Latest gamesTM scores

[Rin]

this is true. however, AC games don't get 9 across the board because they're generally not good enough to. give the new (improved) game to someone who likely would've given 5 or 6 of the previous games a 9 and he's gonna want to give it a 9.

I don't have a clue what any of that means.

But to say any game needs to appeal to everyone to deserve a score of 9 is plain wrong.

[Sprite Machine]

I'm confused, actually.

On what grounds or basis did they decide you couldn't give it a 9?

[Disgraced Toblerone]

I'm confused, actually.

On what grounds or basis did they decide you couldn't give it a 9?

That's what I want to know too.

[SeanR]

I'm confused, actually.

On what grounds or basis did they decide you couldn't give it a 9?

because he's a mech-fanboy and the readers would have smelt a rat?

[Alex W.]

[The Liberal Elite]

Here's my advice: drope the scores. They're totally pointless, and just encourage these meaningless debates. It's like being in a room full of medieval theologians.

And for the record, GamesTM isn't the only mag to decide scores in advance like this - and in my experience (although obviously I can't talk for GTM here), scores tend to be changed on the basis of what commissioning editors anticipate/intuit a game ought to receive, rather than on the basis of any extensive actual experience. During my time with Edge it was pretty rare that we'd adjust scores after a review had been submitted (and we'd never have dreamed of instructing a reviewer what score to award a game).

8/10

[Tetchy]

[Taurus]

8/10

I've been asked to award that score in plenty of commissions...

[Alex W.]

I've been asked to award that score in plenty of commissions...

You sure it wasn't a typo?

Hey, I've got my post count to think of.

[The Liberal Elite]

I've been asked to award that score in plenty of commissions...

Actually, I was going to give it a 9, but had been advised that it would be marked down.

LOL ROFL and so on.

[frumious]

Edge have no tolerance for games which stand more or less completely still, and tend to mark games according to how innovative they are, or whether they update a familiar idea with genuine skill and talent. I imagine that (from their retrospective on Tomb Raider in issue 1) GamesTM are the same.

Silly Edge. This is Wrong.

[The Liberal Elite]

Silly Edge. This is Wrong.

And so is Alex, as per. How did the tiger woods update get an 8 then?

[Alex W.]

And so is Alex, as per. How did the tiger woods update get an 8 then?

Who can tell? Such is the mystery of Edge. However, it's the explaination they wheeled out for Tekken "Tekken 3 with a new mode" Tag's 6/10, wasn't it? I forget. Anyway, I guess it just depends on the reviewer.

Who'd a thunk it?

[frumious]

And so is Alex, as per. How did the tiger woods update get an 8 then?

Yeah, well, they definitely do it at least a bit. And I've always thought it was very silly. You can be really cross that people keep trotting out the same game with slightly better graphics (if that), and say so in your review, but that doesn't make the new version worse than the old version.

[The Liberal Elite]

Has anyone mentioned the Ducks in the intro to katamari Damacy yet?

[The Liberal Elite]

Hooray! Talk of the ducks has melted the hearts of even the blackest of argumentative hearts.

[Tetchy]

Nah, we're all waiting for the GamesTM posse to come and explain why they made Cacky do this terrible thing.

[footle]

good to see the Galleon 4, I thought I was going mad.

the Edge review (and score of 7) made it look like the worst game you could possibly imagine. the 'good points' they mentioned sounded like terrible ideas and the screenshots (in terms of art direction and enviornments) made the game look laughable. and yet it said '7' at the end.

and 'a flip-happy camera will kill you over and over until you perfect your routine' was about the most fun any part of it sounded.

You've played it.

[zuum]

I can't wait to see what the GamesTM boys see either. They're usually pretty quick to bowl up whenever GamesTM's mentioned.

It's pretty brave of Cacophonus to mention this in public as it doesn't reflect very well on the GamesTM editorial policy. I can't imagine the games developers/publishers would be too happy about it either, should they find out.

I await with bated breath.

[Andy_Tanner]

Most Armored Core games don't reviewed properly because 1) the reviewer is a retard and can't be bothered to learn the controls

or maybe they found the game shit?

and 2) have a bias against the genre already.

what genre, the videogame genre?

[hub2]

Nah, we're all waiting for the GamesTM posse to come and explain why they made Cacky do this terrible thing.

They're already here... all around you... everywhere you look...

*spooky music*

[Alex W.]

good to see the Galleon 4, I thought I was going mad.

the Edge review (and score of 7) made it look like the worst game you could possibly imagine. the 'good points' they mentioned sounded like terrible ideas and the screenshots (in terms of art direction and enviornments) made the game look laughable. and yet it said '7' at the end.

and 'a flip-happy camera will kill you over and over until you perfect your routine' was about the most fun any part of it sounded.

Did you just read the captions or something (that one was under a screenshot for the swimming, and referred to the dodgy swimming sections alone, as Edge praised the camera system in general thoroughly)?

Did you miss:

"The freeform movement is the first of Galleon's subtle revolutions".

"When moving cautiously, it's enough to point him towards his ultimate destination and watch with pride as he sidesteps obstacles and perfectly places his own pixels"

"The next revolution is the way of interacting with objects [...] by the time he gets there, Rhama will have figured out what he's going to do with it. There's no standing dumbly by, waiting for you to pull his strings. These two systems- moving and using- conspire to grace the hero with a remarkably convincing representation of intelligence".

Of course, there are plenty of negatives listed, but they do make a good case for the game, however much you disagree with it.

[zuum]

Ah, here they are.

[Cacophanus]

On what grounds or basis did they decide you couldn't give it a 9?

They didn't say precisely why, just that it didn't look like a 9. They also backed this up by saying that my reviews "read like an 8" (oh, how I loved that one).

[Treble]

Here's my advice: drope the scores. They're totally pointless, and just encourage these meaningless debates.

We all know scores are a necessary evil. Lack of scores would mean a massive drop in circulation. In my reviews, I'd personally love to drop scores (especially after the Team Xbox morons jumping all over me for awarding a 7 to Ninja Gaiden ), but they are a necessary evil. Most people, by and large, will not be drawn to a review unless the text is summarised by having a numeric value attached. Sad fact of life.

[Cacophanus]

So you must be better than all other reviewes out there.

At Armored Core and other mecha game in existence, hell YES!

Or perhaps it's a game series that apeeals to a wider audience and garners better word of mouth, no?

That is fueled by a piss ton of marketing though.

...and David, stop jumping on the bandwagon you cheeky fucker!

[Alex W.]

At Armored Core and other mecha game in existence, hell YES!

I've never thought that genre experts were the best choices for reviewing niche genres. A bit OT, but unlike major genres, most people won't have played those titles at all, let alone thoroughly. Therefore, it's probably not best for the games to be reviewed from the point of view of experience, as most of the people reading the review won't share that point of view. A newcomer would be a better choice.

That is, unless you're writing the review for fellow veterans, which depends on the publication, of course.

[Cacophanus]

I've never thought that genre experts were the best choices for reviewing niche genres. A bit OT, but unlike major genres, most people won't have played those titles at all, let alone thoroughly. Therefore, it's probably not best for the games to be reviewed from the point of view of experience, as most of the people reading the review won't share that point of view. A newcomer would be a better choice.

That is, unless you're writing the review for fellow veterans, which depends on the publication, of course.

If anything, because I play so many mecha games, I am overtly harsh on the genre. Many regard Anubis to be utterly superb but to me it's very generic. A thorough knowledge base is essential for games reviewing, after all the reader will compare games because they can't afford everything.

Armored Core 2 and Armored Core 2 Another Age were rather bland and tedious games. Yet to someone who hadn't played the originals, they wouldn't realise that.

[breaksmith]

Armored Core 2 and Armored Core 2 Another Age were rather bland and tedious games. Yet to someone who hadn't played the originals, they wouldn't realise that.

More precisely, if you hadn't played them you would be free to judge them by their own merits.

The extisence of better games does not make inferior games any worse, nor vice versa.

[Alex W.]

If anything, because I play so many mecha games, I am overtly harsh on the genre. Many regard Anubis to be utterly superb but to me it's very generic. A thorough knowledge base is essential for games reviewing, after all the reader will compare games because they can't afford everything.

Armored Core 2 and Armored Core 2 Another Age were rather bland and tedious games. Yet to someone who hadn't played the originals, they wouldn't realise that.

Ah, true. However, you're not best placed to judge how a newcomer would feel going into Armoured Core 3, as you're never going to be a newcomer again. Also:

More precisely, if you hadn't played them you would be free to judge them by their own merits.

The extisence of better games does not make inferior games any worse, nor vice versa.

Hmm, that's true, to an extent. But when it comes to getting into a new franchise, someone's going to want to pick up the best of the lot overall, and in that case such a relative analysis would be handy.