Metareview -- Golden Axe Beast Rider (360, PS3)

by Justin McElroy on Oct 20th 2008 9:55AM

Normally, we avoid metareviews of games that have been universally maligned because, well, who cares about them? But reader Joseph P. pointed us to a review this morning that made us reconsider our position on Golden Axe: Beast Rider. Let's see if you can figure out which one it is.

Eurogamer (30/100): "Castle Crashers has already shown that there's a market for well-produced 2D hackandslash, but instead we get this utterly charmless and shamelessly derivative 3D shrug of a game. SEGA might as well have released this as The Adventures of Fiery Boob Lady, and left their mothballed franchise with at least modicum of dignity."
IGN (32/100): "If had to sum up my feelings for Golden Axe: Beast Rider in five words or less, I'd actually do it in one: hatred. The game is so ridden with poor production values that there's absolutely nothing redeeming about the game, and its checklist of annoying issues will drive all but the already-insane crazy long before it ends."
GamePro (40/100): "Fans hoping for a worthwhile update to one of gaming's most revered hack-and-slash franchises will be sorely disappointed by this poorly designed and utterly mediocre title."
Play (90/100): "I could write another page on things I love about Beast Rider, like how bloody cool it looks when Tyris slices a body in two or hacks off an arm, subtle homages like scampering gnomes and thorny spikes, the naked body parts that Death Adder's minions use for decoration, how the game runs like a dream on PS3, and how awesome it is that the single-player experience wasn't compromised to add some bogus online crapola, but I think my work here is done."

You read that right: A 9 out of 10. How could something like this have happened, you ask? Well, in this missive, reviewer Dave Halverson theorizes that most reviewers didn't even finish the game. We haven't played it ourselves and with Halverson listing "the lack of a multiplayer mode" among the things he loves about Beast Rider, we don't know who to trust. Have any of you given it a shot?

Tags: golden-axe, golden-axe-beast-rider, metareview, PS3, Xbox-360

Reader Comments (79)

The problem is people are/were expecting it to be a re-make of the original game. Golden Axe: Beast Rider isn't a re-make, re-imagining or sequel to Golden Axe. It’s a game set in the Golden Axe universe. I've played it for quite a few hours and actually enjoyed the mindless hacking and slashing. The game doesn't require you to follow an in-depth story, it just wants you to ride mega beasts and destroy stuff. It has its flaws, as do most games (Saints Row 2 I’m looking at you) but if you want a simple hack-n-slash it’ll satisfy your bloodlust.

What does he mean that the other reviews are unjustified? The whole time he continually points out how Tyris is dressed slutty, and how much he enjoys that. To the point where it seems like he is just giving it a 9 for barely clothed boobs.

9/10 huh. Someone got their paycheck early LOL

This game doesnt deserve even a 3/10

Dave Halverson can suck my penis. He is the absolute embodiment of everything wrong in games criticism.

In that he doesn't criticise games, at all. And neither does the well designed, but ultimately worthless publication, Play.

The problem, is that Dave only reviews the games he really really loves. So whereas other publications dismiss the derivative anodyne dreck which 3D platformers generally are, Dave fucking loves them. Death Jr - 9/10 every time. Kameo - 9.5/10. Voodoo Vince, that undisputed classic - 10/10!

I thought Play changed their review policy to do away with scores anyway? Not because it's of any benefit to the reader, but to hide from the casual observer the worthless sycophantic warblings of their writers.

After the Sonic the Hedgehog, "I have no credibilty" debacle I couldn't believe he even tried to defend himself instead of putting his hands up and admitting that as a platformer fetishist, someone who finds delight in the most turgid of shits excreted, should not be offering any objective analysis the subject. It's like a fat fetishist commenting on the rise of obesity levels in the West, what's the fucking point? You know he's going to fucking love it.

Surprise surprise, the same thing has happened here with Beast Rider. Maybe he's right, maybe he's more in tune with "real gamers", those dicks posting 10/10 reviews on Amazon for MGS4 even before it's released, those kids whose parents can only afford one game every few months, and so worship them religiously. Maybe, but I really wouldn't want their opinion. Fuck, I wouldn't pay for it.

Dave Halverson's magazines (Gamefan, Gamer's Republic and Play) have been some of the few to continually give original opinions and observations on video games. It's annoying to read the attacks against this stuff when most of the other magazines / game websites continually regurgitate the same group-think opinions. Don't you PREFER to read from someone opinionated? They give attention to games they enjoy, not to games that are simply the big budget. Seriously, they've been giving attention to little-known titles since their start (Japanese games in GameFan -- they pioneered giving professional attention to import games back in the day) and they still do that today. The main reason why I stick up for "dave's raves" (as they're known) is not necessarily because I agree with him, but because I admire his tenacity to stick with his opinions. He gives positive reviews, and staffs Play such that the critics in them tend to play the games they enjoy. Doesn't mean every game gets high scores, though (or positive reviews). Anyway, I get tired of reading the exact same opinions from every professional critics place. The same goes for movies and best-selling books. They're afraid to give their true opinion of a game without checking to see what others think first. For instance, I was watching this video at 1up.com they showed the staff talking about Hotel Dusk on the DS and one of them wanted to give it a 7 but then he was corralled into giving it an 8 because the two other reviewers in cubicles nearby couldn't believe he'd give such a "obviously great" game such a "low" score (as though 7 is low... this is on a scale from 1 to 10 mind you).

Video game reviews and critics are almost always morons. They don't grade honestly, they give EVERY SINGLE BIG BUDGET game high scores, no matter what, and their review scale never dips below 7 or 6 (6 is awful, 7 is "rent-only").

So I go to people like Dave Halverson or amateurs at Gamefaqs and on forums for honest opinions (if I'm looking for them. I can normally judge for myself by looking at screenshots or videos... but it's nice to read what others have to say even if you disagree)

Hey, I kinda liked Voodoo Vince!

Also, I agree with matthew dickinson's opinion that some variety is nice. It feels like too many publications / websites are just mirrors of one another.

I'm not a fan of American games magazines, but GameFan is definitely one I respect. It was hardcore, and you could really see their love for the medium. It's also a remnant of the 1990s, a time where games criticism and the language of games was no where near as it is right now.

The clue is in the name, GameFan. It's a fan magazine, devoted not to critique, but to enthusiasm. In an offline world, when your hobby was still niche, and your friends were still playing outside, this was a valuable resource.

It's the 21st century, video games are one of the biggest entertainment industries around, they're ubiquitous in the entertainment space. We no longer want the passionate fan-gush from the critics, we want in depth analysis and expert opinion. Games criticism is still looking for its Cahiers du Cinema, yet Dave Halverson is still scrabbling around, waxing lyrical over every single release, an irrelevant remnant of times past.

I agree with you, Dave Halverson does his best to give honest opinions. In the same way that those GameFAQ amateurs, and those Amazon 10/10 user reviews do. And just like them, his opinions are worthless. Because those "real gamers" that Halverson identifies with so strongly, are the same as the "real viewers" who watch The X Factor religiously while ignoring The Sorpranos; the same idiots who were listening to Lulu whilst the rest of the world experienced Hendrix.

That extract from Eurogamer made me chuckle.

Ok, I've gone through all his reviews for the past 2 years. They stopped him from rating games recently (wonder why), but I can tell you that in the past 2 years, not one game has been under 7.0 And that's out of about 50 games at a glance. Just at the edge of 2 years ago, he gave Sonic for the PS3 5.5.

This means one of 2 things: He's in some kind of wonderland after being lobotomised or forced to work down a coal mine as a child, or that he's a coward who's afraid to share his genuine view of a game.

I think you can safely say that his reviews in themselves should be thought of as starting at 7.0 (making 8.5 average) and ending, possibly with 11.

I will own that he has reviewed some good games (and given them all 10), but the one outstanding fact, and the one I'll leave you with, is that he said of Sonic the Hedgehog (PS3) "My advice is to stay as far away from this one as possible; especially if you’re a Sonic fan. After spending 700.00 on a console this is like a kick in the teeth. This game should be cancelled.". and he gave it 5.5 - above average.

Yikes. I doubt it's bribery, it's just an incredibly subjective view, which isn't what they are supposed to do

It's fine if Dave enjoyed it, but he should look beyond that and look at the merits of the game beyond that

I read Play and Play doesn't give out number ratings to games.

it hasn't for several months.

Well, Playonline does seem to give numbered reviews:

"Verdict If you know who Frank Frazetta, Simon Bisley or Tarna are, or read Heavy Metal magazine, you don’t need a parting shot; you need $59.99 plus tax and a car. For everybody else, if you like unsullied action games, beautiful heroines, large pissed-off beasts, or laying waste to evil undead hordes and the earth-plundering demons they work for, you will love Golden Axe: Beast Rider. And if you love them all, buy two for yourself and one for everyone you know as Christmas presents, whether they have a console or not, to assure we get another.

9.0
Extraordinary"

We didn't hack the website and add that 9 in there.

Maybe you did, maybe you didn't. This is precisly why they stopped though.

If you don't conform then people call foul.

What? That was weak.

I was hoping this game got at least decent reviews. I wasn't expecting it to be any good, but at least passable.

Anyway confusing scores, thats nice to know that reviewers actually prefer button smashing games, while any game that takes mastery, will get marked down..... Lovely! (sarcasm)

He talks about how heavenly sword is basically this, which I have to agree. I never bothered learning the combos, since most of them where completely useless on anyone that would actually live pass 10 hits, like bosses! Still fun game mind you.

It's Dave Halverson. He's never met a game he didn't like, and that's been the case since the Die Hard Game Fan days back in 1993. I'd say ignore his suspiciously glowing review and go with everyone else's opinion on the game.

halverson's a bit of an oddball. he badmouths half-life 2 and bio-shock, but gives glowing reviews for utter trash. i loved gamefan, but play seems a mess with its all over the place reviews where they think games should be scored based on a different set of values besides playability, etc. and the random other stuff thrown in the mag just because.

I've loved Play Magazine, as well as Gamefan, as they've always been art mags over anything else. Plenty of pretty pictures with critiques which are a little more precise in details in the general overview reviews I'm used to in other mags. Unfortunately when it comes to reading Dave Halverson's reviews, you really want to focus on the pictures and pass on the words.

Halverson is like some reverse elitist. He tends to like games no one cares for, and if you don't agree it's probably cause you're not a hardcore enough gamer like he. Half his reviews are like literary orgies over what he likes, then a little commentary, followed about the justification which explains that 'most' players won't finish the game like he did. It's always like there's some mysterious 'climax' at the end of the game, that only came with his copy.

I like Dave Halverson's magazines, but I could do without the company sponsored reviews, the orgy reviews, and when a sequel comes out to a lackluster game the final revelation that they thought the first game sucked to. Fortunately there probably won't be a Golden Axe Beast Rider 2, so we won't have to read the flip flop.

He's a reviewer. He's a critic. He is supposed to have his own opinions and he does (Dave Halverson we're talking about here).

I've always enjoyed his reviews and writing, ever since the volume 1 days of Die Hard GameFan.

Look, I think a lot of people in the video game community aren't used the concept of writing your own opinions and not necessarily going with the flow. What's the use of writing a review if it's just going to match everyone else's?

Matthew, I don't know if you read my review, but he gave Sonic (PS3) 5.5 whilst saying that it was a kick in the teeth and shouldn't be released. 5.5 is about average, not "shouldn't be released".

I read through a few of Dan's previous review. Every game is reviewed as if it's the second coming. Every game is a reminder of the digital nirvana in which all games exist as perfect reminders of excellence.

aka, Dan's totally gettin' paid for his reviews. Pathetic.

PLAY is a JOKE. The magazine is filled with glaring misspellings (and this coming from a dyslexic chronic misspeller) and horrible grammer. Many of the writer's meandering, run-on sentences need to be read several times to understand what the hell they are getting at. The fact that their target audience seems to be 8 year olds is no excuse for such shoddy work. And the fact that they whore out 9's and 10's for exclusive covers (yes, beast rider was a cover) is shamefull, even for a for a industry that has pretty low standards.

I Say....why trust reviewers???

GO OUT AND RENT AND PLAY WHATEVER GAME YOU WISH

Decide for yourself...one man's crap is another's treasure.

Look at FREQUENCY or AMPLITUDE...both are better games than GUITAR HERO......yet they didn't get the sales or the sequels ad nauseum.

Ever notice how Play often has the highest score for crappy games or mediocre games?

I can already tell that a lot of the people that are criticizing the game haven't played it. I actually picked up this game during the TRU 3 for 2 last week and from what I played I thought it's at least a decent game. I think I liked it a bit more just because there's not a lot of these type of games anymore. So, here are my thoughts of the game after playing the first 4 levels.

The controls are pretty tight. There's a light attack and a heavy and you can do combos from pressing them(obviously)and I really don't understand the beasts. The controls while on them are really horrible. It's hard to use their regular attacks to hit the baddies and the special attacks uses their HP. The jumping in the game feels useless. You can attack out of a jump, but the usefulness of this move is minimal at best. I like the color coded parry/dodge system(which I heard is like Heavenly Sword) and it games the game some depth and makes it possible to take on multiple enemies in these types of games. I would probably give the controls a 8/10.

Graphics wise, it's hit and miss. It's obvious that they spent a lot of time on the Tyris' model and everything else is a bit bland. You can see a lot of the low resolution textures with a lot of clipping issues too. I find this unacceptable(especially low res textures) on PS3/X360. Minimal clipping is acceptable, but on a flagship title like Golden Axe, NO. 6/10

Sound is pretty mediocre. Voice acting is horrible, music is passable. Nothing memorable like the OG Golden Axe. 4/10

By all means it's not a bad game, it just needed a lot more polish. Remember this is only on the first 4 levels of the game. It could get better or worse as you progress....although I'm hoping better. :)

It always confuses me that a reviewer can write something like "The game is so ridden with poor production values that there's absolutely nothing redeeming about the game" then go on to give the game 32/100. Surely something below 10 would be more apt?

Then again i'm trying to find sense in review scores...

Dave Halverson loves two things in gaming without question: mascot platformers, and digital tits.

This game has tits. Thus, Dave loves it.

Thank God other people know about the shittery that is Dave. I canceled my subscription to Play after three issues because of this guy's pretentiousness. Anything every other reviewer describes as mediocre, he loves. ANYTHING. It's like he never got out of high school, and he's still in the mindset that everyone else is a jock and only HE has the true answers, sitting in the corner and reading Catcher in the Rye or something. Unfortunately, I subscribed to Geek magazine and he's writing for that too, telling the masses how under looked the Speed Racer movie was. I'm serious; he gave it a 99/100.

Seriously. People like different things. That's not everyone who owns a PS3 owns a 360 and vice versa. This is also why Zero Punctuation exists. Calling someone an idiot, certainly does not make them one.

Previous 50 Comments

Metareview -- Golden Axe Beast Rider (360, PS3)

Reader Comments (79)

Posted: Oct 20th 2008 11:21AM (Unverified) said

Posted: Oct 20th 2008 11:22AM Vegnagun said

Posted: Oct 20th 2008 11:44AM rullers said

Posted: Oct 20th 2008 11:53AM hahnchen said

Posted: Oct 20th 2008 4:43PM stalepie said

Posted: Oct 20th 2008 8:33PM ChooChooCharlie said

Posted: Oct 21st 2008 9:08AM hahnchen said

Posted: Oct 20th 2008 11:58AM Haggard said

Posted: Oct 20th 2008 12:17PM soop said

Posted: Oct 20th 2008 12:19PM Mr Khan said

Posted: Oct 20th 2008 12:33PM somesthetic said

Posted: Oct 20th 2008 12:45PM Duke said

Posted: Oct 20th 2008 1:04PM somesthetic said

Posted: Oct 20th 2008 1:18PM Duke said

Posted: Oct 20th 2008 12:55PM (Unverified) said

Posted: Oct 20th 2008 1:01PM MNeko said

Posted: Oct 20th 2008 1:14PM moominsean said

Posted: Oct 20th 2008 1:28PM Jay Mysterio said

Posted: Oct 20th 2008 4:31PM stalepie said

Posted: Oct 21st 2008 11:31AM soop said

Posted: Oct 20th 2008 8:25PM skrutop said

Posted: Oct 20th 2008 5:23PM (Unverified) said

Posted: Oct 20th 2008 2:59PM GoonieGooGoo said

Posted: Oct 20th 2008 3:02PM (Unverified) said

Posted: Oct 20th 2008 3:58PM kaiyouske said

Posted: Oct 20th 2008 4:49PM Chris Smack said

Posted: Oct 20th 2008 5:47PM Schpyder said

Posted: Oct 20th 2008 8:10PM Bocuma said

Posted: Oct 23rd 2008 12:53AM (Unverified) said

Info

Description

MSRP

Release Date

Genre

Developer

Publisher

Rating

Breaking News

WB conjures up Harry Potter for Kinect this fall

Featured Stories

Silver Lining: I Am Alive's unfeeling world

Game Of Thrones and the paradoxes of adaptation

Super Joystiq Podcast 004: 38 Studios meltdown, Gravity Rush, Civilization 5: Gods & Kings, Dragon's Dogma

Engadget

TUAW

Massively

WoW