SydLexia.com Forum Index
"Stay awhile. Stay... FOREVER!"

  [Edit Profile]  [Search]  [Memberlist]  [Usergroups]  [FAQ]  [Register]
[Who's Online]  [Log in to check your private messages]  [Log in]
Resident Evil 6


Reply to topic
Author Message
Alowishus
Joined: Aug 04 2009
PostPosted: Oct 03 2012 12:20 pm Reply with quote Back to top

Fighter_McWarrior wrote:
I think that video games are one of the few places where critics can be trusted. Occasionally I'll buy a game based solely on its critical success (I had no interested in Red Dead Redemption until it got a 98 Metascore, for instance) and I've never been disappointed. With the limited amount of time I have to play games, I try to make sure that the only ones I buy are really fucking good, and critics have always helped a lot in that. They play tons and tons of games annually, and have a good idea how to objectively score them without letting whatever niche appeal they have skew their score. Plus, every game review has to be its own essay, so you can actually get details on why a game is or isn't worth buying.

User reviews are so prone to bias that they're hardly worth reading a lot of times. You ever noticed that every piece of shit Sonic game gets amazing user scores even though the critical reviews fail? That's because their fanboys flood the user section and up jump it. And as Josh points out, sometimes groups of people will target games to downvote the scores. On top of that, the inverse of what Alow talks about is rampant in user scores. People tend to either give games a 10 out of 10 (OMG BEST GAME EVAR!!!!) or a 0 (this game suxxx1 fans are fags) with no in-between at all. That doesn't make for a very accurate read on how good a game is or isn't.

Quote:
When i went to school if i got an average grade it was 50 as it's the central number hence the definition of the word.


50s in every US school I've ever been to is failing. Just saying. 70s is pretty on par for what constitutes average over here. I think your issue here might be a difference in what constitutes average. I would guess that it rated in the 70s because it was a good game that had major issues. None of the reviews Josh posted trashed the thing, and most of them even said it was a good game rather than an average one.

I would be inclined to disagree. I mean i don't pay any attention to any Critics at all and their opinions i don't really hold in much stead. I do get why you'd use them though if you have little time to game and you want a good experience.

Honestly i just buy games by word of mouth. Metacritic i find to be pretty shit all round so i don't go there. It's literally just games my friends are playing or what you guys talk about on here. I regard both sources has having good taste in games and knowing what they're talking about so that is justification enough to look at games. I would also look at the games myself and see if its interesting or if i have played a game earlier in the series. That's how i judge whether to get games or not.

Why i don't really pay much attention to critics is firstly because the score system is so terrible. Basically every game gets a 8-10/10 so by their logic i should just be buying every game out there. Again this is from my view of averages. I appreciate that in the US that 70 may be average in schooling etc. but just by the definition of average it isn't an average score. 50 is the middle score of 100 making it therefore the average. From simple mathematics 70 can never be an average score using a single value - yes if there 5 games and an average score was taken to measure central tendency then yes 70 could be an average however games are considered by themselves making 50 the actual average.

I mean there's no point me really arguing about this, it does make no sense to me but i know how the system works so i at least know that 70 is average. My point would be that by having 70 as an average it's a poor way of measuring score. If 100 is the highest and 70 is average then basically anything which is above average or good is squeezed into a 3 number bracket (80, 90, 100) as opposed to a 5. It's less flexible and the values are then skewed as seen in the diagram.

Again though there is no point debating it, that's the way it works now. It just never used to work like that from my perspective and i used to buy UK gaming magazines where games got scores of 5 and they were average.

I mean i am used to 10 - perfect, 5 - average, 0 - awful

Their system is 10 - perfect, 7 - average - 0 awful.

You have 3 ways of saying how good something is and 7 ways in saying how shit something is. It isn't balanced and it defies the whole point of using a 1-10 system lol. If "goodness" is skewed into such a small bracket then how can you actually determine how good something is?

To push it to extremes, imagine if 9 was average and 10 was perfect. How would you be able to even determine if the game was good? You wouldn't be able to. In contrast though 0-8 would be below average so shitness could be well documented.

Lol anyway another reason why i don't use critics apart from the stupid scoring system is that apparently they are "paid off" for their reviews, hence the high scores. With the scoring the way it is i wouldn't be surprised.

EDIT: Also from a schooling perspective it can make sense, it was a bad example on my part. From scoring a video game though i don't think so.
View user's profileSend private message
Beach Bum
Joined: Dec 08 2010
Location: At the pants party.
PostPosted: Oct 03 2012 03:17 pm Reply with quote Back to top

Yeah I have the same problem with it that Alow has. I know 70 is about a C in school over here, but using a scale of 0-10 you should probably use the whole scale. When you are scoring games and you give it a 70% that seems to say it is good, maybe not the best but better than average on the scale. These reviews suggest it is more of a low 50's, mid 40's where it is at best average but nothing to run out and buy because in a few months it will probably see a significant price drop.

The critic reviews like to heavily mark up bad games in big name franchises seeming to hope that no one will actually read their reviews. It would just be nice to be able to trust the critic reviews at a glance, instead I pretty much have to go through every single one just to make sure their score actually reflects the review after skimming the preview and seeing it already doesn't. The reason I use the user reviews more is because I can skim through a bunch of them quickly and if I start to see common patterns like lots of bugs, bad story, etc. I can get a pretty good idea of what I'm in for. Sure there's a ton of idiotic reviews but they are pretty easy to pick out a few words in and just skip over them.
View user's profileSend private message
sidewaydriver
2010 SLF Tag Champ
Title: ( ͡� &#8
Joined: May 11 2008
PostPosted: Oct 03 2012 03:24 pm Reply with quote Back to top

That's probably why the system is skewed, we can't help but apply the way schools view the system. I always thought 1-5 scales were more fair, even when they have halves. A 3.5/5 sounds like a pretty good game but it's actually a 7 which would normally make you think that it's barely passing.


Shake it, Quake it, Space Kaboom.
 
View user's profileSend private message
Alowishus
Joined: Aug 04 2009
PostPosted: Oct 03 2012 03:28 pm Reply with quote Back to top

Like if RE6 was to go by the normal scale where 50 is average it would have a score of 57%. So literally just above average.

I mean i think the system they use is stupid as it makes it harder to define how good a game is with such a small bracket. However if you know that 70% is average you can work out that the game is above average. So it is usable when you know how it works but the problem with it is it blurs the lines between what an average, above average, good, very good, excellent and perfect game is.

EDIT: Another problem is when a game is scored on a different number of criteria and then given an overall score. There is a website which is notorious for this i think it's IGN.

I remember the site giving a score system like this (i can't remember the exact criteria)

Presentation 6/10
Gameplay 8/10
Story 7/10
Replayability 5/10
Total Score - 8/10

But how can the total score be more than the average of the criteria? It's almost like they just randomly assign numbers.
View user's profileSend private message
Methid Man
Title: Spawn of Billy Mays
Joined: Nov 23 2010
Location: Hackensack, NJ
PostPosted: Oct 03 2012 04:03 pm Reply with quote Back to top

I miss Gamepro's facial expression scoring system.
View user's profileSend private messageSend e-mailAIM AddressYahoo MessengerMSN Messenger
Beach Bum
Joined: Dec 08 2010
Location: At the pants party.
PostPosted: Oct 03 2012 04:23 pm Reply with quote Back to top

I think the problem with the whole break it down into 5 or so categories and then give each an individual score before giving an overall is this: You can have a game like FF XIII that has excellent audio and beautiful graphics but the overall gameplay is boring as fuck with 0 replayability and it can still get a pretty decent score by being floated by those 9s or 10s in Graphics and Audio.

As to IGN, I don't think they use that scoring system anymore, though I think they did in the past. I don't really like their reviews because it seems they are one of the worst offenders for giving a turd good reviews. I'm pretty sure if you actually gave them a turd in a box and a little cash, they would give it a 90% rating. Probably why they constantly give CoD games good scores and then games from smaller publishers, that can't afford the bribes, bad ones even though the smaller budget game was good and CoD was just last year's game repackaged with a half-assed new campaign slapped on.
View user's profileSend private message
username
Title: owner of a lonely heart
Joined: Jul 06 2007
Location: phoenix, az usa
PostPosted: Oct 03 2012 04:29 pm Reply with quote Back to top

Alowishus wrote:
EDIT: Another problem is when a game is scored on a different number of criteria and then given an overall score. There is a website which is notorious for this i think it's IGN.

I remember the site giving a score system like this (i can't remember the exact criteria)

Presentation 6/10
Gameplay 8/10
Story 7/10
Replayability 5/10
Total Score - 8/10

But how can the total score be more than the average of the criteria? It's almost like they just randomly assign numbers.

its a weighted system or some shit like that. where gameplay will be 20% of the total score and story will be 15% or something like that.

nintendo power had a similar system & it used to annoy me. then i just stopped reading nintendo power
Methid Man wrote:
I miss Gamepro's facial expression scoring system.

me too


Klimbatize wrote:
I'll eat a turkey sandwich while blowing my load

 
View user's profileSend private messageAIM AddressYahoo MessengerMSN Messenger
Vert1
Joined: Aug 28 2011
PostPosted: Oct 04 2012 02:27 am Reply with quote Back to top

99% of videogame reviews are complete garbage and they certainly aren't targeting hardcore gamers. EGM's Ikaruga review by Shoe explicitly stated that he couldn't give the game a higher score b/c not everyone is hardcore; i.e., he reviewed the game on terms of someone elses's playing abilities and not his own enjoyment / criticisms with the game. Then you have IGN who knows fuck all giving God Hand a 3 out 10 score. I mean that is some ridiculous shit. Then you have companies like Gamepro deducting points from Paper Mario:TTYD because they felt it was too kiddy. Like Mario, a fucking platforming game, is supposed to have a "mature" theme.

Those are just a few examples of retarded shit. People who are in-the-know do not trust any of those fucks because they know these reviewers are bought and sold (they are paid to give good reviews). The real problem is that the reviewing of the game mechanics by reviewers is terrible. Most of the time reviews will focus on the most retarded aspects of the game and devote one paragraph to the actual mechanics. The difference between a good review (i.e. my Wario World review or Shadows of the Damned review) and a poor review (i.e. every other review written for those two games) is that they get the central point of criticism to go after: the mechanics. The people who are really good at the games tend not to even want to review them (as I tried to get someone who mastered Vanquish to put up a decent review). Gamefaqs reviews are garbage but do check out the threads sometime to find people who really know their shit to key you in on the game's worth.

So I highly recommended that you read through forums of people who provide in-depth analysis and completely ignore site reviews (and that means metacritics). There are a handful of site reviews that are excellent though (i.e. insomnia, postback, and some more I can't think of). I didn't expect anything from RE6 and it is surprising to see it slammed so hard since dogshit like RE5 was well praised. It's funny how this game moving completely into a generic Gears of War design was defended as keeping up with the industry to recoup development costs when in fact that design is decadent and will administer another nail in the coffin to the series.

So I'm not in any rush to play this game or support it in any way (i.e. renting it). The only thing I saw that interested me (but I disagreed with its inclusion) was the sliding mechanic to 180 degree turn to shoot while on the ground. I think I'll start a thread on making better game reviews in the next few days or so.


Image
 
View user's profileSend private messageVisit poster's websiteAIM Address
Cactus
Joined: Oct 05 2012
Location: UK
PostPosted: Oct 06 2012 09:24 am Reply with quote Back to top

I was kind of expecting RE6 to be not great, Capcom like to run all their franchises into the ground instead of quitting while they're ahead.
View user's profileSend private message
Kacen
Joined: Dec 18 2007
Location: Face 2 Face
PostPosted: Oct 12 2012 08:05 am Reply with quote Back to top

I am not really surprised. You could see the signs that the series was degrading in RE5. I'm watching an IGN walkthrough of 6. Leon's campaign. I think they jumped the shark with the plot.

On top of that it seems the game is to older RE games what Call of Duty is to old FPS games. Basic mostly linear shit in between cinematics. There is no survival aspect to speak of. Nice to see zombies back, at least.

EDIT: I think what epitomizes this whole experience is just having watched an interactive cutscene in which Leon and a new female character get inside a car which is surrounded by zombies and you have to mash buttons repeatedly to help Leon look in different compartments to find car keys.


Image

Sloop Up!™ for Mobile Sloops™ Weekdays at 4:00 PM!
 
View user's profileSend private messageAIM Address
Cactus
Joined: Oct 05 2012
Location: UK
PostPosted: Oct 12 2012 08:24 am Reply with quote Back to top

I'm looking forward to this instead!

http://tangogameworks.com/project/index_en.html
View user's profileSend private message
Fighter_McWarrior
Title: Gun of Brixton
Joined: Jun 05 2011
Location: Down by the River
PostPosted: Oct 12 2012 10:32 am Reply with quote Back to top

Well, whatever you think of the numbers as a whole, there seems to be a certain critical consensus that gathers around awesome games. I'm talking about your Red Dead Redemptions, Arkham Cities and Borderlands 2s here. Since those are the only games I buy anyway (given my limited time to game and limited money to buy games with) I'd say critical reception suits me just fine.


"Spanish bombs, yot' quierro y finito
Yo te querda oh ma corazón
Oh ma corazón, oh ma corazón" - The Clash, Spanish Bombs
 
View user's profileSend private message
Vert1
Joined: Aug 28 2011
PostPosted: Oct 12 2012 03:11 pm Reply with quote Back to top

Kacen wrote:

EDIT: I think what epitomizes this whole experience is just having watched an interactive cutscene in which Leon and a new female character get inside a car which is surrounded by zombies and you have to mash buttons repeatedly to help Leon look in different compartments to find car keys.


That's pretty funny. I can imagine while Leon is searching he'd be yelling "I can't find anything!!," and then he'd tilt his head around, the camera would zoom-in showing the anguish on his face, and with desperate eyes staring directly at the player he'd yell "MASH HARDER!!".

This leads us to examine how QTEs are used in videogames. For me I did not like the mashing to run from boulders in RE4. I did not like the mashing to "hang-on" in cutscenes. I did like the mashing to knife slash las plagas of the El Gigante. I did like mashing to turn the crank. I did like the QTE dodge button prompts with Krauser.

And what I liked about dodging prompts for Verdugo was that it functioned like a dodge prompt you could hit with a flick of the c-stick for action games, BUT it kept it used sparingly. This was the only option as the ability to roll dodge at will like in Tears of War is not survival horror; it gives too much action ability (power) over to the player. The question would become what is the difference between knowing when to hit a dodge button in time within a select time window in something like God Hand versus what is in RE4. Let's also note that some button prompts are not mandatory in RE4 (i.e. you can shoot the enemy to knock them out of their action or simply run out from their range).

This is a serious question that has been left unanswered (in critical analysis) by gamers on what they find acceptable or not. The button mash for God Hand's kicking/spanking/punching was great. I did not enjoy any QTEs in Vanquish -- I find analog twirl inputs to dodge very displeasurable and mashing to eventually overpower and deliver a big hit also displeasurable--, but I do think the Dead Space QTE where you can aim and shoot were neat (though games have made this too easy by giving the player a large response time). The Shenmue arcade punching game (punch 4 bags) via a button press assigned to a bag that pops up was very pleasurable. And that can be seen as a QTE since it is testing reflexes to hit inputs within a short time window. So my theory right now is that QTEs are fun for players when DAMAGING (button mash) or DODGING (button prompt).

So I will eventually start a thread on hardcore analysis on QTEs here.


Image
 
View user's profileSend private messageVisit poster's websiteAIM Address
Cameron
Title: :O � O:
Joined: Feb 01 2008
Location: St. Louis, MO
PostPosted: Oct 12 2012 06:03 pm Reply with quote Back to top

Is it really as awful as people are saying it is? I mean from what I've seen in regards to trailers and youtube videos it does seem a bit overblown, over the top (in a bad way), unfocused and way too action-y, but it nevertheless looks like a fun game me and my friend can sit on the couch and play together. Mind you, I'll still wait until it's much cheaper to get it, but it looks like it'll still be fun as long as I pretend it's not even a Resident Evil game (which it really isn't, but still).


Image
 
View user's profileSend private message
sidewaydriver
2010 SLF Tag Champ
Title: ( ͡� &#8
Joined: May 11 2008
PostPosted: Oct 12 2012 08:07 pm Reply with quote Back to top

Cameron wrote:
Is it really as awful as people are saying it is? I mean from what I've seen in regards to trailers and youtube videos it does seem a bit overblown, over the top (in a bad way), unfocused and way too action-y, but it nevertheless looks like a fun game me and my friend can sit on the couch and play together. Mind you, I'll still wait until it's much cheaper to get it, but it looks like it'll still be fun as long as I pretend it's not even a Resident Evil game (which it really isn't, but still).

That's about what it is. It's not awful awful, but nothing what you wish it would be. It's about as fun as 5. It's fun enough but nothing special.


Shake it, Quake it, Space Kaboom.
 
View user's profileSend private message
Lady_Satine
Title: Head of Lexian R&D
Joined: Oct 15 2005
Location: Metro area, Georgia
PostPosted: Oct 12 2012 09:05 pm Reply with quote Back to top

http://www.blisteredthumbs.net/2012/10/sage-reviews-re6/

Sage's video was pretty damn insightful and as someone not interested in co-op, the game sounds like ass.


"Life is a waste of time. Time is a waste of life. Get wasted all the time, and you'll have the time of your life!"
 
View user's profileSend private messageVisit poster's website
jprime
Title: Ex-GameWinners
Joined: Jan 27 2008
Location: Southern Ontario
PostPosted: Oct 12 2012 09:56 pm Reply with quote Back to top

I'm yet to play it, but as someone who played and enjoyed 5, I think I can say that the only complaint I'll have about this game is that it explicitly states that Sherry was, in fact, infected with the G-Virus in RE2, which only happens in Claire A and not Claire B.
View user's profileSend private message
Cameron
Title: :O � O:
Joined: Feb 01 2008
Location: St. Louis, MO
PostPosted: Oct 13 2012 02:00 am Reply with quote Back to top

jprime wrote:
I'm yet to play it, but as someone who played and enjoyed 5, I think I can say that the only complaint I'll have about this game is that it explicitly states that Sherry was, in fact, infected with the G-Virus in RE2, which only happens in Claire A and not Claire B.

I guess that would make Claire A & Leon B canonical? Surprised Which is fine with me, I always thought Leon B was way more interesting than Leon A and Claire A was more interesting than Claire B, anyway.


Image
 
View user's profileSend private message
LeshLush
Joined: Oct 19 2009
Location: Nashville, TN
PostPosted: Oct 13 2012 02:26 am Reply with quote Back to top

Vert1 wrote:
So I will eventually start a thread on hardcore analysis on QTEs here.

I know I can make fun of your opinions pretty hard when I think your threads are too ridiculous, but this is a topic I'm looking forward to reading. I can't stand QTEs, but I hardly ever play modern games at all, and dislike a lot of the aesthetics of most popular modern games, so in some ways I'm sure my opinion is a little unfair. Anyway this sounds like a fun discussion.

And maybe it will get ridiculously overblown and I'll feel compelled to satirize your blog quotations, but you know what? That's fun too.
View user's profileSend private message
Greg the White
Joined: Apr 09 2008
Location: Pennsylvania
PostPosted: Oct 13 2012 02:57 am Reply with quote Back to top

In RE3, a file talked about scientists shooting the virus' guinea pigs, but they would keep going. I didn't realize that "guinea pig" was a euphemism for "human test subject," and thought Umbrella was just shooting invincible zombie guinea pigs.


So here's to you Mrs. Robinson. People love you more- oh, nevermind.
 
View user's profileSend private message
Beach Bum
Joined: Dec 08 2010
Location: At the pants party.
PostPosted: Oct 13 2012 03:31 am Reply with quote Back to top

LeshLush wrote:
Vert1 wrote:
So I will eventually start a thread on hardcore analysis on QTEs here.

I know I can make fun of your opinions pretty hard when I think your threads are too ridiculous, but this is a topic I'm looking forward to reading. I can't stand QTEs, but I hardly ever play modern games at all, and dislike a lot of the aesthetics of most popular modern games, so in some ways I'm sure my opinion is a little unfair. Anyway this sounds like a fun discussion.

And maybe it will get ridiculously overblown and I'll feel compelled to satirize your blog quotations, but you know what? That's fun too.

As someone who does play modern games, QTEs will make me put down a game faster than anything else. Fucking hate them. They feel lazy as hell, just a way to add challenge to an otherwise easy game in the most frustrating way possible.
View user's profileSend private message
Cameron
Title: :O � O:
Joined: Feb 01 2008
Location: St. Louis, MO
PostPosted: Oct 13 2012 03:57 am Reply with quote Back to top

Beach Bum wrote:
LeshLush wrote:
Vert1 wrote:
So I will eventually start a thread on hardcore analysis on QTEs here.

I know I can make fun of your opinions pretty hard when I think your threads are too ridiculous, but this is a topic I'm looking forward to reading. I can't stand QTEs, but I hardly ever play modern games at all, and dislike a lot of the aesthetics of most popular modern games, so in some ways I'm sure my opinion is a little unfair. Anyway this sounds like a fun discussion.

And maybe it will get ridiculously overblown and I'll feel compelled to satirize your blog quotations, but you know what? That's fun too.

As someone who does play modern games, QTEs will make me put down a game faster than anything else. Fucking hate them. They feel lazy as hell, just a way to add challenge to an otherwise easy game in the most frustrating way possible.

Completely agreed, and the infamous boulder-punching moment from RE5 is a good example. I think the first time I played through the game as Chris it took me six or seven times before I managed to mash the A button fast enough to get Chris to become the Hulk. Sad


Image
 
View user's profileSend private message
Vert1
Joined: Aug 28 2011
PostPosted: Oct 13 2012 04:34 am Reply with quote Back to top

Cameron wrote:
Beach Bum wrote:
LeshLush wrote:
Vert1 wrote:
So I will eventually start a thread on hardcore analysis on QTEs here.

I know I can make fun of your opinions pretty hard when I think your threads are too ridiculous, but this is a topic I'm looking forward to reading. I can't stand QTEs, but I hardly ever play modern games at all, and dislike a lot of the aesthetics of most popular modern games, so in some ways I'm sure my opinion is a little unfair. Anyway this sounds like a fun discussion.

And maybe it will get ridiculously overblown and I'll feel compelled to satirize your blog quotations, but you know what? That's fun too.

As someone who does play modern games, QTEs will make me put down a game faster than anything else. Fucking hate them. They feel lazy as hell, just a way to add challenge to an otherwise easy game in the most frustrating way possible.

Completely agreed, and the infamous boulder-punching moment from RE5 is a good example. I think the first time I played through the game as Chris it took me six or seven times before I managed to mash the A button fast enough to get Chris to become the Hulk. Sad


You need a presciption of Mario Party. "It's all in how you hold the controller". I guess it's a question of how hard can the average gamer button mash compared to a button mashing pro. Outside of Mario Party games which I have avoided post-N64, the last hand brutalizer was reviving high health characters in killer7 by mashing the A-button. If we're talking about sadistic button mashing I think the hardest button masher of all time was this:



Image
 
View user's profileSend private messageVisit poster's websiteAIM Address
Cactus
Joined: Oct 05 2012
Location: UK
PostPosted: Oct 13 2012 10:00 am Reply with quote Back to top

Button mashing parts in games are pointless. Once you figure out a good technique the difficulty is trivial, so it just wastes your time and wears your controller out.
View user's profileSend private message
Kacen
Joined: Dec 18 2007
Location: Face 2 Face
PostPosted: Oct 14 2012 11:56 am Reply with quote Back to top

Cactus wrote:
Button mashing parts in games are pointless. Once you figure out a good technique the difficulty is trivial, so it just wastes your time and wears your controller out.


I can understand having to press a random set of buttons in a set amount of time to quickly dodge something,

However I think button mashing for the sake of itself is a difficulty solely based on trying not to tire yourself out. It seems like a copout and it's legitimacy in games is questionable.


Image

Sloop Up!™ for Mobile Sloops™ Weekdays at 4:00 PM!
 
View user's profileSend private messageAIM Address
Display posts from previous:      
Reply to topic

 
 Jump to: