Edge #285 - LBP vs SMM

[rgraves]

It's good to see the resident Nintendo zealots reacting to a numeral in Edge with the dignity and grace for which they've grown famous.

Having read Edge threads on here for many years Nintendo fanboys are by far the worst for flipping their shit every bleeding month over a figure being 1 or 2 off what they think it should be. There's a reason that the reaction to Double Dash is still a running joke.

[Jolly]

Even if Super Mario Maker did get a 10, some smartarse would be still be complaining at the implication it's the same level of quality as LittleBigPlanet. And I don't buy that because their house style is anonymous we're all supposed to think it's written by one amorphous, multi-limbed, ageless blob. I expect they mistakenly hope that we're all sensible enough to figure out for ourselves that that's not the case.

[Stolly]

I haven't got Mario Maker so can't comment on that but, yeah, LBP didn't deserve a 10. Mind you neither did Skyward fooking Sword!

[Stanley]

I haven't got Mario Maker so can't comment on that but, yeah, LBP didn't deserve a 10. Mind you neither did Skyward fooking Sword!

Skyward Sword deserved a 'fooking' 11.

[Stolly]

Skyward Sword deserved a 'fooking' 11.

Oh no it fooking didn't

You have to laugh though at disagreeing about scores. Little Big Planet came out a yonk ago (I got it bundled with my PS3) and although the controls and the physics were 'woolly', it did come across as a slick and clever package I guess. And it did seem new and revolutionary at the time and that always used to count for something with Edge reviews which are/were supposed to reward revolutionary over evolutionary (or some bollocks like that). That said I felt conned after giving it a go. I was also rubbish at it and my score would probably be a generous 6.

With Skyward Sword I can only assume my remote and motion sensor set up was shonky as I randomly lost synch and, added to that, couldn't at all master one or two of the waggle sword swipes. From memory my sideways swipe would often be recognised as a diagonal swipe or vice versa, or something. It also had the hand holdyest start to a game in living history and that all meant that I pretty much gave it up at or around the first dungeon boss fight (was it a caterpilla thingy on some stairs fought using bombs?). Anyway maybe that game was completely brilliant after that point but it was just a 3 or 4 out of 10 up until that point to me.

All the same I can still often see where Edge 10's come from. They definitely got it right with Ocarina of Time anyway

[Sprite Machine]

let me put in a way you can hopefully understand. Take Rise of the Robots. Compared to other fighting games of the time, like Street Fighter, you can objectively state that it's bad for the gameplay in that particular genre when you can't turn around after jumping over an opponent. Because other fighting games have proven that being able to turn around makes for a better game.

Actually, Mr. Gerbik, you can't objectively state that ANYTHING is "bad" because the word bad is, by definition, subjective.

"You can't turn around in Rise of the Robots" - objective statement.

"This makes it a bad game" - subjective statement.

You go on to say that "reviews are definitely subjective of course", so how do you fail to extrapolate that a particular subset of a review (eg. a review of the control scheme) is also subjective?

[Stanley]

But the controls don't work Sprite Machine. You might like that they don't work but it's not a subjective observation it's a fact.

[Sprite Machine]

But the controls don't work Sprite Machine. You might like that they don't work but it's not a subjective observation it's a fact.

Unless the buttons and sticks literally do nothing, all you're doing is stating a preference. In this context, "doesn't work" simply means "doesn't do what I think they should do".

[Stolly]

Absolutely. My Skyward Sword controls were much more rubbish than those of LBP

[Mr. Gerbik]

Unless the buttons and sticks literally do nothing, all your doing is stating a preference. In this context, "doesn't work" simply means "doesn't do what I think they should do".

No, in this context it means that the controls are not suited for a platform game. Which it is. Objectively.

[Stanley]

Unless the buttons and sticks literally do nothing, all you're doing is stating a preference. In this context, "doesn't work" simply means "doesn't do what I think they should do".

If what I think they should do is respond instantly to my inputs I'd class that as not working than a personal preference.

Would you call a chair with three legs a personal preference?

If your answer is yes you have a preference for broken chairs. Same here.

Absolutely. My Skyward Sword controls were much more rubbish than those of LBP

On your remote. Apparently

[Stanley]

I think I fall within the "Nintendo zealot" category.

Skyward Sword did not deserve a 10.

See earlier reply

[Sprite Machine]

No, in this context it means that the controls are not suited for a platform game. Which it is. Objectively.

"Not suited" is also subjective.

If what I think they should do is respond instantly to my inputs I'd class that as not working than a personal preference.

It's both because they're the same thing. That's the point.

Would you call a chair with three legs a personal preference?

It obviously is.

(One might call such a thing a "stool", incidentally. They're quite popular in kitchens.)

[Rudderless]

Loads of people have a blind spot when it comes to motion controls, to the point where I don't know if it's a genuine issue or just an unwillingness to learn. For what little it's worth, I thought Skyward Sword had pretty much the best motion controls ever. The game itself isn't free of flaws, but to me the way the Wiimote was used in combat and puzzles was one of its strengths, not its biggest weakness.

I gave it a 10 elsewhere, and with hindsight that's a touch generous, but if I had my time over it'd still be getting a very high score. There's loads of good stuff there. And some of the music is just beautiful: the Romance Theme is a thing of wide-eyed wonder; the final refrain of Fi's Theme is heartbreaking.

[Stanley]

You'd call a three legged chair a stool? Interesting.

[Sprite Machine]

You'd call a three legged chair a stool? Interesting.

I imagine it would totally blow your mind if I told you the chair I'm sitting on right now has FIVE legs. Or one, depending on how you measure it.

[Stanley]

I imagine it would totally blow your mind if I told you the chair I'm sitting on right now has FIVE legs. Or one, depending on how you measure it.

Yes but by definition a stool is not a chair. A chair with three legs is a broken chair. A game with unresponsive controls is a game with broken controls. Preference doesn't come into it. You're enjoying the game in spite of its problems. Problems which objectively lead one to describe it as broken.

Should a broken game get a 10? Not when the bit that's broke is central to the whole experience.

[Mr. Gerbik]

"Not suited" is also subjective.

I

I'm not a native English speaker so maybe it's my fault that you don't seem to understand me. Let me try this again: CONTROLS NO WORKY MEANS BAD GAME, MKAY? BAD PLATFORMER OBJECTIVELY

I really don't know why you're so defensive about this, unless you're... uhmm the person who actually wrote that edge review? No hard feelings man, so you goofed once. Happens to the best of us. But if you're also the person who wrote the edge Turok 2 review: fuck you and give me money back

[Nespresso]

I'm not a native English speaker so maybe it's my fault that you don't seem to understand me. Let me try this again: CONTROLS NO WORKY MEANS BAD GAME, MKAY? BAD PLATFORMER OBJECTIVELY

I really don't know why you're so defensive about this, unless you're... uhmm the person who actually wrote that edge review? No hard feelings man, so you goofed once. Happens to the best of us. But if you're also the person who wrote the edge Turok 2 review: fuck you and give me money back

Turok 2 was great you fucking piece of shit!

[RubberJohnny]

It's because you're doing the "objectivity in reviews" bollocks under a smokescreen that you're not actually doing the objectivity in reviews bollocks.

It's extra daft because you could just say you personally don't like it and no one would disagree or take issue? This is like when you freaked out at peoples extreme opinion of "some mobile games are good" and started going on about objectivity.

[Mr. Gerbik]

Turok 2 was great you fucking piece of shit!

it was a piece of shit!

It's because you're doing the "objectivity in reviews" bollocks under a smokescreen that you're not actually doing the objectivity in reviews bollocks.

It's extra daft because you could just say you personally don't like it and no one would disagree or take issue? This is like when you freaked out at peoples extreme opinion of "some mobile games are good" and started going on about objectivity.

Nah that was just a misunderstanding as I admitted. We made up

[Uncle Mike]

http://www.topchair.cn/product-pic/three-legged-shell-chair.jpg

Broken

[Sprite Machine]

Yes but by definition a stool is not a chair. A chair with three legs is a broken chair. A game with unresponsive controls is a game with broken controls. Preference doesn't come into it.

Goodness me, if you don't think people can have preferences for chairs with fewer than four legs, I strongly urge you to stay out of IKEA!

You're enjoying the game in spite of its problems. Problems which objectively lead one to describe it as broken.

Whether or not something has problems in the first place is subjective. One man's problem is another man's pleasure.

The fact that you can't seem to grasp this painfully simple concept is utterly baffling!

I'm not a native English speaker so maybe it's my fault that you don't seem to understand me. Let me try this again: CONTROLS NO WORKY MEANS BAD GAME, MKAY? BAD PLATFORMER OBJECTIVELY

I understand you perfectly, you're just wrong with your use of the word "objective".

I really don't know why you're so defensive about this, unless you're... uhmm the person who actually wrote that edge review? No hard feelings man, so you goofed once. Happens to the best of us. But if you're also the person who wrote the edge Turok 2 review: fuck you and give me money back

I'm trying to help people understand the (apparently baffling and alien) concept that somebody might not think a particular thing is bad just because you do, which in this very thread has led to astonishingly daft comments as "how is it possible to score this game a 10" and "it MUST have been their first platformer ever".

Open your mind to other ways of thinking, you'll be at peace with the world, man.

[Lovelyman]

You could definitely have a three legged chair you divvies.

[Stanley]

A chair has (at least) four legs!

[Stanley]

Whether or not something has problems in the first place is subjective. One man's problem is another man's pleasure.

The fact that you can't seem to grasp this painfully simple concept is utterly baffling!

I think you're going too far the other way. Of course you can state, objectively, that something is broken. If I press jump and it doesn't happen 100% every time it's broken.

[Wiper]

This thread is getting odd. And I'm very sad to learn that my office chair is not a chair.

[Stanley]

Come on, Sprite Machine decided to label a broken chair a stool. Perhaps I worded it wrong but he knew what I meant.

[Nespresso]

it was a piece of shit!

I'm cross with you right now.

[Sprite Machine]

I think you're going too far the other way. Of course you can state, objectively, that something is broken. If I press jump and it doesn't happen 100% every time it's broken.

Nope, that's still subjective because somebody could state "what a delightfully unexpected surprise when the jump doesn't happen, I love it!".

In fact, randomisation is a key aspect of a lot of games.

You're free to call this broken, of course. That's your opinion and you're welcome to it. I call any stealth game broken if it doesn't have "lines of sight" (a la MGS), but I'm under no illusion that it makes such a statement objective.