| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Massively, and more

Reader Comments (129)

Posted: May 4th 2009 1:52PM (Unverified) said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
looks like a good feature to help keep me away from bad games. thanks alot joystiq
Reply

Posted: May 4th 2009 3:21PM Vegnagun said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
Justin plays through some really crappy games. If he can't play through it then I can't even look at it, so I agree.
Reply

Posted: May 4th 2009 3:30PM latin trident said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
You should have started this section during the Yaris game instead! Too late, now I have a game I don't like.
Reply

Posted: May 4th 2009 4:53PM Swizzler said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
thanks joystiq, I was on the fence with this one, you grabbed me and pulled me off the fence.
Reply

Posted: May 5th 2009 11:45AM SirUrza said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I wish I'd read this first.. played the game.. after 2 hours I knew it sucked.
Reply

Posted: May 4th 2009 1:53PM SpacePenguinBot said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Quitters never win.
Reply

Posted: May 4th 2009 1:58PM The Monarch said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Super Mario Br....onds?
Reply

Posted: May 4th 2009 1:58PM MystileArmor said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Quitters do win. When you stop playing crappy games in order to make time for the ones you enjoy, you win.
Reply

Posted: May 4th 2009 2:39PM (Unverified) said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Finally someone agrees with me! Now where'd my heroine go...
Reply

Posted: May 4th 2009 2:42PM SpacePenguinBot said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Users are losers!
Reply

Posted: May 4th 2009 4:46PM The Blank Mage Returns said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Ah, ragers.
Reply

Posted: May 4th 2009 1:56PM Diezal said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
So basically what your saying is...Mr. T is missing from the game.
Reply

Posted: May 4th 2009 1:57PM Duke said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I read the IGN review and they really seemed put off by this game too. I am impressed that you guys admit the game blew too much to keep playing. Good for you! Now, to make the article better you should find a picture of a cute cat and put a funny quote under it. That would make this perfect!
Reply

Posted: May 4th 2009 2:00PM MystileArmor said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
You should be more impressed IGN didn't give it a good review, if anything.
Joystiq reviews are always reliable and truthfull.
Reply

Posted: May 4th 2009 2:19PM David Black said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@MystileArmor - I generally would agree with you but Joystiq's exceptionally poor Resistance: Retribution review comes to mind as one they really got wrong.
Reply

Posted: May 4th 2009 2:30PM MystileArmor said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I didn't read said review, although wether or not a good review, Joystiq doesn't get under the proverbial table of developers to give it some oral pleasure.
IGN reviews are biased as hell.

*Here Mr. IGN reviewer, we give you a shit-ton of cool stuff for free if you, y'know..*wink wink**
Reply

Posted: May 4th 2009 2:33PM Duke said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
Oh, I forgot that I was supposed to hate on IGN reviews cause the cool kids do it. Forgive me, but I haven't access to the secret files that prove they're in everyone's pockets. My error.
Reply

Posted: May 4th 2009 2:42PM Roofie said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@David Black

So you generally think that they do a good (and honest) job of reviewing games, but you don't think that they're fair because about the game that you really liked? Wake up, man! I really liked the Conan game, but I can understand why people shit on it.
Reply

Posted: May 4th 2009 2:50PM MystileArmor said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@ Duke

I'm not hating on IGN because it's the cool thing. I stopped following fads when I realized installing skateboard wheels on my front-axl of my bicycle wasn't practical.

I don't like IGN reviews cause they just suck, period. And it's a well known fact IGN gets all kinds of swag from publishers. So does Joystiq, but they give it away to the readers!
Reply

Posted: May 4th 2009 3:13PM Vidikron said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
But do you actually have proof that their reviews are biased due to any of this swag?
Reply

Posted: May 4th 2009 4:49PM The Blank Mage Returns said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
10 Shit-tons.
Reply

Posted: May 4th 2009 5:01PM whylekat said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Do you people seriously think that IGN gives games better reviews cause they receive cheap junk in the mail? You honestly believe that a can of Infected Energy drink was what swayed their resident evil 5 review? Not the fantastic gameplay?

I gaurentee they get plenty of shitty shwag from terrible games and give them bogus reviews, deservingly.
Reply

Posted: May 4th 2009 5:11PM (Unverified) said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
I don't think IGN is corrupt. It's just that their reviews are worthless to me, their opinions never jive with mine so there's no reason to look to them for a recommendation.

Also their review scale sucks, they need to learn to round up. Can someone tell me the difference between a 6.9 and a 7.1, really?
Reply

Posted: May 4th 2009 5:13PM Alex R said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Blank-Mage;
Nice. Not sure if anyone else got that reference. Well they should! They are on the Xbox section of Joystiq.
Reply

Posted: May 4th 2009 7:09PM JoshMilewski said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Uh, Alex, no I'm not.
Reply

Posted: May 4th 2009 9:57PM PN04 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Actually IGN isnt biased or taking bribes. they're just in compenten morons with poor reviewing skills, they've been that way for 2 generations of systems, it's not like it's going to stop now.
Reply

Posted: May 5th 2009 2:03PM Dowse said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@ Neuromancer.
Surely a 7.1 is a round down
Reply

Posted: May 17th 2009 8:08PM NeopToIemy said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Look at IGN's Blitz 2 review, everywhere else gave it about an 8 but IGN bashed the hell out of it but its not because the guy that reviewed said game used to be a producer for EA Tiburon.
Reply

Posted: May 18th 2009 5:54PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Review scores are completely subjective. As are the way different people play games. It's the glaring flaw of using a numbered scoring system.

As for IGN, I'll defend them and say that review bias usually stems from personal preference(likes and dislikes) and not so much swag. Take Greg Miller from the IGN Playstation Team for instance. The guy gave Patapon 2 a 9.5(the highest score on metacritic last time i checked) and it's not because he's getting a blowjob from Sony, but because everyone know he's crazy about Patapon. Obviously someone who didn't care for the first one might give the sequel a 7 or 8 based on merits.

tl;dr. I know.

Reply

Posted: May 4th 2009 1:58PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Sounds about like the same impressions I got when I tried it at the NY ComicCon.

I like the idea of Joystiquitter. If the game got bad enough to the point where you'd stop playing, why not share and report that? After all I'm not a paid reviewer so I certainly wouldn't force myself to finish a game I didn't like, so It'd be nice to know where that quitting point would play into it.

Reply

Posted: May 4th 2009 1:58PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Nice idea for the new feature, I like it. I'm still going to try Velvet Assassin anyway. I've been looking forward to it for far to long to not atleast try it.
Reply

Posted: May 4th 2009 2:03PM butaneko said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Can we get a picture of that dude with the hook from Showtime at the Apollo?
Reply

Posted: May 4th 2009 2:06PM (Unverified) said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Do you pronounce it JOY-stiq quitter or joy-STIQ-quitter. I think the second one rolls off the tongue better (pronounced to sound like non-sequitur)
Reply

Posted: May 4th 2009 2:16PM butaneko said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
I was thinking JOY-sti-quitter
Reply

Posted: May 4th 2009 2:07PM Eoco said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
What happens if a game really picks up in the second half, but you've already stopped playing and so don't get to experience it? All we would read about is the negative first half.

This often happens with JRPGs where the first 20% of the game is pretty dull, but it all picks up about 5 in.

Games don't always provide an evenly spread amount of fun -- quite often the pacing is off.
Reply

Posted: May 4th 2009 2:13PM Eoco said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
*but it all picks up about 5 hours in.
Reply

Posted: May 4th 2009 2:31PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Thats broken logic. You want to hook me in the front end. If the game sux in the front you need to fix it. Its not the players fault. If the last 2 hours are good but the first 5 are awful. Why trudge through it?
Reply

Posted: May 4th 2009 2:36PM Eoco said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I agree, but what if the first 2 hours are terrible and the last 5 are great? Then it's worth slogging through, since there's more good than bad.
Reply

Posted: May 4th 2009 3:04PM Vidikron said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
"I agree, but what if the first 2 hours are terrible and the last 5 are great? Then it's worth slogging through, since there's more good than bad."

But that doesn't appear to be the case here. 5 hours is a long time to put up with a bad/frustrating game, especially of this type, in the hope that it will get better afterward. But regardless of how you feel about the 5 hours, Joystiq tells you that they quit after 5 hours and felt like they were roughly half way through. At that point it is now up to you to decide if you want to see if the last half is any good. Joystiq didn't care to see.
Reply

Posted: May 4th 2009 3:14PM Eoco said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
It's just a shame that these have to be used as companion pieces with reviews from other outlets. Otherwise I'll never know if the game gets better.

I hope they still mainly do the standard reviews, rather than these. I trust Joystiq's judgement a lot, so normally I just read Joystiq's review of a game, but with these I have to rely on other outlets as well.
Reply

Posted: May 4th 2009 3:14PM thesimplicity said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I definitely agree. Right now, this article is basically saying "don't buy this game," which is terrible considering Joystiq's volume of readers and the fact that it's a struggling new title. If they keep this feature, I think it needs to be a bit more in depth than two paragraphs after a few hours play.
Reply

Posted: May 4th 2009 3:17PM Vidikron said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
But what if the alternative was that they didn't print this information at all? In other words, they started to play intending to do a full review and then stopped because they didn't feel like continuing, but never told us they attempted to do a review. I'd rather know that the games was poor enough to make them quit rather than no nothing at all.
Reply

Posted: May 4th 2009 3:17PM Vidikron said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
*know
Reply

Posted: May 4th 2009 3:22PM Eoco said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Yes, I'd definitely rather have this than nothing, but for the sake of 5 hours, I would rather have full review.
Reply

Posted: May 4th 2009 3:33PM (Unverified) said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
I can think of literally ZERO games that sucked two hours in, and then magically got better after 50% of the game.

If I ever encounter a game like that, it'll piss me off more than if it just sucked throughout because it'd be akin to the game developer saying, "Look, we knew we were doing a shit job, but we didn't care enough to make the entire game good. So here's half of a good game."

I wouldn't care if Joystiq wrote a full review based on 50% of the game, because that's all you'd ever need. Am I going to return this after being 5 hours in? Yes? Well, then why do I care if someone got to hour 10. It sucks. That's all I honestly need to know.
Reply

Posted: May 4th 2009 3:35PM Eoco said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
X-Men Origins: Wolverine is a bit boring to start with, but then they start chucking in things like the huge sentinel boss towards the end. Also, most JRPGs are pretty boring for the first 10 hours, but then they really pick up.
Reply

Posted: May 4th 2009 4:16PM Stix Remix said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
I agree with Eoco, in particular because of the games he is describing.

Ideally, we all want a game that we can play for at least 20 hours, be it a storyline, campaign, or general multiplayer fun. Gamers want something that will last and is worth the buck we pay for the bang (or at least we all should).

In the case of some 20+ games, cracking the first five hours is hardly reaching the greater portion of the game. Plus, the reviewer is not creating a "fair" review. "Fair" in that this review really only applies to people who would be turned away from this game.

Say someone is looking for a really cool stealth game and can put up with some monotony, repetition, and an unforgiving checkpoint system? This gamer is not given a full view of the game or an accurate measurement of the game's entirety.


Joystiq's Negareviews are better than this new column because it archives all the negative sentiments of a game into one place, instead of only highlighting the negative sentiments of one portion of a game.
Reply

Posted: May 4th 2009 4:53PM The Blank Mage Returns said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I have a disease that requires me to finish all things I start in the hopes it gets better. So far, this has only been the case with Mahou Sensei Negima. On the flip side, Kingdom Hospital was the most agonizing experience I've yet lived through. Basically, I agree with you, but the scales are radically in favor of terrible things remaining terrible.
Reply

Posted: May 4th 2009 5:10PM Mr Khan said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
It might just be my luck, but i've found that most games that start off poorly do tend to get better

I have never been completely dissatisfied.
Reply

Posted: May 4th 2009 5:14PM Vidikron said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Stix Remix

"In the case of some 20+ games, cracking the first five hours is hardly reaching the greater portion of the game. Plus, the reviewer is not creating a "fair" review. "Fair" in that this review really only applies to people who would be turned away from this game."

But, again, in this specific instance we aren't talking about a 20+ hour game. We're talking about a game that is maybe 10 hours... quite likely less. I'd be a bit more patient with a game, especially an RPG, that was expected to take 20+ hours. But even then 5 hours of frustration is pushing it for most people.

And speaking of frustration, let's not forget that that is indeed one of the main reasons they quit. This isn't that same as an RPG where the story may move a bit slow at first, they're were frustrated with the base gameplay mechanics. There's no real reason to expect that to change with the rest of the game.

IMO, based on the length of the game and their reasons for quitting I think they gave this game a fair shot.
Reply
Sorry, you must be logged in to leave a comment.

Featured Stories

Shank 2 review: Refined brutality

Posted on Feb 10th 2012 11:45AM

Rhythm Heaven Fever review: Crazy into you

Posted on Feb 9th 2012 12:00PM

Engadget

TUAW

Massively

WoW