Reviewing games on Normal is REALLY BAD for industry

  • 81 results
  • 1
  • 2

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#1 Edited by me3x12 (1765 posts) -

Perfect example a game like Thief has a ton of hardcore options to be turned on and the game truly doesn't shine unless you play on higher difficulty and turn on or off some of these options.

Prime example the IGN reviewer said he had enough of a challenge on normal and that's all he could take? LMFAO!!! really who the hell are some of these reviewers these aren't hardcore gamers these are casual gamers pretending to be real gamers man GET REAL!!!

I'm watching a live twitch stream of someone playing Thief on Master difficulty and the game looks so dope and the atmosphere is amazing also. It's sad a lot of games get low scores from casual reviewers who play games on normal setting when clearly the game need to shows its potential when it's designed for hardcore gamers in mind by changing options and turning hand holding garbage off.

http://www.twitch.tv/shamwowzaman

#2 Edited by lostrib (37624 posts) -

Except normal is the setting most people will play on. If they want to show off how "hardcore" and awesome their game is then turn those settings off by default in Normal mode

But seriously, stop making threads

#3 Posted by Animal-Mother (26962 posts) -

No it's not. You have to account for how the majority will play the game. You can't jack up a games difficulty and it's options assuming most purchasers will play the game that way. You're idea of how a game should be reviewed is silly and counter intuitive to actually reviewing a game.

#4 Posted by Demonjoe93 (9627 posts) -

Oh God, another guy who thinks that seems to think you're only a "real gamer" if you play everything on the hardest difficulty.

#5 Posted by ReadingRainbow4 (14444 posts) -

This is like people saying Halo should only be reviewed on legendary. They have to account for the average consumer, most people play these games on the default difficulty. Not to mention most often higher difficulties are merely artificial in the first place.

#6 Edited by Wasdie (50001 posts) -

No. Normal is what the game is meant to be played on. Nobody cares if you consider yourself a "hardcore gamer" that only plays on the hardest difficulties.

They scale games up and down for people of various skill levels, but the normal is what they expect the average gamer to find challenging enough to be fun.

#8 Edited by lostrib (37624 posts) -

@ReadingRainbow4 said:

This is like people saying Halo should only be reviewed on legendary. They have to account for the average consumer, most people play these games on the default difficulty. Not to mention most often higher difficulties are merely artificial in the first place.

also, time restraints. I would imagine harder difficulties will take longer, and these guys are on a time table, and there doesn't seem to be much benefit to turning up the difficulty in relation to the game review

#9 Edited by me3x12 (1765 posts) -

I play every game on hard it's mind boggling to me how these casual gamers play these games. 99.9% of the time games when played on hard offer a way better experience. and especially for a game like Thief when the developers made it a big deal talking about all the options available for real gamers to make Thief a real Thief game it's sad reviewers didn't play it on a real Thief gameplay setting and opted to play it on casual easy trash. No wonder the game is not getting the justice it deserves. After watching this live stream on master difficulty it's a instant buy for me because this game truly shines when played like a real Thief game

#10 Edited by YearoftheSnake5 (7484 posts) -

@lostrib said:

Except normal is the setting most people will play on. If they want to show off how "hardcore" and awesome their game is then turn those settings off by default in Normal mode

But seriously, stop making threads

This.

#11 Edited by lostrib (37624 posts) -

@me3x12 said:

I play every game on hard it's mind boggling to me how these casual gamers play these games. 99.9% of the time games when played on hard offer a way better experience. and especially for a game like Thief when the developers made it a big deal talking about all the options available for real gamers to make Thief a real Thief game it's sad developers dident play it on a real Thief gameplay setting and opted to play it on casual easy trash. No wonder the game is not getting the justice it deserves. After watching this live stream on master difficulty it's a instant buy for me because this game truly shines when played like a real Thief game

Playing a game on hard isn't actually that hard. It's just not worth the time for most people. But congratulations, you're "hardcore," now go away

#12 Posted by seanmcloughlin (38216 posts) -

It's called "Normal" for a reason, it's the normal way to play it. How it's meant to be played and the mode everything is balanced around. Other modes are just variations or number changes based off normal mode.

#13 Edited by ReadingRainbow4 (14444 posts) -

@lostrib said:

@ReadingRainbow4 said:

This is like people saying Halo should only be reviewed on legendary. They have to account for the average consumer, most people play these games on the default difficulty. Not to mention most often higher difficulties are merely artificial in the first place.

also, time restraints. I would imagine harder difficulties will take longer, and these guys are on a time table, and there doesn't seem to be much benefit to turning up the difficulty in relation to the game review

Yeah, usually higher difficulties just make the enemies into larger pincushions that do more damage but aside from that don't do anything to actually increase the games difficulty like introducing more complex AI or more enemies, hardly seems worth it.

I wouldn't be against them checking how the higher difficulties effect the game play however, especially if it's a note worthy change.

#14 Edited by lostrib (37624 posts) -

@ReadingRainbow4 said:

@lostrib said:

@ReadingRainbow4 said:

This is like people saying Halo should only be reviewed on legendary. They have to account for the average consumer, most people play these games on the default difficulty. Not to mention most often higher difficulties are merely artificial in the first place.

also, time restraints. I would imagine harder difficulties will take longer, and these guys are on a time table, and there doesn't seem to be much benefit to turning up the difficulty in relation to the game review

Yeah, usually higher difficulties just make the enemies into larger pincushions that do more damage but aside from that do anything to actually increase the games difficulty like introducing more complex AI or more enemies, hardly seems worth it.

I wouldn't be against them checking how the higher difficulties effect the gameplay however, especially if it's a note worthy change.

Yeah, that's mostly how I feel. Unless the enemy actions somehow change, I don't see much difference to want to play against a bunch of bullet sponges. Unless, it's like Far Cry 2 where the enemies died way too easily

#15 Posted by me3x12 (1765 posts) -

@Wasdie said:

No. Normal is what the game is meant to be played on. Nobody cares if you consider yourself a "hardcore gamer" that only plays on the hardest difficulties.

They scale games up and down for people of various skill levels, but the normal is what they expect the average gamer to find challenging enough to be fun.

Here's the deal when a game like Thief has been stated and overstated by the developers if you want the true Thief experience you need to play on higher settings. When it's made a well known fact by the developers to game sties and potential reviewers I think they owe it to the developers to review the game like they clearly tell you how it's really should be played. This way the game gets a fair review for the true potential of the game.

#16 Posted by lostrib (37624 posts) -

@me3x12 said:

@Wasdie said:

No. Normal is what the game is meant to be played on. Nobody cares if you consider yourself a "hardcore gamer" that only plays on the hardest difficulties.

They scale games up and down for people of various skill levels, but the normal is what they expect the average gamer to find challenging enough to be fun.

Here's the deal when a game like Thief has been stated and overstated by the developers if you want the true Thief experience you need to play on higher settings. When it's made a well known fact by the developers to game sties and potential reviewers I think they owe it to the developers to review the game like they clearly tell you how it's really should be played. This way the game gets a fair review for the true potential of the game.

Then the developers should have made the true Theif experience the normal mode since that is what most people will play and how they will form their impressions of the game.

#17 Posted by YearoftheSnake5 (7484 posts) -

@me3x12 said:

I play every game on hard it's mind boggling to me how these casual gamers play these games. 99.9% of the time games when played on hard offer a way better experience.

Because you think that way, everyone else should? Alright, gotcha.

#18 Edited by Wasdie (50001 posts) -

@lostrib said:

@me3x12 said:

@Wasdie said:

No. Normal is what the game is meant to be played on. Nobody cares if you consider yourself a "hardcore gamer" that only plays on the hardest difficulties.

They scale games up and down for people of various skill levels, but the normal is what they expect the average gamer to find challenging enough to be fun.

Here's the deal when a game like Thief has been stated and overstated by the developers if you want the true Thief experience you need to play on higher settings. When it's made a well known fact by the developers to game sties and potential reviewers I think they owe it to the developers to review the game like they clearly tell you how it's really should be played. This way the game gets a fair review for the true potential of the game.

Then the developers should have made the true Theif experience the normal mode since that is what most people will play and how they will form their impressions of the game.

Exactly this. If they wanted the game to be a challenge then they should have made normal more challenging.

#19 Edited by me3x12 (1765 posts) -

@lostrib said:

@me3x12 said:

@Wasdie said:

No. Normal is what the game is meant to be played on. Nobody cares if you consider yourself a "hardcore gamer" that only plays on the hardest difficulties.

They scale games up and down for people of various skill levels, but the normal is what they expect the average gamer to find challenging enough to be fun.

Here's the deal when a game like Thief has been stated and overstated by the developers if you want the true Thief experience you need to play on higher settings. When it's made a well known fact by the developers to game sties and potential reviewers I think they owe it to the developers to review the game like they clearly tell you how it's really should be played. This way the game gets a fair review for the true potential of the game.

Then the developers should have made the true Theif experience the normal mode since that is what most people will play and how they will form their impressions of the game.

The amount of options built into Thief for gamers to make adjustments is more then you see in typical games. So developers should take that into account and at least play a few levels with the more true Thief experience and what the game is capable off. But when you have a guy like on the IGN review that says he can't even play on higher then normal so he is getting far easier situations and AI and such. When you have a game that has this many options built in and offers more options then most games reviewers need to take this into account more and at least play some of the game with options turned on so they can offer an opinion on the true Thief experience available in the game. But when you don't try any of that you really not properly reviewing the game and what it truely has to potentialy offer for a better experience?

#20 Posted by seanmcloughlin (38216 posts) -

@me3x12 said:

@Wasdie said:

No. Normal is what the game is meant to be played on. Nobody cares if you consider yourself a "hardcore gamer" that only plays on the hardest difficulties.

They scale games up and down for people of various skill levels, but the normal is what they expect the average gamer to find challenging enough to be fun.

Here's the deal when a game like Thief has been stated and overstated by the developers if you want the true Thief experience you need to play on higher settings. When it's made a well known fact by the developers to game sties and potential reviewers I think they owe it to the developers to review the game like they clearly tell you how it's really should be played. This way the game gets a fair review for the true potential of the game.

Like lostrib said, this "true experience" should have been normal mode then as that's the base mode everyone starts a game on

It's like when Metro Last Light came out and they said ranger mode was the way it's meant to b played, such crap. Make normal mode more challenging then

#21 Posted by Newhopes (4582 posts) -

Normal is the way the developers ment the game to be be played....

#22 Edited by ShepardCommandr (2740 posts) -

@Animal-Mother said:

No it's not. You have to account for how the majority will play the game. You can't jack up a games difficulty and it's options assuming most purchasers will play the game that way. You're idea of how a game should be reviewed is silly and counter intuitive to actually reviewing a game.

#23 Posted by killatwill15 (845 posts) -

@me3x12 said:

@lostrib said:

@me3x12 said:

@Wasdie said:

No. Normal is what the game is meant to be played on. Nobody cares if you consider yourself a "hardcore gamer" that only plays on the hardest difficulties.

They scale games up and down for people of various skill levels, but the normal is what they expect the average gamer to find challenging enough to be fun.

Here's the deal when a game like Thief has been stated and overstated by the developers if you want the true Thief experience you need to play on higher settings. When it's made a well known fact by the developers to game sties and potential reviewers I think they owe it to the developers to review the game like they clearly tell you how it's really should be played. This way the game gets a fair review for the true potential of the game.

Then the developers should have made the true Theif experience the normal mode since that is what most people will play and how they will form their impressions of the game.

The amount of options built into Thief for gamers to make adjustments is more then you see in typical games. So developers should take that into account and at least play a few levels with the more true Thief experience and what the game is capable off. But when you have a guy like on the IGN review that says he can'[t even play on higher then normal so he is getting far easier situations and AI and such. When you have a game that has this many options built in and offers more options then most games reviewers need to take this into account more and at least play some of the game with options turned on so they can offer an opinion on the true Thief experience available in the game. But when you don't try any of that you really not properly reviewing the game and what it true has to potential offer for a better experience?

is this a stealth thread about how microsofts games shouldn't be reviewed,

because they perform worse than the ps4 and the scores don't reflect that?

#24 Edited by PhazonBlazer (11916 posts) -

Since a review is a personal opinion, it should be based on how the person likes to play the game. If he wants to review based on the hardest difficulty, he can. If he wants to review it on the easiest difficulty, he can do that as well.

#25 Edited by me3x12 (1765 posts) -

Not all games should be reviewed on higher difficulties most are fine on normal. But when the developer has made a big point to build in this many options and in every preview before release the developer talked heavily about getting the full experience by bumping up the plethora of option that you don't normally see in games this should be taken into consideration when the game is reviewed.

#26 Posted by Animal-Mother (26962 posts) -

@me3x12 said:

@Wasdie said:

No. Normal is what the game is meant to be played on. Nobody cares if you consider yourself a "hardcore gamer" that only plays on the hardest difficulties.

They scale games up and down for people of various skill levels, but the normal is what they expect the average gamer to find challenging enough to be fun.

Here's the deal when a game like Thief has been stated and overstated by the developers if you want the true Thief experience you need to play on higher settings. When it's made a well known fact by the developers to game sties and potential reviewers I think they owe it to the developers to review the game like they clearly tell you how it's really should be played. This way the game gets a fair review for the true potential of the game.

Nobody owes anything to the developers.

#27 Edited by Salt_The_Fries (8991 posts) -

I refuse to play on lower than hard even as a busy man and a husband. I also despise people who complain a certain game is too easy when they refuse to play it on harder difficulty. And I also don't buy into this oh so politically correct mantra that "games are meant to be played on normal" since games nowadays are scaled down to unbearably low levels just to ensure higher completion rate SO MUCH THAT I FUCKING DARE YOU TO PLAY MAX PAYNE 3 ON NORMAL AND WITH BOTH AIMING ASSISTS ON! You literally don't even have to aim - just pull the triggers, the game will play itself.

#28 Posted by DJ-Lafleur (34157 posts) -

Since everyone else basically said what I was going to say, I am just going to that you are silly TC.

#29 Edited by me3x12 (1765 posts) -

Not saying you owe anything but when your in a position to be a game reviewer you should have enough sense to know how a game should be played to give it a proper review. You should play the game how it's truly meant to be played then say ok this is how the game shines like this but if you want to just run through the game and miss out on it's finest qualities with the options built in the game for you to achieve this then fine just play it on normal. This is how games like this should be reviewed. You should not just run through a game and say well you have all these options that are there to give you the true game experience and I know the developers have even been emphasizing this. But I'm not going to play it like that I'm going to miss out on the true potential that even developers told me about and I'll just review the game in it's lowest form of quality and avoid all together the crazy amount of options there for me to greatly enhance a game, and I'll just give an opinion on the game in it's lowest form. You should not be a game reviewer at all if your going to do this with games that can't obviously give a true interpretation of the full true experience the game can offer.

#30 Edited by trugs26 (5573 posts) -

I think developers should be considering normal as their main build. To me, it's the vanilla "you should play like this" build. The build that they debug, beta test, etc.

#31 Posted by Salt_The_Fries (8991 posts) -

@trugs26 said:

I think developers should be considering normal as their main build. To me, it's the vanilla "you should play like this" build. The build that they debug, beta test, etc.

Maybe back when you joined in 2004 that's how things were. Certainly not now. Some games are STILL FUCKING LAUGHABLE ON HARDEST SETTINGS.

#32 Posted by me3x12 (1765 posts) -

@Salt_The_Fries said:

I refuse to play on lower than hard even as a busy man and a husband. I also despise people who complain a certain game is too easy when they refuse to play it on harder difficulty. And I also don't buy into this oh so politically correct mantra that "games are meant to be played on normal" since games nowadays are scaled down to unbearably low levels just to ensure higher completion rate SO MUCH THAT I FUCKING DARE YOU TO PLAY MAX PAYNE 3 ON NORMAL AND WITH BOTH AIMING ASSISTS ON! You literally don't even have to aim - just pull the triggers, the game will play itself.

Thank you and if your a game reviewer you need to take things like this into account especially for A game like Thief when it has been heavily emphasized by the developers that if you want to true experience play with the ton of options we built into the game for you to play with. But when a reviewer just mentions they are there to be played with but they are just playing on normal they are clearly not getting the true experience so how are they giving a true review of what the game has to offer.

#33 Edited by betamaxx83 (351 posts) -

A game on hard isn't really that "hard", most people play on lower settings because one they don't have a lot of time, or just want something less challenging.

Being good at video games is rather easy. A lot of it depends on muscle memory, once you've mastered the basics. You get better over time once you are exposed to it more.

#34 Posted by cainetao11 (17708 posts) -

Creating threads on meaningless, and stupid, is bad for SW. Yet, we persevere.........

#35 Posted by Salt_The_Fries (8991 posts) -

@me3x12 said:

@Salt_The_Fries said:

I refuse to play on lower than hard even as a busy man and a husband. I also despise people who complain a certain game is too easy when they refuse to play it on harder difficulty. And I also don't buy into this oh so politically correct mantra that "games are meant to be played on normal" since games nowadays are scaled down to unbearably low levels just to ensure higher completion rate SO MUCH THAT I FUCKING DARE YOU TO PLAY MAX PAYNE 3 ON NORMAL AND WITH BOTH AIMING ASSISTS ON! You literally don't even have to aim - just pull the triggers, the game will play itself.

Thank you and if your a game reviewer you need to take things like this into account especially for A game like Thief when it has been heavily emphasized by the developers that if you want to true experience play with the ton of options we built into the game for you to play with. But when a reviewer just mentions they are there to be played with but they are just playing on normal they are clearly not getting the true experience so how are they giving a true review of what the game has to offer.

Stealth games and FPS games are beyond easy when played on anything but the hardest settings. I would never ever play a stealth game on normal.

#36 Edited by me3x12 (1765 posts) -

And honestly just watch the Master difficultly gameplay on the Twitch link does this game really lok like a score of a 6? Hell no at least gametrailers got the reviewer more accurate with a 7.5 and praised some of the better things in Thief. If all reviewers played Thief with bumping some of the options the developers has been emphasizing to give you a true Thief experience I think reviews across the board would be higher.

#37 Posted by Sushiglutton (5331 posts) -

I think all reviewers should follow Kotaku and clearly state exactly what they have played and on what difficulties.

#38 Edited by CrownKingArthur (4894 posts) -

i think, in general, reviews for video games aren't helpful.

#39 Posted by YearoftheSnake5 (7484 posts) -

Thread Title: Reviewing games on Normal is REALLY BAD for industry

@me3x12 said:

99.9% of the time games when played on hard offer a way better experience.

@me3x12 said:

Not all games should be reviewed on higher difficulties most are fine on normal.

Mmkay. Surely, I'm not the only one who sees a conflict here.

#40 Posted by R4gn4r0k (16630 posts) -

I'm going to play Thief on normal first and then use some tweaks on a second playthrough.

@Sushiglutton said:

I think all reviewers should follow Kotaku and clearly state exactly what they have played and on what difficulties.

Totally agree with this. Can't stand reviewers playing on easy and then stating it wasn't a challenge...

#41 Posted by turtlethetaffer (16789 posts) -

Majority of people are playing on Normal. Hell, that's what I always do these days. Normal for first play through, maybe higher difficulty for the future.

#42 Posted by Salt_The_Fries (8991 posts) -

@turtlethetaffer said:

Majority of people are playing on Normal. Hell, that's what I always do these days. Normal for first play through, maybe higher difficulty for the future.

I (almost) never replay games that's why I play them on hardest difficulties, among other reasons of course. I can't relate to such a modus operandi.

#43 Posted by Sushiglutton (5331 posts) -

@R4gn4r0k said:

I'm going to play Thief on normal first and then use some tweaks on a second playthrough.

@Sushiglutton said:

I think all reviewers should follow Kotaku and clearly state exactly what they have played and on what difficulties.

Totally agree with this. Can't stand reviewers playing on easy and then stating it wasn't a challenge...

Agree! Another thing that annoys me are reviewers who write about MP focused games and it seems like they have mainly played the campaign (and vice versa)

#44 Edited by uninspiredcup (8938 posts) -

My friend, most IGN staff 20 something hipsters with thick black rimmed glasses who think they are comedy gold.

About the closet thing to a decent opinion you will probably get is IRL Alan Partridge, 29 years (yes really) old going on 45.

#45 Posted by kingtito (5014 posts) -

@killatwill15 said:

@me3x12 said:

@lostrib said:

@me3x12 said:

@Wasdie said:

No. Normal is what the game is meant to be played on. Nobody cares if you consider yourself a "hardcore gamer" that only plays on the hardest difficulties.

They scale games up and down for people of various skill levels, but the normal is what they expect the average gamer to find challenging enough to be fun.

Here's the deal when a game like Thief has been stated and overstated by the developers if you want the true Thief experience you need to play on higher settings. When it's made a well known fact by the developers to game sties and potential reviewers I think they owe it to the developers to review the game like they clearly tell you how it's really should be played. This way the game gets a fair review for the true potential of the game.

Then the developers should have made the true Theif experience the normal mode since that is what most people will play and how they will form their impressions of the game.

The amount of options built into Thief for gamers to make adjustments is more then you see in typical games. So developers should take that into account and at least play a few levels with the more true Thief experience and what the game is capable off. But when you have a guy like on the IGN review that says he can'[t even play on higher then normal so he is getting far easier situations and AI and such. When you have a game that has this many options built in and offers more options then most games reviewers need to take this into account more and at least play some of the game with options turned on so they can offer an opinion on the true Thief experience available in the game. But when you don't try any of that you really not properly reviewing the game and what it true has to potential offer for a better experience?

is this a stealth thread about how microsofts games shouldn't be reviewed,

because they perform worse than the ps4 and the scores don't reflect that?

Still moooing I see. Moo on cow, mooo on

#46 Posted by kingtito (5014 posts) -

@me3x12 said:

And honestly just watch the Master difficultly gameplay on the Twitch link does this game really lok like a score of a 6? Hell no at least gametrailers got the reviewer more accurate with a 7.5 and praised some of the better things in Thief. If all reviewers played Thief with bumping some of the options the developers has been emphasizing to give you a true Thief experience I think reviews across the board would be higher.

So one reviewers opinion is more accurate than anothers? Here I thought they were both opinions.

#47 Posted by dotWithShoes (4858 posts) -

@me3x12 said:

I play every game on hard it's mind boggling to me how these casual gamers play these games. 99.9% of the time games when played on hard offer a way better experience. and especially for a game like Thief when the developers made it a big deal talking about all the options available for real gamers to make Thief a real Thief game it's sad reviewers didn't play it on a real Thief gameplay setting and opted to play it on casual easy trash. No wonder the game is not getting the justice it deserves. After watching this live stream on master difficulty it's a instant buy for me because this game truly shines when played like a real Thief game

"Real gamer" .. without a doubt the single worst phrase ever uttered, specially being used the way you are using it. Wanna know something? I play games, I'm a real gamer. My parents play games, they are real gamers. If you play games, you're a real gamer. Unless, of course, you do not exist, then you are not real at all. I think the correct phrase you are looking for is "CORE GAMER". But anyways, I don't wanna argue with a brick wall right now, but congrats on playing every game on hard, glad you have the extra time between doing your homework, chores, and eating the dinner your mother cooks for you.Don't forget to make sure she remembers her ID when she goes with you to buy Thief for you.

#48 Edited by Bread_or_Decide (17761 posts) -

These reviewers have a limited amount of time to finish a game, write up a review, and edit and have it ready for the website.

So you want them to play every game on a difficulty that will make this process longer, slower, and more of a hassle? RIGHT. Not happening.

#49 Posted by nutcrackr (12634 posts) -

Most play on normal, therefore most reviews on normal makes sense. Also difficulty settings can't make a game good imo. Hitman Absolution had some choices for difficulty but it was clearly designed with instinct mode.

#50 Edited by edwardecl (2239 posts) -

A game should be designed around balance, there should be a challenge on default settings.

If you start having to mess about with loads of options to make a game fun for you then they have failed, do they expect the average person to sit there working out which options to set?

That mode is there obviously after for someone has already completed the game.