Social NintenZone Social 5 - Thanks, Everyone

[Mythra]

Games that focus on having the player collect lots and lots of different kinds of objects in the game, that are required to access certain kinds of content in the game. In order to avoid being overly repetitive, they tend to also have some collectibles be rewards for some kind of mini-game or challenge. 100% completion involves collecting everything. Level design is usually open-ended instead of linear, and they are usually a sub-genre of the platformer genre (though some games like open world RPGs can incorporate Collectathon elements).



Mario 64 isn't really a good example.

Power Stars are just really glorified end of level goal posts, with many only being available by you selecting the specific mission they are tied to. It has Collectathon elements with the Red Coin missions and the 100-coin star in each world, but the game itself is not a Collectathon as a whole.

Now I get it, I think.

Kinda reminds me of Pac-Man World 2, with the, dot/pellet/token/fruit collecting; however only the tokens award prizes.

 

[Deleted member]

Really, number scores should just die already, at least general ones
Giving separate categories scores is fine if you're going to use them, even if they'll still be a subjective thing(unless it falls under the Bad Writing Index, most of the time) because you can try to measure how well the game does that specific thing but you can't add them together. (6x+8y)/2 does not equal to 14z.
Reviews should be about pointing out what is good and what is bad in a game and letting readers decide for themselves.

 

[Cutie Gwen]

I wish more reviewers took SomecallmeJohnny's approach to reviewing.

Give an overall summary of what you liked and didn't like at the end, and not a score.

I have a better idea
Having people actually READ the bloody reviews. For example, Gamespot's Shovel Knight review was a 7/10 iirc. Yet it listed no negatives. Or all the negative Yooka Laylee reviews saying it's a Banjo-esque game. Lern 2 rid

 

[allison]

I don't think there nothing inherently wrong with a numerical score, but it should not replaced a well thought-out piece. Getting people to actually read the full review is closer to the actual issue. Too many people just look at the number and stop there. Metacritc can be useful to collect and thoroughly read multiple opinions.

I mean, the easiest way to keep people from only looking at the number is by not having one

 

[Kurri ★]

I think reviews shouldn't even just be about what is good and what is bad, but just the overall experience it provided for the reviewer.

There's plenty of games that don't do anything bad, I just don't enjoy it. Aside from the Sci-Fi entries, Call of Duty is one such franchise where I don't actually think there's anything glaring flawed with the games, they're just not for me. If I were, for some reason, tasked to review a CoD game, my review would probably come off as having an average experience, while someone who loves CoD would write it off as an exceptional one. The reverse is true too, the game may be doing everything wrong, but you just love it. iirc, the original Nier is that kind of game, it's flawed, it's buggy, it's a mess, but people still had an amazing experience with it.

Detail the goods and bads, but remember to focus most on the experience.

 

[Deleted member]

I think reviews shouldn't even just be about what is good and what is bad, but just the overall experience it provided for the reviewer.

There's plenty of games that don't do anything bad, I just don't enjoy it. Aside from the Sci-Fi entries, Call of Duty is one such franchise where I don't actually think there's anything glaring flawed with the games, they're just not for me. If I were, for some reason, tasked to review a CoD game, my review would probably come off as having an average experience, while someone who loves CoD would write it off as an exceptional one. The reverse is true too, the game may be doing everything wrong, but you just love it. iirc, the original Nier is that kind of game, it's flawed, it's buggy, it's a mess, but people still had an amazing experience with it.

Detail the goods and bads, but remember to focus most on the experience.

The problem with the "experience" thing is that it only applies to the person who's writing it
There's no point in saying "oh yeah, I enjoyed it" if you can't recognise what people will like or dislike about it.
It CAN work but only when you clearly know the reviewer's taste and know why they would like it or not

 

[Deleted member]

Really, number scores should just die already, at least general ones
Giving separate categories scores is fine if you're going to use them, even if they'll still be a subjective thing(unless it falls under the Bad Writing Index, most of the time) because you can try to measure how well the game does that specific thing but you can't add them together. (6x+8y)/2 does not equal to 14z.
Reviews should be about pointing out what is good and what is bad in a game and letting readers decide for themselves.

I give your post a "kill an abstract construct"/salt.

 

[Professor Pumpkaboo]

The best part about reviews is you, as a human, have the ability to silmply not take the review or number to seriously

 

[A Distant Demon]

I mean, the easiest way to keep people from only looking at the number is by not having one

The problem is, then most people just dont bother to look at your review at all ad go look for reviews with scores


Humans are lazy creatures

 

[ChikoLad]

I really do wish people stopped pushing the "objective review" bull****. Someone tried arguing that big review outlets are horrible because they review "superfluous" stuff like, story, or character design, they want to know about the "game." Well, last I checked, all of that was part of the game, and can create a wildly different experience. Detailing how a game controls, or what button "jump" is mapped to doesn't tell me anything about the experience.

It's just tactics to deter people from critically analyzing games.

There are still elements of a review you can be objective, or at least unbiased about, though. And I think they should be emphasised first and foremost when writing a review. It's how I would write reviews anyway.

For example, frame rate, graphical fidelity (i.e texture image quality, polygon counts, etc), and camera mechanics are pretty easy to be objective about. We have standards for those in the industry. For example, Yooka-Laylee's camera is being criticised for being objectively archaic and basic. It basically uses none of the modern camera programming technology available to devs these days, and basically acts like an out of the box, basic Unity (the game's engine) camera that anyone could have in their game. And the game is not properly designed around it, the levels are too complex and detailed for such a basic camera. Not to mention the abruptly switching camera perspectives at times (that change which direction on the analogue stick is forward, back, left, or right), and the cutscene triggers for simple things being placed in poorly chosen places at times.

Now we compare that to A Hat in Time, a very similar kind of game to Yooka Laylee.

A Hat in Time makes an effort to use the extra tools available to developers these days, actually improving over the most revered 3D platformers' camera systems. And it's only in beta. It's objectively good in this department, there is no reason for a 3D platformer to settle for less than this and have it still be considered a well designed camera.

And in regards to PC games, you can go over the depth of the graphics settings, where more depth is almost always better.

Even when a game isn't to one's tastes (especially if it's purely for contextual reasons), they should be able to acknowledge whether or not it's a good game for what it is and the audience it's aiming for. For example, I'm not much of a Call of Duty guy, or even an FPS guy in general, but if I was reviewing a Call of Duty game like Modern Warfare or something, I'd say I didn't enjoy it too much because of my tastes, but I would still say stuff like how the controls were responsive and that there were a lot of weapon options, so anyone who does like this kind of game can see it's still a well-polished game in that genre.

I think that's why Jim Sterling's review of Yooka-Laylee is annoying people. If the game is not to his taste, that's fine, but giving a game a 2/10 (not to mention what he says about the game) doesn't come close to meaning good on anyone's scale, no matter their tastes. It implies a game that is both unplayable and barren for meaningful content. Yooka-Laylee definitely has some objective issues and other than it's visuals and tightness of the controls, fails to really improve upon it's predecessors in any meaningful way. But for the most part, it's still a well-polished and well put together experience that definitely caters to it's niche well (even though it could still do that a bit better). Jim Sterling's review makes it sound like even the biggest platformer - no, even Banjo-Kazooie - fans would hate this game. That's clearly not the case, though.

Also, I disagree with controls not being important in a review. They are what gives the player agency in a game world. They're one of the most important aspects of any video game. Bad controls, or at least controls you can't mesh with, inhibit your ability to enjoy everything else in the game, if not completely ruin the game for you.

Video games are the fusion of technology and art. Just like how we need a mix of engineers, programmers, artists, designers, musicians, etc, to make a game, we need people equally capable of dissecting the technical AND artistic aspects of games to critique them. Only specialising in one or the other means you are not qualified to review games, in my opinion.

Unfortunately, people who do specialise in both, are few and far between. The video game review industry is probably the worst one of the review industries, as a result.

 

[Deleted member]

I give your post a "kill an abstract construct"/salt.

"Number scores are a social construct"
I say this jokingly, but it's actually true
We are predisposed to it due to being given them and taught we should strive for higher numbers ever since we were kids by our schools and it's why we feel the need to rank things from 1 to 10 and why we think we can measure everything.

We are taught we can quantify a person's abilities through some categories without looking at their wholes.

It's the classic example of "asking a fish to climb a tree"

The best part about reviews is you, as a human, have the ability to silmply not take the review or number to seriously

I think you're missing the point here, you can't simply try to ignore a problem, that's not a solution, and it'll just grow into something worse as time goes

 

[Schnee117]

All I get from the review discussion is that the general gaming community online are a load of imbecilic morons that need to learn about how reviews and opinions work on top of how to read.

Oh well, new Overwatch comic:

There was a problem fetching the tweet

Yeah uh, I want this as a Genji Skin.

 

[Deleted member]

"Number scores are a social construct"
I say this jokingly, but it's actually true
We are predisposed to it due to being given them and taught we should strive for higher numbers ever since we were kids by our schools and it's why we feel the need to rank things from 1 to 10 and why we think we can measure everything.

Oh, I know that ratings are just abstract constructs, that wasn't the joke though, the joke was killing an abstract construct.

I think you're missing the point here, you can't simply try to ignore a problem, that's not a solution, and it'll just grow into something worse as time goes

You just can't except that Cory in the House, although far more obscure, is a far superior game to BotW. If critics were to review I'm sure it'd be a perfect 100.

Spoiler

 

[Chrono.]

The new KOF themes are getting posted and unsurprisingly it's all good stuff.

Kinda sad about no remix of Spread the Wings though.

EDIT: Also there's a new graphics update on the way.

Here's new Terry.

Spoiler

 

[Space Stranger]

The Space Stranger could show you the way.

>Tags he who shall not be named
>Claims my trolling is "high quality"
>me
>high quality

This is why we don't meet our heroes.

 

[Kurri ★]

There are still elements of a review you can be objective, or at least unbiased about, though. And I think they should be emphasised first and foremost when writing a review. It's how I would write reviews anyway.

For example, frame rate, graphical fidelity (i.e texture image quality, polygon counts, etc), and camera mechanics are pretty easy to be objective about. We have standards for those in the industry. For example, Yooka-Laylee's camera is being criticised for being objectively archaic and basic. It basically uses none of the modern camera programming technology available to devs these days, and basically acts like an out of the box, basic Unity (the game's engine) camera that anyone could have in their game. And the game is not properly designed around it, the levels are too complex and detailed for such a basic camera. Not to mention the abruptly switching camera perspectives at times (that change which direction on the analogue stick is forward, back, left, or right), and the cutscene triggers for simple things being placed in poorly chosen places at times.

Now we compare that to A Hat in Time, a very similar kind of game to Yooka Laylee.

A Hat in Time makes an effort to use the extra tools available to developers these days, actually improving over the most revered 3D platformers' camera systems. And it's only in beta. It's objectively good in this department, there is no reason for a 3D platformer to settle for less than this and have it still be considered a well designed camera.

And in regards to PC games, you can go over the depth of the graphics settings, where more depth is almost always better.

Even when a game isn't to one's tastes (especially if it's purely for contextual reasons), they should be able to acknowledge whether or not it's a good game for what it is and the audience it's aiming for. For example, I'm not much of a Call of Duty guy, or even an FPS guy in general, but if I was reviewing a Call of Duty game like Modern Warfare or something, I'd say I didn't enjoy it too much because of my tastes, but I would still say stuff like how the controls were responsive and that there were a lot of weapon options, so anyone who does like this kind of game can see it's still a well-polished game in that genre.

I think that's why Jim Sterling's review of Yooka-Laylee is annoying people. If the game is not to his taste, that's fine, but giving a game a 2/10 (not to mention what he says about the game) doesn't come close to meaning good on anyone's scale, no matter their tastes. It implies a game that is both unplayable and barren for meaningful content. Yooka-Laylee definitely has some objective issues and other than it's visuals and tightness of the controls, fails to really improve upon it's predecessors in any meaningful way. But for the most part, it's still a well-polished and well put together experience that definitely caters to it's niche well (even though it could still do that a bit better). Jim Sterling's review makes it sound like even the biggest platformer - no, even Banjo-Kazooie - fans would hate this game. That's clearly not the case, though.

Also, I disagree with controls not being important in a review. They are what gives the player agency in a game world. They're one of the most important aspects of any video game. Bad controls, or at least controls you can't mesh with, inhibit your ability to enjoy everything else in the game, if not completely ruin the game for you.

Video games are the fusion of technology and art. Just like how we need a mix of engineers, programmers, artists, designers, musicians, etc, to make a game, we need people equally capable of dissecting the technical AND artistic aspects of games to critique them. Only specialising in one or the other means you are not qualified to review games, in my opinion.

Unfortunately, people who do specialise in both, are few and far between. The video game review industry is probably the worst one of the review industries, as a result.

The thing is, even all of that is to an extent all subjective. If Super Mario 64 came out today, people would not look at it fondly at all, but back in the 90s it was the pinnacle of 3D platformers. You're not going to turn around and say an old game is bad because it doesn't adhere to today's standards, you acknowledge that there were different standards and take that into account. It's all subjective.

If you reviewed an FPS game, telling me about how responsive the controls were and how many weapon options wouldn't really help me at all. Most FPS games, especially among AAA games tend to have very similar controls. A lot of them tend to have tons of weapon options too, but how fun are those weapon options? What can I do with them? It's one thing to tell me that a game has hundreds of weapon options, it's another thing to tell me how fun it is to wreck **** with a plasma caster.

Having more graphic options is nice, but it doesn't make a game "objectively better." A bad game doesn't get bonus points just because I have a plethora of Anti-Aliasing options.

 

[Swamp Sensei]

Reviews in general are weird.

 

[Professor Pumpkaboo]

Geomarty Dithering is something Snake Pass really needs. The amount of times leaves got in my way andnI couldnt see anything is too high

 

[Deleted member]

Kinda sad about no remix of Spread the Wings though.

Spoiler

Spread Wings

Aye, keep the dirty stuff out, this is a PG thread.

Everyone keep your wings closed at all times, no need to pull a Basic Instinct here.

Reviews in general are weird.

TO BE FAIR, their could be reasons why a collection like that could get a lower score than the originals at launch. This could be because
1. People have changed opinions on the games over time.
2. The collection has technical issues. That was the case with the Master Chief Collection at launch, and as a result it's not nearly as active as it should be. Which is a shame, because the multiplayer is really fun.

 

[Robertman2]

No tag mode in Injustice 2... But the story is longer than the first game and MKX

Spoiler

Spread Wings

Aye, keep the dirty stuff out, this is a PG thread.

Everyone keep your wings closed at all times, no need to pull a Basic Instinct here.


TO BE FAIR, their could be reasons why a collection like that could get a lower score than the originals at launch. This could be because
1. People have changed opinions on the games over time.
2. The collection has technical issues. That was the case with the Master Chief Collection at launch, and as a result it's not nearly as active as it should be. Which is a shame, because the multiplayer is really fun.

I need more people to play the MCC. I love the first 3 Halos so much

 

[Wario Bros.]

I think I need a game guide for Breath of the Wild.

 

[Swamp Sensei]

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2...c-patch-targets-camera-issues-and-performance

Well this is great news.

Might be too late though.

 

[Bandana Dee3]

Ok I let me get this straight
Sonic Forces already has problems?
So I guess a alpha stage showing of the game is going to dictate how the end result is.

Man I HATE this fanbase.
Some people just over criticized this game too much.
There is so much negative criticism on this game and when people are to get into the series, this is what they see which resulted in backlash.
No wonder why Sonic is the punching bag of the gaming community
>Wants change
>Gets change(Lost World)
>Hated
>Goes back
>Hated
Ok?
Really?
If I was Sega I would start working on other franchises and leave Sonic alone honest.
Make ya own game

 

[Wario Bros.]

I'm sure I'll enjoy Yooka-Laylee when I play it myself. Don't need or care about random opinions from people I don't know.

 

[ChikoLad]

The thing is, even all of that is to an extent all subjective. If Super Mario 64 came out today, people would not look at it fondly at all, but back in the 90s it was the pinnacle of 3D platformers. You're not going to turn around and say an old game is bad because it doesn't adhere to today's standards, you acknowledge that there were different standards and take that into account. It's all subjective.

No, it isn't subjective even then. Super Mario 64's camera (and other aspects of it) were the best when it came out, but other games that released shortly after then offered alternatives that had some things done better, and now, camera control has heavily evolved.

Thing is, Super Mario 64 was reviewed when it came out. Not now. Professional review sites aren't giving that game scores now. When it came out though, it got really high scores, which is why it has that high Metacritic score.

If Super Mario 64 came out, in it's exact same state in today's game industry, it surely would garner a different reception. Heck, Super Mario 64 has a 94% on Metacritic, while Super Mario 64 DS has an 85%, even though the latter is considered by most to be an improvement in almost every way. The different versions were reviewed in different times where different standards applied. The things that amazed people when Super Mario 64 came out, are no longer amazing. In cases like this, we use the term "dated" as opposed to "bad" or "unpolished" or something. An acknowledgement that a product was amazing when it came out but is less impressive now that more impressive products exist.

If you reviewed an FPS game, telling me about how responsive the controls were and how many weapon options wouldn't really help me at all. Most FPS games, especially among AAA games tend to have very similar controls. A lot of them tend to have tons of weapon options too, but how fun are those weapon options? What can I do with them? It's one thing to tell me that a game has hundreds of weapon options, it's another thing to tell me how fun it is to wreck **** with a plasma caster.

Controls aren't just about which button does what though. One would also discuss how responsive, intuitive, and accessible a game's controls are. That's important information a review shouldn't gloss over.

And in terms of weapons, it's not about simply having lots of weapons, but how they effect the game. That stuff is important to know and is objective. For example, one game could have 100 weapons but they're all just slight variations of the same assault rifle, but another could have 20 weapons that all do completely different things. The latter is better than the former. And as such, it's worth discussing this aspect every time you review a different FPS. It's valuable information for the consumer.

Having more graphic options is nice, but it doesn't make a game "objectively better." A bad game doesn't get bonus points just because I have a plethora of Anti-Aliasing options.

...Yes it does. Even if a game were barren for content, badly programmed, and uninteresting to look at, it should still be mentioned if it has really well-fleshed out graphics options. To not do so is being clearly biased. If it's a merit, especially an objective one, you should mention it, always. Same goes if a game is really well made but doesn't have good graphics options on PC - the game may be good, but the lack of graphics options makes it accessible to less people, which is an objective flaw.

 

[PsychoIncarnate]

Oh, I know that ratings are just abstract constructs, that wasn't the joke though, the joke was killing an abstract construct.


You just can't except that Cory in the House, although far more obscure, is a far superior game to BotW. If critics were to review I'm sure it'd be a perfect 100.

Spoiler

View attachment 127676 View attachment 127677

Is an abstract construct what happens when someone's job is artificer but their passion is art?

 

[Professor Pumpkaboo]

wow this pollen is kicking my ass right now

 

[Robertman2]

The Flash has an amazing super move

 

[Aurane]

>Tags he who shall not be named
>Claims my trolling is "high quality"
>me
>high quality

This is why we don't meet our heroes.

Last time I checked, you weren't Lord Voldemort. Then again, I don't pay attention to these things. Maybe you are I dunno. If you are, how do you smell? Do you smell? I've always wondered that.

And I didn't say your trolling was high quality. I just don't know anyone here who does it better without wetting themselves when **** gets too tense. Basically you're the freshest piece of garbage. I bet you smell good too.

On a side note, I don't have heroes- except great value pizza. Cheap and tastes good. I like to put extra pepperoni and cheese on it and it becomes a superhero as a result. Superheroes taste great.

 

[Lord-Zero]

You've guessed it, the Queen of Punches herself Tifa Lockhart won. Naturally, I would imagine her as a secondary VII rep if Sephiroth doesn't make the cut. Barret didn't do too bad either.

Now this is covering the rest of the party except a certain pilot (Sorry Cid fans). Your choices are Yuffie, Vincent, Cait Sith, and Red XIII. It makes you wonder what would become of Jenova's special boy next time.

There was a problem fetching the tweet

Definitely Yuffie. She's my favorite.

 

[ChikoLad]

Now if they brought this to Europe, I'd spend some My Nintendo points.

There was a problem fetching the tweet

 

[Cutie Gwen]

Now if they brought this to Europe, I'd spend some My Nintendo points.

There was a problem fetching the tweet

tbh MyNintendo deals are ****. Does this apply for the discounted version should you already have Conquest?

Though here's an AMAZING suggestion. Orbs. Who WOULDN'T use their MyNintendo points for the bloody things?

 

[Lord-Zero]

He gave BotW a 7/10 and a bunch of people went berserk about it. God forbid someone doesn't enjoy something as much as you do. The same goes here. Perhaps a 2/10 may be harsh for some, but for others, it's a perfect spot to place it. Standards change from person to person, getting worked up because someone had a vastly different experience to you is silly.

I guess it's another case of "this is the internet where having a different opinion is seen as heresy". I'd give BotW a lower score due to my issues with it.

 

[SegaNintendoUbisoft]

Now if they brought this to Europe, I'd spend some My Nintendo points.

There was a problem fetching the tweet

I was thinking about getting Birthright but I have no Gold Coins.

Darn.

 

[Lord-Zero]

Now if they brought this to Europe, I'd spend some My Nintendo points.

There was a problem fetching the tweet

And I have those games purchased already and there's info on Awakening for some reason.

...

So...Nowi is a key character now? Heroes worked miracles for her.

"Nowi wins!"

 

[Robert of Normandy]

Now if they brought this to Europe, I'd spend some My Nintendo points.

There was a problem fetching the tweet

It's only birthright and not either Conquest or Revelation? Oh well.

I already own all of those games so this doesn't mean anything for me. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

[Deleted member]

Remember when we could get free games? And we could registre physical copies? My Nintendo is such a downgrade from Club Nintendo it's actually sad

 

[Schnee117]

Remember when we could get free games? And we could registre physical copies? My Nintendo is such a downgrade from Club Nintendo it's actually sad

But that Zelda Picross though. Such a good reward

 

[PLATINUM7]

Remember when we could get free games? And we could registre physical copies? My Nintendo is such a downgrade from Club Nintendo it's actually sad

But you can register physical copies... for a fraction of the points.

 

[Deleted member]

But you can register physical copies... for a fraction of the points.

You can? Since when? And how?
Still, it's only part of them