Printable View
Basically spite, for not adding online play. He pretty much said that. But almost every sentance in the review is infuriating. Basically he thinks that it was good on DC, but it doesn't hold up the the higher standard of fighter on Xbox.Quote:
Originally posted by Chibi Nappa
?? IGN gave Marvel Vs Capcom 2 less than a 4? Any insiders here that can tell us why they gave it such a low score? I can't see it being worse than the DC game, and the DC game is great.
grade it for what it's worth, not how you expect it. ;)Quote:
Originally posted by MonsterMash
"All of this hostility is because it's not an online fighting game as originally promised and instead is just another 2D fighter with outdated graphics on the most powerful home console around. It's not that 2D fighting is dead, but it damn sure doesn't need to be resurrected in this fashion."
Basically, it got a low score because it can already be found cheaper on every other console.
seriously, sometimes these editors totally negate every reason why they should even have the right to be a part of the gaming industry. Every now and then, they write a review that serves no point but to shoved streight up their (censored)!
that so-called high standard isn't any bit higher today then it was 2 years ago. 3rd strike still whoops soulcalibur's arse...Quote:
Originally posted by Frogacuda
Basically spite, for not adding online play. He pretty much said that. But almost every sentance in the review is infuriating. Basically he thinks that it was good on DC, but it doesn't hold up the the higher standard of fighter on Xbox.
Xbox needs guilty gear XXXXXXXXXX and just that alone would give it a 5. (mvc1/2 is still cps2-grade complete with old sprites from the early 90s)
...then if it improves upon the animation of SF3 (as well as being on par with GG's 640x480 screen res) it should get about a 7. Then if the game is balanced and has new techniques we haven't seen before in 2d fighters it would score a couple of extra points. ..And then if it had online support it would score a 10. Anyway, that's how I'd rate a new 2d fighter.. :D (When is capcom going to make a mugen-style fighting game construction kit for the xbox? )
My suggestions to cappy for getting some easy $ from the fighter fans: (what with the dissapointing sales of RE0 on cube and all)
-re-release sfIII on the box complete with online support. (my dc has finally died and will not turn on.)
-release a capcom collection dvd with all the old school cps1 and cps2 2d beat emups on it. (rather than ignoring the fact everyone will play them free on emulators and missing the opportunity)
-Hire the guys who used to work at crawfish to handle a port of mvc2 on the gba. (me wants a vs game on gba.)
Shouldn't you start the overall grade on the gameplay, and then do the graphics if they affect said gameplay? Judging a fighter on the graphics alone to a score of up to 7, and then debating about how it plays seems kinda dumb, don't you think?Quote:
Then if the game is balanced and has new techniques we haven't seen before in 2d fighters it would score a couple of extra points.
Consider the source. He forgot to mention that it would get a +2 for being on Xbox.Quote:
Originally posted by MechDeus
Judging a fighter on the graphics alone to a score of up to 7, and then debating about how it plays seems kinda dumb, don't you think?
Gameplay is important but the graphics play an important role too for getting those extra points. (And anyway I didn't say it would get 7 for graphics alone did I?) Most of the points do go to gameplay but you have to consider that games have to be judged against other games out there. A game that you would have considered a 10, a few years ago may have been superceded by a game today that has everything that that other game did, but just with more and better stuff. (and improved on the existing stuff too. Progress becomes important in rating games in certain genres you know)
How would you like it if I just released pacman arcade on xbox and charged you full price for it? (oops better not upset the retro gamers :D) Besides people cry when they don't get all the animtions intact because it upsets gameplay, so I consider the graphics important for feedback mechanism and allowing the gamer to respond at the right moment. In a racer or a fps for example, if the framrate sucks you get less time to respond. Similarly if you recycle or reuse a frame in a fighter shouldn't that affect your responses too. Arcade ports get off light though since people want perfect ports but I don't see why this shouldn't affect the rating for other games where it is possible to see improvments by considering the system ability.
Oh and yoshi: no it doesn't have to be on the xbox at all. If a cube game had online suppport I'd be just as happy too, just as I would have been had the original dc games been online. A good game is a good game. Many average-scored games have had great gameplay alone. It should be done so that the little extra effort in polishing up the game above other games is rewarded with the extra points (like the features and modes and stuff) instead of every game getting the highest score just because of gameplay alone. (as if there is no way to improve upon it, and misleading people into thinking it's going to be the best thing out there forever)
Yeah, that's basically what I was getting at. Especially on the Xbox where the high lite has been like... DoA3, and we get crap like Kakuto Chojin and Tao Feng.Quote:
Originally posted by unit003
that so-called high standard isn't any bit higher today then it was 2 years ago. 3rd strike still whoops soulcalibur's arse...
that's what I've been waiting for a long long time... :(Quote:
Originally posted by GameHED
-re-release sfIII on the box complete with online support. (my dc has finally died and will not turn on.)
Quote:
How to be a Game Reviewer: Unabridged Edition
by Omni
Almost one year ago I produced a “How To” guide to establishing yourself as a game reviewer. While it by no means guaranteed you employment in the field of game reviewing, it would certainly equip would-be reviewers with the necessary skills and principles to make some in-roads. This is the Unabridged version, with more examples, new notes, and some spelling and grammar corrections but essentially does what the original manifesto set out to do. This guide represents the very essence of writing game reviews and is based on years of reading and writing them. The following observations and notes are easy to follow and should be kept handy when writing samples to accompany your resumé to your favorite game publication. (Although this in no way guarantees you’ll actually get a job reviewing games, it’s worth a shot.)
Vocabulary: use lots of big words and phrases in your reviews
Here’s a handy list: primary atypical pneumonia, humectant, lapislazuli, magniloquent, magnetohydrodynamic, deuteranopia, bryology, vorlage, Wesleyan.
The basic rule of thumb is to use words that have to be looked up to be fully understood even when more common words are suitable. And don’t be afraid to use words you don’t understand.
Use lots of References
Any reviewer worth his weight in games should be able to quote book titles, some Shakespeare; be able to mention authors and philosophers and their basic schools of thought. Doesn’t a university education make you feel good? Failing the ability to drop names and quote passages from obscure Russian plays or Monty Python, you can always mention every game you’ve ever played.
Also, anything classified as a “cult favorite” is fair to mention – the more obscure the better; like references to The Prisoner.
Build yourself up in your reviews
This point is pretty easy to meet because A) 99.9% of the readers have no idea who you really are and B) those same readers will never meet you. Essentially, you want to make yourself look cool. This can be accomplished a number of ways.
Work the phrase, “When I was at E3” into everything you write. There’s a general notion among readers that E3 is the be-all, end-all of the gaming industry – use this to your advantage and give yourself oodles of creditbility.
Make impossible statements to inflate your credibility. Example: “Using the new combo system I was able to rack up a combo score of 94,000,000 on every level – it becomes simple after a while.” Or, “Morrowind is a great but it only took me a few hours to finish.” You are, after all, a gaming god who can do no wrong!
Be sure to mention your hardware. If reviewing PC games, always make sure you increase your CPU power by a factor of 2 and mention your top-of-the-line video card by name. This implies to the reader that money is no object or you have some great contacts in the industry to make sure you always have the best stuff. If reviewing console games, mention your TV. Is it a 42” plasma screen? Even if it isn’t, say it is. That and you game with a 4,000 Watt sound system.
Be precise or be vague – never walk the middle ground
Precision requires that you go into extreme detail on every aspect of a game, possibly even incorporating a walkthrough, so that readers will feel like they played the game and didn’t just read about it.
Being vague in some respects is more difficult to do, but if you use sweeping statements or use the “fill in the blank” method, vagueness is only a few keystrokes away.
For example: ______ is a great game. The graphics are ______ although there are ______ and _____ that make _____ a step above ______. Sound also helps to ______ and _____ is _____ in his role as _____.
If you haven’t mastered the cynicism and loathing needed to be a game reviewer and need to say something nice about a really bad game, use ambiguity to your advantage
Controls suck? “A challenging control scheme.”
Poor frame rates? “You have many opportunities to view the landscape.”
Physics model laughably “realistic?” “Interesting physics model.”
Did the game just erase your O/S? “My hard drive has never been so blank.”
The general rule of thumb is to use the word “interesting” to preface any judgment since anything after it can be taken positively or negatively.
Do not fact check anything
Most would assume that a game reviewer would check the facts. A small percentage – roughly 3% -- actually do, but they’re missing something: as part of the gaming press whatever you say is fact. (Be warned though, reviewing military conflict games will more often than not elicit much reader mail as the genre prides itself on its facts.) Fact checking should go no further than opening the game's manual.
Tone: sound like you know what you’re doing
This is essential. To create this effect, always mention something that happens at the end of the game. This shows you’ve played through most of the game – even if you didn’t totally finish it. Also mention specific aspects of the interface layout and an event that happens mid-game.
Wit: make at least one sexual reference
Whether it be breast size or dialogue from the game that isn’t dirty but sounds like it when taken out of context, you’ve got to make some sexual reference. Especially when the protagonist is female.
Always give a lower score to a game that has been “ported” from another platform
You’ve played the game on every single platform and you’re sick and tired of playing it, so when it appears on yet another system you’ve had enough. Drop the score like a bag of dirt.
Lower scores should also be awarded if you’re not a fan of the genre, developer, publisher, console and/or country of origin of the game you’re reviewing. Just don’t think the PS2 is top of the line anymore? Have a GameCube and reckon everything else is inferior? Think North America produces soulless, crap games? Make a point of it in your reviews.
If you’re a console fan make mention of how much PC games suck
Conversely, if you’re a PC fan be sure to portray consoles (and console gamers in general) in the worst possible light
Your audience is irrelevant
Write for yourself and your friends.
Make at least one reference to something that only you and your co-workers will understand or care about
This is self-explanatory. All those clever little “–Ed” comments are for cheap laughs around the office and possibly people that have consistently read your publication for a number of years.
Clever Writing
Bored of writing the typical review? Write your next review in the form of a letter. Or better yet in the voice of a video game character and written backwards.
Critical comments of your reviews
It’s bound to happen sooner or later that a review you write will rile someone enough to write a scathing email – attacking not only your review but your parentage, intelligence and your ability to judge red from blue as well. You have two options open. The first, is not to respond. Who wants to reinforce a lunatic behavior? The second option is to respond with some snappy answers, with reference to their spelling, punctuation, where they’re from, or their manhood. (Isn’t email great? – Ed)
Previews are inevitable
In your duties as game reviewer you will be called upon to write previews. Above all else remember this: your last sentence should be a variation of “This is the game to watch.” (This increases the chances that the publisher of the game will use a quote from the preview in their print ads.) Just be sure to include the almighty “if.”
Example: “If the developer can improve the graphics, include more than three sound effects, overhaul the interface and control schemes, eliminate or reduce the references to eating excrement, and get the graphics engine to move faster than 5 frames per-second, Game X is the game to watch.”
The “if” absolves you from any accusations of being a fanboy and you emerge with your objectivity intact. However, if you choose to dabble in hyperbole jump right in with statements like, “This game will be better than Half-Life, Unreal II and all the Super Mario games combined! No ifs, ands, or buts – this will prove to be the ultimate game when it ships next month!” even when you have reliable information that the developer and/or publisher is about to file for bankruptcy.
State the obvious
Even when the obvious is very plain to see, point it out anyway. You may get complaints with statements like, “Myst III isn’t for first-person shooter fans,” but you’re writing for yourself, so who gives a damn?
Bugs: blow them out of proportion
If you encounter one bug in a PC game – no matter how minor – write two paragraphs as to why it ruined the entire game for you. Did the game crash or stutter while you were running a defrag, virus scan, and burning some MP3s while playing? If the answer is “Yes” make sure you include the descriptor, “Unstable.” Some bugs should be reported in your review. If the game deletes your O/S, make mention of it, if only to avoid angry emails.
Never mention competing publications by name (unless you’re published by the same company) – only infer
This allows you free reign to libel those publications while avoiding threat of lawsuits.
If graphics are not bleeding edge, dock 1/3 of the score from the rating
If you’re playing the greatest game ever made but the graphics are rendered using last year’s engine, your score of 10 / 10 must be dropped to 6.7 / 10, because everyone knows graphics are the be-all, end-all of gaming.
Always mention voice acting
Even though you can’t tell if the phone sex operator is really “enjoying” herself and you wouldn’t recognize good voice acting if it hit you in the ass, always say the voice acting was “mediocre”, "average for the genre”, or “nothing special but it gets the job done.” After all, you’re a critic of games not movies – leave that to Ebert.
Mention control scheme
If you have to learn the controls always write “steep learning curve” in your review. This way when dumb people (i.e. everyone except you) play the game and can’t figure out the controls you won’t get angry emails from them, thereby saving you from using your supply of snappy answers.
When reviewing a violent action game, never indicate its offensiveness but take a shot at the mainstream media (and in turn, the government) for its portrayal of videogames and gamers
The mainstream media just doesn’t understand the gaming hobby – apparently, most gamers have hair-trigger tempers, pale skin and a host of psychological and sociological issues – and will use any statistics they need to back-up that point. But you know they’re making those stats up. You never fact check so what makes you think they are? When someone calls them on it, they carefully retract the story or just let it drop. Basically, the mainstream is out to get us. Death to the mainstream media!
Now the tricky part is up to you! Happy job hunting
Well, my two cents is that the review for DOAXBV in Gamespot was possibly the most blindly written, biased and stupid review I've read EVER. I'll go check IGN's CT3 review, though, just in case.