The definitive Space Giraffe thread

Yak · Post by **Yak** » Thu Aug 16, 2007 4:58 pm 0

It just feels a bit fucking weird to have the so-called "official" magazine of the X360 doing their best to kill off my fucking game before it's even out there, and I have no idea why. It's more than reviewer indifference which might just yield a mediocre score. 2 is pretty much a flat-out accusation of gross incompetence, and I haven't seen *anybody* react to the game in that way.

It's a bit bloody fishy if you ask me. Something is going on and I would like to know what, and why.

arron · Post by **arron** » Thu Aug 16, 2007 5:00 pm 0

/me gets out the crystal ball to look into the SG reviewing process.

5 minutes to play one afternoon (assuming they did play it of course). They might not have had a working box or the game even, but you can tell what's going on from screenshots and watching YouTube videos for a few minutes. If you're not going to be doing screenshots, then you don't need to risk people playing it themselves.

5 minutes to scribble down some vague spiel about Llamasoft past history, make a few comments about colourful graphics..how it's not different to some other old arcade game involving tubes. Jeff Minter is a weird bloke, so can say more of less what you like..are the kids going to care about facts? And it's Friday afternoon. You don't want to miss out getting a table down the pub. 2/10..have I pushed it too far? I don't think that we'll see any comeback from this one. And we give too many high ratings as it is.

5 minutes to file copy. Check with editor that no-one might sue. It's not like we're doing a game for EA here. We're not going to be getting an exclusive jolly out of it. So screw them.

Down the pub to get pissed. A job well done by a lazy hack..and it's time to get the beers in! Cheers!

Dave · Post by **Dave** » Thu Aug 16, 2007 5:00 pm 0

Maybe the Rev got a new job.

gilesgoat · Post by **gilesgoat** » Thu Aug 16, 2007 5:02 pm 0

Game Rogue wrote:I personally do care about the score; I know that I am still getting Space Giraffe upon its release and regardless of the 2.0 will still be talking it up as much as possible on other forums I visit!!

I would like to read the detail of why the reviewer gave SG a 2.0.

Me too, to read a score like that without the rewiew is just "WTF ??!".

I can understand perfectly that SG is a game that maybe not just "anyone"
can like it and it take a LITTLE to understand it.

But .. 2.0 .. that's really "you haven't really tried it not even 5 mins haven't you ?" ..

I mean this is really shitting all over .. it's really like to say "you can't find
a thing more crap than this one" if you compare it to all the other reviews and scores.

I mean you everything with 7 .. 8 .. 6 .. 5 and then ZAM something with a '2'
and you are going to think "WTF is that to be SO shite ?"

There's something really ODD in here I am telling you even if you don't
get it at all "it's still a game you can play and have some fun" .. 2 ..
have they ever gave '2' to anything else just to know it or are we the first ones ?

Bah .. they may be crap, it may be a crap magazine .. neverthless with
that move it already did quite some damage to LS, first at all moral second
at all now all the people thinking/talking "hey look the official MS magazine
says SG is really CRAP" ..

.. lovely .. just what we needed .. how can I say .. it makes you feel really good huh ?

Now the "weird" thing is since we are developing it really amost ANYONE
that saw it say "it's really nice I like it" .. people at MS love it .. and .. I
open an "offical MS magazine" and I see someone saying '2' ? .. WHAT ?

I am really really curious to see the real review .. the thing is anyway
that "what is said is said" and now it's there .. I know that "at the end of
the day YOU ( the user ) decide" but it's quite depressing to see that a
voice coming from someone "that works in the field" ( and theoretically
should have experience in judging things ) came out with something like that ...

I repeat, true NOT anyone can like it .. but I don't think it deserves a 2 really .. here we are really going a bit too low IMHO ..

PVB · Post by **PVB** » Thu Aug 16, 2007 5:06 pm 0

arron wrote:/me gets out the crystal ball to look into the SG reviewing process.

5 minutes to play one afternoon (assuming they did play it of course). They might not have had a working box or the game even, but you can tell what's going on from screenshots and watching YouTube videos for a few minutes. If you're not going to be doing screenshots, then you don't need to risk people playing it themselves.

5 minutes to scribble down some vague spiel about Llamasoft past history, make a few comments about colourful graphics..how it's not different to some other old arcade game involving tubes. Jeff Minter is a weird bloke, so can say more of less what you like..are the kids going to care about facts? And it's Friday afternoon. You don't want to miss out getting a table down the pub.

5 minutes to file copy. Check with editor that no-one might sue. It's not like we're doing a game for EA here. We're not going to be getting an exclusive jolly out of it. So screw them.

Down the pub to get pissed. A job well done by a lazy hack..and it's time to get the beers in! Cheers!

I'm guessing we may get a few new members of the forum once it's come out, some of whom will be as critical as a certain person on Yak's LJ.

Let's wait to see what the review says when the mag actually comes out.

kalmar · Post by **kalmar** » Thu Aug 16, 2007 5:08 pm 0

Guys, in all likelyhood it's someone trying to wind you up, so don't take the bait. I seriously doubt it'll make any difference to the sales at all, especially not "kill it" - reviews just don't do that.

As I say, worst this can do is create a bit of a fuss on messageboards and get people wanting to know more. Just hope the next reviews are a bit better

gilesgoat · Post by **gilesgoat** » Thu Aug 16, 2007 5:11 pm 0

kalmar wrote:Guys, in all likelyhood it's someone trying to wind you up, so don't take the bait. I seriously doubt it'll make any difference to the sales at all, especially not "kill it" - reviews just don't do that.

As I say, worst this can do is create a bit of a fuss on messageboards and get people wanting to know more. Just hope the next reviews are a bit better

I know what happened, we did not send the 100K cheque "in that place" so that's why we get 2, we forgot the "tip for the media coverage" ..

Tch .. I'll have to blame our business department for not reminding us this

Dave · Post by **Dave** » Thu Aug 16, 2007 5:12 pm 0

kalmar wrote:Guys, in all likelyhood it's someone trying to wind you up, so don't take the bait. I seriously doubt it'll make any difference to the sales at all, especially not "kill it" - reviews just don't do that.

Yeah. Everyone who has their 360 online is going to download the demo and give it a go and judge for themselves.

Flabio · Post by **Flabio** » Thu Aug 16, 2007 5:16 pm 0

For what it's worth, I played it a bit and didn't really get on with it. It's not the sort of game I enjoy playing.

2/10 is still bloody harsh though.

I wonder if you'll get as wide a spread of scores as we did for BW2

disciple · Post by **disciple** » Thu Aug 16, 2007 5:16 pm 0

Surely a 2.0 just guarantees a cult hit.

Sir_LANs-a-lot · Post by **Sir_LANs-a-lot** » Thu Aug 16, 2007 5:16 pm 0

Dave wrote:
kalmar wrote:Guys, in all likelyhood it's someone trying to wind you up, so don't take the bait. I seriously doubt it'll make any difference to the sales at all, especially not "kill it" - reviews just don't do that.
Yeah. Everyone who has their 360 online is going to download the demo and give it a go and judge for themselves.

Absolutely. I trust the opinions of the people on the message boards I frequent a lot more than a.nonymous in a mag.

Having played the game at RV earlier this year, it'll definitely be getting a purchase from me.

All about the leaderboards...innit...

Xstreme · Post by **Xstreme** » Thu Aug 16, 2007 5:18 pm 0

Dave wrote:Yeah. Everyone who has their 360 online is going to download the demo and give it a go and judge for themselves.

Too true. That's the great thing about live. You can try and actually 'think for yourself' rather than been blindly led by some reviewers opinion. For that reason alone I wouldn't worry about it too much. Shame it's happened but I don't think it will really damage SG.

gravy · Post by **gravy** » Thu Aug 16, 2007 5:20 pm 0

I've a bit of a background in game reviewing and have seen SG take form during development and I find this a very odd score.

I've been involved in quite a few games in the past and managed to maintain enough objectivity to have a good idea how a game is going to score.

This is a complete surprise, especially as this only costs 400 points

Really need to see the review to comment any further

grue · Post by **grue** » Thu Aug 16, 2007 5:36 pm 0

FFS isn't OXM controlled by Microsoft? I mean it's the Official magazine after all, one would think that they would have a bit of control over their reviewers. I'm not saying that they should bully the scores but at least they could demand of their people to do their job and play the games at least with an open and objective mind.

Glyndwr · Post by **Glyndwr** » Thu Aug 16, 2007 5:37 pm 0