[charmed23]

Only 6.7 ???!!! What is that ? I was dying to see their review and only 6.7 ?? but the review does have some good points .I'm not going to talk about Still Life because there were already many topic about the game .Just give you guys ..bad new Couldn't believe my eyes when i read it .
The review :http://www.gamespot.com/pc/adventure...fe/review.html

[Legolas813]

What did you expect? The review is from Gamespot, and the game they are reviewing is from the adventure genre. I wouldn't expect a high score.

Hey, at least they took the time to review it. They never did do a review for The Moment of Silence, though they have a game page for it.

[Zack]

(sigh)

All I can say is that that review for Still Life is very average. It's especially worth noting that the critic said it was only suitable for adventure fans, and unsuitable for others.

At least, the community reviews on Gamespot were good. There was only one bad review on there, and it was from a gamer who gave it a 5.8. The others were pretty good, though.

I still intend to play this game, though, and I won't let this average review dissuade me from it.

[eriq]

I, personally, think the review is pretty honest and straightforward. Fair seems fair enough.

[fov]

The review is very fair. It's not like the ones in certain print magazines (who will remain nameless ) that just make fun of the game without giving it a fair shake.

The only real gripe I have with the review is this:

Adventure game fans will be more willing to forgive the game's technical shortcomings than anyone else, but it's hard to believe that anyone who is still devoted to this style of gaming will find a lot in Still Life that they haven't experienced already.

This is a generalization with no basis in reality. Considering how many people who are "devoted to this style of gaming" have expressed how much they loved Still Life (on this board and others), clearly there is something positive about the experience. It may be hard for the reviewer to believe, but that doesn't make it untrue.

I'd never expect a reviewer to change his or her stance based on popular opinion, but I hope that people who read the review remember that this is just one person's view, out of many (and I'm sure any smart reader will).

[Bruno_Malta]

I don´t believe it is a fair review. Gamespot, for some years now, has been a pretty bad place to look for a game Review. They gave shity games like HALO 2 some high Scores and small games always get´s low scores from then. It´s like they HAVE to give a high score to high profile, high waited games.
I never liked their reviews of Adventure Games, they are always lacking. That´s why i searched for sites like AdventureGamers.

[samIamsad]

Originally Posted by fov

Considering how many people who are "devoted to this style of gaming" have expressed how much they loved Still Life (on this board and others), clearly there is something positive about the experience. It may be hard for the reviewer to believe, but that doesn't make it untrue.

The score is 6.7. Not 3.0 or something, maybe an indicator that he sill thinks the game has something going for it.

[Jake]

Originally Posted by Legolas813

What did you expect? The review is from Gamespot, and the game they are reviewing is from the adventure genre. I wouldn't expect a high score.

Nice one. Go go unfounded generalizations! Clearly Gamespot dislikes adventure games... Oh wait:

Gamespot reviews: Grim Fandango - 9.3, Game of the year 1998
Gamespot reviews: The Longest Journey - 9.3
Gamespot reviews: Syberia - 8.1 9.1


I'd expect a high score from Gamespot if the reviewer thought the game was good. That seems reasonable enough?

[Curt]

Originally Posted by Zack

It's especially worth noting that the critic said it was only suitable for adventure fans, and unsuitable for others.

I'm not having a go at you here, Zack, but at those reviewers who make such claims as this. That's like saying an FPS will only appeal to FPS fans. It's a stupid stupid statement that is so obvious the reviewer should be slapped with a wet fish. Show me a non-FPS fan who liked Doom 3 and you'll be showing me someone who has escaped his padded cell. FPS games are made with FPS fans in mind, likewise Adventure games are made with adventure fans in mind. Cross-genre games are the ones that try to appeal to a mix.

@ gamespot doubters - to be fair to gamespot they do at least give the gamer the chance to vote. I see that to date 179 gamers have rated Sill Life and it has an average of 8.9 so clearly it IS getting good press on Gamespot. This re-ignites my on-off desire to play this game.

Too many people come to this board with their cups half empty.

[Jake]

Originally Posted by Curt

I'm not having a go at you here, Zack, but at those reviewers who make such claims as this. That's like saying an FPS will only appeal to FPS fans. It's a stupid stupid statement that is so obvious the reviewer should be slapped with a wet fish. Show me a non-FPS fan who liked Doom 3 and you'll be showing me someone who has escaped his padded cell. FPS games are made with FPS fans in mind, likewise Adventure games are made with adventure fans in mind. Cross-genre games are the ones that try to appeal to a mix.

WHAT?

WHAT?

Holy shit. Christ on a crutch.

"Show me a non-FPS fan who liked Doom 3 and you'll be showing me someone who has escaped his padded cell."

Most twisted stupid argument to make... ever!

See, Doom 3 was a supremely inbred, retro-throwback gore-ridden (and in my opinion, subpar) FPS designed for the core FPS players who have been at it since Doom 1. But, how about this: "Show me a non-FPS fan who liked Halo, or Half Life?" Let me tell you: There are a goddamn ton of them.

Or, how about: "Show me a non-adventure fan who liked Myst, or who liked Grim Fandango?" Again, a f*ucking heap of them.

The best games in any given genre aren't "just for fans," they make new fans. Saying a reviewer should be slapped for making a remark like that is one of the most stupid things I've read on these boards in a while. Good god.

When the reviewer said that fans will like it but others won't, what they meant was that the game wasn't the kind that will attract new gamers to the genre - they were saying that Still Life is not going to make many new adventure fans. That's a pretty reasonable (and, in my opinion, pretty damning) statement to put in a review. For more on the subject of "adventure games for adventure gamers" versus "making new fans," see the 65 page thread from last month.



A new slogan for PC gaming: "All genres are niche genres. Get the f*ck off my lawn."

[syntheticgerbil]

I usually don't have a problem with Gamespot reviews, although I feel the Syberia review is wrong, but then... sigh...

Hey anyways, I think you guys should give up the adventure game conspiracy theory.

[squarejawhero]

[charmed23]

Uh..Actually ,Syberia got 9.1 on PC and 8.1 on XBOX from Gamespot .Syberia II got 7.8 on PC .

[sethsez]

Originally Posted by syntheticgerbil

Hey anyways, I think you guys should give up the adventure game conspiracy theory.

Agreed.

Still Life is the kind of game that will only be enjoyable if you're a die-hard fan of the genre. I'm not a RTS fan, but I love StarCraft. I'm not a sports fan, but I love Virtua Tennis. I'm not a space sim fan, but I love Freespace 2. And even though I consider myself a FPS fan, I only really like a select few.

It's a filler game for fans of the genre to eat up and non-fans to ignore. It's not the kind of thing that will convert anyone because it's not good enough in any respect to do so. If I were to compare it to horror movies, this is definitely closer to Halloween 4 than The Exorcist. Exorcist is a horror movie that many people liked even if they didn't care for the genre in general. That's not the case with H4.

Originally Posted by fov

I'd never expect a reviewer to change his or her stance based on popular opinion

What popular opinion? Popular opinion is that current adventure games are dull. People who like modern adventure games are a minority in the overall gaming industry.

[Igor]

Originally Posted by sethsez

It's a filler game for fans of the genre to eat up and non-fans to ignore. It's not the kind of thing that will convert anyone because it's not good enough in any respect to do so.

But really.. did Syberia convert anyone?
The way i see it, Still Life is just as interesting for mainstream crowd as was Syberia or Myst.. or to some degree even more.. for its story (violence and mass murderers are "in" right now, or so i heard ).

Review.. while i don't agree with its score, it was well writen with mostly good points..

[Ninth]

Originally Posted by Jake

Nice one. Go go unfounded generalizations! Clearly Gamespot dislikes adventure games... Oh wait:

Gamespot reviews: Grim Fandango - 9.3, Game of the year 1998
Gamespot reviews: The Longest Journey - 9.3
Gamespot reviews: Syberia - 8.1 9.1


I'd expect a high score from Gamespot if the reviewer thought the game was good. That seems reasonable enough?

I haven't read the review, but giving 9.1 to Syberia and 6.7 to Still Life seem really strange to me.

EDIT: Now I've read it. I'm not sure what the techincal shortcomings that will stop non fans to like the game are? Canadian accents? Etheral background?

[fov]

Originally Posted by sethsez

What popular opinion? Popular opinion is that current adventure games are dull.

So all the people who have posted that they enjoyed Still Life are just the voices in my head?

Originally Posted by Jake

A new slogan for PC gaming: "All genres are niche genres. Get the f*ck off my lawn."

Can I get that on a tee shirt, please?

[sethsez]

Originally Posted by fov

So all the people who have posted that they enjoyed Still Life are just the voices in my head?

No, they're postings on niche-oriented boards that don't properly represent the gaming industry as a whole.

I visit a website called shmups.com which is devoted to 2D shooters (1942, Gradius, Raiden, etc... old arcade standbys, though the genre still exists and games are still made in it). Now, one of the most "popular" companies in the genre is called Cave, and every time they release a game people on shmups go absolutely nuts. Praise is showered on them and the games are dissected for months. However, step outside of that niche-oriented community and the rest of the gaming world doesn't even know Cave exists. The last "popular" shooter in that style was Ikaruga, and even that didn't exactly sell truckloads or get tons of press. In the isolated 2D shooter community however, it was received the same way Syberia was received in the adventure community.

Likewise, the latest Dario Argento movie was big news in the horror movie community, and the fact that he's going to make a movie about the Third Mother has many horror fans absolutely ecstatic. However, most movie fans in general hear that news and go "third mother? Dario Argento? What?"

Yes, adventure fans generally like Still Life, but they're the only ones who really care about it one way or the other.

[squarejawhero]

Originally Posted by fov

Can I get that on a tee shirt, please?

Here you go, for a limited time only. Any proceeds will be paypal'd to Jake on this one.

http://www.cafepress.com/storytees.23492233

Be sure to check out Kommando Kitty merchandise and new products soon.

[fov]

Originally Posted by sethsez

No, they're postings on niche-oriented boards that don't properly represent the gaming industry as a whole.

But that's who the reviewer was referring to.

Originally Posted by Gamespot reviewer

Adventure game fans will be more willing to forgive the game's technical shortcomings than anyone else, but it's hard to believe that anyone who is still devoted to this style of gaming will find a lot in Still Life that they haven't experienced already.

The people who are still devoted to this style of gaming ARE the ones who post on the so-called niche-oriented boards. And many of them DID find a lot in Still Life that made it worth the experience.

Yes, adventure fans generally like Still Life, but they're the only ones who really care about it one way or the other.

I can't say I agree with that, but that's not the issue. My issue was with the reviewer discounting even adventure gamers liking the game (or acting incredulous that they would), in the portion that I quoted, when that is clearly not the case judging by the response this game has had in the adventure gaming community.