Jump to content

Latest gamesTM scores


Swainy
 Share

Recommended Posts

Why do all these Edge and Games™ threads always end in fights?

The only positive thing is that this time it's between people writing for the same magazine, which is a first if I'm not mistaken.

Can't wait until the consolevania guys fall out... that would be GREAT entertainment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought Strider and Mart worked there and Cacophanus wrote the occasional thing now and then. It seems odd to have a public debate though. Very intrigued to read this review now, wondering if the readers are referred to as middlecore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But what about the other bit he alleges you said?

Martin's already explained that we can't go into this in deeper detail. I was simply explaining that we don't tell of freelancers what score they have to give a game.

You'll have to draw your own inclusions to this like everyone else...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Martin's already explained that we can't go into this in deeper detail. I was simply explaining that we don't tell of freelancers what score they have to give a game.

Then why was I given strict rules on scoring the two games I had to review?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Martin's already explained that we can't go into this in deeper detail. I was simply explaining that we don't tell of freelancers what score they have to give a game.

You'll have to draw your own inclusions to this like everyone else...

Cacky says you told him a "score cap"

You say you don't do that.

Hmmmm... I'm not even sure I need to stir things up here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...or make glib comments on the sidelines because they haven't got the guts/knowledge/intelligence to contribute!

They might not be at liberty to talk in public about editoral decisions and policies.

It wasn't really professional to bring it up in the first place. You put them in a position where they felt they had to defend themselves on here. Which they did. Beyond that they are not obliged to justify their decisions on here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's pretty obvious that 9 & 10 scores are not given out lightly.  If a freelancer turns in a review with a 9 or 10 score then you'd expect the editorial team to look long and hard at it before letting it through. Or just knock it down a bit if it's a mechy game.

That's what I'd do anyway.

They did look long and hard, but disregarded the content of the review and any subsequent comments I made on it. There was no dialogue, bar them telling me "it's an 8" from before I even submitted the review.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shit. I hate having to go back on my word, but I have to make just one... more... post.

Things to say:

1) I'd like to be here as much as the next guy when it comes to decent debate - however, as has been already said here, all these threads end up in arguments, which then reflect badly on us. If we're not here, that can't happen. End of, I'm afraid.

2) I've given all the info and answers I can on this matter, so if you're looking for more, I'm afraid you're not going to get it. Ergo. :rolleyes:

3) Ollie - if, by being told a score to give rather than making your own mind up, you mean the comment I made along the lines of 'Don't give it a 9 - we know what you're like', I'd have thought you knew the difference between being told to do something (as in a specific suggestion) and a sarcastic comment on your preference for mecha games. The same goes for Darran's comment. If you missed that, then I guess I should apologise but at the same time, I believe we discussed this at length while you were in the office. We also discussed the liklihood of what the Katamari Damashii score was to be going on your previous experience with it, and (if my memory serves me correctly), you agreed that it was likely to be a high 8/low 9 with the final call with you. If you had thought it to be higher, you had the best part of the day to make that point... but you didn't. With regards to the AC review, the final lowering of the score was decided upon after we all read your text and decided that it didn't fit the criteria for a 9 - again, someone has already pointed out here that our scoring system (as is EDGE's) isn't simply a case of a 'great' game getting high scores, but rather more a case of genre-defining and so on. Obviously, I'm opening myself up to all manner of disagreeing comments here, but that's the bottom line and no amount of whining from anyone is going to change that.

So there we go - everybody knows where everybody is. And I'm going back to my crap frozen pizza (the only thing to survive my freezer defrosting itself. Bah). I doubt I'll be back, much as it pains me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What do we have to do around here to have a thread that doesn't degenerate into a traditional Cac fight? I thought this was a thread about Games TM, therefore we should talk about the fact that we all want it to become as respected as Edge is/was/whatever and that its a great mag, but we don't like the design of it that much. THATS what we should be talking about.

I'm looking forwards to the issue, aiming to sub, having enjoyed the past three in a row and could care less about whether Cack wrote a review for it or not. Of course, bearing in mind his propensity for calling any and everyone extrememly rude names for little reason I'd argue that he isn't neccesarily an asset in the diplomatic scale of things but from now on I think ignoring stupid comments would be better than debating the point... 'cos he'll never, ever hear you...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They might not be at liberty to talk in public about editoral decisions and policies.

It wasn't really professional to bring it up in the first place. You put them in a position where they felt they had to defend themselves on here. Which they did. Beyond that they are not obliged to justify their decisions on here.

I wasn't aiming my ire at Mart and Darren on spectator wankiness, just thought I should clarify that.

As for justification, they never even justified why the game should be scored an 8 (despite my detailed and thoroughly analytical responses).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's pretty obvious that 9 & 10 scores are not given out lightly. If a freelancer turns in a review with a 9 or 10 score then you'd expect the editorial team to look long and hard at it before letting it through. Or just knock it down a bit if it's a mechy game.

That's what I'd do anyway.

Yeah, especially if it's Cacky with a mecha game.

We could have knocked the marks off for ourselves, quite honestly, and left the nine to the mecha freaks. A mecha game that scores a nine is a four to me. Scores are useless. Not utterly useless, but not far off. The only things that makes them not utterly useless are threads like these. Nobody would even be talking about the magazine if it didn't give scores.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They did look long and hard, but disregarded the content of the review and any subsequent comments I made on it. There was no dialogue, bar them telling me "it's an 8" from before I even submitted the review.

I don't believe for one second anyone said 'it's an 8' - that's far too high if they really don't care for the genre.

Are you sure they didn't point out that any scores over 8 are liable for review?

Knocking a 9 down to 8 doesn't sound like 'disregarding' anything. They merely translated a mechy-fan's (mecher?) score into a score suitable for the rest of us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of the things I like about this forum is that (ex)journalists of respected publications post in it. TM, Taurus, Strider, MartTM etc. It would be a blow to us all if you really left because of a childish fight like this. If anything, I'd rather put in a ban-request for the troll who started all this. Even though I don't believe in banning. But a nice cup of SHUT THE FUCK UP would be the best medicine in this case. You know who you are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3) Ollie - if, by being told a score to give rather than making your own mind up, you mean the comment I made along the lines of 'Don't give it a 9 - we know what you're like', I'd have thought you knew the difference between being told to do something (as in a specific suggestion) and a sarcastic comment on your preference for mecha games. The same goes for Darran's comment. If you missed that, then I guess I should apologise but at the same time, I believe we discussed this at length while you were in the office. We also discussed the liklihood of what the Katamari Damashii score was to be going on your previous experience with it, and (if my memory serves me correctly), you agreed that it was likely to be a high 8/low 9 with the final call with you. If you had thought it to be higher, you had the best part of the day to make that point... but you didn't. With regards to the AC review, the final lowering of the score was decided upon after we all read your text and decided that it didn't fit the criteria for a 9 - again, someone has already pointed out here that our scoring system (as is EDGE's) isn't simply a case of a 'great' game getting high scores, but rather more a case of genre-defining and so on. Obviously, I'm opening myself up to all manner of disagreeing comments here, but that's the bottom line and no amount of whining from anyone is going to change that.

So it was a "sarcastic" comment? That completely contradicts the multiple conversations we had during the course of that day and the subsequent phone calls. I didn't defend Katamari because, as I have already stated, that I felt would have been a pointless struggle (as was the score debate for Nexus over the phone, so I was proved right on that one).

I'm looking forwards to the issue, aiming to sub, having enjoyed the past three in a row and could care less about whether Cack wrote a review for it or not. Of course, bearing  in mind his propensity for calling any and everyone extrememly rude names for little reason I'd argue that he isn't neccesarily an asset in the diplomatic scale of things but from now on I think ignoring stupid comments would be better than debating the point... 'cos he'll never, ever hear you...

Not true, if somebody actually knows what they are talking about and/or justifies what they are with sufficient reasoning...I listen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of the things I like about this forum is that (ex)journalists of respected publications post in it. TM, Taurus, Strider, MartTM etc. It would be a blow to us all if you really left because of a childish fight like this. If anything, I'd rather put in a ban-request for the troll who started all this. Even though I don't believe in banning. But a nice cup of SHUT THE FUCK UP would be the best medicine in this case. You know who you are.

Oh, puhlease. There's clearly something here, otherwise there wouldn't BE an argument. If Cacky's shouting "score fixing!", then do we - the purchasers of the magazine - have a right to know whether it's true or not?

I think we do, but I've just been (very obviously) winding people up all the way through this thread. I think it worked.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.