I HATE "STUFF GAMER"

Mothergoat · Post by **Mothergoat** » Wed Mar 10, 2004 11:04 am

Stuff magazine is first on my top five WORST game reviewers in the frikkin world. Example:
http://www.stuffmagazine.com/hype/revie ... _6487.html

Wow. It's simple what's wrong here. They didn't play Ninja Gaiden...at all.

I hold the belief (like IGN, Gamespot) that you don't have to finish an entire game to write a comprehensive review (even though I've beaten 90% of the games I've reviewed), but holy crap, you've gotta actually play most of it!!! ...And to clarify...Ninja Gaiden is one of those games that comes along in a great while that MUST be completed to appreciate...

frikkin fiends

Realm · Post by **Realm** » Wed Mar 10, 2004 12:07 pm

Personally, if someone just wants to give his impressions of a game without finishing it, that's fine, but if one wants to review a game he should complete the damn thing before he gives a score. For example, I won't give out any spoilers here, but I don't think I would have liked Halo nearly as much if I hadn't played the ending. (with the warthog and all) For me the ending totally made up for some of the other flaws through the game. On the other hand, Unreal 2's ending kinda ruined the game for me. But people don't review movies without finished them, why do that with games? Time restraints I guess.

But ya, Stuff sucks.

Mothergoat · Post by **Mothergoat** » Wed Mar 10, 2004 12:41 pm

Obviously games like NG and Halo must be completed. I believe I could be misunderstood... My 10% that isn't "beaten" comes from sports and sports-ish games...which you don't really "finish" (i.e. no storyline, outsied of your careers and franchises)

Of course, most people didn't finish Halo on Legendary before reviewing it, and I think that's the only way to fully appreciate it.

Still movies and video games are completely different. a movie asks you to sit on your butt for 2-ish hours in a passive intake. Endings in movies actually play into the overall tone.

Video games take from 3- 50 hours to "complete" but most of the gameplay elements are learned way before you've beaten it. Games are a completely different animal. The last two levels in a game aren't likely to change a fun factor whereas a stupid ending can kill a movie.

Regardless, my standard is to finish all non-sports games, but I've seen killer points out of people who don't finish games.

Do you REALLY think IGN and Gamespot finish everything they review? My, then, the cloak is thick. Some walkthrough's they post are usually handed to them by the developer, then they rephrase everything.

With big name games, you better believe they finish it...but the no-names that slip by on sub-headlines probably don't get the Ninja Gaiden or HAlo 2 examination.

Just my thoughts

Realm · Post by **Realm** » Wed Mar 10, 2004 1:52 pm

M.G. wrote:My 10% that isn't "beaten" comes from sports and sports-ish games

Perfectly understandable.

M.G. wrote:Games are a completely different animal. The last two levels in a game aren't likely to change a fun factor whereas a stupid ending can kill a movie.

Depends on the game, or at least the genre. In a Mario game the ending's not really the point, you saved Peach again, whoopdeedoo, but it was fun, but for something like Max Payne a good ending is absolutely critical, because the plot and characters were so crucial to the enjoyment of the game itself.

And no, all the big review sites are dipshits, and I take everything they say with a grain of salt.

I'm not arguing with ya here; I love how games can cater to so many different types of people. And I love debating the deeper philosophies in gaming. Maybe that's what I'll be someday: a Gaming Psychologist/Sociologist/Philosopher dude. Like Tycho!