Jump to content
IGNORED

GamesTM Issue #62


Rudderless
 Share

Recommended Posts

That's pretty rubbish K.

Liking one fucking excellent game slightly more than another excellent game is in no way ridiculous.

It's not a case of "liking" it though, is it? If I want to know if someone "likes" it, I'll ask one of my mates. This is meant to be a respected opinion based upon professional insight. It's a critical review. It's not "this is good, isn't it." Do you get what I mean? Otherwise, they'd drop the scores and simply just say whether they liked it or not.

"Halo 3, BioShock – yeah, they're both pretty good."

The difference between 9 and 10 is a big deal. I seem to remember someone - possibly Games TM - putting a press release out when the magazine gave Burnout 3 10/10. It makes a big difference. And, to me, to award a title like Burnout or BioShock a 10 while Halo 3 scores a 9 just skews the whole system - especially with the BioShock and Halo reviews coming out so close to each other. It's like those in charge aren't looking at the picture as a whole - which, again, ties in with my feeling that no-one at Games TM really knows what the magazine is for. That could well be an overhang of its Highbury days, with Imagine picking up a profitable title but not really knowing what to do with it.

Though, naturally, I'm sure they'd refute that.

I'm sure there are other, better examples than Halo and BioShock, but that's what first struck me about this issue and the only one I can recall at 3.17 am. Anyway, like I say, I'm not especially bothered. I still buy Games TM every few months or so when I'm getting the train or something, just to see what's changed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I swear they just hand these scores out so we all discuss in hushed tones "did you HEAR what they gave game x?".

I just get the imppression that they're desperate to be different and end up looking liking monkeys with no idea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With the redesign, Have they kicked out uber-cunts Tim Rogers and The Shape?

No. Reduced to a page each, but the word count is the same apparently.

It may look like edgeTM now, and I'm trademarking that pun in the British Empire and all its colonies, but there's still a real difference in the content. gamesTM still has more "soul". As for Halo 3, is it really that much different to what's gone before? Maybe it gets that one less because it's a sequel, you know, whereas Bioshock tried to go somewhere new.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No-one mentioned the couple of "Illustrated" sections ? If the right games are chosen these will become a lovely little addition.

The Killer 7 one is stunning, what i wouldnt give for a large canvas style print of some of those images.

Anyone know if that sort of thing exists ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not a case of "liking" it though, is it? If I want to know if someone "likes" it, I'll ask one of my mates. This is meant to be a respected opinion based upon professional insight. It's a critical review. It's not "this is good, isn't it." Do you get what I mean? Otherwise, they'd drop the scores and simply just say whether they liked it or not.

"Halo 3, BioShock – yeah, they're both pretty good."

The difference between 9 and 10 is a big deal. I seem to remember someone - possibly Games TM - putting a press release out when the magazine gave Burnout 3 10/10. It makes a big difference. And, to me, to award a title like Burnout or BioShock a 10 while Halo 3 scores a 9 just skews the whole system - especially with the BioShock and Halo reviews coming out so close to each other. It's like those in charge aren't looking at the picture as a whole - which, again, ties in with my feeling that no-one at Games TM really knows what the magazine is for. That could well be an overhang of its Highbury days, with Imagine picking up a profitable title but not really knowing what to do with it.

Though, naturally, I'm sure they'd refute that.

I'm sure there are other, better examples than Halo and BioShock, but that's what first struck me about this issue and the only one I can recall at 3.17 am. Anyway, like I say, I'm not especially bothered. I still buy Games TM every few months or so when I'm getting the train or something, just to see what's changed.

Bioshock is groundbreaking in different ways than Halo is groundbreaking. And they aren't the only people to have rated Bioshock higher. Personally, I think they are both (well Halo 1 and 2, not tried 3 yet) vastly overrated, and my copy of Bioshock soon to be converted into Phoenix Wright 3.

People like different games. How about that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No-one mentioned the couple of "Illustrated" sections ? If the right games are chosen these will become a lovely little addition.

The Killer 7 one is stunning, what i wouldnt give for a large canvas style print of some of those images.

Anyone know if that sort of thing exists ?

Nope but if you can link me to some images I might be able to knock up something (I am thinking about going back to painting and having videogames as art)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not a case of "liking" it though, is it? If I want to know if someone "likes" it, I'll ask one of my mates. This is meant to be a respected opinion based upon professional insight. It's a critical review. It's not "this is good, isn't it." Do you get what I mean? Otherwise, they'd drop the scores and simply just say whether they liked it or not.

"Halo 3, BioShock – yeah, they're both pretty good."

The difference between 9 and 10 is a big deal. I seem to remember someone - possibly Games TM - putting a press release out when the magazine gave Burnout 3 10/10. It makes a big difference. And, to me, to award a title like Burnout or BioShock a 10 while Halo 3 scores a 9 just skews the whole system - especially with the BioShock and Halo reviews coming out so close to each other. It's like those in charge aren't looking at the picture as a whole - which, again, ties in with my feeling that no-one at Games TM really knows what the magazine is for. That could well be an overhang of its Highbury days, with Imagine picking up a profitable title but not really knowing what to do with it.

Though, naturally, I'm sure they'd refute that.

I'm sure there are other, better examples than Halo and BioShock, but that's what first struck me about this issue and the only one I can recall at 3.17 am. Anyway, like I say, I'm not especially bothered. I still buy Games TM every few months or so when I'm getting the train or something, just to see what's changed.

oh man.

I don't think I can go along with any of that. Not that I understand any of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I genuinely don't understand your points above. I don't understand this idea that a review is something more than just an opinion. I can comprehend the words but can't quite follow what it is you are saying.

I don't believe this 'professional insight' is anything at all. I don't think it exists. Anyone one of us is capable of evaluating a game. Reviewers don't have any greater insight. Some of them are better communicators sure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't believe this 'professional insight' is anything at all. I don't think it exists. Anyone one of us is capable of evaluating a game. Reviewers don't have any greater insight. Some of them are better communicators sure.

I don't think you're quite right on that. I watch Match of the Day, and the pundits will often pull out moves or failing that I've missed. They often also talk a lot of rubbish, but it isn't all merely opinion. A good reviewer will do that -- they'll pull out little things the game does, good or bad that an untrained eye is likely to have missed. That's professional insight.

Obviously, there is a lot of subjectivity too, and if you enjoy a game, you enjoy a game. But if you have paying for the opinion, it helps if it is backed up, not just well written.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No. Reduced to a page each, but the word count is the same apparently.

Oh well, better than nothing. The columns are what the editors like to call the "controversial" part of the mag. They are what everyone else calls the fucking shit part of the mag.

BASTARD HELL! How hard can it be to find column writers that aren't such absolute pricks?

You have Tim Rogers, who believes he is some kind of rock star in his head, but is actually an anime obsessed smug as fuck cocksucker. If a Japanese person ever calls you a "stupid white cunt" and chins you, you know this boy is to blame, him and all those other fat american fucks who went to Japan. Doesn't help that he can't write to save his life, we don't care that Final Fantasy XII brought back memories of the time you got bummed by your uncle. And if anyone did care, they wouldn't sit through 200 pages of pretentious wank to get there, except for your circle jerk of twat friends. We don't care that super mario bros felt like a handjob off shigeru miyamoto to you (he actually does that often, compares things to gay sex acts)

FUCK OFF OUT OF OUR MAG AND DIE YOU POOF.

And then you have The Shape, another cocksucker, another massively smug prick, suprisingly from our island. He must be english.

Sort it out Gamestm! And stop trying to be like Edge, Edge is wank.

Then maybe I wouldn't feel as though I am being swindled on a monthly basis.

User was warned for this post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think you're quite right on that. I watch Match of the Day, and the pundits will often pull out moves or failing that I've missed. They often also talk a lot of rubbish, but it isn't all merely opinion. A good reviewer will do that -- they'll pull out little things the game does, good or bad that an untrained eye is likely to have missed. That's professional insight.

Obviously, there is a lot of subjectivity too, and if you enjoy a game, you enjoy a game. But if you have paying for the opinion, it helps if it is backed up, not just well written.

I think I'm more objecting to the idea that a reviewer automatically has this extra insight, simply by dint of having the job.

I know nowt about football but I think most professional pundits are ex-players and managers. Game reviewers aren't at the end of a 20-30 year career in development. They aren't trained and I don't think they generally show any greater insight than the more articulate members of this board.

My original comment was a reaction to the idea that marking two games 9 &10 could be perfectly reasonable one way around yet ridiculous the other way around. That is just daft.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We don't care that super mario bros felt like a handjob off shigeru miyamoto to you (he actually does that often, compares things to gay sex acts)

FUCK OFF OUT OF OUR MAG AND DIE YOU POOF.

And then you have The Shape, another cocksucker, another massively smug prick, suprisingly from our island. He must be english.

Sort it out Gamestm!

Maybe you should replace both columnists next month. gamesTM really needs someone to address the needs of the growing homophobic sector of its audience.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nope but if you can link me to some images I might be able to knock up something (I am thinking about going back to painting and having videogames as art)

Would be interested in this if the price and quality was right.

One of my favorite images is the top Killer 7 one from here...

http://images.google.co.uk/imgres?imgurl=h...l%3Den%26sa%3DN

The second image is good as well.

I also like the one in the mag of the woman with what looks like angel wings.

The strange thing about it all, Killer 7 was a game i didnt really get into but i loved the style, hopefully No More Heroes will be a bit more accessible to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No wonder no-one's buying magazines, then.

Magazines used to be a source of information - that's gone now thanks to the internet. I'm not really sure what function paper magazine have now - there's very little they can do that can't be done online other than the fact you can read them on the bog\bus\in bed (which is not an insiginficant factor).

I only look at the pictures anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think I'm more objecting to the idea that a reviewer automatically has this extra insight, simply by dint of having the job.

I know nowt about football but I think most professional pundits are ex-players and managers. Game reviewers aren't at the end of a 20-30 year career in development. They aren't trained and I don't think they generally show any greater insight than the more articulate members of this board.

My original comment was a reaction to the idea that marking two games 9 &10 could be perfectly reasonable one way around yet ridiculous the other way around. That is just daft.

A lot of movie critics have never made movies. Or music critics. In fact, in many cases I think that would make them worse. I am not saying all reviewers are equal, any more than all footballers are, but there is such a thing a "professional insight" that comes form playing a hell of a lot of games and thinking about them.

As for training, you don't particularly value degrees so you can't have it both ways.

The 9-10 thing is daft, yes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A lot of movie critics have never made movies. Or music critics. In fact, in many cases I think that would make them worse. I am not saying all reviewers are equal, any more than all footballers are,

Yeah I agree. I was just responding to the football pundit example. I could be wrong but I think they are generally ex-footballers & managers.

but there is such a thing a "professional insight" that comes form playing a hell of a lot of games and thinking about them.

Something most of us on here have done plenty of.

As for training, you don't particularly value degrees so you can't have it both ways.

Fair enough Yes, I don't think a degree tells you very much about someone's ability and I'm attempting to make the same point about job titles. Being employed to write a review doesn't automatically instill any special insight.

The proof is in the writing. If you think that magazine reviews generally display a special insight then fair enough. I don't think there's much evidence of that myself. That doesn't mean I don't find reviews entertaining or informative (on occasion), I just don't think (say) an Edge review automatically carries any more weight than angels or meh's. I think most of us on here are capable of understanding and evaluating a game. Not of all of us are as good at expressing our views as professional writers - I'm clearly not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The 9-10 thing is daft, yes.

See, I don't get that. How is it daft? If there is no difference between awarding a 9 or a 10, then why score at all?

The very reason that magazines use a scale proves that there's a difference between a game getting a 9 and one getting a 10. My point was, Games TM's scoring throughout its history hasn't been very consistent. To give Burnout 3 - as much as I love it - a 10 seems a bit daft when they're also awarding games of an obviously higher quality 9s. There's nothing wrong with giving Burnout a 10, but it does mean that every other game you review after that has to be applied to the same scale.

Is an editorial thing, really. It doesn't reflect very well if they want their scores to be taken seriously and remembered. Anyway, I said all this before, but I obviously speak a different language to everyone else. :ph34r:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah I agree. I was just responding to the football pundit example. I could be wrong but I think they are generally ex-footballers & managers.

This wasn't always the case, and it isn't universally thought of as a good thing. Many of the finest sports writers and pundits were simply journalists.

Something most of us on here have done plenty of.

I doubt many of us get through as many games a professional reviewer, or has to think about and justify rating a piece of software. A good professional has an edge on an amateur. Just like anywhere else.

Fair enough Yes, I don't think a degree tells you very much about someone's ability and I'm attempting to make the same point about job titles. Being employed to write a review doesn't automatically instill any special insight.

Educational achievement tells you nothing, jpb title tells you nothing..... not much does, does it :(?

The proof is in the writing. If you think that magazine reviews generally display a special insight then fair enough. I don't think there's much evidence of that myself. That doesn't mean I don't find reviews entertaining or informative (on occasion), I just don't think (say) an Edge review automatically carries any more weight than angels or meh's. I think most of us on here are capable of understanding and evaluating a game. Not of all of us are as good at expressing our views as professional writers - I'm clearly not.

Edge has an advantage because it has built up a reputation for a number of years. You may give personal recommendation more weight, but it doesn't carry through the wider world. What Edge sells, really, is trust. And decent writing.

See, I don't get that. How is it daft? If there is no difference between awarding a 9 or a 10, then why score at all?

The very reason that magazines use a scale proves that there's a difference between a game getting a 9 and one getting a 10. My point was, Games TM's scoring throughout its history hasn't been very consistent. To give Burnout 3 - as much as I love it - a 10 seems a bit daft when they're also awarding games of an obviously higher quality 9s. There's nothing wrong with giving Burnout a 10, but it does mean that every other game you review after that has to be applied to the same scale.

Is an editorial thing, really. It doesn't reflect very well if they want their scores to be taken seriously and remembered. Anyway, I said all this before, but I obviously speak a different language to everyone else. :ph34r:

That's not the question, There is a difference between 9 and 10. The issue is if they are justified in taking a different view on what games make those grades.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's not the question, There is a difference between 9 and 10. The issue is if they are justified in taking a different view on what games make those grades.

Well, if that's your question, then of course they are.

I just don't think they've taken the right ones. :ph34r: Not if they want to be taken seriously.

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.