Jump to content
IGNORED

No Half-life 2 Review Again In Gametm?

JoeK

By JoeK
in Discussion

 Share

Recommended Posts

Stolly

Stolly

Posted
Posted
Good lord.

Do the math.

GamesTM has a readership of approx 20-25k I would imagine.

Now, out of how many of them, how many do expect to read nothing else? How many do you expect are looking forward to HL2? How many of those looking forward to HL2 are waiting for GamesTM's review before buying it?

I'd say about none.

If they're looking forward to HL2 chances are they already have it. Chances are they've read the lashingly sycophantic "this game does no wrong!" gushings in every other magazine that covers PC gaming. Chances are the amount of people waiting for one magazines opinion on a game that has been out a month already, been called game of the millenia by all and sundry already, is equal to the amount of people living on the sun.

FFS, how can you say they have done their readership a disservice. One review. One game. Is HL2 bigger than everything else? Is it? No. It's a pretty damn good FPS. And that's it. Big deal.

Sometimes things wind me up because some people blow things way out of proportion. This is one of them. ;)

Then why not also miss out reviewing Halo 2 and Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas too. Just another fps and another car stealing, hip-hop, murder, drug dealing and hooker game.

In fact they should presumably miss out all reviews on that basis?

I just picked up Games tm 12 as an example and in it for instance they bothered to review NHL Hitz Pro (4/10), Dungeons & Dragons Heroes (4/10), NBA Jam (5/10) and UFO: Aftermath (4/10). Why spend time reviewing games like that at all and yet go on to completely ignore Half Life 2?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
squirtle

squirtle

Posted
Posted
Then why not also miss out reviewing Halo 2 and Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas too. Just another fps and another car stealing, hip-hop, murder, drug dealing and hooker game.

In fact they should presumably miss out all reviews on that basis?

I just picked up Games tm 12 as an example and in it for instance they bothered to review NHL Hitz Pro (4/10), Dungeons & Dragons Heroes (4/10), NBA Jam (5/10) and UFO: Aftermath (4/10). Why spend time reviewing games like that at all and yet go on to completely ignore Half Life 2?

Erm, because they had them on time, I guess.

The horse has already bolted well into the distance with HL2. I like Concept's idea of a quick retrospective review six months down the line, taking into account any mods and the like that have been created in the meantime.

One other thing I would like to point out about the reviews of HL2 in the future mags. There was no mention, at all, of the stuttering problems or the steam problems, that thousands of users have encountered. The game I first played through upon purchase was nowhere near a 10 as it was clearly bugged and unfinished. Now, you can say this about a lot of PC games, but they don't get 10's. HL2 did. In the form that a lot of people experienced the game, how could it deserve a 10? Edge are usually quite harsh on Tech problems within games, and yet here they were strangely missing. No wonder Valve wanted it reviewed from within their headquarters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JoeK

JoeK

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Erm, because they had them on time, I guess.

One other thing I would like to point out about the reviews of HL2 in the future mags. There was no mention, at all, of the stuttering problems or the steam problems, that thousands of users have encountered. The game I first played through upon purchase was nowhere near a 10 as it was clearly bugged and unfinished. Now, you can say this about a lot of PC games, but they don't get 10's. HL2 did. In the form that a lot of people experienced the game, how could it deserve a 10? Edge are usually quite harsh on Tech problems within games, and yet here they were strangely missing. No wonder Valve wanted it reviewed from within their headquarters.

Erm, because they had them on time, I guess

Well, sort of. I distinctly have the impression that both the games had been in the shops for a while before that particular issue came out though.

As for the problems with Half-Life 2, and stuttering. Whilst I'm aware of the problem that many people have suffered from it, the fact is that I never had any of that, so it's possible that the magazine's machines didn't suffer either. With the Steam problems though - certainly Edge have a news article about it in the latest issue. Yes, that certainly is a big fuck off in the face (hence my annoyed thread elsewhere), but that's actually not a game issue per se.

Is Half-Life 2 a 10 anyway? It's certainly my game of the year, and possibly the best PC game I've ever played, but it is merely an FPS with a spangly gravity gun. Either way, it is an important game and which should be talked about ALL THE TIME, UNTIL THE WORLD GETS EATEN BY THE LLAMAS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
squirtle

squirtle

Posted
Posted

Well, sort of. I distinctly have the impression that both the games had been in the shops for a while before that particular issue came out though.

As for the problems with Half-Life 2, and stuttering. Whilst I'm aware of the problem that many people have suffered from it, the fact is that I never had any of that, so it's possible that the magazine's machines didn't suffer either. With the Steam problems though - certainly Edge have a news article about it in the latest issue. Yes, that certainly is a big fuck off in the face (hence my annoyed thread elsewhere), but that's actually not a game issue per se.

Is Half-Life 2 a 10 anyway? It's certainly my game of the year, and possibly the best PC game I've ever played, but it is merely an FPS with a spangly gravity gun. Either way, it is an important game and which should be talked about ALL THE TIME, UNTIL THE WORLD GETS EATEN BY THE LLAMAS.

I was under the impression they reviewed it at Valve headquarters. Future's machines never got anywhere near the game to review it, AFAIK.

And the stuttering is a major problem. I've got it running smoother (not smooth, smoother) now after fiddling around all over the place, but considering the smooth piece of coding that Doom 3 was and Far Cry, HL2 is a stuttery mess. Which detracts from the game as a whole.

And it was never mentioned in any review. At all. Don't you think it would have popped up somewhere?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted
And it was never mentioned in any review. At all. Don't you think it would have popped up somewhere?

Oh come on. I can name other Best Selling PC Games, which are generally "loved" where by they get huge, glowing reviews, and bugs just aren't mentioned!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
strider

strider

Posted
Posted
One word sums up Games TMs attitude in this affair.

Juvenille

That is all. TBH I don't think the world really needs Games TM and I have had enough of the condescending attitude towards their readership.

Yes, because you've always had a good word to say about gamesTM haven't you sandman ;)

It's funny really your special word sums up most of the attitudes on this thread. Well done mate...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted
It's funny really your special word sums up most of the attitudes on this thread. Well done mate...

------------------------------------

It makes a change from the Edge is better than gamesTM banter that you normally find on here...

;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sandman

sandman

Posted
Posted
Yes, because you've always had a good word to say about gamesTM haven't you sandman ;)

It's funny really your special word sums up most of the attitudes on this thread. Well done mate...

Sorry, Strider, but I really do wish you could see this from the other side of the fence as it were.

I still subscribe to Games TM (the only mag I do subscribe too), but it seems increasingly (well, not YOUR section, which is getting better all the time) up its own arse. We ALL make mistakes, but Games TM doesn't seem to want to admit to them. Thats why it won't review Half Life 2, that will be admitting its wrong which it will never do.

I may never even play Half Life 2 (is it coming to Xbox??), but even I can see that it is one of the most important games of all time and to ignore it is to do your readers a great diservice. The only review of HL2 I have read is the Edge one which was bloody terrible. So, I have one badly written review to help me form an opinion on the quality of what some are calling the best game of all time. I know I could just buy more mags, but that is not the point. Some of your readers will ONLY buy your magazine and they should be informed on all important game releases.

Even the Manhunt and Galleon reviews were not enough to make me think about cancelling my subscription. I may have disagreed with them immensley, but a review is personal taste and not everybody can have the same as you. But, to NOT review a game is indefensible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
strider

strider

Posted
Posted

A review is going to be placed on our website (due to reader demand on the forum) is this enough to placate you?

It's highly unlikely that a conventional review is ever going to appear in the mag now (it would be at least 4 issues late) but until we're all back in the office (off till the 4th) this just isn't something we can discuss at the moment (ie Concept's mention of a retrospective). What I do know though is based on the info we have received so far opinion does seem to be divided on the matter (although we've not had a chance to check any hatemail that may have been sent to the office ;) )

Link to comment
Share on other sites
strider

strider

Posted
Posted
Put it this way: to the average punter, GamesTM will be "The magazine that doesn't review crutial titles because it's been slighted by the publishers."

We have over 24,000 readers at the mo, there's been around 20 individual complaints (on the various forums I've visited so far), so what average punters are you talking about?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Alex W.

Alex W.

Posted
Posted
We have over 24,000 readers at the mo, there's been around 20 individual complaints (on the various forums I've visited so far), so what average punters are you talking about?

The ones that don't read you yet? ;)

Something like that, anyway. You won't do yourself too many favours by not having a review up on the cover, but to be fair, you weren't going to have one up at the same time as your competitors anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
KieronGillen

KieronGillen

Posted
Posted
yeah, why bother when you can just buy them out eh?

Gamer didn't buy Zone when I was on staff, chum*.

To be honest, I still wouldn't mention them in a magazine I was running. I'm not even sure if Gamer mention them directly now. I'd imagine it's frowned upon, for exactly the same reasons I gave above.

Look at that: You have a dig at me and I furnish you with more pseudo-insider information about videogames magazines relationships. Am I not a cutie?

KG

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sandman

sandman

Posted
Posted
A review is going to be placed on our website (due to reader demand on the forum) is this enough to placate you?

It's highly unlikely that a conventional review is ever going to appear in the mag now (it would be at least 4 issues late) but until we're all back in the office (off till the 4th) this just isn't something we can discuss at the moment (ie Concept's mention of a retrospective). What I do know though is based on the info we have received so far opinion does seem to be divided on the matter (although we've not had a chance to check any hatemail that may have been sent to the office ;) )

A review on the website is certainly a step in the right direction. But, I didn't even realise you HAD a website until you mentioned it now.

This whole "the review will be X amount of months late" thing is just silly. I haven't bought the game yet (My PC is a bit iffy with current releases - Rome Total War is the last big release that was OK), but even if I had I would still want to hear what Games TM has to say about it.

For a magazine that is getting SO MUCH right it is a shame that the "management" seem to have a god complex. If you like you can sack 'em and I'll take over! They call me Hitler at the office so I should fit right in!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
KieronGillen

KieronGillen

Posted
Posted
No one is really bothered whether they review it or not. But the fact is, it is only GamesTM that lose out.

No, only GamesTM's loyal readers lose out.

That's why I'm angry with them.

KG

*I distinctly remember, back in the prehistory, waiting faithfully for Syndicate's review in AP, despite it being in the shops. If AP had decided Bullfrog were big poopy-heads, I'll be waiting in Stafford's Smiths to this very day, wondering what was going on. This is because I trusted them, and believed in them. For them to *not* to have reviewed it would imply that Games TM don't actually believe anyone trusts or believes in them. Which is a shame, in all manner of ways. Christ - insult Vivendi as much as you like in the review, because that's always good fun for everyone, but *do your job*.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
strider

strider

Posted
Posted
You won't do yourself too many favours by not having a review up on the cover, but to be fair, you weren't going to have one up at the same time as your competitors anyway.

Nah, that's not strictly true mate, look at those near identical Halo 2 covers; unless the game has been given exclusively to another magazine, there's every chance that we could have the same games on the front cover.

Halflife 2 (from a cover point of view) is old news. Do you really think it would sell copies of a magazine if it was featured on the cover of February's issue?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cyhwuhx

Cyhwuhx

Posted
Posted
We have over 24,000 readers at the mo, there's been around 20 individual complaints (on the various forums I've visited so far), so what average punters are you talking about?

.::: Probably the ones that never tell you anything. The same that never fill out questionaires and are practically invisble, but DO build up the glut of your readers.

They're a problematic bunch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
biglime

biglime

Posted
Posted
No, only GamesTM's loyal readers lose out.

That's why I'm angry with them.

KG

*I distinctly remember, back in the prehistory, waiting faithfully for Syndicate's review in AP, despite it being in the shops. If AP had decided Bullfrog were big poopy-heads, I'll be waiting in Stafford's Smiths to this very day, wondering what was going on. This is because I trusted them, and believed in them. For them to *not* to have reviewed it would imply that Games TM don't actually believe anyone trusts or believes in them. Which is a shame, in all manner of ways. Christ - insult Vivendi as much as you like in the review, because that's always good fun for everyone, but *do your job*.

To be fair, though, Edge's review WAS atrocious. I don't know the ins and outs of all this sneaky peek review shenanigans that Valve enforced, but the standard of review that resulted from them was shockingly poor.

So, yeah. A late review might have been a good idea. As long as it didn't do anything mental like, you know, give it a 10.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
KieronGillen

KieronGillen

Posted
Posted
A late review might have been a good idea. As long as it didn't do anything mental like, you know, give it a 10.

You know, thinking idly on this topic, I don't believe HL2 is actually any worse than any of the other games which got the Edge 10.

Possible exception for Mario 64.

KG

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
Go to topic listing

  • 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.

  I accept