(10-04-2010, 09:02 PM)dvow Wrote: [ -> ]Some people actually really respect him for this, since his reviews are far more interesting than most, and his opinions tend to be, well personal by nature, pretty tasteful. He isn't afraid to totally destroy a popular and highly rated game in his videos if he thinks they're poo.
I think it's more about the fact he acknowledges that every review is subjective in their own ways regardless if it's mainstream or not, and makes good use of that. Even one gaming magazine I occasionally read tends to have quite frequently more personal reviews, and they are often truly hilarious while also being like a review. Hilariously they also have a warning included that every review is a subjective and should be treated as such rather than some absolute mathematical value
(10-04-2010, 01:14 AM)VampLena Wrote: [ -> ]On a side note, there has only been 1 game to ever almost really scare me, and thats this Japanese game called Siren. Look it up on you tube, that game is really hardcore.
Personally I found this game very f'in scary, so I disagree with you on that, but I am totally with you on Siren. The sequels and the PS3 'Siren Blood Curse' aren't a patch on the original, the original was and is the bomb.
Amnesia is the first game to do for me what Siren did back in the day; scare the
ship ;P out of me.
And he furthermore admits/implies that all of the games rated higher than Amnesia are because he personally is in a sandbox mood and thus biased towards them.
(01-06-2011, 02:45 AM)hollowleviathan Wrote: [ -> ]And he furthermore admits/implies that all of the games rated higher than Amnesia are because he personally is in a sandbox mood and thus biased towards them.
Agreed, and I like the fact the bias is out in the open. I enjoy his reviews, but his yes/no isn't always a huge factor for me, but it has given me the heads up as to what to expect.
I honestly don't take his reviews really seriously at all.
Maybe its because theres a few games I own he reviewed, where he hardly played/didn't play the game at all.
Like in monster hunter, he only played the shitty tutorial part of the game, and assumed thats the whole game even though its not. Although the rest of the game sucks too.
Or super smash bros, which he said is just another button masher fighting game. Although, honestly. Smash bro's is the only fighting game I ever played where the moves are pretty easy to remember, but thats probably because they're all just a/b + Up/down/left/right which is pretty easy to remember.
Guess its just him and wii games though.
I like his highly critical reviewing style. It means if a game impresses him then it must be bloody good.
As a writer/snob, he is generally also favorably biased towards games with strong story or innovation for innovations' sake, usually allowing up to moderate flaws in gameplay or bugginess to pass by. Great gameplay with only a moderate story does not generally fare nearly so well. See: Pyschonauts versus TF2.
I think that's how you can tell he views videogames as an artform rather than just merely "games"; he cares a lot more about the story, characters and atmosphere and how they flow with gameplay mechanics rather than trivial things such as graphics, general gameplay, etc.
(01-10-2011, 09:02 PM)hollowleviathan Wrote: [ -> ]As a writer/snob, he is generally also favorably biased towards games with strong story or innovation for innovations' sake, usually allowing up to moderate flaws in gameplay or bugginess to pass by. Great gameplay with only a moderate story does not generally fare nearly so well. See: Pyschonauts versus TF2.
Tf2 has terrible gameplay though ???
Oh you mean 3 years ago, when it was good and he reviewed it.
my bad!