ITT P.P.A. buys recent Sonic games he didn't have before.

[P.P.A.]

While in the Netherlands I bought Sonic and the Secret Rings for 20€ and a week later I found a Sonic Rivals for 12€. Now let me share my experiences with them!

SatSR:
Awful. Just awful. The controls are an utter mess, the constant running forward a retarded idea poorly executed, the music is pretty bad most of the time, the bosses suck, the levelling up is stupid blah blah blah. In short, I hate this game. Still beta it with all 7 world rings. The only positive things I'd have to mention are for once the great cutscenes, which are nicely drawn and not that badly written either (the scene where Sonic "rescues" Robotnik is awesome) and the graphics are also pretty good (Night Palace <3). Still, it's a hardly playable mess and one of the worst Sonic games I've touched so far. FFFF--- would not play again.

Sonic Rivals:
Bah, you do nothing but holding right here this can't be good... Wait, what? This game, it's actually... fun?! Impossible!
I didn't expect much of it, but was pleasantly surprised. While it's not truly great, it's not bad either. The scenarios are nice, there are a lot of alternate paths (most only accessible via quick-time events, but still) and the bosses are pretty good and definitely better than the crap you had to fight in a lot of the previous Sonic games (Heroes, Shadow, Advance 2 and Rush especially come to mind). A few points of criticism however would be that there's few platforming involved, all the characters play the fucking same so you're basically playing the game 4 times in story mode without any real variation (dialogues aside), you mostly hold right all the time and press some buttons, and the whole racing against a rival mechanic wasn't really necessary. Still, these 12€ were well-spent and I enjoyed playing the game. And yeaa playing as Metal Sonic.

[Neo]

Let me ask you something, do you really believe people value your opinion that much?

[gr4yJ4Y]

I hate it how everyone feels the need to review every game they play. Everytime I see a fan review for a well-known game that's already been reviewed by about 100 actual journalists, I cringe a little. Most of them are so poorly done too. On YouTube people have a habbit of repeating the same few things over the course of 10 minutes.

I don't mean any disrespect to P.P.A. and his opinion when I write this, but Neo's reply made me think of it.

[P.P.A.]

Let me ask you something, do you really believe people value your opinion that much?

Good point actually.

[DackAttac]

I figured after denouncing Galaxies as inferior and pronouncing Sonic 360 as "not that bad", he was just going for shock value. I look forward more to his next vacation to the Netherlands and a coherent photo gallery of the area's finest brothels.

It is an interesting trend, though. Everyone wants their multi-page review on a game to be posted up in neon and then uses metacritic so they can reduce the rest of the world's opinion to a number. I'm nowhere near innocent of that charge.

[Forza Johnman]

I did a review for Sega Superstars Tennis on Sonic the Comic Online. So yeah.

Well, I was going to make a thread on Soul Calibur 4 when I got that and played it for a while, summing up my thoughts etc. (Because I've seen a few of those threads around on here) But if most people think those sorts of posts are a bit sad, I'll just do a breast joke and just say its alright or its terrible or something. If that.

[Neo]

The posts are only sad when thirty other people on the same forum have already reviewed the same game. Go for it.

[gr4yJ4Y]

The posts are only sad when thirty other people on the same forum have already reviewed the same game. Go for it.

Not to mention if said game, that's been reviewed by thirty other people, is more than a few months old. I actually haven't heard anything on SC4 yet from a non-journalist who has played it.

[P.P.A.]

I actually just remembered I only made this thread to express my surprising approval of Sonic Rivals but then decided to cram a SSR rant into it as well.

Ah anyway, on the topic of reviews. I have decided to personally simply ignore reviews, especially that of mainstream magazines or large video game sites (oh how I detest the latter). If at all, I only listen to opinions of other, normal people (who are not working for a money-making video game site or mag). But usually I just get games that look interesting to me, no matter what whoever says.
Super Mario Galaxy was over hyped and showered in 9+ ratings and I hated it, Blinx got average to low scores and yet I enjoy it, Sonic Rush was praised everywhere but I found it a pain to play whereas games like Outrun 2006, Senko no Ronde or Sonic Rivals totally slipped under the radar of the general public but they interested me so I just pocked them up and grew to love the former two and like the third. My point is, reviews have started to mean nothing to me. I may have different tastes than the people who test these games, I don't get paid for doing so and after all the most important thing is that I have fun with it.

...which makes me wonder why I made this thread in the first place then. Perhaps to share my individual, unpaid opinion? Who knows. *shrugs*

[Zeta]

I think you just might have bad taste.

[Bekel]

The thing about criticism is that its the easiest fucking position on the planet. If you're capable of holding an opinion, you're capable of writing a totally proffesional review. You could be a total shithead and your opinion could be utterly retarded and tasteless, but you'd still be a perfect fit for the position. Which is why I consider being a proffesional critic to be one of the lowest positions in the world. Not financially, but certainly on a scale of relevance.

Also I agree that official gaming magazines/sites are pretty much completely horrid. I hate the type of people who run magazines in general.

And I enjoyed SatSR, even though I'd agree with you on pretty much everything except for that the cutscenes were actually good and the previously mentioned fact that I liked it.

[Tsuyoshi-kun]

Yeah I don't trust video game magazine / online reviews at all. And in the realm outside of video games, Leonard Maltin is one of maybe three reviewers in the world I trust the opinion of (though I still find myself disgareeing with some of the movies in his yearly movie guides).

Sonic and the Secret Rings blew. Unresponsive, slow, and cumbersome are the three best words I could use to describe it, with some of the cheapest hits in a Sonic game since the Game Gear era.

[Hybrid]

If you're capable of holding an opinion, you're capable of writing a totally proffesional review.

That's a complete load. You might be able to write what your opinion is, but that doesn't mean that you're at all capable of writing a high quality, professional review. A review needs to be informational and entertaining otherwise there's little point in writing it, and while I agree many major gaming sites don't have particularly entertaining reviews, to say that it takes nothing but having an opinion to write a good review is a total fallacy.

[Bekel]

Well yes, you're right, but the thing is that reviews that are written in proffesional positions and reviews that are written well don't typically mix together.

[DackAttac]

The whole point of a review is not to jack off to it like porn when you agree with it, or to feel like strangling someone (or writing a very angry response loaded up with racist and homophobic epithets), although that seems to be the direction the general consensus has swung. The point is to find out whether the qualities you find to be important are there or not. I can read a totally negative review of an album that only convinces me to go for it, because they meticulously list everything they dislike about it. But I don't care how adept the Offspring are at social commentary or how disposable their recent offerings may ultimately be—if they're still catchy, I'm still on board.

Unfortunately, people seem to use review consensus as proof that their opinion is "right", or—and I bloody love this one—that "it's too far ahead of the critics". I think Yahtzee from Zero Punctuation put it really well in the Brawl mailbag episode, that if you like the game, someone else's opinion shouldn't bother you unless, in the back of your mind, there's some naggling doubt that you're not having as much fun as you think you should be, but don't want to admit it because you're a fanboy.

I think one of my favorite things about Secret Rings outside of the game's content is that it's really the first Sonic game to go without a consensus. Unlike something with largely mediocre reviews, SR was mixed like nothing I've seen. I've seen otakus and well-rounded gamers alike give the game varying degrees of praise or rejection. I personally enjoyed it up until the final half of the last cutscene, and I don't need everyone else on this forum to agree in order to continue living my life.

Once you own a game and have your own opinion, reviews have no worth.

PS - Unless, as Bekel has overlooked, your review is actually a well-written piece of literature that is fun to read.

[gr4yJ4Y]

The whole point of a review is not to jack off to it like porn when you agree with it, or to feel like strangling someone. ... The point is to find out whether the qualities you find to be important are there or not. I can read a totally negative review of an album that only convinces me to go for it, because they meticulously list everything they dislike about it.

I have read bad reviews and been convinced to buy it based on the writing before, but I can't really think of anything at the moment. I think I might have done that with Sonic Heroes.

In EGM a few years back, there was a review of Baten Kaitos: Origins with a pretty large range of scores (something like 3.0, 6.0, and 7.0). I thought that was somewhat curious (since they all tend to agree pretty closely in that magazine) and read it. Having played the first game, I came to the conclusion that they all had the same opinion of the game (much like my opinion of the first game), but couldn't find a place to put their opinion on the number scale. I think it was one of the most informative reviews I've ever read for a game, noting the changes since the first game.

Unfortunately, people seem to use review consensus as proof that their opinion is "right".

I tend to jump in alarm when someone says they enjoy a game that received bad scores (I did this once to a gamer who said he liked Superman 64 and it was a fine example of an American-made game). I should really make an effort to change that.

I tried to show someone Secret Rings once and I told him how it was a really good game, that it wasn't just me speaking as a Sonic fanboy, but he couldn't open his mind to thinking that the reviews he'd read could be wrong. I showed him a level with the speed all the way up and he scoffed, taking words from the review, like, "Pffssh. How long did it take you to beat this game, like 2 hours?" I told him that I'd played it around 50 hours or so and hadn't unlocked everything to which he said, "Well that's just you, being the Sonic fan you are. I bet most people couldn't stand this game for that long." This was all without him ever playing the game. I offered for him to play and he gave a high and mighty, "Uh, no thanks."

I think Yahtzee from Zero Punctuation put it really well in the Brawl mailbag episode, that if you like the game, someone else's opinion shouldn't bother you unless, in the back of your mind, there's some naggling doubt that you're not having as much fun as you think you should be, but don't want to admit it because you're a fanboy.

This has sadly happened to me more than I'd like to admit. I'll read good reviews for a game and my friends will recommend it, but while playing it I don't really seem to enjoy it as much as they do. But I keep on going at it in hopes of getting my money's worth. This usually leaves me frustrated and I end up playing something I actually do like eventually. A good example of this is Knights of the Old Republic (where I spent about 20 hours before finally setting it aside).

[Bekel]

PS - Unless, as Bekel has overlooked, your review is actually a well-written piece of literature that is fun to read.

Okay, so what I was trying to say wasn't that ALL reviews are bad, just that, if you want to write reviews in a proffesional position, you don't need any real writing talent as a good deal of people who ARE in paying positions for writing reviews are rather, y'know, complete idiots, but I don't think I executed wording such in a proper manner.

Also I've been a fan of Zero Puncuation since what I'd assume would be the start of Yahtzee's review-video career thing and I still love his videos even though his new theme song makes me want to drill a fucking brick into my head.

[DackAttac]

I'd agree that more publications are falling victim to Pitchfork Media syndrome, where the goal is for the author to commit literary masturbation to the point of climax in under 500 words. Reviewing the product at hand is almost secondary. Zero Punctuation is one of the few reviews out there that seems to focus on entertainment before elitism. And that's what really can turn me off of a reviewer. Condescension. The "try to understand where I'm coming from, as I'm a high taste reviewer, and you are a bourgeois jackoff" tone. The ones that tell you that if you don't appreciate a movie, it's because you're a retarded piece of ape dung who can't understand fine art. About Schmidt was a horrible movie and I didn't hate it because I didn't "understand it" (or because it made me "look at Kathy Bates tits bobbing about in a hot tub"), I hated it because I understood it all too well, and I disagreed with its theses.

ZP's new music is not my cup of tea either, but using clips of popular songs under the fair use clause is pretty much the apex of amateurism.

[Isuka]

While the numerical score may look like the only important thing about a review, after the "Zero Gravity disinformation orgy" incident I felt like the only way to tell if a game review is or isn't bullshit is by actually playing the damn thing, which somewhat defeats the whole point of giving games a chance if whatever you read about them sounds like it suits your taste.
Be it by disinterest or by good ol' bribing, most reviews (even "professional" ones) just aren't all that important that you have to swear by them without trying the real deal yourself first.

[Bekel]

ZP's new music is not my cup of tea either, but using clips of popular songs under the fair use clause is pretty much the apex of amateurism.

That's kind of what I liked about it though. It was amateur. He wasn't trying to have some big cinematic bullshit like the opening now. He just wanted to come in, say something about how the entire gaming industry was made of shit-eating dildos, and have some (generally) good music here and there for kicks.

I felt like the only way to tell if a game review is or isn't bullshit is by actually playing the damn thing, which somewhat defeats the whole point of giving games a chance if whatever you read about them sounds like it suits your taste.

Y'know, I think that might just be the reason why I haven't saved up my money and gone out to buy a game since I don't know how long ago.

[DackAttac]

Maybe that's why renting is so popular. I never understood the allure; you get it for five days... I could count on one hands the game I have that I beat in that amount of time.

[gr4yJ4Y]

Which is why you should only rent games that are fairly short. I only rent games that I know will be 15 hours or less. Sometimes I'll rent a game I know is longer, but only had enough interest in it to spend $7.50 (or whatever it is these days) rather than $50 or $60, knowing full well I won't reach the end.

I usually have to have a week where I know I can spend 15 hours playing without being too disrupted by work, class, or social happenings, so I rarely get around to renting games.

[Isuka]

I just played SatSR last sunday, and I find it really difficult to disagree with P.P.A.
That shit is broken, like, it's almost completely unplayable. I'm relieved I didn't buy it, because I'd be terribly pissed off if I had. I don't even find the cutscenes particularly appealing, although they surely are the single best thing this turd has to offer.
But yeah, it blew big time, not touching it again no matter how "good" the controls get or how engaging the story becomes after Levitated Ruin.

[DackAttac]

Who told you the story got engaging?

[P.P.A.]

I got Sonic Rivals 2 a few weeks ago and was disappointed that in away it was worse than the first one. They improved the graphics and level design, added useful things like the free run mode etc, but at the same time they also added tons of bad things like having to play the story EIGHT times, that while you can to switch characters every second stage and you have to do these just pointless battles/Capture the Chao/tag games. And the levels aren't as charming as in Rivals 1.
Short story, they improved on the first one but at the same time added so much bad stuff that in the end the overall result's worse. :(