Don't step in the Pharaoh

[Esrever]

"Summary" might be a bad choice of words. A better one might be "conclusion".

Someone could spend twenty pages telling you everything they think about every single aspect of a game... the graphics, the aiming system, the voice acting, the pace, the accuracy of the sky textures, Nate Drake's shirt physics... the whole shebang! And if they are a good, thoughtful writer, it might be really interesting to read. If it's REALLY good, it will help give you a better idea if YOU are going to like the game, regardless of what they thought of it themselves.

But ultimately, they've still got to wrap that shit up. They've got to write a conclusion. They've got to nut and commit, take that plunge and say, "You know what? I CAN say the poofy landing stars were cooler than the environment graphics were repetitive. And this good part was more important than this bad part, this gameplay was better than this framerate problem was annoying, this flopping half-tucked shirt was more satisfying than this plot twist was stupid... when I review and rank all my opinions, in the end, this was how I felt about it. It was pretty good. 3 stars."

And they can do that because we ALL do that, all the time, with everything. If someone asks you how a game was, you tell them it was good, or great, or amazing, or terrible. You use words instead of stars or numbers, but it's still the same thing. After you say it, you probably tell them WHY you felt that way, but you always lead with the base opinion first. You probably say it again when you're done. "So yeah, that one boss was really annoying, and I hated the stealth missions... but you know, it was pretty good overall." It contextualizes everything else you said.

I agree that people take those numbers way too fucking seriously, though. It's only one part of the review formula. I just don't think it's entirely without value.

[Crisis]

Are game critics actually afraid of coming across as opinionated or clever? I ask because of people like Film Critic Hulk, who occasionally offer insightful opinions that are subsequently ruined by a terrible gimmick, in this case writing in the voice of the Hulk. It's not very funny and reading a 7000 word essay (!!!) in broken English and all caps is borderline painful.

It does scream "Don't take what I have to say seriously, it is a joke!!!" though. The Game Overthinker has similar issues - often he has something worthwhile to say, but is it really worth sitting through 10 minutes of schlocky, uninteresting sketches to get there? Extra Credits over on Penny Arcade at least takes itself seriously enough to entirely devote each episode to a single topic, but episodes are typicaly 5 minutes apiece and it's just not possible to go into any kind of depth. If you watch the series for any length of time you start to realise that in every episode they're tripping over themselves trying to cover as much ground as possible before the time limit cuts them off right as things are starting to get interesting.

I thought that the audience demanding intellectual game criticism was just too small to be noticed, and if I looked hard enough I was bound to find something. At the moment, it's starting to feel like critics are intentionally dumbing down their content out of either laziness or a genuine fear of being perceived as "too smart". Which reflects pretty badly on the industry.

My search continues. The Brainy Gamer podcast seems to be decent. It's headed by an academic (I think he has a background in movies/theatre, but hey I'll take what I can get), and is generally thought-provoking despite suffering from all the flaws of the podcast format. There's also a blog, which is ok as well.

[G.Silver]

Extra Credits over on Penny Arcade at least takes itself seriously enough to entirely devote each episode to a single topic, but episodes are typicaly 5 minutes apiece and it's just not possible to go into any kind of depth. If you watch the series for any length of time you start to realise that in every episode they're tripping over themselves trying to cover as much ground as possible before the time limit cuts them off right as things are starting to get interesting.

Since you mentioned it, I just gotta chime in here to say that I find Extra Credits to be virtually intolerable. They really do have some good points, and the episodes I have watched have generally been pretty satisfying and felt sufficiently in depth most of the time, but I have only watched a few, because I can't stand the voice distorter they use. If that really is the guy's voice, then I'm sorry. The only thing the show really has going for it is that it does talk about things that are interesting, but everything about their delivery mechanism is a turnoff. Compared with other critics that I might say are sort of similar, like Yahtzee or Mr. Plinkett, the voices are part of the character. EC does not really have character, so the voice doesn't add anything.

I wish they'd just write it down and let me read it.

[Esrever]

It's a hard thing! You can't turn to the mainstream sites because, quite frankly, they're not willing to pay for longer reviews. When your revenue comes from ad impressions, the way to get the most cash out of the least content is with lots of shorter articles, not fewer longer ones ... so it's all one paragraph rumour posts, one paragraph descriptions of screenshots or trailers, and top ten lists. I think the fact that some reviews are even as long as they are is a sign of the passion of the writers, because I guarantee you they are not getting paid more for all those extra words.

So that leaves the hobbyists and independent bloggers. And of course, that can be a mixed bag too! Some are going to have great points, and some are going to be great writers, and some are going to have the free time needed to actually produce the content... but how many are going to have all three? Again, it would be different if it could be monetized, so people could make a living at it. But when everyone has to have a "real" job too...

[Crisis]

Since you mentioned it, I just gotta chime in here to say that I find Extra Credits to be virtually intolerable. They really do have some good points, and the episodes I have watched have generally been pretty satisfying and felt sufficiently in depth most of the time, but I have only watched a few, because I can't stand the voice distorter they use. If that really is the guy's voice, then I'm sorry.

That's true. I had honestly forgotten about the voice distorter (I've heard him on podcasts without it), but I guess I can add that to the annoying gimmick list.

I do like Extra Credits, but I think adding 2000 or so words for each episode would do a whole lot of good. Maybe that's too much to ask since everyone on the show has a demanding full time job.

[Green Gibbon!]

Fair enough about summarizing an overall opinion, but even then I'd be hard pressed to come up with more than 3 or 4 phrases with which to do that effectively - I sure the hell couldn't come up with 10 categorically distinct divisions for my opinion on anything. And I don't think anyone could.


Having that said, though, I actually don't follow game news and I don't read reviews at all except for whatever's on the front page of Penny Arcade. I would never have the patience to sit through a 3-page review no matter how good it was.

[Tsuyoshi-kun]

You read Penny Arcade? You never really striked me as the type to really read webcomics.

I would never have the patience to sit through a 3-page review no matter how good it was.

I find this kind of ironic, considering some of your earlier game reviews on the forum, such as Star Ocean Til The End of Time.

[Green Gibbon!]

Hell man, I don't even remember which one that was much less what I wrote about it.

Penny Arcade's the only webcomic I read (with respect to people here who I know write those!). I actually stopped for years and just started again on a whim I guess about six months ago. That shit is still funny.

[G.Silver]

I actually don't follow game news

I really should try this.

[Cuckooguy]

I go to Magic Box. That's about it.

[Locit]

I check out 1up every week or so. They have great cover stories, good features, decent one-offs, and abandoned the numbers rating system years ago in favor of grades (A,B,C...) on the grounds that no one has a standard value associated with numbers--i.e., 5/10 was supposed to denote an 'average' title at many sites for a long time, but most people associated with the same connotations of a failing grade with which they regard a 50%. They can go off the rails in reviews sometimes, but it's usually in pursuit of trying out a new angle for the format, which I can get behind.

[Green Gibbon!]

I go to Magic Box. That's about it.

Oh yeah, I still do Magicbox every day, I guess 'cause there's no politics, it's just like "here's what's happening" in charming broken English. And it takes like 2 minutes to see everything.

Way too much coverage of Final Fantasy crap, though.

[gr4yJ4Y]

I check out 1up every week or so. They have great cover stories, good features, decent one-offs, and abandoned the numbers rating system years ago in favor of grades (A,B,C...) on the grounds that no one has a standard value associated with numbers--i.e., 5/10 was supposed to denote an 'average' title at many sites for a long time, but most people associated with the same connotations of a failing grade with which they regard a 50%. They can go off the rails in reviews sometimes, but it's usually in pursuit of trying out a new angle for the format, which I can get behind.

I check 1up every so often. Sometimes their reviews are good (very detailed for a collection review, goes through what's changed from the original releases and how much that matters), but sometimes they're nuts (2 pages of shouting, "YOU SHOULD BUY THIS! THERE'S SO MANY PEOPLE THAT LIKE IT A LOT!" where the writer saves a paragraph to go over its flaws and the reader is left learning very little over the game itself).

[G.Silver]

We try so hard at Naughty Dog to push things, and then games come out that are fun and exciting and get visceral things right, but to read in reviews that they have an amazing story is disheartening to us because we work so hard at it.

This is the kind of thing you miss when you don't check the game news every day!

[Popcorn]

Are game critics actually afraid of coming across as opinionated or clever?

Yes. Game writers, both professional and amateur, subscribe to the school of journalism known as Describing Everything Pointlessly. To these people a "review" consists of functionally listing everything about a game and then giving it a score charitably provided by the publisher. To provide any modicum of criticism or insight or original thought is regarded with deep suspicion by both readers and publishers. The point is to DESCRIBE. DESCRIBE IT, YOU DUNCES.

[Edgerock]

So the team behind Uncharted 2 were apparently working on "The Last of Us," which is Naughty Dog's new IP.

http://www.lastofus.com/agegate.html

http://kotaku.com/5867274/everything-we ... last-of-us

The new game is deep into development. Creative director Druckmann says that he has been working on the game for two years. Elsewhere, Naughty Dog confirmed that it is no longer a one-game-at-a-time studio. The Last of Us has been made in parallel to Uncharted 3. A two-team studio can, in theory, produce a game a year, and that could peg The Last of Us as a 2012 release, but there is no confirmed release year for it yet.

[Radrappy]

We try so hard at Naughty Dog to push things, and then games come out that are fun and exciting and get visceral things right, but to read in reviews that they have an amazing story is disheartening to us because we work so hard at it.

This is the kind of thing you miss when you don't check the game news every day!

thats funny because uncharted 3's story was really bad. Also they're coming off a tad bit hoity toity, given that Uncharted 2, while having a great story as far as video games are concerned, would be pretty average if it were a film. Git off yer high horse guys.

[Green Gibbon!]

So what do you guys think of that, anyway? At this point it just looks like it could be any other zombie game. Years ago when I was doing research for my thesis project, my crazy Korean professor made me watch this zombie movie I didn't like that had a premise almost exactly the same as this. I guess this is the premise of all zombie media?

Anyway, I really don't like zombies.

[Popcorn]

I have no particular problem with zombies, but they're a touch overplayed at this point, aren't they? Actually, more cliched than the zombies themselves are the post-apocalyptic environments... I watched that trailer and thought, overgrown pavement, smashed glass, bloody handprints, here we go. I can't deny it's a setting that continues to captivate me done right, though. And by that I mean Half-Life 2.

I'm nonetheless intrigued by the project due to the pedigree of the devteam and the unusual protagonist. I mean, I didn't like Juno, but it's so refreshing to see a female, non-badass, non-sexualised character in a game. If only she were paired with someone as interesting.

Is she actually played by/modelled on Ellen Page or she just eerily similar?

[gr4yJ4Y]

It's not mentioned on Ellen Page's IMDB page, so I would guess she's not the actual actress.

Game writers, both professional and amateur, subscribe to the school of journalism known as Describing Everything Pointlessly. To these people a "review" consists of functionally listing everything about a game.The point is to DESCRIBE. DESCRIBE IT, YOU DUNCES.

Most of the time they fail to even do this! I wish more reviews would describe a game in a way that doesn't spoil the experience while making it worth my time to read/watch it.

---

I agree with the guy from Naughty Dog, when he says that most games - even games with stories that are considered good - don't often say much about the human condition. It's something that I've been thinking about a bit lately and it's pretty surprising to see Naughty Dog be the ones to mention it. Sometimes I wonder if gamers are just more interested in action and universe structure. Can you guys think of any titles that do touch on the human condition? The only ones I can think of off the top of my head are God of War, Metal Gear Solid and Enslaved.

[Radrappy]

I agree with the guy from Naughty Dog, when he says that most games - even games with stories that are considered good - don't often say much about the human condition. It's something that I've been thinking about a bit lately and it's pretty surprising to see Naughty Dog be the ones to mention it. Sometimes I wonder if gamers are just more interested in action and universe structure. Can you guys think of any titles that do touch on the human condition? The only ones I can think of off the top of my head are God of War, Metal Gear Solid and Enslaved.

Just because it addresses the human condition doesn't make it good: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xenosaga

I think the word you're looking for is pathos.