The First Bad Review SMG2 -- 'This is kids stuff'

[QUOTE="-wildflower-"]

Yeah, and that's not even the least bit condescending. :roll:

clicketyclick

How is that condescending? You find it insulting to be grouped in with a nephew, a casual gamer, your parents, and nintendo fans?

Really? You can't figure that one out on your own? Lets see, he basically says the game is only enjoyable for old people, children and fanboys (which is something quite different from the "Nintendo Fans" you claim). If you truly can't read between the lines in what he's saying then, in all honesty, there's really no point continuing this discussion.

Here, lets see if this makes things a little more clear and lucid for you: I noticed you rated Okami a 10. Sure, it's a good and a large game and it's especially enjoyable if you're mentally challenged, a neanderthal or five years old. What? You don't like being grouped with the mentally challenged, neanderthals and toddlers?

Something tells me you just want to argue for the sake of arguing.

[QUOTE="kenakuma"]

If thats the reason that you think that line was poorly written than Clickety is right!

Hungry_Homer111

edit: And just so you know, I have voted down a few Gamespot reviews which scored the game highly because it's poorly written, and had basically the same "What's wrong with these people's opinions?" attitude that he had, if that's basically all they had to say in their review. I just think that kind of sentiment should be completely left out of reviews, let alone "professional" reviews.

Clickety is talking more about grammar and such than what he is actually saying in determining wether it is poorly written or not.

So if your saying the reason that line is poorly written because of what he is saying than, well, clickety is right!

[QUOTE="Hungry_Homer111"][QUOTE="kenakuma"]

If thats the reason that you think that line was poorly written than Clickety is right!

You think SMG2 is kiddie as well as the reviewer?

If so I'd put up my flame shield if I were you!

[QUOTE="clicketyclick"][QUOTE="BrunoBRS"] agree or disagree with the guy's point, you have to admit it was awfully written, even for a forum post.Hungry_Homer111

He doesn't build up tension anywhere. I also think 'I'm going to do this' is a very poor way to start any article, unless if it's a scientific essay.DraugenCP

Actually, it's proper writing. I just finished a philosophy major and this is how they encourage you to write. In the very first paragraph, state exactly what you're trying to argue. Right in the first paragraph. And this is how not just university students are told to write, but is also how professional philosophers write. Wow that sounds funny.

He did not criticise reviewers instead of the game. This second part was what you call "building up tension". The tension is that it seems no-one else feels the same way and his POV is not being reflected by any reviewers. This is the tension point because it surprises him that no-one finds a single point of criticism for the game - that it's just universal praise everywhere. We've all had a game where everyone seems to praise it to the skies and we're like "what? seriously? really? I had a completely different experience. Were we playing the same game? Why does everyone think it's great? Am I alone here? Am I crazy or something?"And that's the tension point he was bringing up.

Then he explained why he disagreed WHILE still making it clear that they weren't wrong to say it's a good game. He's not disagreeing with them that it's good, but just that it is lacking something that would make it appeal to most adults who didn't grow up with nintendo.

Now you say his points don't describe "something fundamentally wrong with the game" and call it poor argumentation because of that. However, that's merely because you disagree! The things he found frustrating and annoying... well, you were ok with them. But just because you were ok with them doesn't mean they aren't valid problems!!!! A lot of people complain about the camera in tomb raider games. I accept that, but I've rarely had a problem with it. I still accept it as a valid complaint, because I can appreciate that other people weigh issues in a game differently.

And that's really the whole purpose of a review, isn't it? Everyone states what they like and dislike. You read those things to see if you dislike those same things as much as they do (in which case you'll probably have just as negative an opinion as they do and should avoid the games.) Alternately, if you don't mind the things they dislike, you're probably not going to dislike the game as much as they do! And of course vice versa with the things they liked.

Yes, the whole point of reviews is to gather a bunch of different people's opinions on a game so you can get a full set of positives and negatives about a game, and judge for yourself how much each point matters to you, and on that basis, make an informed decision about whether to invest your hard-earned money in the game. And for that very reason, I hope this review counts to metacritic. The more opinions the better. Always. Always. Always.

Btw jazz jackrabbit is awesome

See my edit. I was mearly saying that I just think that kind of attitude, where the reviewer is basically calling out other reviewers for their own opinion is completely unprofessional, and pretty much destroys any credibility they may have. Whether it's people like him, who think poorly of the game, or question why people love it so much, or people who enjoy the game and are calling out any reviewers who gave it low scores. I personally love the game so far, but that's my opinion. I'm not going to go around blasting other peoples' opinions (though I may state my disagreement in a civilized manner), unless if there's something like this which makes them look completely unprofessional while expressing that opinion.Hungry_Homer111

Yeah, as soon as I posted it I saw your edit and rewrote my response.

Suprised you caught that first post, I deleted it in a matter of seconds...

[QUOTE="clicketyclick"]

How is that condescending? You find it insulting to be grouped in with a nephew, a casual gamer, your parents, and nintendo fans? -wildflower-

Really? You can't figure that one out on your own? Lets see, he basically says the game is only enjoyable for old people, children and fanboys (which is something quite different from the "Nintendo Fans" you claim). If you truly can't read between the lines in what he's saying then, in all honesty, there's really no point continuing this discussion.

Here, lets see if this makes things a little more clear and lucid for you: I noticed you rated Okami a 10. Sure, it's a good and a large game and it's especially enjoyable if you're mentally challenged, a neanderthal or five years old. What? You don't like being grouped with the mentally challenged, neanderthals and toddlers?

Something tells me you just want to argue for the sake of arguing.

Now that was incredibly condescending. :)

Thank you for proving my point. The people in this thread can't accept opinions that differ from their own. You say that the claim that a game appeals to children, casual gamers, older gamers, and nintendo fans is condescending... and then when someone asks you how because they can't see it, you proceed to lambast them with condescending insults. Oh the irony!

just throwing it here, he doesn't even know the name of the wiimote and nunchuck, or starbits. BrunoBRS

Just because he doesn't use the name doesn't mean he doesn't know it. People who haven't played SMG don't know what "starbits" means - it's easier to just describe them. And I wonder exactly how many wii owners know the names of the controllers. I know you certainly don't, because it's actually "wii remote" and "nunchuk" ;)

As for the story, a game deserves criticism for its story if it puts an emphasis on it. Galaxy has cut-scenes and a narrative. In SMG1, there was a terribly large emphasis on story what with the whole comet princess and all. He says that he understands people don't play mario for the story, but guess what? The story is part of the reason why I don't like mario games, and why I feel it's lacking... what shall we say... sophistication. So ya, it still is a problem for me, even though I get that this doesn't make it a bad game.

Actually, it's proper writing. I just finished a philosophy major and this is how they encourage you to write. In the very first paragraph, state exactly what you're trying to argue. Right in the first paragraph. And this is how not just university students are told to write, but is also how professional philosophers write. Wow that sounds funny.clicketyclick

A scientific essay is something different, something which I already mentioned in my previous post. I am very well aware of how to write an essay, but this is not an article that has to clarify its purpose - it's a review of a video game, and it is nonsensical to think you have to spill the beans in the first sentence, let alone in such a way. Seeing as his target audience probably isn't your usual gamer (as I don't think this is a gaming website), he will probably want to introduce the subject before giving his opinion on it - the former of which he fails to do in the entire review. If I were ignorant of the latest gaming trends, I would have no idea how to play this game after reading this article. And mind that, in a scientific article, one of the FIRST things you do is to introduce the subject.

Also, if you're judging this review by Academic standards, how can you ignore his horrid argumentation structure? He claims that the game is not fun for adults because is it kiddy. But why? Why doesn't it appeal to adults? Why do you think the music is bad? This review is just a series of random statements with no clarification.

But all of that is still not considering the weirdness of you trying to compare a random statement about SMG2 being a good game for his nephew Kyle to the introduction of a scientific thesis. I've actually had to write reviews for Academic writing classes, and I can guarantee you that if I turn in something like this, I probably wouldn't even get points for trying.

"He did not criticise reviewers instead of the game. That was what you call "building up tension". The tension is that it seems no-one else feels the same way and his POV is not being reflected by any reviewers. This is the tension point because it surprises him that no-one finds a single point of criticism for the game - that it's just universal praise everywhere. We've all had a game where everyone seems to praise it to the skies and we're like "what? seriously? really? I had a completely different experience. Were we playing the same game? Why does everyone think it's great? Am I alone here? Am I crazy or something?" And that's the tension point he was bringing up."

Again, it's not necessarily the fact that he does this (although any attempt to start some kind of polemic or whatever should be magnificent or left out altogether), but the fashion in which he does it. Take this sentence for instance:

"With all due respect to other reviewers, this is kids' stuff. Are you really enjoying this game so much? Really? Really?"

Do you honestly believe such a sentence belongs in a review that pretends to be halfway professional?

"Then he explained why he disagreed WHILE still making it clear that they weren't wrong to say it's a good game. He's not disagreeing with them that it's good, but just that it is lacking something that would make it appeal to most adults who didn't grow up with nintendo. Now you say his points don't describe "something fundamentally wrong with the game" and call it poor argumentation because of that. However, that's merely because you disagree! The found frustrating and annoying... well, you were ok with them. But just because you were ok with them doesn't mean they aren't valid problems!!!!"

As I said, I haven't play this game, hence why I don't even HAVE an opinion on it, so I really do have no clue why you are implying that I don't like this review because I allegedly accept some frustrations he doesn't. I do know, how to play Wii games, and how to play SMG1. If he pointing the Wiimote at the screen all the time makes your hand go numb, you're seriously doing it wrong. When he said this, I imagined this guy sitting in front of the television with his arm pointed straight forward holding the Wiimote in the direction of the screen. Yes, then you will get a sore arm. If you just let your hand rest on your lap, there is no problem. (That's not even mentioning that you don't actually have to point the Wiimote at the screen about 99% of the time.) So if this complaint results from the fact that he is probably holding the controller the wrong way (which I would imagine seeing as he doesn't even know what they're called), is it a valid complaint about the game itself? No, it isn't. This has nothing to do with my opinion on the game, as I already explained in this paragraph as well as in my previous post, but somehow people keep insisting on trying to discredit opinions they don't agree with as personal bias (ironic, isn't it?).

"And that's really the whole purpose of a review, isn't it? Everyone states what they like and dislike. You read those things to see if you dislike those same things as much as they do (in which case you'll probably have just as negative an opinion as they do and should avoid the game) or if you don't mind those things. If you don't mind the things they dislike, you're probably not going to dislike the game as much as they do! And of course vice versa with the things they liked. Yes, the whole point of reviews is to gather a bunch of different people's opinions on a game so you can get a full set of positives and negatives about a game, and judge for yourself how much each point matters to you, and on that basis, make an informed decision about whether to invest your hard-earned money in the game. And for that very reason, I hope this review counts to metacritic. The more opinions the better. Always. Always. Always."

As someone who is looking to buy SMG2, I actually found this review unhelpful, as it presents nothing but a few vague complaints in a disorganised fashion (why didn't he try to tell us a bit more about the music, for instance?). Now that I think of it, the most basic problem of this review is that he only says THAT he dislikes certain aspects, but fails to explain WHY. This is why this review is terrible. As I explained already, I'm actually looking for more critical reviews as the mindless praise is often not very informative, but this review failed to satisfy that need in anyway.

Don't interpret the above as some fanboy attempt to discard a review he doesn't like as poorly written because it isn't compatible with his opinion, though - it really is poorly written. I have no interest in bashing it because it's more negative than the others, if only because I've not actually played the game and am open to any complaints about it, as that's actually more useful than mindless praise. I was even one of the first to criticise the IGN review because it wasn't critical enough, but after I read this review I was just disappointed at how poor it was, as I expected some good points to be made. I am seriously not even sure if this is a serious, or just some lame attempt to generate more hits.

DraugenCP

for example, i was reading NGamer the other day, and they wrote a review on monster hunter tri. i love the magazine, but that specific review was inconsistent and poorly written. they gave the game a 95/100, a great score which i'd agree with, wasn't it for the fact that the whole review was full of complaints and the reviewer finished by saying "i'm only not giving it a perfect score because the broadband connection in Brazil is limited (note: funny, i pay the equivalent to $30 for 10MB speed, i'm pretty sure the average gamer can pay it). i know, it's not the game's fault, but it doesn't fit the reality of the country" (again: on a country where games cost at least $100, if you're a gamer, you have money for good internet speed).

deducting points from something that's not even the game's fault and makes no sense rather than the tons of complaints done during the review (some valid, some not exactly) is an example of poor writing. and just like Mr. "the video game dork" here, the reviewer on MH3 did little to describe the game itself.

Actually, it's proper writing. I just finished a philosophy major and this is how they encourage you to write. In the very first paragraph, state exactly what you're trying to argue. Right in the first paragraph. And this is how not just university students are told to write, but is also how professional philosophers write. Wow that sounds funny.

clicketyclick

It's proper writing if you're writing an editorial. It's not proper writing if you're writing a review on a game.

Here are all the things wrong with it:

"Super Mario Galaxy 2 is a very cute Mario game that I would strongly suggest for my nephew, Kyle. It's quite good. On the other hand, I'm going to devote a lot of this review to criticizing the one super dumb thing in it that's annoying me to no end."

Right off the bat, the reviewer basically acknowledges that this isn't going to be a review. Spending a considerable time in a review criticizing one single thing makes for an objectively bad review. The purpose of a review is to give a broad overview of a game and to evaluate it as a whole such that those reading will be able to better make a decision regarding whether or not to purchase it. Leave your pet peeves at the door. Mention them in passing if you must, but for God's sake don't declare right in the opening paragraph that you're going to devote much of the review to them.

"OK, that's great. For kids. And for casual gamers. And for parents. But what is it with all the adult reviewers in America giving this game their best ratings of the year? With all due respect to other reviewers, this is kids' stuff. Are you really enjoying this game so much? Really? Really?"

As if the first paragraph wasn't enough, now we find out one of the dumb things in it that's annoying him to no end, and it's... not even something in the game. He devotes three whole sentences right at the beginning to saying absolutely nothing about the game, and instead looks like he's trying to desperately draw out applause from the crowd as if he's Jerry Seinfeld ("I mean, seriously guys, what's up with those adult reviewers liking this game? Am I right?").

"The big, good thing: There are more than 40 stages to travel through. The universe looks creative and colorful. The planets are lovely. It's fairly easy to maneuver Mario (but not smooth enough, I'd say). The annoying thing: As usual with the Wii, you hold one hand controller in your left hand, and another hand controller in your right hand. That's fine. But for this game, more than most games, you must point the right-handed wand at the screen for what seems like an eternity, to control a cursor that A) rolls over floating stars (to collect them), B) grabs onto things to eat, and C) grabs onto things to zipline up to."

OK, you hate using the Wii pointer, even though that's an integral part of the controller. Fine.

"Am I the only critic who thinks pointing-at-collectible-stars-all-the-time is off-putting and makes my right hand go numb after a few hours? I think I might be."

And now we're back to talking about those weird ol' other adult critics again.

"I don't want to sound like a Mario hater. I'm not. Me and Mario go way back. But this never-ceasing Wand-pointing business makes me want to play a different game in my spare time. I want to stress that complaint to game-makers for future 'Galaxy' sequels. Thank you. That said, let's get back to perspective: This is a very good, huge game, with months of replay value for your nephew, your casual gamer, your parents, your Nintendo fanboys. Also, your adult critics, one of whom called this the best Wii game yet made."

And that's it. That's the whole review. He spends two-fifths of the time complaining about one single design choice that he didn't like, two-fifths of the time awkwardly questioning the tastes of, uh, basically every reviewer in the world, and one-fifth of the game talking about how despite these facts the game is great. I can summarize why this is a terrible review in one sentence: If I were a prospective buyer, and if I had read the review, I would have walked away with absolutely no extra knowledge whatsoever that would have helped me in my decision on whether or not to buy the game. This review would have gotten a poor grade in high school. It's rambling, aimless, and totally unhelpful on every level. The guy has basically abused his position as a reviewer to instead just write a poorly written rant. And that is why this is an objectively bad review.

[QUOTE="BrunoBRS"] just throwing it here, he doesn't even know the name of the wiimote and nunchuck, or starbits. clicketyclick

Just because he doesn't use the name doesn't mean he doesn't know it. People who haven't played SMG don't know what "starbits" means - it's easier to just describe them. And I wonder exactly how many wii owners know the names of the controllers. I know you certainly don't, because it's actually "wii remote" and "nunchuk" ;)

and nitpicking is unfair :P anyway, i think it's much easier for any person on earth to realize that a person is talking about the wii remote (which everyone, including nintendo, calls "wiimote") when they call it by its name ("oh, it's the remote you use to play wii") than calling it a "hand controller", which i swear it's the first time i've ever read that name to describe any kind of controller.

and i'll let you go with the story part, since you and the guy aren't the only ones who complained (wired did too), even though his way of complaining is still vague and limited, an adjective no review should have in any situation

[QUOTE="-wildflower-"]

[QUOTE="clicketyclick"]

How is that condescending? You find it insulting to be grouped in with a nephew, a casual gamer, your parents, and nintendo fans? clicketyclick

Really? You can't figure that one out on your own? Lets see, he basically says the game is only enjoyable for old people, children and fanboys (which is something quite different from the "Nintendo Fans" you claim). If you truly can't read between the lines in what he's saying then, in all honesty, there's really no point continuing this discussion.

Here, lets see if this makes things a little more clear and lucid for you: I noticed you rated Okami a 10. Sure, it's a good and a large game and it's especially enjoyable if you're mentally challenged, a neanderthal or five years old. What? You don't like being grouped with the mentally challenged, neanderthals and toddlers?

Something tells me you just want to argue for the sake of arguing.

Now that was incredibly condescending. :)

Thank you for proving my point. The people in this thread can't accept opinions that differ from their own. You say that the claim that a game appeals to children, casual gamers, older gamers, and nintendo fans is condescending... and then when someone asks you how because they can't see it, you proceed to lambast them with condescending insults. Oh the irony!

Surely, you know that wasn't a real insult, and was just a way to get you to see the point. The fact that you describe -wildflower-'s reply as an insult, however, shows the true irony of the whole thing; you seem to think that the reviewer's remark of Galaxy 2 are reasonable and say that those who object to it can't handle an opinion, yet the moment an example of a similar remark is geared towards a game of your preference, you want to call it an insult. Am I seeing a double starndard here? You went out of your way to call out and stereotype Nintendo fans for something that you apparently can't deal with well yourself.

Personally speaking, I've nothing against the review. Quite frankly, I'm enjoying Galaxy 2 too much to care about whether or not someone calls it "kid's stuff" or anything else for that matter. If it makes me look like a kid to play a superb game, then so be it. :roll: It just looks like the reviewer wanted to gain some attention, hence why he insisted on calling out all of the positive reviews Galaxy 2 has received as if the game is undeserving of it, only to wind up giving it a darn good score himself. His gripes with the game are less actual faults of the game itself and more along the lines of who he thinks the game is made for, which can easily be disproven by adult gamers who aren't generally Mario/Nintendo fans being able to enjoy the game.

[QUOTE="clicketyclick"]

[QUOTE="-wildflower-"]

Really? You can't figure that one out on your own? Lets see, he basically says the game is only enjoyable for old people, children and fanboys (which is something quite different from the "Nintendo Fans" you claim). If you truly can't read between the lines in what he's saying then, in all honesty, there's really no point continuing this discussion.

Here, lets see if this makes things a little more clear and lucid for you: I noticed you rated Okami a 10. Sure, it's a good and a large game and it's especially enjoyable if you're mentally challenged, a neanderthal or five years old. What? You don't like being grouped with the mentally challenged, neanderthals and toddlers?

Something tells me you just want to argue for the sake of arguing.Madmangamer364

Now that was incredibly condescending. :)

Thank you for proving my point. The people in this thread can't accept opinions that differ from their own. You say that the claim that a game appeals to children, casual gamers, older gamers, and nintendo fans is condescending... and then when someone asks you how because they can't see it, you proceed to lambast them with condescending insults. Oh the irony!

Surely, you know that wasn't a real insult, and was just a way to get you to see the point. The fact that you describe -wildflower-'s reply as an insult, however, shows the true irony of the whole thing; you seem to think that the reviewer's remark of Galaxy 2 are reasonable and say that those who object to it can't handle an opinion, yet the moment an example of a similar remark is geared towards a game of your preference, you want to call it an insult. Am I seeing a double starndard here? You went out of your way to call out and stereotype Nintendo fans for something that you apparently can't deal with well yourself.

@Draugen - a philosophy essay is not a scientific essay! A philosophy essay is meant to explain material the reader may be unfamiliar with as well as present an opinion on it.clicketyclick

It actually often is of a scientific nature, yes, or at least structured accordingly.

And what is a game review if not that? FIRST you state your thesis - what you're going to argue.

Game reviews actually start the other way around. First the subject is introduced, then first impressions are given (but the conclusion is often not yet drawn until its very end).

"Then you give some background information to help the reader understand the material"

Did he describe anywhere how this game is played? Apart from some vague references to its number of stages and star bits, he does not, and gamers who are completely unfamiliar with this game would have no idea how this game works after reading this article. That's undeniable, really. Hell, I think he even managed to fail to mention it's a platforming game.

"It's in this specific structure so that the reader doesn't have to guess where you're going with things. They know right off the bat that you feel this way about it, and they can read the rest with that in mind, looking for why you don't like it. His form is fine. He explained why it doesn't appeal to non-nintendo fan adults. It's not really something that the game does, but what it doesn't do. It's the lack of story, the simplistic goals... it's just... it's made with children in mind. That doesn't mean that adults can't enjoy it, but it's infinitely harder if you're not a fan already."

Actually, he didn't mention all the things you just mentioned in so many words. He did say something about the story, but he later said Mario doesn't need a story, and he even fails to relate many of his points to the overall thought ('this game is kiddy'), which is why I'm getting the impression you're just looking for things that aren't there.

"And yes, I find the sentences "Are you really enjoying this game so much? Really? Really?" To be fitting. If someone can't find a single point of criticism, I'm a bit skeptical that they really thought it was as great as they say. EVERYTHING has a flaw. I don't know if this story is true or not, but one time when I was playing piano at a concert, I messed up a bit. It still went well, but I was upset because I had practiced a lot. My piano teacher told me that one time, Chopin was giving a concert and he played so beautifully that people were reduced to tears in the audience. He got a standing ovation for many minutes. Afterwards, one of the audience members came up to him and said, "that was an incredible performance! Absolute perfection!" To which, he replied: "I missed a B-flat." Nothing human-created is perfect. If people can't see any flaws with a game, then I get suspicious that they are viewing it through rose-coloured glasses. Others just go all out and scream payoff. :p But the point is, if you're a video game critic, I expect criticism, EVEN if you liked the game. Because of course that is how proper essay writing works. If you like something, you're supposed to bring up criticism of it, and defend it against the criticisms you brought up. Have we really seen that from the other reviewers?"

*sigh* Do you actually read my posts, like, as a whole? I already said like three times that I would actually LIKE to read some valuable criticism. I already said like three times that I DID think many of the 10/10 reviews were insufficient and non-helpful. But I also said that this review just completely fails at making a point, while I was actually hoping to finally read some complaints about the game. I am a potential buyer of this game, I am looking for information on its quality. I should be part of this guy's target audience, and from that perspective I can say in all honesty that this review was a waste of my time, and I regret I'll never get the 2 minutes back that it took me to skim through this incoherent rambling. If you're just trying to argue for the sake of arguing in some trollish attempt to try and keep me busy with repeating myself, I congratulate you for succeeding, but if not I encourage you to read through my posts again and make sure I haven't addressed your points in one of them already.

Explain to me exactly how being grouped with the list "nephew, casual gamer, parents, and Nintendo fanboys" is equivalent to being grouped with the list "mentally challenged, neaderthal, and five years old". What, you think nephews (or children in general) are all five years old, all Nintendo fanboys are neaderthals, and all casual gamers are mentally challenged? Well, I respectfully disagree with you. :) Though I find your opinion about casual gamers to be very off-putting and off-base. ;)clicketyclick

It's the semantical value of that statement. Five year olds aren't known for their elevated level of thinking, casual gamers aren't known for their vast knowledge of gaming, and Nintendo fanboys aren't known for their objectivity.

So if you read inbetween the lines, he says that, in order for you to enjoy this, you should preferably have the mindset of a toddler, be ignorant of games, or be a zealous and biased follower of the series.

If you can't see that's an insult then I'll just rest my case.

[QUOTE="Madmangamer364"]

Surely, you know that wasn't a real insult, and was just a way to get you to see the point. The fact that you describe -wildflower-'s reply as an insult, however, shows the true irony of the whole thing; you seem to think that the reviewer's remark of Galaxy 2 are reasonable and say that those who object to it can't handle an opinion, yet the moment an example of a similar remark is geared towards a game of your preference, you want to call it an insult. Am I seeing a double standard here? You went out of your way to call out and stereotype Nintendo fans for something that you apparently can't deal with well yourself.

clicketyclick

I'm very disappointed... I thought you were smart enough to see the similarities between the two to know the way of treating and disproving them can be done in the exact same manner. Much like you don't have to be a neanderthal, five year old, or mentally challenged to enjoy Okami, you don't have to be a 'casual gamer', parent, nephew, or Nintendo fanboy to see what's great about Super Mario Galaxy 2. It wasn't about the terms that were being used to group the potential players of the game, but the fact that the groupings themselves don't do the games or its players justice; they very rarely do, and the reviewer's grouping was one of the worst I've seen in some time. Once again, you reacted in a way that, according to your opinion on Nintendo fans, you don't think too highly of.

And don't try to put words in my mouth, suggesting that I'm implying something that I'm not. By now, you should know that I find the term 'casual gamer' to be a bad and insulting enough stereotype by itself to think that everyone who is given the label is mentally challenged. ;)

Game reviews actually start the other way around. First the subject is introduced, then first impressions are given (but the conclusion is often not yet drawn until its very end).DraugenCP

Says who? Oh, says convention. If everyone does it like that, doing it differently must be wrong. And if everyone says that SMG2 is perfect then... well... :)

Did he describe anywhere how this game is played? Apart from some vague references to its number of stages and star bits, he does not, and gamers who are completely unfamiliar with this game would have no idea how this game works after reading this article. That's undeniable, really. Hell, I think he even managed to fail to mention it's a platforming game.DraugenCP

Pretty much everyone knows what Mario gameplay consists of. It's fairly basic and has been around since like... the 70s or 80s (I'm too lazy to look it up) and hasn't changed in that time. For the people who don't know what Mario is, telling them it's a platformer isn't going to help them because they are probably clueless about gaming and have no interest in it. Those people are either not reading the article, or, this paragraph does fine: "Galaxy 2 feels a lot like the first Super Mario Galaxy. You portray Mario. You travel from planet to quirky little planet, running or riding across each orb for a few minutes, bonking bad guys, finding hidden gems, collecting floating stars and coins, then flying to the next planet for more of the same."

*sigh* Do you actually read my posts, like, as a whole? I already said like three times that I would actually LIKE to read some valuable criticism. I already said like three times that I DID think many of the 10/10 reviews were insufficient and non-helpful. But I also said that this review just completely fails at making a point, while I was actually hoping to finally read some complaints about the game. I am a potential buyer of this game, I am looking for information on its quality. I should be part of this guy's target audience, and from that perspective I can say in all honesty that this review was a waste of my time, and I regret I'll never get the 2 minutes back that it took me to skim through this incoherent rambling. If you're just trying to argue for the sake of arguing in some trollish attempt to try and keep me busy with repeating myself, I congratulate you for succeeding, but if not I encourage you to read through my posts again and make sure I haven't addressed your points in one of them already.DraugenCP

This is why I hate posting in this forum. People quickly start throwing the word "troll" around if someone happens to not toe the line about a Nintendo game. I haven't had that happen anywhere else except when discussing Nintendo games, funnily enough. I'm not sure what that says about Nintendo fans, but it leads me to be even more sympathetic to his viewpoint.

Look, this review offers some criticisms. You don't consider the things he found problematic to be an issue for you. Fine! You'll like the game then. That's what it tells you. But just because you don't think the things he's criticising will be a problem for you doesn't mean they're not valid and doesn't mean it wasted your time. And honestly, if you're not sure whether you'll like a Mario game at this point...

[QUOTE="clicketyclick"]Explain to me exactly how being grouped with the list "nephew, casual gamer, parents, and Nintendo fanboys" is equivalent to being grouped with the list "mentally challenged, neaderthal, and five years old". What, you think nephews (or children in general) are all five years old, all Nintendo fanboys are neaderthals, and all casual gamers are mentally challenged? Well, I respectfully disagree with you. :) Though I find your opinion about casual gamers to be very off-putting and off-base. ;)DraugenCP

It's the semantical value of that statement. Five year olds aren't known for their elevated level of thinking, casual gamers aren't known for their vast knowledge of gaming, and Nintendo fanboys aren't known for their objectivity.

So if you read inbetween the lines, he says that, in order for you to enjoy this, you should preferably have the mindset of a toddler, be ignorant of games, or be a zealous and biased follower of the series.

If you can't see that's an insult then I'll just rest my case.

Says who? Oh, says convention. If everyone does it like that, doing it differently must be wrong. And if everyone says that SMG2 is perfect then... well... :)clicketyclick

Considering you said this:

"And this is how not just university students are told to write, but is also how professional philosophers write."

You were the first one to refer to an authority to prove your point, and now you accuse me of doing the same. That's cute.

"Pretty much everyone knows what Mario gameplay consists of. It's fairly basic and has been around since like... the 70s or 80s (I'm too lazy to look it up) and hasn't changed in that time. For the people who don't know what Mario is, telling them it's a platformer isn't going to help them because they are probably clueless about gaming and have no interest in it. Those people are either not reading the article, or, this paragraph does fine: "Galaxy 2 feels a lot like the first Super Mario Galaxy. You portray Mario. You travel from planet to quirky little planet, running or riding across each orb for a few minutes, bonking bad guys, finding hidden gems, collecting floating stars and coins, then flying to the next planet for more of the same."

Obviously not everyone is gonna no seeing as it is not a gaming publication and chances are slim that the casual/non-gamer/whatever you'd like to call it crowd has ever played a 3D platformer. I'm not saying he should say 'it's a platformer', but describe how the platforming element is implemented into the gameplay, as SMG does that in a rather unique way, with the gravity elements, pull star sequences, etc.. The reviewer failed to mention any of this in his quotation, and the misguided assumption that SMG2 basically still plays the same as SMB1 isn't a way out of it.

"This is why I hate posting in this forum. People quickly start throwing the word "troll" around if someone happens to not toe the line about a Nintendo game. I haven't had that happen anywhere else except when discussing Nintendo games, funnily enough. I'm not sure what that says about Nintendo fans, but it leads me to be even more sympathetic to his viewpoint."

Nice try on trying to catch the 'you are a fanboy' escape pod there, but this has absolutely nothing to do with it. I am just annoyed that you try to attribute my criticism on this obviously horrendous review to my non-existant opinion of this game.

"Look, this review offers some criticisms. You don't consider the things he found problematic to be an issue for you. Fine!"

For the xth time, he fails to mention exactly WHAT it is he dislikes about the game. It is vague, and your attempts to clarify it by giving some hypothetical thoughts on the motivation behind his bad arguments doesn't make it any better.

"You'll like the game then. That's what it tells you. But just because you don't think the things he's criticising will be a problem for you doesn't mean they're not valid and doesn't mean it wasted your time."

I don't think his criticisms are valid because they aren't criticisms, rather random impulsive statement on the game with no examples or elaboration to back it up.

Haz Jayson wrote it you should know that

Haz Jayson wrote it you should know that

link027

LOL he's a "Hardcore".

:P

Considering you said this:

"And this is how not just university students are told to write, but is also how professional philosophers write."

You were the first one to refer to an authority to prove your point, and now you accuse me of doing the same. That's cute.DraugenCP

You said it wasn't proper writing. It was poor writing. I defended that it wasn't by referring to authorities on excellent writing. You referred to convention. Convention does not good writing make!

And look, if someone said that Okami appeals to children, parents, casual gamers, and Nintendo fanboys, i'd disagree because I'm not sure how much Nintendo fans and casual gamers would like it... I suppose they might. But I wouldn't be offended or feel insulted.

His criticisms were:

- it's more of the same as previous outings in the series ("Galaxy 2 feels a lot like the first Super Mario Galaxy"; "It begins with Princess Peach getting kidnapped by Bowser for the 1 zillionth time in a Mario game")

- gameplay is repetitive ("You travel from planet to quirky little planet, running or riding across each orb for a few minutes, bonking bad guys, finding hidden gems, collecting floating stars and coins, then flying to the next planet for more of the same"; "You just need to run from point A to point B to C to D to infinity")

- the controls are annoying, at least for older people ("Am I the only critic who thinks pointing-at-collectible-stars-all-the-time is off-putting and makes my right hand go numb after a few hours? I think I might be"; " this never-ceasing Wand-pointing business makes me want to play a different game in my spare time. I want to stress that complaint to game-makers for future "Galaxy" sequels")

- the musical score is not very good ("the background music sounds like the bad orchestral cheese they spread over the end-credits of Academy Awards programs")

And really, what more is there to say? Pokemon is a good game... or was... but it's been reiterated and reiterated to the point that, well, some people can't really say "what a great game" anymore and want to play it because it's just repetitive and more of the same. Nintendo did the same with Animal Crossing. It was a good game when it was originally released... it's still basically that same good game that was originally released... but do you still want to play it? Or are you tired of that?

His claim is that this latest Mario outing is yet another franchise that Nintendo has milked without adding that many new ideas to keep it fresh. Now you can disagree with that. That's fine. But if you do feel this way about mario, what more is there to say for why you don't like it but that it's good yet it's just more of the same thing we thought was good a few years ago." His claim is that non-nintendo fan adults aren't as forgiving of repetition and more-of-the-sameyness. They want a new experience.

I mean, isn't that why the Wii succeeded in the first place?

That guy's just looking for attention. He must have gotten an award for trolling.

"If I wanted to nitpick, I'd tell you the background music sounds like the bad orchestral cheese they spread over the end-credits of Academy Awards programs"

Pathetic.

Can someone please explain to me what a "normal adult" is, and why fans of Nintendo games don't fit into that category?

And really, what more is there to say?clicketyclick

What more is there to say? :? What about, well, everything about the game? He didn't even really say anything specifically about the game. He assumes that the reader knows all about Super Mario Galaxy, which is in itself a problem, and then takes up a majority of the review just complaining about the pointer controls (which were also in Super Mario Galaxy...) and worst of all complaining about other reviewers.

I hope you're just playing devil's advocate. :P

[QUOTE="clicketyclick"]And really, what more is there to say?GabuEx

What more is there to say? :? What about, well, everything about the game? He didn't even really say anything specifically about the game. He assumes that the reader knows all about Super Mario Galaxy, which is in itself a problem, and then takes up a majority of the review just complaining about the pointer controls (which were also in Super Mario Galaxy...) and worst of all complaining about other reviewers.

I hope you're just playing devil's advocate. :P

You said it wasn't proper writing. It was poor writing. I defended that it wasn't by referring to authorities on excellent writing. You referred to convention. Convention does not good writing make!clicketyclick

Nor does some arbitrary reference to how a vastly different current of writing would somehow justify his style, ignoring the fact that his opening sentence is weak from an argumentative point of view, and plain nonsensical from a literary point of view. Yes, you can mention your general opinion or impression in the opening sentences, but his opening, which is basically a completely random thought he fails to back up anywhere in his article, just goes against any aesthetical view you might have of whatever type of writing. The guy cannot write, it's as simple as that.

His claim is that this latest Mario outing is yet another franchise that Nintendo has milked without adding that many new ideas to keep it fresh.

He didn't say that. You're trying to interpret and reconstruct what he might have tried to say, while it is painfully obvious that, even if he meant these things you speak of, it came out poorly.

That's all I feel like replying to for now, as I have no intent of repeating myself. And I hope you're playing devil's advocate, as well. :P

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

[QUOTE="clicketyclick"]And really, what more is there to say?clicketyclick

What more is there to say? :? What about, well, everything about the game? He didn't even really say anything specifically about the game. He assumes that the reader knows all about Super Mario Galaxy, which is in itself a problem, and then takes up a majority of the review just complaining about the pointer controls (which were also in Super Mario Galaxy...) and worst of all complaining about other reviewers.

I hope you're just playing devil's advocate. :P

He didn't say that. You're trying to interpret and reconstruct what he might have tried to say, while it is painfully obvious that, even if he meant these things you speak of, it came out poorly.DraugenCP

He's not complaining about other reviewers, but about their unanimity and lack of all criticism.clicketyclick

So, um, he's not complaining about other reviewers, but about other reviewers? He even specifically addresses questions to the reviewers with the pronoun "you" in his article. That is complaining about reviewers.

And really, that's what you do in persuasive essays. You attack other people's opinions. Attacking the reviewer's opinions is not the same as attacking the reviewer himself, which is what the people in this thread did ("bad writing!", "troll!", "ignorant!" etc)clicketyclick

Yeah, that's great, but this is not a persuasive essay. It's a review.

It never ceases to amuse me how often the "poor writing!" accusation comes up when someone happens to disagree with a review of a game they love.clicketyclick

I thought Super Mario Galaxy was overrated and thus far I feel that Super Mario Galaxy 2 is the same, but, you know, thanks for asking.

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

[QUOTE="clicketyclick"]And really, what more is there to say?clicketyclick

What more is there to say? :? What about, well, everything about the game? He didn't even really say anything specifically about the game. He assumes that the reader knows all about Super Mario Galaxy, which is in itself a problem, and then takes up a majority of the review just complaining about the pointer controls (which were also in Super Mario Galaxy...) and worst of all complaining about other reviewers.

I hope you're just playing devil's advocate. :P

In persausive essays you be chartible and attack & defend arguments. This is a review though. You dont't do that.

So, um, he's not complaining about other reviewers, but about other reviewers? He even specifically addresses questions to the reviewers with the pronoun "you" in his article. That is complaining about reviewers.

GabuEx

Yeah, that's great, but this is not a persuasive essay. It's a review.

GabuEx

In persausive essays you be chartible and attack & defend arguments. This is a review though. You dont't do that.

trugs26

Hey Click, what is a "normal adult"?

Hey Click, what is a "normal adult"?

bob_newman

Nope, that's challenging their opinions. He didn't say anything about them personally as people. He questioned whether he was really alone in thinking these things, or whether they really enjoyed it as much as they seem to make it out (from a complete lack of criticism.) Questioning a person's opinion: did you really have no problems with this game at all? None? Questioning a person: your post is just poor writing. I'm just going to skim it or not bother reading it at all. Troll! Cmon, you're a mod. Which is the moddable offense: posting to tell someone you're not going to bother reading what they wrote and calling them a troll (aka. flamebaiting) or, questioning someone whether they really enjoyed a game as much as they say they did and have no criticisms for it?clicketyclick

This?

"But what is it with all the adult reviewers in America giving this game their best ratings of the year? With all due respect to other reviewers, this is kids' stuff. Are you really enjoying this game so much? Really? Really?"

If someone posted that on GameSpot and wrote it in response to users, then yes, I actually would call that a moddable offense. He calls out the reviewers. He says as though it were a matter of fact that the game is kids' stuff. He rhetorically asks them if they are enjoying the game that much (implying that they're not, and that they're lying), and then punctuates that with two instances of "Really?" The use of the phrase "with all due respect" doesn't save a rant that is not respectful at all. That passage is trolling, no question about it.

Maybe I missed the part where it was established that you cannot write a review (an opinion piece) like a persuasive essay. Was it the 11th commandment that Moses brought down from the mountain? Thou Shalt Not Kill and Thou Shalt Not Write Opinion Pieces Like Persuasive Essays Or God Shall Be Quite Irate? Did they put that in the textbook for the journalism class Game Reviewing 101: Proper Formats For Writing Game Reviews? Hey. This guy, unlike most game reviewers, is an actual journalist with an actual journalism degree. Most don't even have that! Most come out of English or Drama backgrounds. I kid you not. This is the guy who got an education on how to write with proper format. And people are saying he's not writing like a Drama major so he's doing it wrong.clicketyclick

OK, now I know you're just playing devil's advocate.

Reviewer dude seems a little butt hurt that a game he doesnt like did so well. IMO this guy is just hating. He didnt say much about the actual game. Just keeps complaining about how he has 3 pubes and everyone else has none, and that means he cant play anything with colorful graphics because he is so manly and AMERICAN!!!! YEAH!!!!!!!:P Can't believe somepeople here say this guy is actually sensible.

Maybe I missed the part where it was established that you cannot write a review (an opinion piece) like a persuasive essay. Was it the 11th commandment that Moses brought down from the mountain? Thou Shalt Not Kill and Thou Shalt Not Write Opinion Pieces Like Persuasive Essays Or God Shall Be Quite Irate? Did they put that in the textbook for the journalism class Game Reviewing 101: Proper Formats For Writing Game Reviews? Hey. This guy, unlike most game reviewers, is an actual journalist with an actual journalism degree. Most don't even have that! Most come out of English or Drama backgrounds. I kid you not. This is the guy who got an education on how to write with proper format. And people are saying he's not writing like a Drama major so he's doing it wrong.clicketyclick

Can someone please explain to me what a "normal adult" is, and why fans of Nintendo games don't fit into that category?

bob_newman

This review is being blown out of proportion

1. He said it's for kids, casuals, and parents.

That's 100% true, all you need to do is check out the page for the game to see how much Nintendo is aiming for the people who never played a video game before. "This is a Wiimote and this is how you connect a nunchuk"

2. THe story is missing. Well it's Mario so.....

3. THe music is bad. I agree with that 100%, it makes the game seem like it's trying too hard. It's badly arranged with the levels because there's no intro, build up, and end. Instead it's "BA BA BA DOM LISTEN TO HOW STRONG WE MADE THIS CAN'T YOU SEE WE'RE TRYING?!"

Now the first two are facts and the third one is just opinion, really the only thing to argue about is the music.

This review is being blown out of proportion

1. He said it's for kids, casuals, and parents.

That's 100% true, all you need to do is check out the page for the game to see how much Nintendo is aiming for the people who never played a video game before. "This is a Wiimote and this is how you connect a nunchuk"

2. THe story is missing. Well it's Mario so.....

3. THe music is bad. I agree with that 100%, it makes the game seem like it's trying too hard. It's badly arranged with the levels because there's no intro, build up, and end. Instead it's "BA BA BA DOM LISTEN TO HOW STRONG WE MADE THIS CAN'T YOU SEE WE'RE TRYING?!"

Now the first two are facts and the third one is just opinion, really the only thing to argue about is the music.

Jaysonguy

The structure of the review is the real problem. None of his complaints are really invalid (aside from his directed statements towards other reviewers, which is incredibly unprofessional), but when he spends most of the space of the review on either one single complaint about the controls or on his inability to accept adult reviewers' enjoyment of the game, and when he spends basically no time whatsoever actually, well, talking about the game... that makes for a bad review.

Of course, I've never even heard of this guy, so I would presume he doesn't have much influence, and as a result I don't really care too much... I care more about the subsequent suggestions in this thread that a persuasive essay is a valid format for a review. :P

[QUOTE="Jaysonguy"]

This review is being blown out of proportion

1. He said it's for kids, casuals, and parents.

That's 100% true, all you need to do is check out the page for the game to see how much Nintendo is aiming for the people who never played a video game before. "This is a Wiimote and this is how you connect a nunchuk"

2. THe story is missing. Well it's Mario so.....

3. THe music is bad. I agree with that 100%, it makes the game seem like it's trying too hard. It's badly arranged with the levels because there's no intro, build up, and end. Instead it's "BA BA BA DOM LISTEN TO HOW STRONG WE MADE THIS CAN'T YOU SEE WE'RE TRYING?!"

Now the first two are facts and the third one is just opinion, really the only thing to argue about is the music.

GabuEx

The structure of the review is the real problem. None of his complaints are really invalid (aside from his directed statements towards other reviewers, which is incredibly unprofessional), but when he spends most of the space of the review on either one single complaint about the controls or on his inability to accept adult reviewers' enjoyment of the game, and when he spends basically no time whatsoever actually, well, talking about the game... that makes for a bad review.

I don't know if I'd even call that a standard review

Know those variety celeb shows that cover a bunch of news one after another? It was more like that

It starts with "this is what I think of Mario Galaxy 2 and now what's Bioshock doing these days? Later, what soccer game is hitting shelves soon? FIFA look out!"

This review is being blown out of proportion

1. He said it's for kids, casuals, and parents.

That's 100% true, all you need to do is check out the page for the game to see how much Nintendo is aiming for the people who never played a video game before. "This is a Wiimote and this is how you connect a nunchuk"

2. THe story is missing. Well it's Mario so.....

3. THe music is bad. I agree with that 100%, it makes the game seem like it's trying too hard. It's badly arranged with the levels because there's no intro, build up, and end. Instead it's "BA BA BA DOM LISTEN TO HOW STRONG WE MADE THIS CAN'T YOU SEE WE'RE TRYING?!"

Now the first two are facts and the third one is just opinion, really the only thing to argue about is the music.

Jaysonguy

[QUOTE="Jaysonguy"]

This review is being blown out of proportion

1. He said it's for kids, casuals, and parents.

That's 100% true, all you need to do is check out the page for the game to see how much Nintendo is aiming for the people who never played a video game before. "This is a Wiimote and this is how you connect a nunchuk"

2. THe story is missing. Well it's Mario so.....

3. THe music is bad. I agree with that 100%, it makes the game seem like it's trying too hard. It's badly arranged with the levels because there's no intro, build up, and end. Instead it's "BA BA BA DOM LISTEN TO HOW STRONG WE MADE THIS CAN'T YOU SEE WE'RE TRYING?!"

Now the first two are facts and the third one is just opinion, really the only thing to argue about is the music.

Sepewrath

You're saying that Call of Duty is for children?

No, that's rated M

Also that has a story, although I'm wondering why you're comparing Mario to Madden since they don't mesh at all.

You're saying that Call of Duty is for children?

No, that's rated M

Also that has a story, although I'm wondering why you're comparing Mario to Madden since they don't mesh at all.

Jaysonguy

No, but Call of Duty is arguable to be a casual title, as is Halo.

It's just a 'different' type of casual crowd, they're both mainstream (Mario, Wii Fit, COD, Halo etc).