The Jeff Gerstman should not review action or retro games thread....
This topic is locked from further discussion.
5.0 "Mediocre" for ToeJam & Earl: Mission to Earth
Oct 22, 2002
http://www.gamespot.com/xbox/adventure/toejamearl3missiontoearth/review.html
Gerstmann's only gripe about the game was that he didn't think it was funny. The gameplay is still like the original game's, it's got all of the elements of the original, the additional gameplay elements, and boss fights. Even in concept TJ&E3 sounds much better than "mediocre" to me. Having owned it, I now know that the Gamespot reviewer just had some beef with TJ&E's style of humor. Seriously, in the whole review all he says against the game is that it wasn't funny, and he didn't like the music or the rapping. He even says that it plays like the original and lists all of the functions of the gameplay that would make it do so:
"The actual gameplay in ToeJam & Earl III is like a cross between the first two games in the series. Like in the original, you, either alone or with a friend, must move from level to level, exploring the maps from a third-person perspective and ending each level with a trip in a flying elevator. Like in the second game, you'll find earthlings and, with a blast of your "funk fu," bless them with the healing power of the funk. The game is broken up into worlds, each with a handful of different stages and each culminating in a boss fight or other task. However, the standard level gives you a checklist of things to accomplish. Some levels will force you to convert every earthling in the level. Others will have you unlocking "presents," which are the game's equivalent to power-ups. You'll discover presents that give you various movement items, like spring shoes, rocket skates, and so on. Other presents are weapons, such as the large funk fu blast or the funkify notes. Still others are simple pleasures, such as life-recovering food, a decoy to trick pesky earthlings, and the like.
Regardless of the tasks at hand, all you really need to do is run around, blasting humans with the funk via your funk fu attack or the specialized weapons granted by the presents. Along the way you'll pick up keys, microphones, and other items that can be used to unlock later levels. In cooperative mode, the two players can split off from one another, which automatically changes the game's viewpoint to a split screen, which remerges when the two players enter the same area--a nice feature that unfortunately doesn't help the gameplay much. "
and then:
"The game's music, which is unlocked as you collect more of the missing records, is mostly drum machine and synthesized slap bass. It may be on par with early Genesis games, but you'd probably expect to hear something that sounds a little more current. "
and his conclusion:
"Big fans of the original ToeJam & Earl game will probably have very mixed feelings about the game. On one hand, the gameplay is roughly the same as that of the original game, full of wacky presents with varied effects. On the other, the poor voices and music really date the game and make it feel incredibly stale. The simple mechanics certainly don't help hide the game's other flaws, either, and ultimately the original ToeJam & Earl still remains a better game overall. So anyone looking for a ToeJam & Earl fix would be better off digging up a copy of the original. And anyone who has no idea what the previous games in the series are even about should look elsewhere for entertainment, at this point."
These are the only useful paragraphs in his entire review and even they are dripping with his bias against the game. Everything else is just **** and moaning about the game not being as "hip" as he'd have liked it to be.
Toe Jam & Earl is an amazing game! It's one of the few that I played for ages without end, never caring that I was replaying sections to get to the next. I still cringe when I think of the Gamespot review of TJ&E 3 on Xbox, and its subsequent rejection, it's every bit as good as the original. The only real problem is that it doesn't try to be anything but what it is. If it'd tried to look like Jak & Daxter, or whatnot, no comparisons to "hip hop" culture would have been made, it just would have been pronounced "good".
If you like Toe Jam & Earl 1, it's a very good continuation of that concept. If you're looking for anything else, I seriously doubt you'll find it.
7.2 "good" for Sonic Mega Collection
Nov 18, 2002
http://www.gamespot.com/gamecube/action/sonicmegacollection/review.html?sid=2897902
"It's true that the inclusion of even more Sonic games would have added a lot, but there's still a ton of gameplay to be found in Sonic Mega Collection."
"It seems the retro game compilation trend is trucking right along--plenty of companies are taking the time to mine their back catalogs for their previous hits and are bringing them to modern systems. While some companies take the bare-bones approach to compilation design, the better packages toss in a handful of extras along with the games, such as old commercials, manual scans, video documentaries, and more. Sonic Mega Collection has a few of these sorts of extras, but more importantly, it combines most of the core 16-bit games from Sega's long-running and popular Sonic the Hedgehog series of fast-paced platformers onto one disc."
"When you first open up the games menu in Sonic Mega Collection, you'll find the basics right there in front of you. Right off the bat, you can play Sonic the Hedgehog, Sonic the Hedgehog 2, Sonic the Hedgehog 3, Sonic & Knuckles, Sonic 3D Blast, Sonic Spinball, and the Puyo Puyo-style puzzle game with a Sonic makeover, Dr. Robotnik's Mean Bean Machine. Five unlockable games are also available after you play the initially available games a specific number of times. While some of them--the lock-on version of Sonic 3, for example--fit in nicely with the rest of the Sonic games, there's also some non-Sonic-related filler here, namely Flicky and Ristar. Not that there's anything wrong with Flicky or Ristar, but considering this is supposed to be a collection of Sonic games--and it's missing at least one key game in the Sonic series--the inclusion of these seems a little cheap."
"All the games play just fine with the GameCube controller, even if you're using the analog stick instead of the more accurate D pad. The game defaults to using the B, A, and X buttons as the Genesis' A, B, and C buttons, respectively. You can choose from a few different control options, but the default works just fine."
"The graphics and performance of the games in the collection match their Genesis counterparts perfectly. "
"While it's great that all the basic Sonic games have been included here, there's still quite a bit missing. It would have been nice to see this collection expand beyond the Genesis into some of Sonic's more obscure adventures. Sonic CD, in particular, is a noticeable exclusion, as it's arguably the best Sonic game ever produced. Sonic R, Sonic the Fighters, and the three-player arcade-only Sonic game are also missing and would have been welcome."
Okay, so even though the gameplay and graphics are perfect to the originals, according to Gerstmann, the compilation is a 7.2 for not having more Sonic games on it. How all of the original Sonic games on one disk can collectively average out to a 7.2 when the originals themselves individually scored perfect or near perfect scores is not addressed by the reviewer. When Sega delivered the games Gerstmann wanted, in Sonic Gems Collection, Ryan Davis of Gamespot gave it a 6.3.
This is where I would like to start hopping around a bit to demonstrate Gerstmann's inconsistency with sequels and compilations. First I would like to point out that whenever anything relating to Mario is the subject of the review, it will automatically score at least an 8.0, as seen in Super Mario Sunshine:
"great" with "camera problems" and all.
Aug 26, 2002
http://www.gamespot.com/gamecube/action/supermariosunshine/review.html?sid=2878399
8.3 "great" for Super Mario Bros on Wii
Jan 2, 2007
http://www.gamespot.com/wii/action/smb/review.html?sid=6163683&tag=reviews;title;0
" Super Mario Bros. is still totally sweet, even after more than 20 years.
The Good: Minus world is totally intact; terrific control over mario, just like in the original.
The Bad: Could have used voice acting (kidding!); kind of easy to finish once you get used to the controls again."
Unfortunately for Sonic the Hedgehog this same principle doesn't apply.
8.9 "great" for Twilight Princess
Dec 14, 2006
http://www.gamespot.com/gamecube/action/thelegendofzelda/review.html?sid=6163226
"Twilight Princess contains the same expertly designed puzzles and time-tested gameplay that you've come to expect from the series, though parts of its presentation feel stuck in the past.
The Good: Compelling characters and story; outstanding world and puzzle design; longer than most action adventure games; terrific graphics, from an artistic perspective.
The Bad: Graphics and sound sometimes go from nostalgic to dated."
"When game consoles transitioned from offering primarily 2D games to polygonal 3D games about 10 years ago, all of the tricks and gameplay ideas that developers had been relying on for years flew right out the window. During this time, Nintendo quickly found its footing and released masterful takes on its old franchises that retained the fun and feeling of the older games while properly updating them in exciting and impressive new ways. 1998's The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time was a prime example of this. It featured a more realistic take on the series' fantasy world than ever before, while implementing innovative new controls and offering a good sense of freedom without making the player feel lost. It's one of the greatest games of all time, so it's hard to fault Nintendo for revisiting that same formula. And that's precisely what the latest game in the series, Twilight Princess, does."
"But once you get over the rush of excitement from a big, new Zelda game having finally arrived, it's hard not to feel a tinge of disappointment--there's a very noticeable lack of evolution here, which makes aspects of the game seem more dated than classic. Even so, there isn't much out there that compares to Twilight Princess, except for the Zelda games that have come before it."
"Objectively speaking, it's still a little disappointing that the series hasn't evolved much at all with this latest installment. You'll almost certainly enjoy the game for its terrific puzzles, colorful characters, and compelling story, but at some point the feeling of nostalgia crosses the line and holds this game back from being as unbelievably good as some of its predecessors. So as impressive of a game as it is, Twilight Princess seems like it could have been so much more if Nintendo had broken from the formula a little bit more. But even without that, Twilight Princess is a great game that stays extremely true to the Zelda franchise's past. That's excellent news for fans of the series, who'll find in Twilight Princess a true-blue Zelda game with updated visuals, some new twists, plenty of challenging puzzles, and a faithful dedication to the series' roots.
Editor's note 12/15/06: The original version of this review overlooked an alternate method for performing the spin attack. GameSpot regrets the error."
So, sometimes a game being identical to an older successful title is a good thing, and other times it is derivative, and Gerstmann's opinion of the game is the only difference.
I would think they don't want to take that kind of risk - they obviously care more about publicity than whether it's good or bad, but yeah, slandering a title like Gerstman's been known to do could, in theory, actually be something that could be used for building a lawsuit. Eventually Gerstman's incompetence will get him fired, but only when Gamespot gets an admin changeover.Apathetic_Prickand that's not likly to happen soon.
[QUOTE="Apathetic_Prick"]I would think they don't want to take that kind of risk - they obviously care more about publicity than whether it's good or bad, but yeah, slandering a title like Gerstman's been known to do could, in theory, actually be something that could be used for building a lawsuit. Eventually Gerstman's incompetence will get him fired, but only when Gamespot gets an admin changeover.waflerevolutionand that's not likly to happen soon.
No, because a a form of news media gets ruined if it develops a sense of integrity. Or shoved underground.
Another really good reviewer to read is DailyRadar's Dan Eggar. Check his stuff out on archive.org sometime if you're bored.
I liked the editors note thing. if only his editors checked all his facts...waflerevolution
Well, you have to keep up appearances, as they say. heaven forbid they correct his articles and demonstrate that while he has no competence, the site has plenty of integrity from the editorial end. But no, that would be too easy :P
could you elaborate?Apathetic_PrickI could but I'm not in a complaining nor writing mood...
[QUOTE="Apathetic_Prick"]could you elaborate?waflerevolutionI could but I'm not in a complaining nor writing mood...
Pfft, than what frickin' good are ya? :P
I found this one to be unfair, inacurate and somewhat untrue.waflerevolution
I find it funny that the only typo in the review is a mis-spelling of the word intelligence, 'artificial intellgence'.
I am yet to play my copy of Spy Vs. Spy. I liked the Commodore 64 version despite the technical problems.
[QUOTE="waflerevolution"]I found this one to be unfair, inacurate and somewhat untrue.aspro73
I find it funny that the only typo in the review is a mis-spelling of the word intelligence, 'artificial intellgence'.
I am yet to play my copy of Spy Vs. Spy. I liked the Commodore 64 version despite the technical problems.
I liked the NES one. Jeff compares the "classic mode" to the origional and even though it's a VERY faithful translation of the game to 3D, he bashes it with a paragraph of nastalgia driven insults.
*sigh* I still don't feel like complaining or typing...
[QUOTE="aspro73"][QUOTE="waflerevolution"]I found this one to be unfair, inacurate and somewhat untrue.waflerevolution
I find it funny that the only typo in the review is a mis-spelling of the word intelligence, 'artificial intellgence'.
I am yet to play my copy of Spy Vs. Spy. I liked the Commodore 64 version despite the technical problems.
I liked the NES one. Jeff compares the "classic mode" to the original and even though it's a VERY faithful translation of the game to 3D, he bashes it with a paragraph of nostalgia driven insults.
*sigh* I still don't feel like complaining or typing...
I just read that review, and as a professional game reviewer standpoint (used to work as one) that review is utter crud. I would have rejected that one. Why it's not even really a review! It's all opinion based and it explains hardly anything about the game. What if you didn't play the original games? I haven't actually so imagine me, as others too, who are completely clueless as to what this game is about and how it plays. He never explained how the gameplay is, what you do, etc. Why did it get the score it did? Heck if I know, I'd be best to play the game either way, cause this review doesn't explain a thing.
I'm sorry for ranting, and Jeff is a good guy and all, but that's a cruddy review.
[QUOTE="waflerevolution"][QUOTE="aspro73"][QUOTE="waflerevolution"]I found this one to be unfair, inacurate and somewhat untrue.GAMECAMILLER
I find it funny that the only typo in the review is a mis-spelling of the word intelligence, 'artificial intellgence'.
I am yet to play my copy of Spy Vs. Spy. I liked the Commodore 64 version despite the technical problems.
I liked the NES one. Jeff compares the "classic mode" to the original and even though it's a VERY faithful translation of the game to 3D, he bashes it with a paragraph of nostalgia driven insults.
*sigh* I still don't feel like complaining or typing...
I just read that review, and as a professional game reviewer standpoint (used to work as one) that review is utter crud. I would have rejected that one. Why it's not even really a review! It's all opinion based and it explains hardly anything about the game. What if you didn't play the original games? I haven't actually so imagine me, as others too, who are completely clueless as to what this game is about and how it plays. He never explained how the gameplay is, what you do, etc. Why did it get the score it did? Heck if I know, I'd be best to play the game either way, cause this review doesn't explain a thing.
I'm sorry for ranting, and Jeff is a good guy and all, but that's a cruddy review.
see, there is my point. and Corey, he's not really a good guy. he's petty and has a god complex.
[QUOTE="GAMECAMILLER"][QUOTE="waflerevolution"][QUOTE="aspro73"][QUOTE="waflerevolution"]I found this one to be unfair, inacurate and somewhat untrue.waflerevolution
I find it funny that the only typo in the review is a mis-spelling of the word intelligence, 'artificial intellgence'.
I am yet to play my copy of Spy Vs. Spy. I liked the Commodore 64 version despite the technical problems.
I liked the NES one. Jeff compares the "classic mode" to the original and even though it's a VERY faithful translation of the game to 3D, he bashes it with a paragraph of nostalgia driven insults.
*sigh* I still don't feel like complaining or typing...
I just read that review, and as a professional game reviewer standpoint (used to work as one) that review is utter crud. I would have rejected that one. Why it's not even really a review! It's all opinion based and it explains hardly anything about the game. What if you didn't play the original games? I haven't actually so imagine me, as others too, who are completely clueless as to what this game is about and how it plays. He never explained how the gameplay is, what you do, etc. Why did it get the score it did? Heck if I know, I'd be best to play the game either way, cause this review doesn't explain a thing.
I'm sorry for ranting, and Jeff is a good guy and all, but that's a cruddy review.
see, there is my point. and Corey, he's not really a good guy. he's petty and has a god complex.
Yeah, if you're caught criticising his reviews - heck if you even IM him about it, he'll have you banned.
[QUOTE="waflerevolution"][QUOTE="GAMECAMILLER"][QUOTE="waflerevolution"][QUOTE="aspro73"][QUOTE="waflerevolution"]I found this one to be unfair, inacurate and somewhat untrue.Apathetic_Prick
I find it funny that the only typo in the review is a mis-spelling of the word intelligence, 'artificial intellgence'.
I am yet to play my copy of Spy Vs. Spy. I liked the Commodore 64 version despite the technical problems.
I liked the NES one. Jeff compares the "classic mode" to the original and even though it's a VERY faithful translation of the game to 3D, he bashes it with a paragraph of nostalgia driven insults.
*sigh* I still don't feel like complaining or typing...
I just read that review, and as a professional game reviewer standpoint (used to work as one) that review is utter crud. I would have rejected that one. Why it's not even really a review! It's all opinion based and it explains hardly anything about the game. What if you didn't play the original games? I haven't actually so imagine me, as others too, who are completely clueless as to what this game is about and how it plays. He never explained how the gameplay is, what you do, etc. Why did it get the score it did? Heck if I know, I'd be best to play the game either way, cause this review doesn't explain a thing.
I'm sorry for ranting, and Jeff is a good guy and all, but that's a cruddy review.
see, there is my point. and Corey, he's not really a good guy. he's petty and has a god complex.
Yeah, if you're caught criticising his reviews - heck if you even IM him about it, he'll have you banned.
no but he'll mod you a bunch and attack you verbally like a froth-mouthed fanboy.[QUOTE="Apathetic_Prick"][QUOTE="waflerevolution"][QUOTE="GAMECAMILLER"][QUOTE="waflerevolution"][QUOTE="aspro73"][QUOTE="waflerevolution"]I found this one to be unfair, inacurate and somewhat untrue.waflerevolution
I find it funny that the only typo in the review is a mis-spelling of the word intelligence, 'artificial intellgence'.
I am yet to play my copy of Spy Vs. Spy. I liked the Commodore 64 version despite the technical problems.
I liked the NES one. Jeff compares the "classic mode" to the original and even though it's a VERY faithful translation of the game to 3D, he bashes it with a paragraph of nostalgia driven insults.
*sigh* I still don't feel like complaining or typing...
I just read that review, and as a professional game reviewer standpoint (used to work as one) that review is utter crud. I would have rejected that one. Why it's not even really a review! It's all opinion based and it explains hardly anything about the game. What if you didn't play the original games? I haven't actually so imagine me, as others too, who are completely clueless as to what this game is about and how it plays. He never explained how the gameplay is, what you do, etc. Why did it get the score it did? Heck if I know, I'd be best to play the game either way, cause this review doesn't explain a thing.
I'm sorry for ranting, and Jeff is a good guy and all, but that's a cruddy review.
see, there is my point. and Corey, he's not really a good guy. he's petty and has a god complex.
Yeah, if you're caught criticising his reviews - heck if you even IM him about it, he'll have you banned.
no but he'll mod you a bunch and attack you verbally like a froth-mouthed fanboy.really? ;)
I've not posted too much on this topic (actually I don't think I have at all) but this one really bugged me. The Sonic the Hedgehog reviews. For the 360 the game got a 4.4. Clearly, he didn't like the game. Now that the PS3 version is out, he has posted another review. The PS3 version got a 4.2 As it is now almost three months out fromt the 360 release I figured there would be some comparisions to the 360 title or something. But after reading the review and then looking back at the 360 review I wondered if he played the PS3 version at all or if he just did a nice copy paste job. I ran a text compare and found that his PS3 review add the following, "Compounding the issue is a very sketchy frame rate that slows the entire game down at seemingly random intervals. Considering the main appeal of Sonic is that he's supposed to be able to run fast, all the sluggishness really takes away from the game's already ugly presentation." This line I am guessing is responsible for knocking .2 off of the Sonic score for the PS3.
There are two things that really bug me about the Sonic reviews. First, the score on the You Say section is 6.7, that's a pretty big difference. Makes me wonder about his Sonic review in general. Second, there is absolutely no comparision between the two systems that the game is on. Usually mulitplatform games have a section where the control schemes and graphics between the systems are compared, but for this we get nothing. Â Anyway, I was a little disappointed with the lack of effort that was given to the PS3 review of Sonic and felt this was a good place to share it.
Can we drop this topic or get it back on the actual reviews? A discussion of the presence or absense of Jeff's personal issues are not elevating to this topic (Until he writes in his review, '...and since I hate Waflerevolution, I give this game a 2.3').I could see that, and I'd laugh if he did.
aspro73
it does seem odd that no comparison is given... he really likes comparing in his other reviews...I've not posted too much on this topic (actually I don't think I have at all) but this one really bugged me. The Sonic the Hedgehog reviews. For the 360 the game got a 4.4. Clearly, he didn't like the game. Now that the PS3 version is out, he has posted another review. The PS3 version got a 4.2 As it is now almost three months out fromt the 360 release I figured there would be some comparisions to the 360 title or something. But after reading the review and then looking back at the 360 review I wondered if he played the PS3 version at all or if he just did a nice copy paste job. I ran a text compare and found that his PS3 review add the following, "Compounding the issue is a very sketchy frame rate that slows the entire game down at seemingly random intervals. Considering the main appeal of Sonic is that he's supposed to be able to run fast, all the sluggishness really takes away from the game's already ugly presentation." This line I am guessing is responsible for knocking .2 off of the Sonic score for the PS3.
There are two things that really bug me about the Sonic reviews. First, the score on the You Say section is 6.7, that's a pretty big difference. Makes me wonder about his Sonic review in general. Second, there is absolutely no comparision between the two systems that the game is on. Usually mulitplatform games have a section where the control schemes and graphics between the systems are compared, but for this we get nothing. Anyway, I was a little disappointed with the lack of effort that was given to the PS3 review of Sonic and felt this was a good place to share it.
duncanr2n
[QUOTE="aspro73"]Can we drop this topic or get it back on the actual reviews? A discussion of the presence or absense of Jeff's personal issues are not elevating to this topic (Until he writes in his review, '...and since I hate Waflerevolution, I give this game a 2.3').I could see that, and I'd laugh if he did.
waflerevolution
it does seem odd that no comparison is given... he really likes comparing in his other reviews...I've not posted too much on this topic (actually I don't think I have at all) but this one really bugged me. The Sonic the Hedgehog reviews. For the 360 the game got a 4.4. Clearly, he didn't like the game. Now that the PS3 version is out, he has posted another review. The PS3 version got a 4.2 As it is now almost three months out fromt the 360 release I figured there would be some comparisions to the 360 title or something. But after reading the review and then looking back at the 360 review I wondered if he played the PS3 version at all or if he just did a nice copy paste job. I ran a text compare and found that his PS3 review add the following, "Compounding the issue is a very sketchy frame rate that slows the entire game down at seemingly random intervals. Considering the main appeal of Sonic is that he's supposed to be able to run fast, all the sluggishness really takes away from the game's already ugly presentation." This line I am guessing is responsible for knocking .2 off of the Sonic score for the PS3.
There are two things that really bug me about the Sonic reviews. First, the score on the You Say section is 6.7, that's a pretty big difference. Makes me wonder about his Sonic review in general. Second, there is absolutely no comparision between the two systems that the game is on. Usually mulitplatform games have a section where the control schemes and graphics between the systems are compared, but for this we get nothing. Anyway, I was a little disappointed with the lack of effort that was given to the PS3 review of Sonic and felt this was a good place to share it.
duncanr2n
Yeah, if it's an attempt to demonstrate quality or lack thereof, comparing in a review is a big no no unless it's to convey an experience; eg. "the combat in Arx Fatalis is similar to that of Morrowind in that if you move to the left or right and press the attack button you'll do a different attack and furthermore, the longer you hold the button, the harder you'd hit". That's an acceptable comparison.Â
As much as I dislike Final Fantasy, if I said in a review of, say, FF XII "it's not as deep as Morrowind so it sucks", I'm making a major faux pas, period. Not even an amateur can have leeway with a statement like that. Even if they extrapolate, they can't because the games have totally different development structures.Â
But Greg K. did that, too; a lot of professional reviewers did when Half-Life came out, although Gamespot and IGN are the two places I see it the most.
Not that i'm defending it; I was really offended, actually, during the "reign" of Half-Life because I personally don't think it raised the bar on anything.
Oh, yeah, that's basically the same way he based TJ&E 3. "It's not fun" seems to be one of Gerstmann's best defenses. It's too bad that he never even tries to qualify his opinion, and then expects us to accept it as fact.
I've not posted too much on this topic (actually I don't think I have at all) but this one really bugged me. The Sonic the Hedgehog reviews. For the 360 the game got a 4.4. Clearly, he didn't like the game. Now that the PS3 version is out, he has posted another review. The PS3 version got a 4.2 As it is now almost three months out fromt the 360 release I figured there would be some comparisions to the 360 title or something. But after reading the review and then looking back at the 360 review I wondered if he played the PS3 version at all or if he just did a nice copy paste job. I ran a text compare and found that his PS3 review add the following, "Compounding the issue is a very sketchy frame rate that slows the entire game down at seemingly random intervals. Considering the main appeal of Sonic is that he's supposed to be able to run fast, all the sluggishness really takes away from the game's already ugly presentation." This line I am guessing is responsible for knocking .2 off of the Sonic score for the PS3.
There are two things that really bug me about the Sonic reviews. First, the score on the You Say section is 6.7, that's a pretty big difference. Makes me wonder about his Sonic review in general. Second, there is absolutely no comparision between the two systems that the game is on. Usually mulitplatform games have a section where the control schemes and graphics between the systems are compared, but for this we get nothing. Anyway, I was a little disappointed with the lack of effort that was given to the PS3 review of Sonic and felt this was a good place to share it.
duncanr2n
Sonic The Hedgehog on the 360 is really a surprising mess of complications. I went back today and edited my review to point out that Gerstmann's complaints are at least true. There are double loads in the missions, the camera twists do cause control problems, etc. I was interested to see if the PS3 having an HDD in both units would fix the double loads but Gerstmann didn't even bother to mention that he was reviewing the PS3 version. With his poor track record of fact listing, I feel the need to play the PS3 version just to see if the load times are the same as the 360 version.Â
Regardless of that, the scores are way off, listing a few flaws in the game does not qualify calling it "broken". I've run into glitches in Gears of War nearly every time I have played it, even to the point of having to start a section over. If quirky game aspects weighed as heavily as Gerstmann implies Gears of War would not even approach an 8/10, much less the 9+ score and all of the awards it keeps getting. That's just listing the glitches, I could complain about the limitations of the camera view in 3rd person view (which Gerstmann does with the *optional* view in Outtrigger), the quirks of replacing weapons due to the relatively small icons, the ease of mistaking a "Grub" for a teamate because of the color schemes, and the stupid AI on Normal difficulty.Â
Most of these complaints would be intrinsic to all shooters though, and since shooters are popular reviewers would be seen as "whining" if they pointed them out. Sonic's speed in a 3D action game has not been attempted by anybody but Sega, so reviewers like Gerstmann get to blow the game's *limitations* into glaring flaws and then pat themselves on the back. Hooray for crowd rules.
[QUOTE="duncanr2n"]I've not posted too much on this topic (actually I don't think I have at all) but this one really bugged me. The Sonic the Hedgehog reviews. For the 360 the game got a 4.4. Clearly, he didn't like the game. Now that the PS3 version is out, he has posted another review. The PS3 version got a 4.2 As it is now almost three months out fromt the 360 release I figured there would be some comparisions to the 360 title or something. But after reading the review and then looking back at the 360 review I wondered if he played the PS3 version at all or if he just did a nice copy paste job. I ran a text compare and found that his PS3 review add the following, "Compounding the issue is a very sketchy frame rate that slows the entire game down at seemingly random intervals. Considering the main appeal of Sonic is that he's supposed to be able to run fast, all the sluggishness really takes away from the game's already ugly presentation." This line I am guessing is responsible for knocking .2 off of the Sonic score for the PS3.
There are two things that really bug me about the Sonic reviews. First, the score on the You Say section is 6.7, that's a pretty big difference. Makes me wonder about his Sonic review in general. Second, there is absolutely no comparision between the two systems that the game is on. Usually mulitplatform games have a section where the control schemes and graphics between the systems are compared, but for this we get nothing. Anyway, I was a little disappointed with the lack of effort that was given to the PS3 review of Sonic and felt this was a good place to share it.
SHEATH013
Sonic The Hedgehog on the 360 is really a surprising mess of complications. I went back today and edited my review to point out that Gerstmann's complaints are at least true. There are double loads in the missions, the camera twists do cause control problems, etc. I was interested to see if the PS3 having an HDD in both units would fix the double loads but Gerstmann didn't even bother to mention that he was reviewing the PS3 version. With his poor track record of fact listing, I feel the need to play the PS3 version just to see if the load times are the same as the 360 version.
Regardless of that, the scores are way off, listing a few flaws in the game does not qualify calling it "broken". I've run into glitches in Gears of War nearly every time I have played it, even to the point of having to start a section over. If quirky game aspects weighed as heavily as Gerstmann implies Gears of War would not even approach an 8/10, much less the 9+ score and all of the awards it keeps getting. That's just listing the glitches, I could complain about the limitations of the camera view in 3rd person view (which Gerstmann does with the *optional* view in Outtrigger), the quirks of replacing weapons due to the relatively small icons, the ease of mistaking a "Grub" for a teamate because of the color schemes, and the stupid AI on Normal difficulty.
Most of these complaints would be intrinsic to all shooters though, and since shooters are popular reviewers would be seen as "whining" if they pointed them out. Sonic's speed in a 3D action game has not been attempted by anybody but Sega, so reviewers like Gerstmann get to blow the game's *limitations* into glaring flaws and then pat themselves on the back. Hooray for crowd rules.
I thought I was the only one getting uber-stuck in bugs on gears...
I thought I was the only one getting uber-stuck in bugs on gears...waflerevolution
Nope, I've had the problem frequently but unreplicatably. That's why I pointed it out, the game is winning awards even while it has a variety of fatal bugs in the code, just because of popularity and ambiguous declarations of "fun". Don't get me wrong I like the game a lot, I even got a 360 this month so I could play it on Live with friends. I just don't feel the need to blow its merits out of proportion.
[QUOTE="waflerevolution"]
I thought I was the only one getting uber-stuck in bugs on gears...SHEATH013
Nope, I've had the problem frequently but unreplicatably. That's why I pointed it out, the game is winning awards even while it has a variety of fatal bugs in the code, just because of popularity and ambiguous declarations of "fun". Don't get me wrong I like the game a lot, I even got a 360 this month so I could play it on Live with friends. I just don't feel the need to blow its merits out of proportion.
that is the sad case with all popular games... the media TELLS people what the like and don't like and people have officially lost the ability to decide for themselves... it works with movies, games, books, TV, medication, food, internet, cars, cameras... whatever really... free will is dead, soon thinking will be illeagal.
that is the sad case with all popular games... the media TELLS people what the like and don't like and people have officially lost the ability to decide for themselves... it works with movies, games, books, TV, medication, food, internet, cars, cameras... whatever really... free will is dead, soon thinking will be illeagal.waflerevolution
    I suppose if it's not the media it's the marketing telling them, and they do like to be told what to think, but only in the format they've become accustomed to. I'm not even a marxist, but I am sure seeing a lot of bad things with our "free" capitalist state.
[QUOTE="waflerevolution"]that is the sad case with all popular games... the media TELLS people what the like and don't like and people have officially lost the ability to decide for themselves... it works with movies, games, books, TV, medication, food, internet, cars, cameras... whatever really... free will is dead, soon thinking will be illeagal.SHEATH013
I suppose if it's not the media it's the marketing telling them, and they do like to be told what to think, but only in the format they've become accustomed to. I'm not even a marxist, but I am sure seeing a lot of bad things with our "free" capitalist state.
...meanwhile a Capitilist society is doomed to fail while in a Democratic Republic state. all "freedoms" will be temporrarry as the will of man is to take awayand destroy. Those that come from hunting and killing can not and will not change. spreding like a bacteria, parasite or mixture of the two destroying that which it inhabits. that is the country; ney, world we live in. ~ waflerevolution 2004 my origional speach and presentation included comparisions to how money destroys culture and media destroys money while being used to influence culture. I also had some stuff that showd buisness groth charts and predictions that basically showed the future being only a few corperate super-powers ruling the world with more power and money then any government. I also had some really neat stuff like references to books like "1984", "the Giver" and more. my faveorite part was getting to insult the president in public with visual and audio media (clips, quotes and un-doctored pictures) to back it up.
Wafler, these are sayings that sound nice and are easy to use to dismiss our civic responsibilities, but they are virtually impossible to back up with facts. By "responsibility" I mean that should we wish to help preserve our society for more generations than our own (societies *have* fallen in less than one generation) we are obligated to do what we can. As gimmicky as "higher" education is, it will expose you to ideas and teachings that are far more complex than your own (at the start). You can then choose to use this to help those you influence.Â
One thing people will not even tolerate, much less recieve, is rhetoric that sounds like anarchist/marxist propoganda. The more I learn about past societies while working for my masters in history, the more I find myself wanting to remain silent in these hot-headed political debates and cursary predictions about the future. Hype can skew our perceptions in almost any walk of life, and a great counter-balance is a personal commitment to back up our statements with facts and careful analysis (not just examples). I recommend at the least to read about the origins of the ideas presented in The Matrix and the book 1984, specifically the lives of the people who originated them.
[QUOTE="waflerevolution"]meanwhile a Capitilist society is doomed to fail while in a Democratic Republic state. all "freedoms" will be temporrarry as the will of man is to take awayand destroy. Those that come from hunting and killing can not and will not change. spreding like a bacteria, parasite or mixture of the two destroying that which it inhabits. that is the country; ney, world we live in. ~ waflerevolution 2004 my origional speach and presentation included comparisions to how money destroys culture and media destroys money while being used to influence culture. I also had some stuff that showd buisness groth charts and predictions that basically showed the future being only a few corperate super-powers ruling the world with more power and money then any government. I also had some really neat stuff like references to books like "1984", "the Giver" and more. my faveorite part was getting to insult the president in public with visual and audio media (clips, quotes and un-doctored pictures) to back it up.SHEATH013
I recommend at the least to read about the origins of the ideas presented in The Matrix and the book 1984, specifically the lives of the people who originated them.
I don't; both are fiction; Matrix is also pure hackwork that doesn't deserve to be in the same sentence as 1984.
1984 is an okay reference, but it's a clunky read. I'd recommend Brave New World instead, but both are ideas; 1984 is believed to be based on post WWII North America, iirc. And that's where it turns to rhetoric.
[QUOTE="SHEATH013"][QUOTE="waflerevolution"]meanwhile a Capitilist society is doomed to fail while in a Democratic Republic state. all "freedoms" will be temporrarry as the will of man is to take awayand destroy. Those that come from hunting and killing can not and will not change. spreding like a bacteria, parasite or mixture of the two destroying that which it inhabits. that is the country; ney, world we live in. ~ waflerevolution 2004 my origional speach and presentation included comparisions to how money destroys culture and media destroys money while being used to influence culture. I also had some stuff that showd buisness groth charts and predictions that basically showed the future being only a few corperate super-powers ruling the world with more power and money then any government. I also had some really neat stuff like references to books like "1984", "the Giver" and more. my faveorite part was getting to insult the president in public with visual and audio media (clips, quotes and un-doctored pictures) to back it up.Apathetic_Prick
I recommend at the least to read about the origins of the ideas presented in The Matrix and the book 1984, specifically the lives of the people who originated them.
I don't; both are fiction; Matrix is also pure hackwork that doesn't deserve to be in the same sentence as 1984.
1984 is an okay reference, but it's a clunky read. I'd recommend Brave New World instead, but both are ideas; 1984 is believed to be based on post WWII North America, iirc. And that's where it turns to rhetoric.
hey, matrix makes way more sence if you've seen animatrix. also, "Brave New World" was involved in my speach as well. where do you think I gave said presentation SHEATH?hey, matrix makes way more sence if you've seen animatrix. also, "Brave New World" was involved in my speach as well. where do you think I gave said presentation SHEATH?
Where it was presented doesn't matter as much to me as what sources are backing it and what purpose it was given for. That also could sum up my point fairly concisely.
[QUOTE="Apathetic_Prick"][QUOTE="SHEATH013"][QUOTE="waflerevolution"]meanwhile a Capitilist society is doomed to fail while in a Democratic Republic state. all "freedoms" will be temporrarry as the will of man is to take awayand destroy. Those that come from hunting and killing can not and will not change. spreding like a bacteria, parasite or mixture of the two destroying that which it inhabits. that is the country; ney, world we live in. ~ waflerevolution 2004 my origional speach and presentation included comparisions to how money destroys culture and media destroys money while being used to influence culture. I also had some stuff that showd buisness groth charts and predictions that basically showed the future being only a few corperate super-powers ruling the world with more power and money then any government. I also had some really neat stuff like references to books like "1984", "the Giver" and more. my faveorite part was getting to insult the president in public with visual and audio media (clips, quotes and un-doctored pictures) to back it up.waflerevolution
I recommend at the least to read about the origins of the ideas presented in The Matrix and the book 1984, specifically the lives of the people who originated them.
I don't; both are fiction; Matrix is also pure hackwork that doesn't deserve to be in the same sentence as 1984.
1984 is an okay reference, but it's a clunky read. I'd recommend Brave New World instead, but both are ideas; 1984 is believed to be based on post WWII North America, iirc. And that's where it turns to rhetoric.
hey, matrix makes way more sence if you've seen animatrix. also, "Brave New World" was involved in my speach as well. where do you think I gave said presentation SHEATH?Actually, it makes even more sense if you've read Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep, then read Ender's Game, then watched Bladerunner and then Ghost in the Shell. Or better yet, read the manga. Trust me, Matrix is 99% stolen material, right down to man vs. machine (which has been a huge sci-fi argument since the late '50s) philosophy.
Funny thing is, that's what made me hate Enter the Matrix; I just can't stand the story of that series. Take Revelations, mix it with Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep, Ghost in the Shell and Ender's Game and you literally have The Matrix. The Wachowski's (they're not exactly brothers anymore, last time I checked) should have at least waited until Orson Sccott Card and Shirow Masamune passed like PKD, because the Matrix is pretty fuggin' shameless.
Anyway, I think we've derailed this topic enough :P
Gerstmann rights gheytastic reviews; anyone care to extrapolate on that? :P
[QUOTE="waflerevolution"][QUOTE="Apathetic_Prick"][QUOTE="SHEATH013"][QUOTE="waflerevolution"]meanwhile a Capitilist society is doomed to fail while in a Democratic Republic state. all "freedoms" will be temporrarry as the will of man is to take awayand destroy. Those that come from hunting and killing can not and will not change. spreding like a bacteria, parasite or mixture of the two destroying that which it inhabits. that is the country; ney, world we live in. ~ waflerevolution 2004 my origional speach and presentation included comparisions to how money destroys culture and media destroys money while being used to influence culture. I also had some stuff that showd buisness groth charts and predictions that basically showed the future being only a few corperate super-powers ruling the world with more power and money then any government. I also had some really neat stuff like references to books like "1984", "the Giver" and more. my faveorite part was getting to insult the president in public with visual and audio media (clips, quotes and un-doctored pictures) to back it up.Apathetic_Prick
I recommend at the least to read about the origins of the ideas presented in The Matrix and the book 1984, specifically the lives of the people who originated them.
I don't; both are fiction; Matrix is also pure hackwork that doesn't deserve to be in the same sentence as 1984.
1984 is an okay reference, but it's a clunky read. I'd recommend Brave New World instead, but both are ideas; 1984 is believed to be based on post WWII North America, iirc. And that's where it turns to rhetoric.
hey, matrix makes way more sence if you've seen animatrix. also, "Brave New World" was involved in my speach as well. where do you think I gave said presentation SHEATH?Actually, it makes even more sense if you've read Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep, then read Ender's Game, then watched Bladerunner and then Ghost in the Shell. Or better yet, read the manga. Trust me, Matrix is 99% stolen material, right down to man vs. machine (which has been a huge sci-fi argument since the late '50s) philosophy.
Funny thing is, that's what made me hate Enter the Matrix; I just can't stand the story of that series. Take Revelations, mix it with Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep, Ghost in the Shell and Ender's Game and you literally have The Matrix. The Wachowski's (they're not exactly brothers anymore, last time I checked) should have at least waited until Orson Sccott Card and Shirow Masamune passed like PKD, because the Matrix is pretty fuggin' shameless.
Anyway, I think we've derailed this topic enough :P
Gerstmann rights gheytastic reviews; anyone care to extrapolate on that? :P
I own most of that... anyway, that's not really the point here... [QUOTE="SHEATH013"][QUOTE="waflerevolution"]hey, matrix makes way more sence if you've seen animatrix. also, "Brave New World" was involved in my speach as well. where do you think I gave said presentation SHEATH?
Where it was presented doesn't matter as much to me as what sources are backing it and what purpose it was given for. That also could sum up my point fairly concisely.
it was given as the opposing side to a political/state of the nation/world debate. I acctually got 60% approval over the oppisite side which was basically saying that things in the US and the world are fine and are getting better as where mine was pointing out they are horrible and getting worse. I loved world affairs classes... well, not really, I loved the teacher... he was so easy going and just a lax, awesome guy. I really wish I had the money to finish college... although it's more like start over now... I don't think credits stay good for 3 errr... I guess 4 yerars now...
Interesting observation I made, but...Apparently, Gerstmann's a member of the union. You think he took a look at this thread any before it went downhill? :PApathetic_Prickno. he barely ever comes here and when he does it's to make some obligatory post or thread which I'd link to but it was so long ago that it's been removed buy the system... and as for reading someone els's posts; well, that would require giving a darn about someone else's opinions. why would he do that? I'm just glad karma gave him some payback for all his misdeeds. maybe more in the future?
[QUOTE="Apathetic_Prick"]Interesting observation I made, but...Apparently, Gerstmann's a member of the union. You think he took a look at this thread any before it went downhill? :Pwaflerevolutionno. he barely ever comes here and when he does it's to make some obligatory post or thread which I'd link to but it was so long ago that it's been removed buy the system... and as for reading someone els's posts; well, that would require giving a darn about someone else's opinions. why would he do that? I'm just glad karma gave him some payback for all his misdeeds. maybe more in the future?
I'd hardly call that karmic payback; it's not like he was beaten down by angry gamers :P
I kind of wondered why this thread stayed around for so long anyways, and no one deemed it off-topic or anything. We might as well lock it IMO.gakon5done.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment