I think it is pretty important that gamespot makes some kind of gesture to the community here, along the lines of a 'please explain'. A lot of people are expressing their outrage, and justifiably so. Gamespot needs to realise that when they make take a dramatic stand like this in stark contrast to the rest of the critical community then they need to justify their decision. No, a few meaningless words from Mods is not enough. For example, if someone like Jeff Gerstmann, who reviewed three of the previous console incarnations of 'Ratchet and Clank', came out and said yes, this game is the weakest in the series, as reflected by the score, then that would be a start.
The first Ratchet game was awarded 9.0, and the further console games were given 8.8, 8.7 and 8.6. For this new PS3 game to be getting 7.5 is a clear signal that gamespot believes that this new game is a dissapointment relative to the previous games, and marks a significant drop in quality. The problem is, so far it seems only that Aaron Thomas believes this to be the case, and none of us can be sure he was a fan of the old games anyway, although it has been noted that he doesn't even own a PS3. Why in this case is he given the most high profile exclusive PS3 games to review? That alone needs an explanation in my opinion.
Game reviewers do have an obligation to be accountable in their reviews, especially when, as other posters here have noted, these reviews are referenced as an authoritive source by retail channels. Of course this will go on to influence purchasing decisions, and, low balling a high profile game like this with less than valid criticisms effectively harms the company whether the intention is there or not. Suggesting that this new game has an 'identity crisis' is one example. The game is rated E for everyone, has stunning graphics and animation and vibrant characters clearly showing the target audience is a young one. If ratchet were to bust out a chainsaw and start severing limbs, maybe then the game would show an 'identity crisis'. For this target audience the difficulty should be easy. While the difficulty level is quoted several times in the review as a problem, no mention is made of whether the unlockable 'hard' mode addresses these concerns, this is just one example of how the review is insufficient in justifyingit's position.
Many people in the playstation community here at gamespot have become disillusioned with the review process in the wake of this, and further by the recurrent wording of news stories and such which seem intended to get a rise out of the same community. I seem to remember a time on Gamespot when the editorial staff was in support of the Sega Dreamcast despite it's lagging sales, at any rate they certainly had a lot to say about the virtues of the system despite it's lack of support. Of course I believe the future of the PS3 is a bit brighter than the dreamcast, but even it the PS3 was to fail then I wouldn't want to think that my favourite video game site contributed to that with questionable reviews. I think video game sites should be positive about the prospects of ALL video games systems they cover, rather than rant about 'corporate arrogance' in podcasts and the like. Anyway I might send this off to the Hotspot, I would like to think that someone on the Editorial staff could read this post, whether they are going over this special 'Sticky' forum I don't know.
Log in to comment