Groupthink and Zelda
A game reviewer with the chutzpah to give the new Zelda an 8.8 score (out of 10) was crucified by legions of zealots who have never played the game but who were convinced that it deserved a much higher score.
VGRC posts an excellent editorial on this ridiculous situation. How did we get here? How is it that the opinions of product reviewers are instantly deemed invalid because said reviewers refuse to play sycophant to the fan community's desire for gushing praise? Why should any reviewer bother to post honest opinions when he knows that the fan community will carry out personal attacks and will throw a general hissyfit?
We can't answer those questions, but we can't say we're surprised. Anyone that dares voice a negative opinion about the sacred Zelda cow gets harassed by fans who don't read game blogs so much for information but to confirm personal bias towards the popular franchise. It's called confirmation bias, and it's an ugly thing to witness.
It's also bad for gaming: blind fandom holds gaming back.
[Thanks Leprecaun90210]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 3)
Probot @ Nov 18th 2006 11:59PM
"It's also bad for gaming: blind fandom holds gaming back."
It's doing wonderful things for Apple.
Luthias @ Nov 19th 2006 12:02AM
88 stands for Heil Hitler. Coincidence, I think not...
LK @ Nov 19th 2006 12:02AM
This entry is somewhat ironic and has grounds for a conflict of interest since you have been crucified for your own little "editorial".
El Hajjish @ Nov 19th 2006 12:04AM
The game is averaging about 96% on Gamerankings for all the reviews combined. It's a shame that people are getting so upset about one review.
Mullinator @ Nov 19th 2006 12:04AM
Then there are also 99% of the other reviews on this game to follow. Confirmation bias? Or seeing how it cannot be true judging by just about EVERY other review out there. Take your pick.
And stop harrasing Zelda and future Wii players Vlad.
ealba @ Nov 19th 2006 12:05AM
You sound like you are taking this to heart, Vladimir. Perhaps from a need for vindication?
SkillCoil @ Nov 19th 2006 12:06AM
The Gamespot review in question does pose some questions as to what the reviewer was trying to do.
There has been biased against the Wii by him, which clouded his judgment. After reading the review, it seems that he sought out to bash the game unwarrantably, and poses the question: Should his biased review even be taken serious and/or should it be taken down?
ShortFinal @ Nov 19th 2006 12:06AM
An aptitude test should be required to have a voice on the internet. This is not directed at the reviewer, but at those rebuking the review based on personal and undeveloped, mind you, opinion.
GoldenS1104 @ Nov 19th 2006 12:07AM
I think it was a bad review score, not because it's Zelda, but because their only complaints were with the graphics, yet they gave it an 8.8. It seems to me that they weighted the graphics as being too important. In their review they made it sound like it deserved at least a 9.3 (still factoring in the graphics).
LK @ Nov 19th 2006 12:09AM
"It's called conflict of interest, and it's a ugly thing to witness."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conflict_of_interest
[just had to add that one...]
Srol @ Nov 19th 2006 12:10AM
People don't read reviews of ultrabrands like Zelda to get scores. They want to know how awesome it is, and any answer other than "Really awesome" is bound to dissapopint.
I think reviews are really only useful for the unknown properties, where people don't know what to expect. Is there anyone who really doesn't know what to expect from a Zelda game. I'm as big a fan as a next guy, but I'm fairly sure by now that each game is gonna have a skinny elf in a green tunic.
Oh yeah, and swords.
Bernard @ Nov 19th 2006 12:11AM
I agree the backlash to an overall positive review was hilariously greazy. (See: http://boards.gamefaqs.com/gfaqs/gentopic.php?board=928519)
Cole's posts are still nothing more than fanboy bait. :P
Kenny @ Nov 19th 2006 12:11AM
I think it's more the fact that people are getting really mad over a freakin review. Is 8.8 really that bad? Take it with a grain of salt.
Erwos @ Nov 19th 2006 12:13AM
Am I the only one who finds it vaguely hilarious that people are piping up here and voicing the very same sort of thing the article rails against?
BklynKid @ Nov 19th 2006 12:14AM
Here's one: I never liked Zelda.
Yes I played it many years ago and I just never got into it. Ocarina of Time after hearing much praise and didn't think it was worth the hype.
I just don't like Zelda. Shocker.
(flame away, tards)
otakucode @ Nov 19th 2006 12:15AM
The solution to this conundrum is simple. A new kind of review site, or a total reworking of one of the existing ones. Instead of going there and finding reviews written by a few writers whose tastes may be greatly disparate from your own, you would find reviews written by authors whose tastes are similar to your own. And you could post your own review too. Other users rate how much the review agrees or disagrees with their tastes, how well it lays out what is needed to be known, etc. As you rate and write reviews, the website distinguishes trends and suggests reviewers whose views are similar to your own. It could even suggest games you might like that reviewers like you found favorable.
A site like that could be pretty successful. If they implemented discrete advertising (text only, Google Adwords or the like) and revenue sharing with the writers whose reviews resonated with the greatest portion of the visitors, it would be positively epic.
Old Gamer Dude @ Nov 19th 2006 12:15AM
I actually didn't think Mr. Cole had been voicing his bias until his last few posts. What is it about the WII that elicits such strong biased (either pro or con) reactions from bloggers that I previously thought to be neutral?
BTW, Golden is right, they gave it a 8.8 simply because of the graphics, which is stupid, because by that logic every PS3 game will be .5-1.2 points higher than WII games because of the graphics.
Dave Silva @ Nov 19th 2006 12:17AM
Since nobody else seems to want to know this, what the hell is that picture on this page from?
Tetranitrocubane @ Nov 19th 2006 12:18AM
Hey, would everyone stop addressing this as a Zelda issue? The point raised here uses Zelda as a poignant example of the issue of fanism, not the sole example of it. There are corners of the internet that are teeming with frothing-mad idiots who refuse to believe any review that doesn't kowtow to their imaginary vision of what the game will be.
Case in point: Go look around the internet about the new sonic game. Universal opinion is that it sucks hard - with an average review score of nearly 5.2 or so. But people on the fansites and message boards are purposefully blinding themselves to these articles, and immediately saying that the sources aren't credible. Their response to the idea that their game (that they hadn't played yet at the time!) could be a poor or inferior product triggered the response that it must be the reviewer's fault - not the developer's.
Zelda's response is particularly interesting becuase the fanbase is so much wider than most other games. The response is just as odd, though.
otakucode @ Nov 19th 2006 12:18AM
Oh, and just a note to all of the gaming journalism community far and wide - nobody cares about your internal squabbles. Generating content by taking down reviews, publicizing why it happened, talking about the reviewers instead of the games, is all self-important masturbation to your public, and they don't need it. It's similar to the mainstream media going nuts over Katie Couric going to anchor some news show somewhere... just absolutely irrelevant to anyone not in the industry, and an example of an industry getting far too enamored of talking about themselves.
obo @ Nov 19th 2006 12:21AM
"because their only complaints were with the graphics, yet they gave it an 8.8."
The reviewer, Jeff Gertsmann of GameSpot (Vlad, learn to credit), complimented the game's look. From the review (Vlad, learn to link):
http://www.gamespot.com/wii/action/thelegendofzelda/review.html
"So if you spend a lot of time trying to pick apart the visuals of Twilight Princess, you'd notice plenty of low-res textures and jagged edges. But that would be missing the point. Twilight Princess is an excellent-looking game due to some terrific art design."
He goes on to rave about the environments, especially the twilight world segments.
No, his complaints - also reflected in the scores - were more on the sound effects (he wishes the music was orchestral rather than synthesized, and didn't like the remote effects), the imprecision of combat ("The combat controls using the Wii Remote may feel somewhat different from past games, but it doesn't draw you into the experience any more than using a standard controller would, and at worst, it's imprecise"), and the general weight of nostalgia on the series that holds the rest of the game down.
Again, from the review:
"You'll almost certainly enjoy the game for its terrific puzzles, colorful characters, and compelling story, but at some point the feeling of nostalgia crosses the line and holds this game back from being as unbelievably good as some of its predecessors. So as impressive of a game as it is, Twilight Princess seems like it could have been so much more with a few presentational updates and more effective and interesting uses of the Wii's unique control scheme."
In this context, the score is fair. But by not scoring the game on its own merits and not those of its predecessors, I think Jeff didn't completely fulfill his job as a reviewer. From the tone of his review, it sounds like Jeff might have at least given Twilight Princess a 9 if he excluded the lack of innovation within the series.
Vlad can go off on the detractors all he wants - yes, most of them are irrational, but so are most people who complain about everything they disagree with. That doesn't mean that all people who disagree with the review have "confirmation bias," and it's improper for Vlad to stereotype all detractors as being flawed.
...
Oh, I'm sorry. VLAD OMG U SUK STOP POSTNG THIS ANTI NINTNDO CRAP!!1!! IM NOT BIASED, UR BIASED
Riemann Lebesgue @ Nov 19th 2006 12:21AM
What a post to put up right at the time of the Wii launch. You've sunk to a new low. I will never, ever refer to you again as Mr. Cole, because that would be giving you more respect than you deserve.
Kenny @ Nov 19th 2006 12:22AM
Mr. Cole, I'd have to actually agree with you on this one.
LK @ Nov 19th 2006 12:23AM
I just feel that it wasn't right for Cole to post this with the 1984 references and wikipedia links especially right after what he went through a couple of days ago.
His hatred for the Zelda fanboys is so tangible in this entry that I could use it as a Wiimote.
A life @ Nov 19th 2006 12:23AM
People getting pissed about a review? Yeah,that's news Joystiq...
Eih'Beir @ Nov 19th 2006 12:24AM
Something else that's ugly...constantly attacking one specific, beloved franchise, because it's the only way people will comment on your "articles."
Shinji Hiko @ Nov 19th 2006 12:26AM
And how is inciting fanboy flame wars good for anyone?
otakucode @ Nov 19th 2006 12:26AM
Vlad called Zelda a cow! Lynch him!
(sorry, really couldn't exist)
Kcen @ Nov 19th 2006 12:26AM
IT seems like it is the graphics got too heavily weighed.
This could be a little problem for the wii, but honestly that is going to be a big factor for the wii can they get over the graphical hurdle. Might as well tackle that fight early.
By the way, I think Wii is going to be this generations console war winner.
jimmuy bay @ Nov 19th 2006 12:27AM
"It's also bad for gaming: blind fandom holds gaming back."
You know what else holds gaming back? The same damn games being released over and over and over under different names, not having anything new and exciting coming to the industry in temrs of innovation, publications catering to some sides for whatever reasons, extreme hype on games that would otherwise be FORGETABLE, identical games recieving vastly different scores on the same website, people being force fed what to believe on the systems, and systems recieving praise/acceptance despite their problems that are relatively unaddressed considering the gaming publications thrashing put on other systems. It's all BS and I am having difficulty trusting new and older sites with each day.
-jimmuy bay
Masaki @ Nov 19th 2006 12:27AM
A review is not an opinion. It is much more.
Hell, if reviews were just opinions, we would be lucky to make it out of college.
If a student writes a well-written essay with top notch grammar and structure, about cars, a professor shouldn't give him an F because he doesn't like the subject.
The gamespot review as a whole is flawed. If Zelda gets a lower score because graphics aren't as good as the 360, then Gears should get a lower score because it doesn't have any kind of motion sensing and aiming with a pointer in the controller. I think it would be fair. But the correct thing to do is rate gears ACCORDING to the system, in this case the 360. Well, same thing should have been done with Zelda and the Wii.
Oh well, I guess some "journalists" like to give controversial scores just to get more hits. And guess what? It worked.
Riemann Lebesgue @ Nov 19th 2006 12:28AM
"Something else that's ugly...constantly attacking one specific, beloved franchise, because it's the only way people will comment on your "articles."
Amen.
serb @ Nov 19th 2006 12:28AM
and sony has the rabid fanboys.........
cpugeek @ Nov 19th 2006 12:28AM
I think this reviewer has some issues. I think he dragged down the score way too much for graphics, sound, and for the controls. That last one seemed very strange to me, because all the other reviewers really applauded the new wii controls. As for graphics and sound, these don't warrant a 1.2 point decrease. Especially since they don't seem to be that bad from what other reviewers have said. I know that reviewers are suppposed to each have individual opinions, but when everyone else is saying that this is the best zelda game ever, it looks strange when a reviewer says its just meh.
Oh, and the same reviewer gave Gears of War a 9.8
SetupWeasel @ Nov 19th 2006 12:29AM
"Posted Nov 18th 2006 11:55PM by Vladimir Cole"
I lasted 18 seconds, and damn, that bull was FIERCE. I claim the early lead in this rodeo.
Ritz @ Nov 19th 2006 12:30AM
"Something else that's ugly...constantly attacking one specific, beloved franchise, because it's the only way people will comment on your "articles."
Win.
Lobe @ Nov 19th 2006 12:32AM
Gamespot reviews I'll read for content they're more reliable than others. However, the scoring system in general is still inherently flawed in my opinion. I think a game score is based on expectations, name brand, hype, and a few other things. Unfortunately, scores are used comparatively between games. We humans love to play with numbers *sigh*.
The reason I think Zelda made a big hassle is because of the name and that it got less than 9.0. But personally I think Gamespot just likes to be controversial. ;)
Lastly and I like how this Joystiq writer sounds like an ass. I like the free association between Zelda fans -and- holding gaming back =P.
Watership @ Nov 19th 2006 12:36AM
Nintendo and yes, Zelda, are just as able to have flaws as any other game or game company. Posting a negative story the day the Wii came out? That's a bad thing? Since when?? There was nothing but bad press for the ps3 for 5 months right up to launch, and no one was crying about that. So here comes a Gamespot review that says "Sorry, its not perfect, but it's still damn good" and reviewer Jeff Gerstmann gets DEATH THREATS. This isn't about the game. This isn't about Nintendo. This is about the problem with Fanatisim and how people can't bear to have something they love criticized or judged. This game isn't YOU. You can love something, and other can have a difference of opinion, and you can both be right.
Dear Zelda fanatics, Relax. Your childish, psychotic zealotry makes the rest of us gamers ashamed to gamers.
Copious @ Nov 19th 2006 12:38AM
Oh thank god for people like you Vladimir, leading the crusade against terrible dangers of enthusiasm for entertainment products with your undying negativity toward all things Nintendo. Give yourself a big ol' pat on the back for being such a swell guy!
*puke*
Masaki @ Nov 19th 2006 12:39AM
"Something else that's ugly...constantly attacking one specific, beloved franchise, because it's the only way people will comment on your "articles."
And Eih\'Beir wins the thread!
Mullinator @ Nov 19th 2006 12:44AM
What I don't understand is how everyone looks at this and automatically assumes it means Gamespot has brought up good points that EVERY other reviewer either missed or did not care about.
Face it, this is a situation where either Gamespot scored it lower than it deserves because they decided to point out a few things that aren't necessarily flawed and deserved to lower the overall score. Or they are the only reviewers who have been correct with their idea of how good Zelda is so far. Personally I am going to say that Gamespot is simply that strange rebel who is just trying to be different from everyone else because they can.
reguy @ Nov 19th 2006 12:44AM
booooooo gamespot sucks!!!!
they hate the wii so i wont care what they say
BIASSSSS
those are just some of the things i've read. stupid stupid fanboys, they would love gamespot if it gave the 100 they think it deserves. never mind the fact that they also gave a ps3 game a 4.9 and a 360 game a 5.9, no, 8.8 is the clear sign that they hate the wii.
i actually agree with gamespot(gasp) how should we judge wii visuals? as gamecube, ps2 or xbox? or next generation? and this is nearly 2007 and zelda(killer app) is still all text? wtf is that shit? that was fine 20 years ago but now it just shows how sad nintendo is the the home market.
BIASSSS
quazz4life @ Nov 19th 2006 12:50AM
Upon looking at all of the Wii reviews on Gamespot, It seems that every single one is lower than what every other reviewer has said. Every game.
I'd call that a console bias. You can call it "good journalism" if you want, but we all reallly know what's going on here: Sony helps pay the bills more than NIntendo. Any respect I had for Gamespot has flown out the window and been hit by a semi-truck going at high speeds.
JohnnyBoy @ Nov 19th 2006 12:51AM
Opinions + Internets = Serious Buisness
I hate the Internets. And Vlad.
Steven @ Nov 19th 2006 12:51AM
You guys are idiots. Did half of you not just read the freaking article that you're commenting about? I wish I could smack you guys in the face. After you get back up maybe you'll see things clearly again.
Spartacus @ Nov 19th 2006 12:55AM
I see one comment over and over again from the Ninty fans:
"You can't judge a Wii game on graphics compared to the competition, you can only compare the graphics with other Wii games."
First of all, yes, you CAN compare the Wii's graphics with its direct competition. Though we all know that it's pointless because the Wii will lose every time.
Second of all, let us not forget that Zelda TP is a direct GCN port. Therefore even for the Wii it probably has graphics that aren't quite up to par. Does it look good for a Gamecube game? Sure, not bad. Does it look good for a next gen game? Eh...
FACT: If the 360 or PS3 launched with their flagship title being an original Xbox or PS2 game respectively, they would be highly criticized. Nintendo should be treated no differently.
Vlad, I completely agree with you and am actually quite amused at your stunts. The fanboy's rabid responses are fun to observe, however sad...
rdsj2k3 @ Nov 19th 2006 12:55AM
Lets just step back a little bit here I think Vlad is right to put this up, he can write whatever he damn pleases as far as im concerned. Zelda getting an 8.8 so what make up your own damn mind, yes go read the reviews and don't crucify other peoples opinion. A someone who likes Nintendo im ashamed of the behavior of fanboys, they mimic the behavior of certain cults, dare i mention any examples. Now all i have to do is wait for the Wii to finally hit our shores, only 18 more days to go.
reguy @ Nov 19th 2006 12:57AM
thank you Spartacus
Mullinator @ Nov 19th 2006 1:00AM
heh heh, a lot of morons on here. If you don't agree with Vlad or the Gamespot review you are automatically a rabid fanboy.
This game will be out tommorow and that is when people will see for themselves whether the game deserves an 8.8 or not. What will happen then if the everyone agrees that an 8.8 was a stupid score to give the game? Will they all be rabid fanboys then? Or will Gamespot simply be seen as crazy for rating the game so low when compared to everyone elses opinions?
A review is not an opinion piece. I think that is something MANY here need to keep in mind.
Exeter @ Nov 19th 2006 1:00AM
"How is it that the opinions of product reviewers are instantly deemed invalid because said reviewers refuse to play sycophant to the fan community's desire for gushing praise?"
It cannot be "how" because the thing you rhetorically inquire about, though it may exist to some degree, is not the reason you've gotten such a negative response.
Perhaps it will be easier if I illustrate.
There is a certain restaurant famous for a particular hamburger on its menu. This burger has certain toppings, is cooked a certain way, and so on, but what it actually is is irrelevant. What matters is customers' reaction to it. As is true with any meal, there will be people who don't care for this burger. Some don't like the amount of meat, or the manner in which the bun is prepared; they shrug, pay for their food and, if they come back, order something else. Others have been coming to this restaurant for twenty years, and are quite fond of this particular burger, and, though it makes no difference in the ultimate sense, think the first group is rather odd. Yet there's no real animosity between the patrons who enjoy the burger and those who don't.
There is a third group, however, that is not content with simply finding that which pleases one's tastes. These people must convince the second group that they are wrong, and encourage the first group to be like them, all the while hiding behind the guise of "we're all entitled to our opinions." Articles are written in the local paper, conversations are started, etc., in an effort to "shake things up" and "save people from complacency" with this burger, which many people thought was just fine to begin with. The ones who didn't like it begin to agree--"This restaurant needs a new burger to suit our tastes."
You can see where it goes, don't you? The last group is you, Vlad. Certainly, you've gotten some inane and uninspired digs simply for not seeing what the big deal about the Wii Zelda is. I'm sorry for that. And in many ways, the flaws you point out may be true, just like a burger might be too greasy or have too many tomatoes. Some people simply don't care. But it isn't enough, is it, to know that you're right? No...no, it's far more interesting to try to prove people wrong, as if that will make you any more right.
Zelda has a brown palette? Isn't what someone wanted it to be? Okay. That's too bad. Some won't buy the game for that reason, most won't really care. It's still worth mentioning, but to keep arguing with the other diners that this burger really isn't any good, and why are you all getting so angry with me for being an argumentative dick about it...well, can you really be so confused about the response you're getting?