I like many of the rest of you am a knowledge minion, constantly seeking little tidbits and facts. I’d like to bring your attention to a little sub category called game previews, Today’s gaming journalism consists of a lot of previews specifically during these summer months. I feel a need to address some of the faults in these articles.
These previews should always contain a dash of mercy since the game is still being developed, but I believe it has all gone to far. When a preview today is read the writer points how a game has bad controls or a repetitive and overused fighting system, saying the developer can fix this before launch. About five months later the game is reviewed and it has the same bugs as oh so long ago. An example would be game Advent Rising. In a preview by GameSpot they state
“The game uses the latest Unreal technology on both the PC and Xbox to power its visuals, and the environments and character models have a solid and cohesive look that’s characteristic of that engine. The environments we saw–which [was] situated aboard a space station and on some lush alien world had a detailed look, and there were some pretty impressive lighting effects on offer as 
well.”
In the review of the game it’s stated that, “Advent Rising doesn’t have much going on from an aesthetical perspective, either. The art design is boring and terribly derivative,” and that “The human characters are bizarrely designed, with legs that take up two-thirds of their bodies, and they feature altogether bland costume designs.” Now that sounds like the exact opposite of the preview. (yes I did single out opposing quotes but still)
I’m saying not all journalists should become super jaded and cry out “crap game” at every booth in E3. But it’s the “they’re trying their best” behavior that’s journalists take upon themselves with previews. If I may find my inner Yahtzee with a description, “it’s like saying the kid who still uses diapers in kindergarten is a ‘little slow’.” Furthering my usage of examples I’ll bring up the über Japanese game Blue Dragon. In a preview by 1up.com they state that “The story follows Shu, Jiro, and Kluke, three kids from the village of Talta… Marumaro, a squat little creature from the Devee tribe, and Zola, an older female mercenary.” That’s the kind of Japanese crap that reminds why I never want to go there. The review makes a statement similar to my criticism:
“You’ve got Shu, who looks like an emaciated Saiyan who somehow escaped from Dragon Ball Z, Kluke, a little girl who seems about 10 years old but sports a disturbingly considerable bustline, Jiro, a boy (seriously, this guy’s so nondescript that that’s his defining feature), and Marumaro, a perpetually squinting, constantly screeching cat/bat creature who’s made of annoying and harbors a disturbing cross-species fetish for your final companion: Zola, an icy female mercenary. She’s definitely the coolest of the bunch — not coincidentally, she’s also the only one who appears to be over the age of 12.”
Harsh words, harsh words for a strange game.
So, yeah that sums it up. Journalists are making statements about games that are later retracted or are given a Mercy point for earliness of development.
Next week I chastise games based off TV shows!
13 July 2008 at 5:16 am
Gotta love how this thing starts with a phrase that simply makes no sense – “I like many of the rest of you am a knowledge minion”.
I pretty much realize it’s just the “like” that’s out of place, but still, it kinda screwed everything up, because I can’t take none of this too seriously after that first sentence.
Still, I’m willing to at least try since you always label your posts with my nickname – and it’s more than Delirium gets a lot of times, so if you care about my opinion you should feel somewhat satisfied.
To start with, you forgot to mention that the hands-on and review were written by two different people. Of course it’s easy to label it as “GameSpot” or “IGN” or “1Up”, but as far as I’m aware these websites still hire people to review games and those people still have their own personalities and opinion. Of course, I can be completely wrong and these previews/reviews are written by robots with an advanced AI and an OS that only supports Oxford Dictionary software.
Plus, not only do people have different opinions (if you want a good example of that, search a bit for Assassin’s Creed reviews on the net), but an incomplete game is actually very different from a complete version. With a WiP build usually the parts that are showcased to previewers are exactly the best in the game, and the flaws are merely ignored as something that still needs ironing. Of course, on a finished build you expect something else, and that can lead to some disappointment. In this case, of course it doesn’t explain the oh-so-contrasted opinions over this game, but it explains others that you could and should have pointed out.
Reviews, in my opinion, should always be taken with a grain of salt. I’ve personally found long ago that reviews often contrast with my own opinion for games – for instance, many reviewers panned James Bond 007: Nightfire, a game for the PS2/GC/XBox console generation, as a mediocre game, but I can safely say that I feel it’s one of the best FPS’s I’ve ever played, and one of the most addictive on multiplayer. And this extends to more than gameplay, actually – there’s not much discussion on graphics, usually, but there are games in which the controls are criticized and I find them extremely comfortable, like in Metal Gear Solid, especially in Guns of the Patriots, where it just felt like a second nature, and a very enjoyable one to add to it.
What I personally do is survey reviews, watch some footage from the game, and then I decide whether or not I want to take a chance with it. Since there’s no renting games around here, I gotta be careful with my choices, but I don’t remember any single occasion where I wasn’t satisfied with a game.
Then again, I’m not much of a hardcore player – I barely buy games these days, not for lack of money (since I got 200€ sitting around in my wallet), but because I’m simply not interested. I absolutely love my PS3 and the two games I have for it – Metal Gear Solid 4 and GTA IV, which are already pretty much a part of my Top 10 games of all time -, and the Wii is simply amazing on all aspects (which reminds me that Brawl is finally out in Europe and I still don’t have it), but even though I now have more choices open than ever – taking into account that I always had Nintendo consoles and even so I started with Game Boys and a GameCube -, I feel even less interested in them. I’m more than satisfied with replaying Half-Life, which I’m currently doing.
And THAT reminds me of an idea I had of comparing Half-Life 1 and Half-Life 2. Sorry, Mike, that’ll be an exclusive to my blog – it’s kinda lacking content these days.
Well gee, Blackout, you sure got an interesting subject here. I’m proud of you.
13 July 2008 at 5:17 am
Oh shit, I think my comment is actually bigger than the post. If not, it’s close.
Sorry about that, I get lost in the writing process and don’t stop till I’m done.
13 July 2008 at 12:18 pm
I’ve thought about this a number of times before, as in, I subscribe to PC Gamer magazine, and they always have previews and they always sound so exciting, but half of those games get scores that don’t represent their initial thoughts of the game.
I’m pretty sure the only reason why they hype every game they see is because nobody wants to read something about some game they don’t want to buy. Reviews are meant to be critical and give bad scores to tell people what not to buy, but previews are only meant to point out the best part of each game.
It’s all about keeping a reader base, as long as you print exciting stuff, you’ll keep making money.
16 July 2008 at 11:43 am
Dan Hsu is the only journalist with balls