advertisement
Click Here
ForumsSite Enhancements & Feedback › I was bothered by the army of two review ...

I was bothered by the army of two review ...

Read the following guidelines to ensure that you are posting in the correct forum:

ENHANCEMENT: An improvement of an existing GameSpot component or feature. FEEDBACK: Anything in relation to the site just as long as it is not a bug or glitch report.

BUG/GLITCH: A bug is an error, flaw, mistake, failure, or fault found on GameSpot that prevents it from working correctly or produces an incorrect result. If this is your problem then visit the Technical Support forum.

HOW-TO: If you have a question on how to use the site, please visit the How To GameSpot board.

MISSING A GAME IN THE DATABASE? Stop by our Missing Games thread located in the Technical support board.

Broken Link Reports: Create a new thread about any broken links. If your issue is not resolved within 24 hours, contact support and provide your thread from this board.

  • Level 34
    Paramecium
    Posts: 7744
    Mar 11, 2008 5:50 am PT

    That's right, one bad apple is screwing up the privatized military business for the rest of the upstanding mercenaries. Neither Rios nor Salem engages in any dishonorable behavior, aside from making fun of the Army for being so slow and ill-equipped. That would be fine if the Army they were making fun of were the Venusian Army. Or conversely, if Blackwater mercenaries in the real world hadn't been asked to leave Iraq for flipping out and massacring its civilians. But in Army of Two, there's no such thing as a civilian. If they aren't good guys, they're terrorists.

    The reviewer is letting politics ruin the game for him and is taking it way to seriously. Thats from the review by the way, apart from that everything else is fine.

    The highlighted part is what I found dumb, sure it might not be a powerful army but keep such remarks to yourself. C'mon, he should review the game for what it is. Should real world polotics be a factor in video games?

    That's right, one bad apple is screwing up the privatized military business for the rest of the upstanding mercenaries. Neither Rios nor Salem engages in any dishonorable behavior, aside from making fun of the Army for being so slow and ill-equipped. That would be fine if the Army they were making fun of were the Venusian Army. Or conversely, if Blackwater mercenaries in the real world hadn't been asked to leave Iraq for flipping out and massacring its civilians. But in Army of Two, there's no such thing as a civilian. If they aren't good guys, they're terrorists.

    The reviewer is letting politics ruin the game for him and is taking it way to seriously. Thats from the review by the way, apart from that everything else is fine.

    The highlighted part is what I found dumb, sure it might not be a powerful army but keep such remarks to yourself. C'mon, he should review the game for what it is. Should real world polotics be a factor in video games?

  • Level 63
    Big Smoke
    Posts: 32154
    Site moderatorBoard Moderator
    Mar 11, 2008 5:55 am PT
    I don't see that as talking about anything in real life, I see it more as showing how it's silly that these 2 guys think they are better than an entire army...I could be wrong, but that was my interpretation.

    I don't see that as talking about anything in real life, I see it more as showing how it's silly that these 2 guys think they are better than an entire army...I could be wrong, but that was my interpretation.
  • Level 26
    Cyber-Lip
    Posts: 2271
    User is Online
    Mar 11, 2008 9:09 am PT
    From: J_Dodson Sent: Mar 11, 2008 12:20 am CT Subject: RE: Army of Two Review

    I'm not any more biased about Army of 2 than you are about my review of it. The game's trivial portrayal of something real and controversial offended my sensibilities, sensibilities you do not share. My review of it offended you, just like the game offended me.

    This was the reviewer's response to my message to him. He seems content with admitting he was offended by the game. Only if he would admit he should leave his offended "sensibilites" out of the review.

    Read this ..the review was biased and he admited to it ..read what all of us have to say over in the ps3 forums

    http://www.gamespot.com/pages/forums/show_msgs.php?topic_id=26282166&page=3

    this page is where our users need to be heard

    ====================================================================
    Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

    PSN ID: Shane12m ,,ONLINE GAMES:Socom C, MLB 08, Rock Band 1+2

    +_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_

    From: J_Dodson Sent: Mar 11, 2008 12:20 am CT Subject: RE: Army of Two Review

    I'm not any more biased about Army of 2 than you are about my review of it. The game's trivial portrayal of something real and controversial offended my sensibilities, sensibilities you do not share. My review of it offended you, just like the game offended me.

    This was the reviewer's response to my message to him. He seems content with admitting he was offended by the game. Only if he would admit he should leave his offended "sensibilites" out of the review.

    Read this ..the review was biased and he admited to it ..read what all of us have to say over in the ps3 forums

    http://www.gamespot.com/pages/forums/show_msgs.php?topic_id=26282166&page=3

    this page is where our users need to be heard

  • Level 26
    Cyber-Lip
    Posts: 2271
    User is Online
    Mar 11, 2008 9:10 am PT
    thanks Pelek I was just about to post this too

    ====================================================================
    Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

    PSN ID: Shane12m ,,ONLINE GAMES:Socom C, MLB 08, Rock Band 1+2

    +_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_

    thanks Pelek I was just about to post this too
  • Level 34
    Paramecium
    Posts: 7744
    Mar 11, 2008 9:26 am PT
    DrummerShane12 wrote:
    thanks Pelek I was just about to post this too
    Nah, thankyou for posting his reply. I am interested to hear his view and what he has to say on the matter.
    [QUOTE="DrummerShane12"]thanks Pelek I was just about to post this too[/QUOTE] Nah, thankyou for posting his reply. I am interested to hear his view and what he has to say on the matter.
  • Level 33
    Goombella
    Posts: 2959
    Mar 11, 2008 9:55 am PT
    I have been a member of this site for quite some time now, in fact I pay for this service, and I am very disappointed about the way this review was handled. A game's review is based on its mechanics, graphics, and the like, not based on the reviewers views of the story line or the biased opinion input of the reviewer. The score does not upset me, any person reviewing a game has full right to give it a number as they so please, but I am however upset that the bias of this person interfered and openly came out in the review. Many people depend on the reviews from this website for purchasing decisions.
    I have been a member of this site for quite some time now, in fact I pay for this service, and I am very disappointed about the way this review was handled. A game's review is based on its mechanics, graphics, and the like, not based on the reviewers views of the story line or the biased opinion input of the reviewer. The score does not upset me, any person reviewing a game has full right to give it a number as they so please, but I am however upset that the bias of this person interfered and openly came out in the review. Many people depend on the reviews from this website for purchasing decisions.
  • Level 37
    Heiankyo Alien
    Posts: 16360
    Mar 11, 2008 10:16 am PT

    I always faced reviews as an opinion so I never mind with the score.

    But, this review was just....too focused on what HE felt and not how the game worked. I read the review and the only thing I got from it was that the game was about 2 guys that were mercenaries...and the rest yelled offended ,offended ,offended.

    But it's just a review, which is just an opinion. But keep in mind that even being just and opinion, it's an opinion based in wrongs aspects :His views of politics and personal opinions.

    I always faced reviews as an opinion so I never mind with the score.

    But, this review was just....too focused on what HE felt and not how the game worked. I read the review and the only thing I got from it was that the game was about 2 guys that were mercenaries...and the rest yelled offended ,offended ,offended.

    But it's just a review, which is just an opinion. But keep in mind that even being just and opinion, it's an opinion based in wrongs aspects :His views of politics and personal opinions.

  • Level 17
    Minus World
    Posts: 195
    Mar 11, 2008 10:43 am PT
    The reviewer completely let his personal views get in the way of writing an unbiased objective review of the game. If I let my personal life get in the way of my job at work, I get repremanded or fired. I expect nothing less from Gamespot.



    The reviewer completely let his personal views get in the way of writing an unbiased objective review of the game. If I let my personal life get in the way of my job at work, I get repremanded or fired. I expect nothing less from Gamespot.
  • Level 26
    Cyber-Lip
    Posts: 2271
    User is Online
    Mar 11, 2008 11:53 am PT
    yeah I totally agree with all of you and I think he should NOT be fired but the review should be rewritten or something

    ====================================================================
    Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

    PSN ID: Shane12m ,,ONLINE GAMES:Socom C, MLB 08, Rock Band 1+2

    +_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_

    yeah I totally agree with all of you and I think he should NOT be fired but the review should be rewritten or something
  • Level 19
    Gitaroo Man
    Posts: 184
    Mar 11, 2008 12:20 pm PT

    Are we getting any sort of response from Gamespot on this?

    Or is it just a rant to them falling on deaf ears? C'mon GS step up!

    Nothing is true. Everything is Permitted. And the cake is a lie



    Are we getting any sort of response from Gamespot on this?

    Or is it just a rant to them falling on deaf ears? C'mon GS step up!

  • Level 26
    Cyber-Lip
    Posts: 2271
    User is Online
    Mar 11, 2008 12:47 pm PT
    yeah im waiting lol

    ====================================================================
    Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

    PSN ID: Shane12m ,,ONLINE GAMES:Socom C, MLB 08, Rock Band 1+2

    +_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_

    yeah im waiting lol
  • Level 15
    Nobunaga's Ambition
    Posts: 268
    Mar 11, 2008 1:25 pm PT
    Yeah I think that if hes going to review games he should do it unbiased.He should focus more on things such as gameplay and not the things that he found as an offensive message of the game.
    Yeah I think that if hes going to review games he should do it unbiased.He should focus more on things such as gameplay and not the things that he found as an offensive message of the game.
  • Level 22
    Blaster Master
    Posts: 843
    Mar 11, 2008 1:32 pm PT

    You know, there are a loft of great titles coming out this year. So as a consumer I realized that my wife would not "let" me (I know laugh if you must) go out and buy every single title that I want this spring and summer. Having said that I also realized that I am going to have to do some hard digging of reviews to check out what games seem to match up across the board and make at least some of my gaming decisions on such reviews. While I know what games I will be purchasing without a shadow of a doubt this year, there are some games that I need to look into more and get some professional opinions on.

    Army of Two is one of those games I am talking about. I had been waiting for this review from GS since the game first launched. I personally have been a member on this site for a very long time and have always trusted the reviews from the writing staff. I could have gone to ps3fanboy, IGN, Gamepro, or any other gamming website/mag to get my reviews, but I (as always) came over to gamespot. I was a little taken back by the viewing of the 6.5 since it did fall below many of the reviews on some other reputable gaming sites, but gamespot as always held games to a high standard so I digress into reading the review. I can honestly say that I haven't been this dissapointed in a review for a long time. I am all for freedom of speech but when you are trying to inform users of your website about a particular game, it is best that the material in the review be presented in an unbiased and professional manner. If there is one weak spot that I have heard about AT, it is the weak story. Is it worth it to give the game that low of a score simply because the story line was weak? No. The reason this was done is simply because the subject matter (the new buzzword on the ps3 forums regarding this review) offended the reviewer. Simply put, Gamespot needs to uphold their high standards of gaming news and reviews by instilling a bit more journalistic integrity into their operation. I have said my peace, GS do the right thing.....

    ------------------------------------------------------------

    WiiS3 owner!

    "Ours is a world of nuclear giants and ethical infants. We know more about war than we know about peace...more about killing than we know about living." Gen. Omar Bradley


    update portable ID select html

    You know, there are a loft of great titles coming out this year. So as a consumer I realized that my wife would not "let" me (I know laugh if you must) go out and buy every single title that I want this spring and summer. Having said that I also realized that I am going to have to do some hard digging of reviews to check out what games seem to match up across the board and make at least some of my gaming decisions on such reviews. While I know what games I will be purchasing without a shadow of a doubt this year, there are some games that I need to look into more and get some professional opinions on.

    Army of Two is one of those games I am talking about. I had been waiting for this review from GS since the game first launched. I personally have been a member on this site for a very long time and have always trusted the reviews from the writing staff. I could have gone to ps3fanboy, IGN, Gamepro, or any other gamming website/mag to get my reviews, but I (as always) came over to gamespot. I was a little taken back by the viewing of the 6.5 since it did fall below many of the reviews on some other reputable gaming sites, but gamespot as always held games to a high standard so I digress into reading the review. I can honestly say that I haven't been this dissapointed in a review for a long time. I am all for freedom of speech but when you are trying to inform users of your website about a particular game, it is best that the material in the review be presented in an unbiased and professional manner. If there is one weak spot that I have heard about AT, it is the weak story. Is it worth it to give the game that low of a score simply because the story line was weak? No. The reason this was done is simply because the subject matter (the new buzzword on the ps3 forums regarding this review) offended the reviewer. Simply put, Gamespot needs to uphold their high standards of gaming news and reviews by instilling a bit more journalistic integrity into their operation. I have said my peace, GS do the right thing.....

  • Level 36
    Radical Ninja
    Posts: 4723
    User is Online
    Mar 11, 2008 3:01 pm PT

    I had a 3 page thread going on about this in the 360 fourms, and yeah. It seems like a fair amount of people share this opinion. That review was Biased more-so then any other review on this site. It focused more on how the reviewer feels about PMC's and State Armys then the game itself. If I wanted a political rant, I would go to a political site. I come here for professional reviews about games. Call the story stupid, good, or say it makes no sense if you want, but don't let your opinions of the source material overwhelm the game itself. This is like someone giving Halo a 5 because he doesn't like it's treatment of aliens as bad, and it shows the earth being taken over by them.

    And to top it all off, in the last paragraph Insults everyone who enjoys the game, calling them dumb. This review was highly unprofessional.

    -

    Live - Xerxes 8933A

    PSN/Steam/X-Fire - Xerxes8933A

    I had a 3 page thread going on about this in the 360 fourms, and yeah. It seems like a fair amount of people share this opinion. That review was Biased more-so then any other review on this site. It focused more on how the reviewer feels about PMC's and State Armys then the game itself. If I wanted a political rant, I would go to a political site. I come here for professional reviews about games. Call the story stupid, good, or say it makes no sense if you want, but don't let your opinions of the source material overwhelm the game itself. This is like someone giving Halo a 5 because he doesn't like it's treatment of aliens as bad, and it shows the earth being taken over by them.

    And to top it all off, in the last paragraph Insults everyone who enjoys the game, calling them dumb. This review was highly unprofessional.
  • Level 40
    Abobo
    Posts: 6420
    Mar 11, 2008 3:26 pm PT

    Sensibilities? Wow, that's a big word. Here is my short review of Oblivion, then:

    "Basically, the game allows you to slaughter various different kind of animals, such as boars and mudcrabs. Despite of the caroonish appearance, the game clearly attempts to portray murdering animals as a form of justifiable entertainment."

    "Score: - 6.5 P.S. I love animals!"

    Army of Two review should be taken down. It might have brought up some valid points, but the non-objective attitude simply ruins it. If a reviewer gets personal about something and is not afraid of admitting it, then he should not be reviewing games

    Edited on Mar 11, 2008 3:34 pm PT Edited 4 total times.

    Sensibilities? Wow, that's a big word. Here is my short review of Oblivion, then:

    "Basically, the game allows you to slaughter various different kind of animals, such as boars and mudcrabs. Despite of the caroonish appearance, the game clearly attempts to portray murdering animals as a form of justifiable entertainment."

    "Score: - 6.5 P.S. I love animals!"

    Army of Two review should be taken down. It might have brought up some valid points, but the non-objective attitude simply ruins it. If a reviewer gets personal about something and is not afraid of admitting it, then he should not be reviewing games

  • Level 26
    Cyber-Lip
    Posts: 2271
    User is Online
    Mar 11, 2008 3:38 pm PT
    yeah we have a 6 page thread going on as well in the ps3 forums so we are not the only ones..but really can we get any responce here??

    ====================================================================
    Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

    PSN ID: Shane12m ,,ONLINE GAMES:Socom C, MLB 08, Rock Band 1+2

    +_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_

    yeah we have a 6 page thread going on as well in the ps3 forums so we are not the only ones..but really can we get any responce here??
  • Level 33
    Goombella
    Posts: 2959
    Mar 11, 2008 3:39 pm PT
    yian wrote:

    Sensibilities? Wow, that's a big word. Here is my short review of Oblivion, then:

    "Basically, the game allows you to slaughter various different kind of animals, such as boars and mudcrabs. Despite of the caroonish appearance, the game clearly attempts to portray murdering animals as a form of justifiable entertainment."

    "Score: - 6.5 P.S. I love animals!"

    Army of Two review should be taken down. It might have brought up some valid points, but the non-objective attitude simply ruins it. If a reviewer gets personal about something and is not afraid of admitting it, then he should not be reviewing games

    Thats exactly what happened. I think he needs to keep in mind that this a game, and games have storylines with scripts that cover issues in society.

    [QUOTE="yian"]

    Sensibilities? Wow, that's a big word. Here is my short review of Oblivion, then:

    "Basically, the game allows you to slaughter various different kind of animals, such as boars and mudcrabs. Despite of the caroonish appearance, the game clearly attempts to portray murdering animals as a form of justifiable entertainment."

    "Score: - 6.5 P.S. I love animals!"

    Army of Two review should be taken down. It might have brought up some valid points, but the non-objective attitude simply ruins it. If a reviewer gets personal about something and is not afraid of admitting it, then he should not be reviewing games

    [/QUOTE]

    Thats exactly what happened. I think he needs to keep in mind that this a game, and games have storylines with scripts that cover issues in society.

  • Level 36
    Radical Ninja
    Posts: 2758
    User is Online
    Mar 11, 2008 4:01 pm PT

    The review was horrendous.

    Army of Two is definitely not in the top tier of shooting games, but its first effort was actually pretty decent.

    The tongue in cheek tone of the whole modern day, mercenaries are cool concept is interesting. I think the reviewer let something get to him that ended up dominating the review.

    Some parts were good, the life bar over enemies for example.. a valid statement. Putting down the whole mercenaries, hardcore, tough guy concept for simply a dislike and political correctness... not a good reason.

    I couldn't really care less about the score, but I feel its not reflective of the ACTUAL game itself. I would've liked to see a full discussion about the campaign and some more in depth analysis of the multiplayer.

    If the gameplay mechanics, graphics, sound, and AI were more deeply discussed and it truly reflected this score. Then hey, fine. But, that review was covered in so much bias that I refuse to take it seriously. Maybe its just me, but the Army of Two 360/PS3 boards are up in arms.. so I guess I'm not alone.

    *******
    Currently Playing *1st playthroughs only*:

    Xbox 360: None

    Wii: Zelda II

    DS
    : Kingdom Hearts 358/2 Days

    Recently Finished: GTA IV, Batman Arkham Asylum, MegaMan III

    The review was horrendous.

    Army of Two is definitely not in the top tier of shooting games, but its first effort was actually pretty decent.

    The tongue in cheek tone of the whole modern day, mercenaries are cool concept is interesting. I think the reviewer let something get to him that ended up dominating the review.

    Some parts were good, the life bar over enemies for example.. a valid statement. Putting down the whole mercenaries, hardcore, tough guy concept for simply a dislike and political correctness... not a good reason.

    I couldn't really care less about the score, but I feel its not reflective of the ACTUAL game itself. I would've liked to see a full discussion about the campaign and some more in depth analysis of the multiplayer.

    If the gameplay mechanics, graphics, sound, and AI were more deeply discussed and it truly reflected this score. Then hey, fine. But, that review was covered in so much bias that I refuse to take it seriously. Maybe its just me, but the Army of Two 360/PS3 boards are up in arms.. so I guess I'm not alone.

  • Level 59
    Virtual Hustler
    Posts: 14731
    GameSpot staff memberBoard Admin
    Mar 11, 2008 7:17 pm PT

    Comment from staff in this thread

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    The thing I treasure most in life cannot be taken away
    There will never be a reason why I will surrender to your advice
    To change myself, I'd rather die!

    Comment from staff in this thread

ForumsSite Enhancements & Feedback › I was bothered by the army of two review ...