The Simpsons Game: Glancing a mainstream review

by Alexander Sliwinski { Nov 9th 2007 at 2:00AM }

Reading entertainment trade publication Variety's review of The Simpsons Game makes it pretty obvious that as video games evolve, and mainstream publications start doing more reviews, so too do the methods of evaluating them. The Simpson's Game seems to be one of those anomalies we're running into more frequently, where the game may not be all that to typical game review publications (and certainly not worth $60), but still presents an experience worth having (Heavenly Sword says "hello"). The games are neither evolutionary nor revolutionary for the hardcore, and so the reviewers give it a whatever score and move on to the next game they have to rate and berate.

Variety got a lot of flak for their Metroid Prime 3 review because it was written from a mainstream perspective. They pointed out to their average mainstream audience that Metroid probably isn't the Wii game for them if they don't know "the rules" of a Metroid game -- just think of trying to teach a non-gamer how to play Metroid compared to Wii Sports. In the case of The Simpsons Game, Variety goes and recommends an average game because they believe the writing could sustain their mainstreamer through the experience. While we frequently put gameplay above story, Variety and more mainstream pubs might see things reversed. It may not be all that simple, but it's plain to see that reviews can be influenced by the audiences they're written for.

Tags: mainstream, simpsonsgame, the simpsons game, thesimponsgame, variety

Related From Joystiq

Masaya Matsuura answers 10 Questions from the Academy
9 days ago
Watch Ezio grow up in this Assassin's Creed 2 dev diary
20 days ago
Winterbottom devs think you're tired of 80-hour games
20 days ago

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)

Clack @ Nov 9th 2007 2:18AM

Forget Variety, some little pissant site gave MP3 a 6/10 within about the past week. I believe its time to go all AO on their asses with my trusty pair of rusty pliers.

Poisoned Al @ Nov 9th 2007 2:25AM

"To put it in "Simpsons" vernacular: Funniest. Videogame. Ever."

Clearly. Ever. Played. Portal.

Poisoned Al @ Nov 9th 2007 2:29AM

*NEVER.

Dammit

Markusdragon @ Nov 9th 2007 3:20AM

Or any Tim Schafer game, either. Or the old Infocom Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy game.

Saying 'The Simpsons Game' is the funniest game ever is like saying that 'The Simpsons Movie' is the funniest movie ever. It's funny, but it sure as hell doesn't beat the well-written classics that people have neglected to acknowledge because they're not quite as mainstream.

Slaziman @ Nov 9th 2007 7:26AM

Perfectly good joke ruined by FAIL, :'(

Poisoned Al @ Nov 9th 2007 12:29PM

I know. Being dyslexic you'd think I'd proof read what I type, but I don't and I fail :(

colin @ Nov 9th 2007 3:08AM

may i have a moment of silence?
rrod ...
;<
time to put some more money into this pc of mine ... it will be a long month.

and if any of you pc gamers have an answer to this question ... it will be much appreciated:

I hav SLI mobo w/ XFXGeForce 6800 XT, would it be a good idea to SLI this or are the gains minimal? 2 Gb OCZ ram, 3200+ athlon processor. any help is appreciated ... i might go for Orange Box to tide me over, but i'd have to skip those achievements.

Dreamcicle @ Nov 9th 2007 4:21AM

SLI gains are pretty minimal. With the 6800 you'd be better off buying a whole new videocard.

colin @ Nov 9th 2007 4:25AM

thanks, 12 months ago 6800 was affordable top-o-theline, what should i upgrade to for the most gain at minimal cost? 360 should be back in a month.

Slaziman @ Nov 9th 2007 7:32AM

One of those new 8800GT's, or an used 8800GTS 320MB that people are liquidating on Ebay to upgrade to said 8800GT

I've seen those 8800GTS go for 200 dollars!

Slaziman @ Nov 9th 2007 7:34AM

Or if you are looking at low-range I'd just get a 7800 or 7950... 8600 if you want DX10 (but DX10 sucks so far)

Dreamcicle @ Nov 9th 2007 8:16AM

It depends on your resolution. 1280x1024/1440x900 a 8600 would be more than enough. If you're at 1680x1050/1600x1200 resolution a 8800GT should be ok. Anything higher get a 8800GTS/GTX.

I'm a nvidia whore. Don't really know about ATI/AMD.

shMerker @ Nov 9th 2007 8:29AM

NO relevant hardware advice, but the PC version of Orange Box has achievements. They're all managed through Steam. The only difference is that you don't get points.

Slaziman @ Nov 9th 2007 9:33AM

Well... I play at 1280x1024 and my 8800GTS 320MB can't pump out max settings for Crysis :(

Sara @ Nov 9th 2007 4:55AM

What? Magazines playing to their audience *shock, gasp*.

Shoot, Famitsu has even flat out confirmed that they pander to their audience. If I remember correctly, they pretty much said that they wouldn't give a mainstream Final Fantasy game a low score, even if they didn't enjoy it very much, thanks to the fact that everyone in Japan is so desperate for Final Fantasy that they don't have qualms with drinking horrid tasting Final Fantasy "Potions".

I could go on, but that's probably the best example for gaming, since everyone pretty much touts Famitsu as a relatively spot on publication.

MasterInsan0 @ Nov 9th 2007 5:09AM

That's no different than any other gaming mag. Final Fantasy is to Japan as Halo 3 is to the US, and the reviews for it work the same here too. Even if the reviewers don't enjoy it very much, they're still going to give the game a good rating, because apparently everyone in the US is so desperate for Halo that they don't have a problem paying $60 for a cat helmet.

shivr @ Nov 9th 2007 8:19AM

wait... I thought dragon quest > final fantasy in Japan... and FF was more of a western rpg title or something

James @ Nov 9th 2007 7:23AM

What have pubs got anything to do with this?

Brian Spence @ Nov 9th 2007 8:15AM

Game publication reviewers are nerds. They get wrapped up in the console wars, which blinds them to great games on a competing system (see Lair). They get too excited about a game that's supposed to be good, but isn't all that (see Halo 3).

J @ Nov 9th 2007 12:48PM

I played the Simpson's game demo and its way more hard than Metroid on the Wii. Are you kidding me? It really takes away from any of the fun or humor that's supposed to be there.

And yes, @Slaziman Portal is that good. You just have to play it.

pixelator @ Nov 9th 2007 7:37AM

This begs the question - are game critics too wrapped up in their own paradigm of jaded, self-congratulatory witticisms to see the value of a solid game that promotes its own agenda successfully even if it's not 'evolutionary or revolutionary'?

How ejaculatory were blog and web game critics over Mario Kart DS, when pretty much the only thing new there was online play? Or any of the other rehash/sequel/revamped vintage gameplay titles Nintendo has trotted out for their latest handheld?

No, I'm not ragging Nintendo - I own Advance Wars 3 - er, DS - along with a couple dozen other games on my Wii and DS. But there IS a nerdland bellcurve going on, where 'cool' or 'vogue' titles DEFINITELY get the ratings boost among this community of online critics.

Simpsons just doesn't hit the curve right now, so there's a lot of 'meh' from the Comic-Book-Guy-Types for its relative lack of 'innovation' (since when did that really mandate a better game, anyway?)...

ck @ Nov 9th 2007 10:02AM

Yeah, I totally agree. I read/watch reviews now just to see what the game is like and if it would be worth renting/buying. I don't care about the reviewers opinion - especially because, like most critics, they're too involved in their own industry to play a game without those critical lenses. I hate music and movie reviews too. They all sound like diatribes on why music sucks nowadays (if the cd is bad) or if the cd is good, it sounds like this really obscure band from the 70s (to toot their own horn on how much more knowledgable they are about music than you). And movie reviews work the same way, except that they throw in lots of bad puns in their reviews ("Bee Movie soars high among the buzz").
God damn. Now I'm mad.

Korova @ Nov 9th 2007 7:41AM

Maybe I am not awake yet, but that was a pretty confusing post. I sort of get it: gamer mags are for performance gamers and Variety is for casual gamers. They have different tastes and different recommendations. I am not much of a performance gamer myself so I need stronger writing and easy (intuitive) controls to pull me through a game.

homerj312 @ Nov 9th 2007 9:23AM

To each their own. Mainstream audiences will read the mainstream reviews and buy mediocre games and hardcore gamers will come here to make fun of them and ask for new levels of Portal.

Seriously Valve more Portal levels soon, charge me whatever you want, I will pay.

Slaziman @ Nov 9th 2007 9:44AM

Dude what's the deal with Portal? It's really that good? I just ordered the Orange Box, looking forward to it, I'll finally know what the hell "the cake is a lie" thing means :(

Sihylm @ Nov 9th 2007 11:57AM

Seriously. Portal IS that good.

Todd @ Nov 9th 2007 10:12AM

I LOVED Heavenly Sword. Hands down, one of the most beautiful combat games, ever.

Savok @ Nov 9th 2007 11:21AM

My mother is lucky to turn on a console, but Metroid she loves and understands the "rules" perfectly.

J @ Nov 9th 2007 12:53PM

I didn't initially mean to reply to you, but since I accidentally did, I might as well actually do it in that Lair did in fact suck and Halo 3 is the shit. Could it perhaps be your own bias that has blinded you?

With that in mind, is everyone entitled to their own opinions except for game reviewers?

J @ Nov 9th 2007 12:54PM

i quit this class

ogvor @ Nov 9th 2007 2:18PM

How about putting the experience above gameplay, graphics and story? I know this has been said before, but Games with great gameplay and a terrible story, or terrible graphics (or vice versa) just don't end up being as good. And a reat story/ graphics can really help average gameplay, and again, vice versa.