The definitive Space Giraffe thread

rockwaldo · Post by **rockwaldo** » Thu Aug 16, 2007 5:38 pm 0

Any game that gets a "2" is usually just the reviewer making a point, I wouldn't get too worked up about it, certainly not before seeing the review itself.

gravy · Post by **gravy** » Thu Aug 16, 2007 5:38 pm 0

grue wrote: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.

It's owned by Future who license the XBOX name from MS, they don't control it

moosedude · Post by **moosedude** » Thu Aug 16, 2007 5:39 pm 0

gravy wrote: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

Yes, we really do need to see the review - then we can rip it too shreds.

but the score does seem very harsh to me.

Rod_S · Post by **Rod_S** » Thu Aug 16, 2007 5:39 pm 0

I remember when Manhunt came out and Games TM crucified it with a 3/10:

What we have here is the absolute bare bones of the stealth genre mixed with shock video scenes that attempt to add flavour to the otherwise bland action. Essentially, the gameplay works as follows: track down a Hunter, get behind him, hold down the X-button...and...that's it.

And then you had other sources that actually understood the game, and said pretty much the exact opposite to Games TM and gave it 9/10:

Violent or not, Manhunt contains substance that other games can only wish for, and does so while pulling off some excellent and original play mechanics, executed to near-perfection.

I'm guessing the OXM reviewer got his arse handed to him on level 1

Yak · Post by **Yak** » Thu Aug 16, 2007 5:40 pm 0

rockwaldo wrote:Any game that gets a "2" is usually just the reviewer making a point, I wouldn't get too worked up about it, certainly not before seeing the review itself.

the "point" being what, exactly, is what I'm trying to work out.... that shovelware emulations are three times as good as trying to do something a bit different?

I'm trying hard to envision some kind of motive and all I can think of is deliberate cuntery.

rockwaldo · Post by **rockwaldo** » Thu Aug 16, 2007 5:42 pm 0

Yak wrote:
rockwaldo wrote:Any game that gets a "2" is usually just the reviewer making a point, I wouldn't get too worked up about it, certainly not before seeing the review itself.
the "point" being what, exactly, is what I'm trying to work out.... that shovelware emulations are three times as good as trying to do something a bit different?

I'm trying hard to envision some kind of motive and all I can think of is deliberate cuntery.

Usually the point is that the reviewer really doesnt like the game. To me this is a major failing as a reviewer, as we dont give a shit if he likes the game - we want him to let us know if *we* would like the game, and as Gravy says that's all about being objective, which this guy obviously isn't.

I doubt very much it's an attack or anything like that, just his personal feelings clouding his judgement perhaps

gilesgoat · Post by **gilesgoat** » Thu Aug 16, 2007 5:49 pm 0

.. and the saddest part of all this is that after a LONG time of LOT of stress and HARD work now
we were finally chilling just a bit waiting for the release and have a bit of fun ..

And now, instead, it's all a really bad mood here and stress again that seems
never to go to finish.

Well, thing is I am ABSOLUTELY CONFIDENT that "the game will speak
by itself", like it or not "who likes it will like it" and I am sure many
people will like and enjoy to play it

Yet .. it's a bit crap really .. '2' means to be "this is absolutely super crap
coded by someone that did not even know about code", the only thing so
far I'd give straight on a '2' is that INfamous DS Atari Compilation.

Many other games I can say "I don't like them at all" yet none I could
say "so totally br0ked to be a 2","2" to me means something along the
lines of "I can't understand how it passed any certification and arrived up to there".

I haven't seen ANY XBLA game so far could give a 2 out of 10.

Yak · Post by **Yak** » Thu Aug 16, 2007 5:52 pm 0

Yeah, for fuck's sake, we were finally, FINALLY just starting to feel a bit relaxed and chilled after fucking months of work and some stupid incompetent vindictive *fuckwit* goes and destroys all that just for the hell of it and now I'm feeling stressed and ill again.

Thanks so fucking much OXM.

arron · Post by **arron** » Thu Aug 16, 2007 5:59 pm 0

The more I think about it, I'm beginning to think this is the workings of a sociopathic cunt myself..out there on the internets, trying to stir it. We don't have any review, or any actual verification of the score from an official source. You get them doing this to try to spoil things, like films..Harry Potter..games..religion. As long as there is controversy, then these people can be important to people who are starved of information and have too much time on your hands.

As long as there is anonymous forum accounts to be had, where attention grabbing and fleeting fame can be had in a consequence free environment, you can go off on a crusade claiming to be an industry insider when the closest you've been inside to anything important is your local bus shelter with a can of White Lightning (or Special Brew depending on preference). Then when the truth comes out, then you disappear knowing for a brief moment in the never ending turd that is your lonely life people were talking to you.

I'll wait for what was said in print..I'm not convinced that what has been released and what is real adds up..

Misfit · Post by **Misfit** » Thu Aug 16, 2007 6:03 pm 0

Yak wrote:Yeah, for fuck's sake, we were finally, FINALLY just starting to feel a bit relaxed and chilled after fucking months of work and some stupid incompetent vindictive *fuckwit* goes and destroys all that just for the hell of it and now I'm feeling stressed and ill again.

Thanks so fucking much OXM.

To be honest when you look at the lies that many of the official mags spew in their reviews the ratings only really relate to the advertising revenue being nice will bring in.

The meetings probably go like this:

"EA will spend lots with us so let's give generic Fifa 2057 9/10 and make them happy."

"Llamasoft aren't going to spend a penny, so, 2/10 to make sure everyone buys EA games."

I think you only need to cast your mind back to the TV spot on Gamespot to see how much fun they were having and how MS included SG in their upcoming games montage to get a real feeling how much of the world is going to think.

Markie · Post by **Markie** » Thu Aug 16, 2007 6:12 pm 0

Jeff ... mate ... calm a bit ...

The truth will soon be seen once released and THEN the reviewer will have to awnser to HIS critics!

SG at RV this year ... first time anyone saw it and EVERYONE loved it! Even me and I was crap at it!. The truth is in the eating eh ...

After a few months send the REAL reviews and number of sales to said reviewer and tell him to shove his reports where the sun dont shine ...

rockwaldo · Post by **rockwaldo** » Thu Aug 16, 2007 6:16 pm 0

All this conspiracy talk is a load of old balls.

Nobody has a vendetta, nobody is reviewing the game badly to give money to EA or Microsoft or anybody, and nobody is attacking anybody with cuntery.

The guy didn't like the game - he isn't going to be the only one. Problem is, he's written a shit review because he is clearly a shit reviewer. My money is on him marking it so low because of some difficulty of making out what is going on or a general dislike of weird trippy visuals.

I can certainly see some hack playing the game and thinking that it is unplayable for the VERY REASON that most people here and everywhere else will love it.

So it's nothing to get offended or worried about - it certainly wont effect sales as demos are freely available in a matter of minutes.

I don't see the point in print magazines reviewing XBLA titles anyway (especially those costing Â£3) - I mean surely the small downloadable FREE demo is much better than a review anyway?

fritx · Post by **fritx** » Thu Aug 16, 2007 6:24 pm 0

he truth will soon be seen once released and THEN the reviewer will have to awnser to HIS critics!

Spot on that, Markie. Maybe this reviewer's one of these Hardcore Gamers I keep hearing about.

Meatpuppet · Post by **Meatpuppet** » Thu Aug 16, 2007 6:27 pm 0

I feel the best strategy is to carry on as normal - it's a tough one to swallow, but it's all part of the process? Though scoring 2/10 is a bit on the shady side.., I mean 4 or 6 out 10 is a demonstration of indifference, scoring '2' comes across as a deliberate attempt to cause a bit of aggrivation. But that's what reviewers do, isn't it?

Jeff Minter, don't throw a Mama Llama

dogbert · Post by **dogbert** » Thu Aug 16, 2007 6:31 pm 0

Markie wrote:Jeff ... mate ... calm a bit ...

The truth will soon be seen once released and THEN the reviewer will have to awnser to HIS critics!

SG at RV this year ... first time anyone saw it and EVERYONE loved it! Even me and I was crap at it!. The truth is in the eating eh ...

After a few months send the REAL reviews and number of sales to said reviewer and tell him to shove his reports where the sun dont shine ...

Yup. I've been on the receiving end of bad reviews like this, and you cannot let them get to you. The reviewer didn't like the game. There's no conspiracy. There's no "stick it to the small guys who didn't buy advertising". The guy simply didn't "get" it or get past the "look" of the game. It happens.