Adventure Gamers - Forums

thejobloshow - 22 March 2013 03:58 PM

I’d say some of the reviews on this website can be redundant. As in, if it’s an adventure game that’s generally well received on Metacritic than this website will praise it and there’s no point in reading the review.

Then the same would be true of reviews from any website, any genre. Why should I read PC Gamer’s review of Call of Duty if everyone else loved it? 

But your premise is flawed. Not only are there games we’ve clearly rated lower than the mainstream, but any good review—hell, even bad ones—will provide information that no aggregate score will tell you.

Star Trek: 25th Anniversary (2.5 stars) is a game which I think deserves a better grade, which is a bit odd since I agree with much of the review; both the good and the bad. But I don’t think its flaws - and there are flaws - detract from the game as much as the reviewer seems to do. To me it’s still an above average game.

On the other end of the spectrum, Ripper (4 stars) was a game I found to be just plain bad. Well made in some respects, but dreadful in so many other ways. I did play through it, hoping it would get better, but it never did. The review does point out some of the negative aspects, so I guess in this case I was the one who couldn’t look past them.

Funnily enough, while he says it’s a good game and I say it’s not, we’re both saying that it is so in spite of Christopher Walken’s performance.

I’m not going to engage on the specifics (that’s not the point of this thread!), but since one of my reviews has been mentioned here as being too harsh and another as being too favorable, I just wanted to pop and in say that when I come up with a score, I’m trying to reflect the enjoyment I had playing the game and how I would recommend it to others (based on the editorial guidelines). If you read a review and agree with all of the points made but think the score should have been higher, then maybe those particular issues don’t bother you as much as they did me. Or vice versa.

It’s never going to be a perfect science, so I think the best any of us can do is be as straightforward as possible in describing the experience we had playing the game, and then trust the reader to decide whether or not the points made in the review matter to them.

Rhem/Rhem 2 (2 stars)
It’s good that Rhem 3 and 4 have much more positive reviews despite the games being exactly the same as 1 and 2 because it really just shows how much a love/hate series this is. I happen to love it. Despite the low score the only thing I disagree with is the comment “It’s just not very exciting”. The criticism of the graphics is fair add the ending IS brief and unsatisfying. It still somehow ended up being one of the most satisfying puzzle games I’ve played.

I thought this summary from the RHEM 1 review captures the games pretty well:

The Good: Massive non-linear game that will challenge you to discover that you have clearly defined limits to your patience and intellect.
The Bad: Massive non-linear game that will challenge you to discover that you have clearly defined limits to your patience and intellect.

And the review of the second game say the same thing perfectly:

If your thoughts were flooded with visions of chocolate, Christmas, or warm cuddly puppy dogs, play RHEM 2. But if your head was filled with images of lima beans, the dentist’s office, and the worst blind date you ever had—run. As far away from this game as you can.

Which, really, you could say the same thing about any game - it’s either a type of game you like or isn’t. Maybe this particular game takes that idea is taken to its ultimate extremes. And I guess this shows how difficult it is to rate a game. Possibly the best you can do is get a variety of reviewers to review the series, so well done for doing that AG!

TimovieMan - 22 March 2013 06:45 PM

That being said, I would have liked to see Curse of Monkey Island have a higher score than 3,5 stars. Personally, I would give it 5 stars, because it is for me the very template of what an adventure game should look, sound and play like.

^ And this.

And also: 3 stars for The Dig is 1.5 stars too little, imo, and vice versa: 5 stars for L.A. Noire is 1.5 stars too much.

You should read the first post, that’s exactly what this thread is NOT about.

And I wish people would stop acting like we’re insulting the reviewers. It’s only presenting an alternative view. There’s a huge difference between criticising and critiquing.

(all my opinion….)

Everything Pendulo that got more than 3.5. No explanation needed really.

Everything Telltale over 4. They made a career out of bland game design and ripping off the formula of past adventures games, then branched out with The Walking Dead into almost unethical emotional manipulation.

Build a great story, and great characters to get emotional reactions, dont rely on over dramatic and over the top set pieces to manipulate your player.

I gave up not because the game was really that bad, but because I was fed up of being dangled a carrot then getting smacked in the face when I:

a) tried to take a bite. (greedy man!)
b) ignored it. (how irresponsible, there’s children to feed!)
c) tried to take it for the kids. (You immoral thief!)

the game would batter you no matter what you did, and relied solely on abusing you throughout the game. Presenting something nice, then shooting you in the face for looking at it.

Disgusting masochistic game design, praised as being great. Really get’s me angry. A film that emotionally manipulative would get laughed off. But in the games industry its hailed as something great.

thejobloshow - 22 March 2013 03:58 PM

I’d say some of the reviews on this website can be redundant. As in, if it’s an adventure game that’s generally well received on Metacritic than this website will praise it and there’s no point in reading the review. The reviews on this website are at their best when they’re examining less mainstream titles.

Having said that, Episode 5 of Walking Dead getting full marks is nonsense to me. The other episodes are far superior.

EDIT: ALSO, not giving ALL THREE HUGO AND PENELOPE GAMES 5/5! Shameful AG! They set the benchmark for ironic shareware pablum.

came in here to quote this. I LOVED the Hugo games growing up! They were the first adventure games I ever played (probably as a result of my family being too poor to afford real computer games so I pretty much only ever played shareware games for the first 7 years I had a computer.

There are so many awesome things about these games.
The intro theme to Hugo’s House of Horrors alone makes it a 5 star game.
Penelope’s “I find that befuddling.”
DAT ENDING in Whoddunit?
I want to replay these right now!

Oscar - 22 March 2013 06:58 PM

There’s a huge difference between criticising and critiquing.

Actually, there’s no difference at all between those two.

But there’s definitely a difference between critiquing and disagreeing. This thread is really about the latter. And that’s fine, since a review’s job isn’t to make everyone agree with it.

Jackal - 22 March 2013 09:30 PM

Oscar - 22 March 2013 06:58 PM

There’s a huge difference between criticising and critiquing.

Actually, there’s no difference at all between those two.

The difference is that critique isn’t used in a negative way. It doesn’t imply a negative judgement of a person or thing the way criticise does. We have even invented a phrase for non-negative criticism - “constructive criticism”.

I’ve complained about this before, numerous times, but giving Broken Sword 2 measly two stars is insane - especially when the third game gets 4 stars and the fourth (and incredibly horrible!) game gets 3½ stars. There’s different opinions on whether the first or the second game in the series is the best (personally I love the second just a tiny bit more) but in general I feel they’re both very well received and are perceived as classics.

I guess the major difference between the first and second game is the humor in the second being a bit more lewd and wacky than in the first, but I don’t think it’s so different that if you liked the humor in the first you’ll hate the second (like the reviewer does). The humor is generally very much alike, I find. I also don’t agree with puzzle difficulty being lower in the second game - both games are pretty easy, if you’re a seasoned adventurer. The only major hurdle in any of the two games are the infamous goat puzzle in the first game.

Kasper F. Nielsen - 23 March 2013 02:43 AM

I’ve complained about this before, numerous times, but giving Broken Sword 2 measly two stars is insane - especially when the third game gets 4 stars and the fourth (and incredibly horrible!) game gets 3½ stars. There’s different opinions on whether the first or the second game in the series is the best (personally I love the second just a tiny bit more) but in general I feel they’re both very well received and are perceived as classics.

I guess the major difference between the first and second game is the humor in the second being a bit more lewd and wacky than in the first, but I don’t think it’s so different that if you liked the humor in the first you’ll hate the second (like the reviewer does). The humor is generally very much alike, I find. I also don’t agree with puzzle difficulty being lower in the second game - both games are pretty easy, if you’re a seasoned adventurer. The only major hurdle in any of the two games are the infamous goat puzzle in the first game.

I just read it and I agree with a lot of what was said, but disagree with the score. It does lack depth compared with the first Broken Sword and the puzzles are too easy, that is undeniable. I think the reviewer was really annoyed that it was weaker game than the first and that might explain the low score. If you read his comments under the review this is partly confirmed, and he even says that because it’s the sequel to Broken Sword it should be held to higher standards. Myself, I don’t think it deserves a “fail”.