I see what you're saying but I don't think I can completely agree with you.
You could play an RPG to death, get all the secrets, get a high level, visit every town but not finish the game. At that point you think you might have an idea of the quality of the game but really there's no payoff. The ending of that sort of game counts for everything, it's the culmination of everything you've done and a good ending can make the difference between a good game and a great game. You might say that that payoff is not a part of the actual game but it's an important part of the experience.
Hmm, I'd like to think I would have an idea of the quality of the game if I did everything listed above. The games ending is a good payoff, you're right about that. You can play a fantastic game that is visually appealing, really draws you in to its gameplay, and so forth. But the ending could be something like "Thank you for Playing. Press Start". That's it. A plain old text ending. No cutscene, no The End, with a ? at the end.
As cheated as I would feel, I would still give that game a good review, without ruining the ending, like I usually do, hehehe.
You are right about the ending being a big part of the experience. You want to be satisfied, and aim for the best time to get the best ending. Would the games ending have an effect on the overall review? For me, no. But there could be billions of others who think differently, and that's ok. _________________ John R. Gibson
Host/Writer/Creator Video Masters TV
"The whole planet Houston?" -General Zod
"Am I supposed to conduct with my penis?" -Peter Griffin (Family Guy)
"What does God need with a starship?" - Star Trek V
I know, chatty Cathy here again to rant and rave. OK, I see where you are coming from, and I understand your "beefs" with the reviews and shit. But here is where I am going to come from. Your concern is uncompleted games and the reviewers level of responsibility to you, the gamer (consumers ) but its quite simple to me my friend. There is sometimes no way to always review a completely, as John stated, RPG's and some games just EAT YOUR time. So your view is that a 5-7mins segment including opening and closing skits, well written scripts with comedy infused, but how can one justify, reviewing every single minute minute (haha like that double use of a word and differentiating terminologies) of a game? Simply put, unlike a movie which takes only 1-3 hours (hopefully unless your planning a Matrix Marathon or some other hair-brained craziness) a game is pretty basic in, a couple ways, most games offer a unique platform of how they are played, NO game is made equal for all intensive purposes, Ex. are a followed, FFX and FFX.5 same chars, same areas, COMPLETELY different styles, another example would be shoot em ups, every one is different, even if its so minuscule its not even there for you to see. But you can review something because as I stated before, a review is a rough draft, now if you are doing a review or a follow up or a walk through, then ya, dammit play it through all the way. But come on, a review says ya, this is its feel, its movements are decent, graphics blah but it works.
See if a review is that then ya its a REVIEW, and Wikipedia defines consumer reviews as this.......
Consumer review refers to a review written by the owner of a product or the user of a service who has sufficient experience to comment on reliability and whether or not the product or service delivers on its promises.
Expert review usually refers to a review written by someone who has tested several peer products or services to identify which offers the best value for money or the best set of features.
And then you have
Bought Review is the system where the creator (usually a company) of a new product pays a reviewer to review his new product. Primarily used in the car, movie and game industry this system creates a kind of undercover advertising. Bought reviews obviously are often biased, although exceptions occur.
So how can you surmise that, simply put, reviews should be only done after a completion of a game when, in all truth and aspects that game can be reviewed if you have enough experience involved in such game you can make an accurate assessment upon what you have. I mean, you don't play and entire game for 30 hours and do a 5 min review, that's just going to bog you down in producing a show. So, for me a review needs 3 critical information to me, 1) Is the controls difficult to use, learn or how the operation of it goes, 2) Is it fun or is it OMG i died two steps into the game when I was mauled viciously by rabbits!!! 3) Would it be something that I might be interested in by seeing what they are showing on the bright screen in front of me? That's about it, endings are endings, just like beginnings are beginnings, some people like em for what it is and if it wraps up nicely, other people, such as my friend Matt, I don't think he would give a rats ass about an ending if they are going to ramble on about YAY I AM THE SAVIOUR OF THE UNIVERSE. No Matt just wants see shit get blown the frick up.
So, can you review a game without completing it, I DO THINK SO, in fact, if everybody followed the way of the people who get it pre-release (How did they get it unless hmmm, they wanted the review before it came out cause it is MARKETING, CONSUMERISM AT ITS FINEST *gets sick at the thought of consumerism*). I mean look at the types of reviews I wrote............. They get paid from the companies to sit around a fuck off and play for pointless hours to give you the same review as if someone who saw enough of it to give the same damn outline without the pressure of being bias.
AGAIN me ranting uncontrollably spewing forth total nonsense! _________________ Paul *Strife Deliveries*
I don't have any beefs at all with VMTV (I love the show). I guess I'm really just fueling a healthy conversation with a foreign viewpoint.
For the types of reviews VMTV provides, I completely agree - I get an introduction to a game, and a general overview of how much fun it is, as well as whatever extra information you guys want to put in. That's cool and it's definitely entertaining and useful for learning about games I haven't played.
Also, you're right - no point spending 30-100 hours on every game - the show would never get done and a lot of that time would be wasted and have little effect on the quality of the review.
But for professional reviewers / game writers, I would have different expectations. If it is someone's job to review games - if that is how they make a living professionally - I would definitely expect them to finish the game - especially if it's a textual review, which would normally mean a lot more information. Sure it takes a long time - but that's what their time is supposed to be used for.
That's not to say that Professional reviewers are any better than VMTV (mostly they're not) but like I say, VMTV gives me an introduction and some gameplay information and a recommendation - a hardcore information site would want a little more depth - not necessarily in the review but definitely in the work behind the review. _________________ http://www.what-song.net http://www.rogershanks.com
Somehow I have a problem with the words "Hardcore" and "depth".
But then I have a problem with the words "Tangy" and "Zesty", hehe. _________________ John R. Gibson
Host/Writer/Creator Video Masters TV
"The whole planet Houston?" -General Zod
"Am I supposed to conduct with my penis?" -Peter Griffin (Family Guy)
"What does God need with a starship?" - Star Trek V
I don't use 'hardcore' the way the new kids use it (they've ruined it for everyone).
As for depth, that's not to say that VMTV isn't deep - I just mean if someone's job is to review games, they better put the time in and give a complete review.
Again, not to say that VMTV doesn't give complete reviews. I just mean that VMTV recognises that it's an entertainment show. If these 'serious' sites want their reviews to be more than entertainment, they better write them that way.
Well, when it comes to X-Play, they just sound too sarcastic, and rely more on jokes than anything else. Both Adam and Morgan sound obnoxious, and sadly, that's how most of the modern gaming generation is.
How that show got to be "TV's most watched video game show" is still a mystery to me. _________________ John R. Gibson
Host/Writer/Creator Video Masters TV
"The whole planet Houston?" -General Zod
"Am I supposed to conduct with my penis?" -Peter Griffin (Family Guy)
"What does God need with a starship?" - Star Trek V
Eugh no. I've only seen clips of that show online and I don't want to see anymore.
I guess I mean sites like IGN or even Gametrailers (to a certain extent).
IGN usually gets the games at least a week or two before the review is due and even then, they've usually had some hands-on time already for previews and at events.
The reviews they put out are normally 2 or 3 pages long (or more). I'd like to hope they'd have finished the game and that there is substancial game-time and general gaming experience behind those reviews.
(This is all speculation of course, based mostly on their podcasts and articles they put out). _________________ http://www.what-song.net http://www.rogershanks.com
OK, now I am seriously confused. More in fact that I am confused about you and your standpoints. A) I never said you had a beef with VMTV, for all intensive purposes, you won't be on here if you did, B) clearly, as stated by both you and I, that yes, IGN and whatever text based reviews are more in depth because of the standpoint of them getting a pre-release. I mean come on, do you really significantly believe that somebody who does a game for 100 hours has any more experience in a game than somebody who spent 10-15 hours? Same game, same experience, just a hell of a less content when it comes to in-depth hardcore reviews? Also, how is anybody who gets a pre-release have anymore knowledge pertaining to the backdrop of the game unless they been told about it...... You can get most that info on Wikipedia and it can also be a leak about it to you through the magic of the internet...And John is right, Adam and Morgan are nothing more than Gen X's trying their bit in the marketing world, I mean, I couldn't believe their sarcasm or their innuendos if it came from them themselves.
OK, my main objective, you say a professional reviewer should in all its glory review the game completely from start to end, right? No doubt about that at all, right? But what seriously, what is the difference from John telling you a game that he has all but an hour left in, or even he has only made it to level 5 out of 20? Is it not the same as completing it, for as said review.
AGAIN pointing out what the word review, since my definitions seem inadequate. A REVIEW is a generalize, well, overview of the game in question. I am thinking you are misconstruing the word REVIEW from its definition, to making it, as you said, hardcore and with depth. What the hell is a review, it's telling you about the game, if not it, would not be called a review but an analysis of the game in question. A review is not particular to completion of said game, but a overlook, and introspectively show you the motions of game. And see as I said, there is a monumental difference between a review of a movie and a game.......
You can review a movie no fricking problem at all, tell the plot, the hero, or tell about the villian, the climax or the twist.......
But a game, have you ever read a review telling you, "Hey ya, I played this game all the way through and just got to tell you, wow, I cannot believe this game for all its worth. I seem memorized but its tantalizing features and its stunning game play. I mean I played this game quite alot, yet it wont be out for all you guys till August 28th, which sucks to be you because you don't understand what your missing. I can't believe this game for what I played of it ,and also completed it quite numerous times before publishing said article so you the people know what I think of a game. BUT all of it looks interesting but hey, guess what, it isn't. This game is shiny and has all the trimmings attached, but hey guess what, I got this game as a beta, so no doubt things are going to change accordingly to this in-depth review of this game. I played it for 100 hours and I still feel I learned everything I needed to know within the first 15 hours of how this game feels and what the people want to know."
HAHAHHAHA BULLSHIT. I swear to you, unless you are going to pay people per hour reviewing a game, it simply isnt done unless somebody has no life and is hired per-say to write a walk-through. I am just simply stating true facts here, Review is a review, not a completed introspect of the game...... FF fan here and here is what I mean....
This website is the REVIEW of FFXII from IGN and is 4 pages long. Personally this is one of my favorite FF's but if you read said review, it is that a review, nothing over the top, nothing I couldn't do with literally 10 hours of game play, wikipedia, and some cool screen shots. They don't list anything in-depth other than how they personally felt by, it, and this is IGN. Simply put even in-depth, its not really in-depth...... its them leading you onto it showing whats what, like I last stated about reviews........ they are written to tell you about its feel (that review explains the battle engine), graphics (explains that too) and how much fun this game is going to be for FF fans.......... SIMPLY PUT IGN REVIEWS ARE NO MORE IN DEPTH THAT 10 HOURS OF PLAY AND SOME REEEEAAALLLY COOL MOVIES IN BETWEEN. rotflmao
See Final Fantasy a RPG gaming revolution since its days as a Gameboy black and well yellowish tinted screen, to this.
It can be shown that reviews, I mean any decent reviews from a game, SIMPLY doesnt have to be a 100% completion of a game. I mean, HELL, if I wanted a review to tell me that hey the ending is what tied it together for me, or the fact that the game was great just because I could complete it and it was awesome that I did, it just wouldn't be any fun picking up any game.
And how serious does the reviewer have to be about his responsibility towards his review of a game? The only time he is concern about it is, predisposed to the game because it is a pre-release and it needs media....... DON'T BELIEVE the hype, cause that is all it is..........
VMTV to me, and I know I rather new, actually, rather wet behind the ear, its seems they want to convey the general aspects of games, whether new or old (thank you for correcting me) it is NOT, ABSOLUTELY NOT the reviewers responsibility to play a game completely through to give you their views........ I mean, I could review a game I just started called The Bard's Tale. 80's computer game turned into a a multi-leveled, story oriented base, with a walking systems that seems to swagger with each step, nice controls with the whole summoning musically inspired creations to save you from hordes of enemies. World map includes unlock worlds but also little subtleties such as priest walking around and a trow (basically a troll) who sells treasure maps. Fighting system is good.........BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH. That is my point, I have played up to Chapter IX of I think XVI and none of the bonus areas, yet I know if I reviewed it, I have enough experience to tell everyone about the game.......
WOW, again, way to long, probably lost points and bored the frick out of anybody who thought I knew what I was saying. But come on, rationality simply dictates that one who reviews has a resposibily to show and tell you a general outline, and not completion of a game. Just read some reviews of your favorite games and see what I mean first hand......
NOTHING BEATS READING A REVIEW AFTER YOU COMPLETED IT!!!!
Its like, wow, ya, really? HUH! Uh, NO DUH!
O.o shutting up now..... hopefully _________________ Paul *Strife Deliveries*
ALSO, this..... I promise shorter posts.... less that 1200 words next time....or this time errr whattttevvver!!! _________________ Paul *Strife Deliveries*
LOL, wow, this is going to take me an hour to read.
Let's not fight with our fellow posters. I know you're new, buddy, but it seems Splodge never meant any harm, and I know you don't, either.
I know you both like VMTV. You can't help being a misguided soul. Tee hee hee.
But I joke....or do I? _________________ John R. Gibson
Host/Writer/Creator Video Masters TV
"The whole planet Houston?" -General Zod
"Am I supposed to conduct with my penis?" -Peter Griffin (Family Guy)
"What does God need with a starship?" - Star Trek V
I didn't realize I was fighting.....O.o I thought we were debating, lmao. I just get a little verbose....... OK ok ok, maybe reaaaaally verbose. Like he said, just fueling a debate from the other side. BUT I think I might kicked a dead horse to death.......... again and again and well you get the point
No harm meant by any of it to Splodge, I was just debating back, I enjoy a challenge, especially if its a good debate, I tend to bring the kitchen sink, when I should just bring wet naps. So if I have offended anybody I am truly sorry.
And as much as the "misguided souls" well, hmmmm, only got to blame only one individual....... THE CREATOR!!!!! lmao And Matt has suggested I be on the show, in fact John, when Matt submits some of his stuff, you will see me as a guest reviewer............. Unlike on here, my words are much much MUCH shorter on it Ask Matt, I swear!!!
Also my apologies for the humongus post as well. _________________ Paul *Strife Deliveries*
I don't see this as a fight - I think it's a fairly healthy debate and it's cool to think about this stuff.
When I talk about the depth of the review, I don't just mean what's written. A review is more than just the words on the page or in the video - the review is all of the work that has gone into the review, playing the game, the entire thought process. Okay, I chose bad words to describe that but thats's what I mean.
For me. the review is the entire amount of work done by the writer from the first time they play the game to the final word they write.
So when I say, I expect there to be a lot of game-time, a lot of depth to the review, that doesn't necessarily have to be apparent on the page. One person who's played five hours of a game could write exactly the same review as someone who has completed the game, have the exact same opinion on the game.
The difference is that one of them has a stronger basis for that opinion. Even if the reviews, read the same, one opinion is more complete because they're basing it on the overall content.
So if you say that FFXII review, has nothing major in it, nothing beyond a ten hour play session, I can understand that (Sorry, I haven't read it yet. I'll read it later). But the point is that the work behind the review is what solidifies the opinion more than what 'information' is in the article. That's how deep the writer has gone to find the truth of the game.
That is my argument for completing games. Being aware of the overall content solidifies your viewpoint. Even if completing a game doesn't change your opinion, it does give you a better basis for having that opinion.
This is a Super Mario Galaxy review. He doesn't reveal any more than a casual review might - it is a lengthy review but a lot of that is background about the game and the series.
But you can tell he is confident in his opinions. He makes a point in saying that getting 60 stars is too easy and that the game is only challenging when you go for the full 120. He goes into detail on the good and bad points of the camera system (maybe a little too much detail).
These are all things someone with minimal experience with the game might point out. The difference is that he is completely certain of what he's saying. He's played the game, probably completed it multiple times. Even if the entire game experience (and the time he spent with it) is not written in the review, it is evident that his opinions are well-founded and he is confident enough to share them. I truly believe that is because he knows the game (but he doesn't have to prove that in the review). _________________ http://www.what-song.net http://www.rogershanks.com
I don't think it's completely fair to compare game reviews to movie reviews.
But I will say, that it is common for reviewers to view a film multiple times before writing a review. That can depend on the type of review they want to write (sometimes it can verge almost on being a study). For me that's the same thing - if they want to review a movie completely, they might watch it multiple times, build a stronger basis for what they believe about the film. _________________ http://www.what-song.net http://www.rogershanks.com
Hmmmmm, Splodge, your point is well taken and understandably validated with your points. Sincerely I see where you are coming from with a more clear perspective, and I must say I see your standpoint.
And also, ya, somebody who has spent and done a lot of game work would seem more confident and notice more of the game and all their strong aspects and then their weaknesses.
So that being said, I really have no steam to come back on, simply because, well I agree with what you are saying. And the similarities between 10 hours of game play to the whole game, ya your going to figure some stuff out, or get something later one which someone who hasn't play it all the way through wouldn't of experienced.
But either or, no matter which way you flip a coin, to get back to the basis of the entire debacle, is that a review shouldn't be considered heavily as a buying guide as much as so as entertainment or a generalization of a game. _________________ Paul *Strife Deliveries*
And Matt has suggested I be on the show, in fact John, when Matt submits some of his stuff, you will see me as a guest reviewer............. Unlike on here, my words are much much MUCH shorter on it Ask Matt, I swear!!!
Really? Dunno if he mentioned you'd be guest reviewing when I was on the phone with him last.
Must have been a surprise. Whatcha reviewing? So now, we're up to 8 people (ok, 7 people, and a robot)
_________________ John R. Gibson
Host/Writer/Creator Video Masters TV
"The whole planet Houston?" -General Zod
"Am I supposed to conduct with my penis?" -Peter Griffin (Family Guy)
"What does God need with a starship?" - Star Trek V
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Join! (free) 
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
) but its quite simple to me my friend. There is sometimes no way to always review a completely, as John stated, RPG's and some games just EAT YOUR time. So your view is that a 5-7mins segment including opening and closing skits, well written scripts with comedy infused, but how can one justify, reviewing every single minute minute (haha like that double use of a word and differentiating terminologies) of a game? Simply put, unlike a movie which takes only 1-3 hours (hopefully unless your planning a Matrix Marathon or some other hair-brained craziness) a game is pretty basic in, a couple ways, most games offer a unique platform of how they are played, NO game is made equal for all intensive purposes, Ex. are a followed, FFX and FFX.5 same chars, same areas, COMPLETELY different styles, another example would be shoot em ups, every one is different, even if its so minuscule its not even there for you to see. But you can review something because as I stated before, a review is a rough draft, now if you are doing a review or a follow up or a walk through, then ya, dammit play it through all the way. But come on, a review says ya, this is its feel, its movements are decent, graphics blah but it works.
Ask Matt, I swear!!!