Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
December 21, 2014, 03:39:30 AM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
Congratulations to Andrew Barker! RPGfan Editor of the Year and now Chief News Editor!
341136 Posts in 13942 Topics by 2222 Members
Latest Member: XanTehMan
* Home Help Search Login Register
+  RPGFan Message Boards
|-+  Media
| |-+  Single-Player RPGs
| | |-+  Why are popular RPGs given bad reviews?
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 Print
Author Topic: Why are popular RPGs given bad reviews?  (Read 8856 times)
Lard
Posts: 5753


Member
*


View Profile

Ignore
« Reply #30 on: August 24, 2010, 12:14:42 AM »

You could at least explain your reasoning in detail instead of just saying that one of the most beloved cult Sci-fi shows sucks.

After watching both Buffy and Firefly, I just think he's an extremely crap and overrated writer.
Logged

I avoid online multiplayer because my brain still works.
insertnamehere
Posts: 1314


Member
*


View Profile

Ignore
« Reply #31 on: August 24, 2010, 12:51:39 AM »

Why was Firefly canceled after one season

It sucked.

a better example than that would be battlestar galactica (except it was extremely successful).
dunno about firefly though.
and a (probable) game equivalent would be FF13
Logged

come get high with me
ba dum tissssss
Fei
Posts: 1336


!?

Member
*


View Profile

Ignore
« Reply #32 on: August 24, 2010, 01:45:05 AM »

You could at least explain your reasoning in detail instead of just saying that one of the most beloved cult Sci-fi shows sucks.

After watching both Buffy and Firefly, I just think he's an extremely crap and overrated writer.

I agree, for the most part.  He almost wastes his fantasy scenarios by focusing so much on casual human interaction, and breaks the 4th wall constantly.  "Gor-ram?"  Seriously?

That said, his shit is fun to watch.  I just don't think he should be heralded as this Sci-Fi Fantasy god.

edit: BTW I'm agreeing with an unpopular opinion because it makes me feel like a winner, because there can only be one winner, and when everyone agrees, you are all probably the losers... how's that for on-topic :P
« Last Edit: August 24, 2010, 01:50:16 AM by Fei » Logged

If you re-spec your elduhz and own a Vita - http://twitter.com/BSNursery
dyeager
RPGFan Editor
Posts: 3860


Code Monkey Like Fritos

Member
*


View Profile
« Reply #33 on: August 24, 2010, 08:22:39 AM »

After watching both Buffy and Firefly, I just think he's an extremely crap and overrated writer.

http://xkcd.com/386/
Logged
Robert Boyd
Posts: 624


Member
*


View Profile WWW

Ignore
« Reply #34 on: August 24, 2010, 09:47:38 AM »

Eh, Whedon does good stuff, but A) he's not perfect and B) he's not the only one working on his shows.

Firefly's big problem is that just when it was starting to get good, it got cancelled.
Buffy is a good show, but fairly inconsistent. Some episodes are awesome, some are decent, and some are awful (like most of seasons 5-7).
Angel is much better than Buffy, but almost the entire 4th season is worth skipping.
The Dollhouse was one big mess, but some of the individual episodes are great.
Logged

Archendrus
Posts: 174


Member
*


View Profile Email

Ignore
« Reply #35 on: August 24, 2010, 11:02:01 AM »

In regards to popular RPG's getting bad reviews, I think there's a couple factors.  1)  "Linearity" has become a dirty word.  If a game plays in linear fashion, it seems to automatically have a few points knocked off it.  Back in the day, games like Chrono Trigger and Final Fantasy III (it was still III back then)  were consistantly praised for being the greatest games ever.  If they were reviewed today by the big publications, they'd no doubt be bashed a bit for being linear.  Personally I think it's a design choice and shouldn't always be seen as a negative.   2)  The RPG in question has the qualities of a "niche" game.  Which will make it extremely satisfying and treasured by those who fall into that niche, but forgetable and uninspiring to those who don't.  "Niche" games are my favorite by the way : )  But they're getting harder and harder to find as more developers are pushing to attract a "broader audience".

In regards to Firefly,  I love it!  : )  I guess it falls into that niche catagory I was talking about.  Love it or hate it.
Logged
Tooker
RPGFan Editor
Posts: 9783


Member
*

king_friday@hotmail.com PeopleJohnT bigfatusername@yahoo.com
View Profile
« Reply #36 on: August 24, 2010, 12:57:56 PM »

As someone said, it's the way of the world.  There will always be popular movies, books, and games that get terrible reviews (and probably deserve them).

There will also be movies, books, and games that get great reviews, but aren't popular at all.

And you can certainly blame some of that on reviewer snobbery (the movie industry seems the most prone to that, IMHO).  Reviewers who don't "have fun" with their medium any more.

But you definitely can't blame it all on that.  There are three other things I'd call out, and probably more that I'm forgetting. 

Some of it comes down to the difference between "fun" and "objectively good."  For example, I loved Pursuit Force on the PSP, but I wouldn't give it a great review.  Despite being really really fun, it had some bugs that could make levels unbeatable, as well as terrible handling on certain vehicles and the occasional crippling difficulty spike.  Granted, that game didn't sell enough to be called "popular," but it's the best example I could think of for "fun, but not objectively good."

The other factor I see could be called "score inflation."  As was mentioned earlier, a game doesn't have to get a 90% to be good.  I'd say that if a game is interesting to you, you may enjoy it even if the average review is way down in the low 70s.

Individual taste.  You've got it, and so do reviewers.  We can certainly try to be objective, but there's a limit to how much anyone can ignore their own opinions, especially in a medium like games, where a big part of the point is to have fun.  I would never review Starcraft 2, for example, because I suck at RTS games.  Since I suck at them, I don't have fun playing them, and wouldn't be able to give an RTS the kind of knowledgeable, objective review that it deserves.

On the other hand, I love hack & slash RPGs.  Truth be told, I may be too kind to them in my reviews, despite my best efforts to be objective.

I guess the individual taste thing comes down to what each player or reviewer values in a game.  Pat is really into video game music, but I'm not, so I'm probably not going to be as tough on a game for having boring music as he is.
Logged

Those who believe in telekinetics, raise my hand.
—Kurt Vonnegut
Hathen
Posts: 1994


FORUM IDIOT

Member
*


View Profile

Ignore
« Reply #37 on: August 24, 2010, 11:29:57 PM »

You could at least explain your reasoning in detail instead of just saying that one of the most beloved cult Sci-fi shows sucks.

After watching both Buffy and Firefly, I just think he's an extremely crap and overrated writer.

Speaking of mindless drones that hate things because they're popular...
Logged
thegamingatheist
Posts: 15

Member
*


View Profile Email

Ignore
« Reply #38 on: August 25, 2010, 02:34:28 AM »

After playing Tales of Symphonia and reading the reviews of Tales of Vesperia I'm starting to recognize a pattern. Some reviewers just bag on a game for being a JRPG. Tons of Versperia Reviews basically complained that the series hadn't innovated in any way. I just don't see how that would make the game bad. If it's the same formula as Symphonia then it should be an awesome game. I looked at the user reviews on metacritic and there was nothing but positive reviews most average people gave it a 10/10. IGN gave Vesperia an 82, RPGfan gave it a cool 86, and 90, Gametrailers gave it an 88. However there's also a ton of no name web sites which give it a bad review. One of metacritic's faults is that one really bad review takes 4 good reviews to offset. Honestly I think quite a few reviewers are wrong about the game. I'm going out tomorrow and picking up Versperia.

On the flip side I can't understand why Final Fantasy X has such great reviews. The voice acting is terrible, the game is linear as all hell, and Wakka is ten times more annoying than Jar Jar Binks.
Logged
Danakir
Posts: 99


Member
*


View Profile

Ignore
« Reply #39 on: August 25, 2010, 02:43:04 AM »

On the flip side I can't understand why Final Fantasy X has such great reviews. The voice acting is terrible, the game is linear as all hell, and Wakka is ten times more annoying than Jar Jar Binks.

Look, I don't like Wakka either, but hyperbole much?

We're talking about one of the dread abominations of modern pop-culture here.

This is lovecraftian stuff, man.
Logged

~My melody of life, rhyming to memento mori...
Lard
Posts: 5753


Member
*


View Profile

Ignore
« Reply #40 on: August 25, 2010, 02:47:05 AM »


After watching both Buffy and Firefly, I just think he's an extremely crap and overrated writer.

Speaking of mindless drones that hate things because they're popular...
[/quote]

So I watched both series, decided for myself that I didn't like them and I'm a mindless drone? Kiss my ass.
Logged

I avoid online multiplayer because my brain still works.
thegamingatheist
Posts: 15

Member
*


View Profile Email

Ignore
« Reply #41 on: August 25, 2010, 02:51:50 AM »

On the flip side I can't understand why Final Fantasy X has such great reviews. The voice acting is terrible, the game is linear as all hell, and Wakka is ten times more annoying than Jar Jar Binks.

Look, I don't like Wakka either, but hyperbole much?

We're talking about one of the dread abominations of modern pop-culture here.

This is lovecraftian stuff, man.

Ok maybe not ten times more annoying. But he *is* a pretty annoying character.
Logged
Hathen
Posts: 1994


FORUM IDIOT

Member
*


View Profile

Ignore
« Reply #42 on: August 25, 2010, 03:20:37 AM »

So I watched both series, decided for myself that I didn't like them and I'm a mindless drone? Kiss my ass.

You're a mindless drone when your response to people asking for you to elaborate is to post the same exact drivel you always post with no backing whatsoever, leading people to wonder if you have even done the thing(s) you claim to have done.

Of course I'm certain you'll go read a wikipedia article or something after reading this post so you'll have some ammo to pretend like you actually have a clue of what you're talking about.
Logged
Gen Eric Gui
Posts: 2302


Member
*


View Profile

Ignore
« Reply #43 on: August 25, 2010, 09:23:34 AM »

After playing Tales of Symphonia and reading the reviews of Tales of Vesperia I'm starting to recognize a pattern. Some reviewers just bag on a game for being a JRPG. Tons of Versperia Reviews basically complained that the series hadn't innovated in any way. I just don't see how that would make the game bad. If it's the same formula as Symphonia then it should be an awesome game. I looked at the user reviews on metacritic and there was nothing but positive reviews most average people gave it a 10/10. IGN gave Vesperia an 82, RPGfan gave it a cool 86, and 90, Gametrailers gave it an 88. However there's also a ton of no name web sites which give it a bad review. One of metacritic's faults is that one really bad review takes 4 good reviews to offset. Honestly I think quite a few reviewers are wrong about the game. I'm going out tomorrow and picking up Versperia.

Actually, having loved Symphonia and played through most of Vesperia, I would agree with the "other" reviewers.  Vesperia is like every other Tales game ever, in taht it goes on for way longer then it's welcome to.  The gameplay is also exactly the same, which becomes a problem because you'd have to love the combat system A LOT to still love it after all these years with little to no improvements.  Vesperia ALSO has the Tales' completely absurd "if you don't do this event in the 5 seconds it's open during the plotline you can NEVER DO IT AHAHAHAHA" system which needs to be killed pronto.

And as has been mentioned, a score in the 70's is still good.  Complaining that your favorite game didin't meet someone ELSE'S criteria for a good game is just a waste of everyone's time.

Quote
On the flip side I can't understand why Final Fantasy X has such great reviews. The voice acting is terrible, the game is linear as all hell, and Wakka is ten times more annoying than Jar Jar Binks.

1. Voice Acting doesn't matter.  Having poor voices shouldn't impact a game if it's good everywhere else.
2. Linear is a problem since when?  You like TALES games, you should have no problem with linear.
3. Wakka is also the best character in the game.  He's also voiced by the guy who does Bender on Futurama, and if you hate Bender you hate everything ever.
« Last Edit: August 25, 2010, 09:25:54 AM by Gen Eric Gui » Logged
thegamingatheist
Posts: 15

Member
*


View Profile Email

Ignore
« Reply #44 on: August 25, 2010, 11:34:39 AM »

Actually, having loved Symphonia and played through most of Vesperia, I would agree with the "other" reviewers.  Vesperia is like every other Tales game ever, in taht it goes on for way longer then it's welcome to.  The gameplay is also exactly the same, which becomes a problem because you'd have to love the combat system A LOT to still love it after all these years with little to no improvements.  Vesperia ALSO has the Tales' completely absurd "if you don't do this event in the 5 seconds it's open during the plotline you can NEVER DO IT AHAHAHAHA" system which needs to be killed pronto.

Symphonia was my first tales game, so the combat system is still fresh for me. I agree that Symphonia goes on for a little too long. But I still love the gameplay.

Quote
1. Voice Acting doesn't matter.  Having poor voices shouldn't impact a game if it's good everywhere else.
2. Linear is a problem since when?  You like TALES games, you should have no problem with linear.
3. Wakka is also the best character in the game.  He's also voiced by the guy who does Bender on Futurama, and if you hate Bender you hate everything ever.


Bad voice acting coupled with a cheesey animoo story killed the game for me. The worst scene was when Yuna started talking about laughing out loud or something. I like having an overworld  that I can traverse freely. FFX killed all exploration whatsoever. There's linear and then there's "no you can't go anywhere you must go exactly where we drag you off too". Bender is great. Wakkka is anti-bender.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  



Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!