the yak’s mouth, he’ll be along soon
In the meantime to wet your whistle here’s a quick review / preview from Edge and Total Film writer Andy Lowe:
I mean, me twice, it’s good.
me twice, it’s good.Really, really good.
I did enjoy the frolics with Gamecube VLM, but was always gagging for Jeff to take the environment and build a playable game around it.
And that’s exactly what he’s done. It’s as mentalist-psychedelic and pyrotechnic as you’d expect, but also beautifully refined in terms of difficulty balance/risk & reward.
The visual and technical audacity is breathtaking. It just feels beamed in from another planet. I’ve absolutely no idea where to start having an idea about how it’s done, but if it looks like magic and feels like magic…
It’s like a bench-test workout for yer high-def telly. After all those nice, placid, colourful games displayed very calmly and correctly, Space Giraffe is like a big fat can of spinach to a Plasma’s Popeye.
Think of Geometry Wars as a 9.99 Standard Family Box sensibly rationed in the back garden, with the Firework Code rigidly observed, watched through the windows just in case the kiddies get scared. Space Giraffe is like strapping on a jet-pack and soaring and swooping around the Sydney New Year display while ripped to the living tits on mescalin.
Knee-jerkers might twitch about it being ‘another Tempest’… And it sorta-kinda is. But more like Tempest 2000 Ultra-Deluxe with all the faintly annoying stuff taken out and some really, really ace progressive game mechanics weaved in.
Instead of just constantly trying to keep everything away from the edge of the web and always being rammed into a defensive, siege-mentality corner (my gripe with Tempest all along) you’re now rewarded for playing in a much more free, open, strategic and (best) aggressive way - harvesting points, boosting a bonus multiplyer, always always pushing the line between pure survival instinct and score maximisation.
In short, my idea of gaming heaven – pretty on the outside, wild at heart.
All the usual obsessions are there - but in a funny, light, lovable way. The character of text announcements is cute enough (”Top hole!”) but the sound design is laugh-out-loud astonishing: a spasming cacophony of bleats, yelps, barks, shrieks, Jarvis game steals, music and film samples…
And the pacing is perfect. Not just in terms of gameplay/difficulty curve; there’s a constant slideshow of spooky, mind-warping background images and textures and zapping, synapse-like white flares. It’sing cinematic - like a hallucinogenic, inner-space odyssey into the designers’ minds and pop-culture cues.
But the really great thing about Space Giraffe is that it feels like Jeff loosening up and getting back to all the things that made us love his stuff in the first place - an unadulterated love of old-school arcadey gaming filtered through his unique, idiosyncratic goggles.
I give it six-and-three-quarter stars. Out of five.
Red, shiny ones, with a sort ofed-up, glowing, pulsing, transcluscent, reptilian, mind-clearing quality about ‘em.
And that’s exactly what he’s done. It’s as mentalist-psychedelic and pyrotechnic as you’d expect, but also beautifully refined in terms of difficulty balance/risk & reward.
The visual and technical audacity is breathtaking. It just feels beamed in from another planet. I’ve absolutely no idea where to start having an idea about how it’s done, but if it looks like magic and feels like magic…
It’s like a bench-test workout for yer high-def telly. After all those nice, placid, colourful games displayed very calmly and correctly, Space Giraffe is like a big fat can of spinach to a Plasma’s Popeye.
Think of Geometry Wars as a 9.99 Standard Family Box sensibly rationed in the back garden, with the Firework Code rigidly observed, watched through the windows just in case the kiddies get scared. Space Giraffe is like strapping on a jet-pack and soaring and swooping around the Sydney New Year display while ripped to the living tits on mescalin.
Knee-jerkers might twitch about it being ‘another Tempest’… And it sorta-kinda is. But more like Tempest 2000 Ultra-Deluxe with all the faintly annoying stuff taken out and some really, really ace progressive game mechanics weaved in.
Instead of just constantly trying to keep everything away from the edge of the web and always being rammed into a defensive, siege-mentality corner (my gripe with Tempest all along) you’re now rewarded for playing in a much more free, open, strategic and (best) aggressive way - harvesting points, boosting a bonus multiplyer, always always pushing the line between pure survival instinct and score maximisation.
In short, my idea of gaming heaven – pretty on the outside, wild at heart.
All the usual obsessions are there - but in a funny, light, lovable way. The character of text announcements is cute enough (”Top hole!”) but the sound design is laugh-out-loud astonishing: a spasming cacophony of bleats, yelps, barks, shrieks, Jarvis game steals, music and film samples…
And the pacing is perfect. Not just in terms of gameplay/difficulty curve; there’s a constant slideshow of spooky, mind-warping background images and textures and zapping, synapse-like white flares. It’s
ing cinematic - like a hallucinogenic, inner-space odyssey into the designers’ minds and pop-culture cues.But the really great thing about Space Giraffe is that it feels like Jeff loosening up and getting back to all the things that made us love his stuff in the first place - an unadulterated love of old-school arcadey gaming filtered through his unique, idiosyncratic goggles.
I give it six-and-three-quarter stars. Out of five.
Red, shiny ones, with a sort of
ed-up, glowing, pulsing, transcluscent, reptilian, mind-clearing quality about ‘em.
Mr. Anderson
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 21 (100%)
Finally! Can't wait till Wednesday.
-Never4ever-
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 107 (100%)
After all this commotion, I can't wait to try the demo. Seems to me that SG is not a game for everyone, and that the OXM reviewer just got frustrated / board with it. Yes, a 2.0 was pretty harsh and unfair, but by the reviewers own words, the game should have gotten no better than a 5 or 6/10.
RelentlessRolento
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 48 (100%)
[quote name='PyroGamer']I have a feeling this might be my first XBLA purchase. Unless I pick up one of the other games I've been eyeing before Wednesday.[/QUOTE]
I'm just wondering why you have yet to get an XBLA game? I find those titles alot more enjoyable than most full release titles... then again, I'm basing this off my own opinion so that may be why...
and wow... great price for this game. I was still getting it even if it was 800.
I'm just wondering why you have yet to get an XBLA game? I find those titles alot more enjoyable than most full release titles... then again, I'm basing this off my own opinion so that may be why...
and wow... great price for this game. I was still getting it even if it was 800.
[quote name='RelentlessRolento']I'm just wondering why you have yet to get an XBLA game? I find those titles alot more enjoyable than most full release titles... then again, I'm basing this off my own opinion so that may be why...[/QUOTE]
I'm with you.
I haven't bought a new game since Earth Defense Force but I have 30 arcade games.
I'm with you.
I haven't bought a new game since Earth Defense Force but I have 30 arcade games.
HumanSnatcher
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 3 (100%)
I've only heard the name here and there on here, so I don't know much about it. I will give the demo a shot though. About the only "must have" arcade title for me on the horizon would be Streets of Rage 2 though...
bread's done