Review: PlayStation Move Roundup

 Pages PREV 1 2
 

I think reviewers should make it their business to learn to play the game well. We have video supplements, why not skill supplements? The first main reason that comes to mind, for why I would like to see them do this, is so that they can give their opinion on what the journey from first play session to near-mastery routine is. I know someone who, pretty much, only plays games so that they can do really well at them. I too am this way to a point. I feel that it is important that we begin to start toting the problem solving and critical thinking skills as one of the major benefits that games have to offer. The stereotype is that video games make you dumb, yet the stereotypical nerd plays a lot of computer and video games. Those two views need to be carefully cross examined. If life hands you lemons, you learn about nature. If life presents you with games of any form, you learn about what it takes to do well at whatever it is that you are doing in life. ^Turo

Man...The Fight looked exactly like how a real life fight between wimpy nerds would actually go. Meaning: it looks just like a very girly slap-fight. Actually...scratch that, I've actually seen girl fights more brutal than that.

Ghored:
Mortal Kombat "FINISH HIM" = Taking the frozen head of your enemy and throwing it at the frozen body of your enemy so that both will shatter.

The Fight "FINISH HIM" = Taking the collar of your enemy, slapping him twice, and lightly tapping his head with your closed fist.

It just screams "The Fight sucks."
I was never that into golf, I would always avoid that part of Wii Sports.
The shooting games looked pretty good, Not the same for Razing storm, obviously.
But other than that, I think that the Playstation's motion controller......

*awesomeglasses*

...Should Move aside.

YEAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

The games for the Move aren't really working out.

There are a lot of finishing moves, when you don't perform one right it just slaps your opponent or pushed their forehead down on the ground. Just like how in Mortal Kombat you attempt to do a finishing move and you accidentally punch the person instead and they just fall.

That's exactly what happened here.

Hate to say it, but this is yet another review that couldn't have taken more than 4-10 hours of play time, if that.

The Fight requires that you train up your character, you gain different moves and you can change your alignment to clean or dirty boxing based on how you fight. You can bet on yourself or online matches for money as well. Yes it has online play, which works pretty well, no mention of that at all...

This roundup review was absolutely awful. They barely scratched on the game at all, just a 45 second snippet of the game and not even a good one.

The Fight is almost like a boxing RPG. It takes a while to really get used to it, and you have to train your character. It shows burning calories and other stats throughout your entire fight/training. When you actually level up your character (which you can de-level as well if you lose) you earn more moves/stat points/appearance customizations.

Spec your character right, and max out certain things and your noob character plays MUCH differently from your decked out character. You want a non-suck character in 15 minutes if your nerdarms can take it?

Go to the speedbag round as long as you can. You can just close your eyes, and listen to the punches to time them correctly and get a good multiplier. I got over 50 stat points my second go around. Sound silly? Sure it does, but if you value exercise, then its not a bad way to get some arm strength, but its no replacement for actual labor. Mostly its just testing your own stamina.

Speaking of stamina, the Fight has a stamina bar that is probably way worse than your actual stamina in real life. Make sure you get 20 points into it right away. When you through punches the bar goes down, if it goes down all the way, you start burning your maximum stamina. If you burn through that you tap out. Which you'd have to REALLY not pay attention to do that. Make sure your character matches you in real life, and things get a lot easier. If you don't have that much stamina, then adding more would be a waste, since you cant' punch that fast anyway.

The game is weird, and takes time to learn, most mainstream reviewers will hate it, but it doesn't mean you will. I happen to really like it when you can take the time to learn it, but I am sure its definitely not the game for everyone.

--Joy double post, silly forum queue. DELETE ME PLOX --

Fuckin Time Crisis!?

NEED! NOW!

This is what The Fight is capable of when being played by people who are actually good at it:

I encourage any PSMove owners looking for a more "hardcore" experience to give it a try.

Gary Cummings:
This is what The Fight is capable of when being played by people who are actually good at it:

It's still slow as molasses and has all the smoothness and flow of passing a kidney stone.

I'm a big fan of the Move, but The Fight just isn't a good showing of the tech.
I'm excited about RE5 and Time Crisis though.

Am I the only one that thinks the Wii Sports boxing is still the best motion controlled boxing game out there? The mechanics to it are pretty simple, but it definitely rewards players who know what they are doing. It's like the Othello of fight games.

SoulChaserJ:
The Fight is a great game. It takes A LOT of getting used to. If you don't have the time to train yourself IRL then you shouldn't play this game. I challenge someone at the escapist to put a week into this game before they pass judgement.

TCZ and The shoot...ugh light gun games with a reticle telling you where you're aiming. No thanks.

I think the point of the review is that if you have to train yourself IRL for it then it's not that great of a game.

Perhaps it's an accurate fighting simulator, but even then I'd rather just take some boxing classes at my local gym. IMO motion control games are best when they are somewhat abstracted.

ThisNewGuy:
Haha, I really love this review because of this statement about the Fight:

The writing isn't great either, the game begins with Trejo looking at you in a basement gym saying, "So you want to be a fighter?" in the most cliché way.

I love how you reviewed the writing of a Move fighting game. I agree too. I also hate the writing in Wii Fit and Pong.

When a game features a cinematic training session I think it's perfectly fair to review the writing.

Especially if they are using an actor as cool as Trejo.

SoulChaserJ:
The Fight is a great game. It takes A LOT of getting used to. If you don't have the time to train yourself IRL then you shouldn't play this game. I challenge someone at the escapist to put a week into this game before they pass judgement.

TCZ and The shoot...ugh light gun games with a reticle telling you where you're aiming. No thanks.

Punching without impact, no thanks.

Actually I am quite keen for that game if any, I simply didn't care for your critisism of the other games is all. =]

Speaking as someone who has seen A LOT of real fights. (work in law enforcement) I think it's pretty damn accurate looking... at least for two random schlubs fighting. Still doesn't look like a very fun game though. :-p

People have been bitching about the wii and it's lack of sensitivity and inaccurate controls. Than we get the move and people whine that it's TOO delicate and not 'game-like' enough. I will now dub these people 'Goldilocks gamers'.
Sheesh.

boholikeu:

ThisNewGuy:
Haha, I really love this review because of this statement about the Fight:

The writing isn't great either, the game begins with Trejo looking at you in a basement gym saying, "So you want to be a fighter?" in the most cliché way.

I love how you reviewed the writing of a Move fighting game. I agree too. I also hate the writing in Wii Fit and Pong.

When a game features a cinematic training session I think it's perfectly fair to review the writing.

Especially if they are using an actor as cool as Trejo.

Ah, I see. So the game made the mistake of using real people rather than mannequins. Because if it used mannequins, then it would've been fine. I didn't know that's how writing is judged.

Unhappy Crow:
Man, The Fight's punches are ridiculous. All that talk about this game being hardcore and the controls are annoying and the combat is laughable.

You mean boxers don't awkwardly half hug half slap their opponents with their wrists? Everything I thought I knew has been a lie!

You know, as a guy who does know how to fight and who is interested in a fighting simulator, I have to keep asking.

"Is the Move all that accurate and are the controls responsive enough that I don't have to adjust a split second back to properly react and attack my opponents?"

I keep hearing complaints but most of the time, I never see a view of the reviewer actually playing the game, so often time, I'm left with the vague impression that it's just the reviewer who doesn't know how to throw a punch...

In this case, I can see the definite lag in response. It's a bit of a shame that it's present, but in the end, this nevertheless still means that I'd need to try it myself. I've never had to actually scale back my timing a split second when it came to things like that so... It'd be interesting to see how well it goes.

That and, in all the videos I've seen, all the punches, even in this one, seem rather... as someone else put it. Rather sissy like. There's little speed in the punch, little impact from what I can see (despite the opponent's head flying). So... yeah. I can only hope it's demoed somewhere in a shop nearby.

ThisNewGuy:

boholikeu:

ThisNewGuy:
Haha, I really love this review because of this statement about the Fight:

I love how you reviewed the writing of a Move fighting game. I agree too. I also hate the writing in Wii Fit and Pong.

When a game features a cinematic training session I think it's perfectly fair to review the writing.

Especially if they are using an actor as cool as Trejo.

Ah, I see. So the game made the mistake of using real people rather than mannequins. Because if it used mannequins, then it would've been fine. I didn't know that's how writing is judged.

I can't tell if you are trolling or if it just went way over your head.

Either way, good day to you sir =)

boholikeu:

ThisNewGuy:

boholikeu:

When a game features a cinematic training session I think it's perfectly fair to review the writing.

Especially if they are using an actor as cool as Trejo.

Ah, I see. So the game made the mistake of using real people rather than mannequins. Because if it used mannequins, then it would've been fine. I didn't know that's how writing is judged.

I can't tell if you are trolling or if it just went way over your head.

Either way, good day to you sir =)

Haha, I love how those are the only two options that you can think of. But, I just wanted to make sure that reviewing writing for a game is because it made a slight effort to not just be boring. I'm looking forward to how the writer will review a Mario game in its writing department.

And honestly, I really don't mind this reviewer reviewing the fighting game on its writing, since every writer write differently. I just want to see some sense of consistency. If this game is reviewed for writing, I hope that the next Sonic, Kirby, Pacman, Dance Central, Rock Band, Mario Soccer, etc will be reviewed for their writing as well.

And yes. good day to me haha.

WOW. The Golf game looked terrible..

ThisNewGuy:

boholikeu:

ThisNewGuy:

Ah, I see. So the game made the mistake of using real people rather than mannequins. Because if it used mannequins, then it would've been fine. I didn't know that's how writing is judged.

I can't tell if you are trolling or if it just went way over your head.

Either way, good day to you sir =)

Haha, I love how those are the only two options that you can think of. But, I just wanted to make sure that reviewing writing for a game is because it made a slight effort to not just be boring. I'm looking forward to how the writer will review a Mario game in its writing department.

And honestly, I really don't mind this reviewer reviewing the fighting game on its writing, since every writer write differently. I just want to see some sense of consistency. If this game is reviewed for writing, I hope that the next Sonic, Kirby, Pacman, Dance Central, Rock Band, Mario Soccer, etc will be reviewed for their writing as well.

And yes. good day to me haha.

My point earlier was the difference between this game and Sonic, Kirby, Pacman, Dance Central, Rock Band, Mario Soccer, etc, is that The Fight has an in-game cinematic tutorial. All the games you listed have little, if any, writing to them at all, let alone cut scenes with dialogue. That's the reason writing in those games isn't held to a higher standard like it is in this case.

The qualm I have with Move so far in relation to fps's is how jittery the movements are. I got the Move opening day and I'm lending it to friends so they can try it, but when the MAG update dropped, I downloaded it. Move on MAG is GARBAGE. I couldn't even give it a chance it was so unintuitive with little sensitivity controls that I just gave up. Plus at that same time they revamped the skill system. Good thing I was borrowing MAG. The Move Sports Champions has been fun with friends, but we really haven't seen the Move hit its stride yet.

boholikeu:

ThisNewGuy:

boholikeu:

I can't tell if you are trolling or if it just went way over your head.

Either way, good day to you sir =)

Haha, I love how those are the only two options that you can think of. But, I just wanted to make sure that reviewing writing for a game is because it made a slight effort to not just be boring. I'm looking forward to how the writer will review a Mario game in its writing department.

And honestly, I really don't mind this reviewer reviewing the fighting game on its writing, since every writer write differently. I just want to see some sense of consistency. If this game is reviewed for writing, I hope that the next Sonic, Kirby, Pacman, Dance Central, Rock Band, Mario Soccer, etc will be reviewed for their writing as well.

And yes. good day to me haha.

My point earlier was the difference between this game and Sonic, Kirby, Pacman, Dance Central, Rock Band, Mario Soccer, etc, is that The Fight has an in-game cinematic tutorial. All the games you listed have little, if any, writing to them at all, let alone cut scenes with dialogue. That's the reason writing in those games isn't held to a higher standard like it is in this case.

That's interesting. I played several Mario, Sonic, Kirby games, and if I remember correctly, they all start with a cinematic and Kirby definitely has cut scenes with dialogue. Maybe I'm just imagining things. I'm not an expert so I could be wrong. Also, Wii Fit has cinematic tutorial before every session as well, yeah Wii Fit also has terrible writing in its tutorials. The only difference between Wii Fit's tutorial and The Fight's tutorials is that The Fight's tutorial has spoken words, whereas Wii Fit uses plain text sometimes.

I'm just quite amused that you're justifying reviewing the narrative in a game's tutorial.

Anyways, happy belated Thanksgiving.

PS. I like how you mentioned that the difference is that there's very little writing in other games, which is to say that a review for writing depends on how long the writing is. So, games games who have 200 lines of dialogue = review-worthy, whereas games with 199 lines of dialogue is not review worthy. Who gets to set the cut off point? Where is the cutoff point? Or is it some arbitrary thing that depends on the mood of the author that day?

ThisNewGuy:

That's interesting. I played several Mario, Sonic, Kirby games, and if I remember correctly, they all start with a cinematic and Kirby definitely has cut scenes with dialogue.

I haven't played the new Kirby game, so you might be right about that.

The Mario and Sonic games I played all had opening cinematics of about 1 or 2 minutes, and none of them had any dialogue. Again, that's much less writing than a video tutorial featuring a semi-famous actor.

ThisNewGuy:
Maybe I'm just imagining things. I'm not an expert so I could be wrong. Also, Wii Fit has cinematic tutorial before every session as well, yeah Wii Fit also has terrible writing in its tutorials. The only difference between Wii Fit's tutorial and The Fight's tutorials is that The Fight's tutorial has spoken words, whereas Wii Fit uses plain text sometimes.

No, actually the Wii Fit tutorial is quite well written for what it needs to be. It's clear, succinct, and matches the rest of the game's tone. Most importantly, it doesn't draw attention to itself.

ThisNewGuy:
I'm just quite amused that you're justifying reviewing the narrative in a game's tutorial.

And I'm quite amused that you don't see why this game was setting itself up to have its tutorial panned in the review.

And let's get something straight too: the game didn't get a bad review because of the tutorial. Apparently it was already bad, and the tutorial was just another failure in a long string of bad choices by the developers.

boholikeu:

ThisNewGuy:

That's interesting. I played several Mario, Sonic, Kirby games, and if I remember correctly, they all start with a cinematic and Kirby definitely has cut scenes with dialogue.

I haven't played the new Kirby game, so you might be right about that.

The Mario and Sonic games I played all had opening cinematics of about 1 or 2 minutes, and none of them had any dialogue. Again, that's much less writing than a video tutorial featuring a semi-famous actor.

ThisNewGuy:
Maybe I'm just imagining things. I'm not an expert so I could be wrong. Also, Wii Fit has cinematic tutorial before every session as well, yeah Wii Fit also has terrible writing in its tutorials. The only difference between Wii Fit's tutorial and The Fight's tutorials is that The Fight's tutorial has spoken words, whereas Wii Fit uses plain text sometimes.

No, actually the Wii Fit tutorial is quite well written for what it needs to be. It's clear, succinct, and matches the rest of the game's tone. Most importantly, it doesn't draw attention to itself.

ThisNewGuy:
I'm just quite amused that you're justifying reviewing the narrative in a game's tutorial.

And I'm quite amused that you don't see why this game was setting itself up to have its tutorial panned in the review.

And let's get something straight too: the game didn't get a bad review because of the tutorial. Apparently it was already bad, and the tutorial was just another failure in a long string of bad choices by the developers.

In all honesty, I really don't care all that much how a review is written. If you feel like reviewing the narrative of a fighting game's tutorial, that's fine with me. I'm just pointing out that you are reviewing the narrative of a fight game's tutorial. That's all.

P.S. Wii Fit's tutorial's narrative is much worse since it really doesn't even have a narrative. It really was just "do this, then do this, you're fat, ok go." If I wrote that on my English paper, I'm sure to fail horribly. Whereas if I wrote something along the lines of The Fight, I just might get the lowest passing grade. If you really want to judge tutorials' narrative, then having narrative should be better than having no narrative.

ThisNewGuy:

P.S. Wii Fit's tutorial's narrative is much worse since it really doesn't even have a narrative. It really was just "do this, then do this, you're fat, ok go." If I wrote that on my English paper, I'm sure to fail horribly. Whereas if I wrote something along the lines of The Fight, I just might get the lowest passing grade. If you really want to judge tutorials' narrative, then having narrative should be better than having no narrative.

Actually having a narrative is not automatically better than not having a narrative. Writing in the real world is all about having the correct tone and form for what you're trying to do. Writing the text of Wii Fit for your English paper would probably earn you an F, but that's because it's not an English paper. Writing the text of Wii Fit for a casual exercise game will probably get you good pay from your boss and maybe even a raise. Heck, Wii Fit was actually praised by some reviewers for it's light-hearted tone, which makes it a lot better writing than what you see in The Fight.

In short:

The writing for Wii Fit is simple and friendly. It perfectly matches what the game is trying to be. The writing for The Fight is hokey and cliched. It conflicts directly with the overall "badass" tone of the game. The Fight would've been much better off without the "story" in the tutorial section, whereas the text in Wii Fit actually reinforces the charm of the game. That's why Wii Fit has better writing than The Fight.

boholikeu:

ThisNewGuy:

P.S. Wii Fit's tutorial's narrative is much worse since it really doesn't even have a narrative. It really was just "do this, then do this, you're fat, ok go." If I wrote that on my English paper, I'm sure to fail horribly. Whereas if I wrote something along the lines of The Fight, I just might get the lowest passing grade. If you really want to judge tutorials' narrative, then having narrative should be better than having no narrative.

Actually having a narrative is not automatically better than not having a narrative. Writing in the real world is all about having the correct tone and form for what you're trying to do. Writing the text of Wii Fit for your English paper would probably earn you an F, but that's because it's not an English paper. Writing the text of Wii Fit for a casual exercise game will probably get you good pay from your boss and maybe even a raise. Heck, Wii Fit was actually praised by some reviewers for it's light-hearted tone, which makes it a lot better writing than what you see in The Fight.

In short:

The writing for Wii Fit is simple and friendly. It perfectly matches what the game is trying to be. The writing for The Fight is hokey and cliched. It conflicts directly with the overall "badass" tone of the game. The Fight would've been much better off without the "story" in the tutorial section, whereas the text in Wii Fit actually reinforces the charm of the game. That's why Wii Fit has better writing than The Fight.

Ahahaha, this is awesome. Good job man. Congrats on reviewing the writing of fighting game's tutorial. I love how reviewers never think that what they're doing may be remotely wrong. It's always the reader's fault. Again, I don't really care about people's opinions on what's good and what's bad, since that depends on taste. But if you're going to review a tutorial's writing for one fighting game, then maybe you should also review the tutorials' writing for all fighting games.

You're arguing that my opinion is just wrong, which is funny coming from a gaming journalists who always play the "it's my opinion" card (I don't know if you do it, but almost every journalists do it). While I'm just pointing out the inconsistency of reviews just to smear a particular game.

ThisNewGuy:

boholikeu:

ThisNewGuy:

P.S. Wii Fit's tutorial's narrative is much worse since it really doesn't even have a narrative. It really was just "do this, then do this, you're fat, ok go." If I wrote that on my English paper, I'm sure to fail horribly. Whereas if I wrote something along the lines of The Fight, I just might get the lowest passing grade. If you really want to judge tutorials' narrative, then having narrative should be better than having no narrative.

Actually having a narrative is not automatically better than not having a narrative. Writing in the real world is all about having the correct tone and form for what you're trying to do. Writing the text of Wii Fit for your English paper would probably earn you an F, but that's because it's not an English paper. Writing the text of Wii Fit for a casual exercise game will probably get you good pay from your boss and maybe even a raise. Heck, Wii Fit was actually praised by some reviewers for it's light-hearted tone, which makes it a lot better writing than what you see in The Fight.

In short:

The writing for Wii Fit is simple and friendly. It perfectly matches what the game is trying to be. The writing for The Fight is hokey and cliched. It conflicts directly with the overall "badass" tone of the game. The Fight would've been much better off without the "story" in the tutorial section, whereas the text in Wii Fit actually reinforces the charm of the game. That's why Wii Fit has better writing than The Fight.

Ahahaha, this is awesome. Good job man. Congrats on reviewing the writing of fighting game's tutorial. I love how reviewers never think that what they're doing may be remotely wrong. It's always the reader's fault. Again, I don't really care about people's opinions on what's good and what's bad, since that depends on taste. But if you're going to review a tutorial's writing for one fighting game, then maybe you should also review the tutorials' writing for all fighting games.

You're arguing that my opinion is just wrong, which is funny coming from a gaming journalists who always play the "it's my opinion" card (I don't know if you do it, but almost every journalists do it). While I'm just pointing out the inconsistency of reviews just to smear a particular game.

*whooosh* =)

Reviews are consistent. Anytime you see a tutorial with the production values of the one in The Fight, it's usually mentioned in the review. I still don't understand why this is so surprising to you.

boholikeu:

ThisNewGuy:

boholikeu:

Actually having a narrative is not automatically better than not having a narrative. Writing in the real world is all about having the correct tone and form for what you're trying to do. Writing the text of Wii Fit for your English paper would probably earn you an F, but that's because it's not an English paper. Writing the text of Wii Fit for a casual exercise game will probably get you good pay from your boss and maybe even a raise. Heck, Wii Fit was actually praised by some reviewers for it's light-hearted tone, which makes it a lot better writing than what you see in The Fight.

In short:

The writing for Wii Fit is simple and friendly. It perfectly matches what the game is trying to be. The writing for The Fight is hokey and cliched. It conflicts directly with the overall "badass" tone of the game. The Fight would've been much better off without the "story" in the tutorial section, whereas the text in Wii Fit actually reinforces the charm of the game. That's why Wii Fit has better writing than The Fight.

Ahahaha, this is awesome. Good job man. Congrats on reviewing the writing of fighting game's tutorial. I love how reviewers never think that what they're doing may be remotely wrong. It's always the reader's fault. Again, I don't really care about people's opinions on what's good and what's bad, since that depends on taste. But if you're going to review a tutorial's writing for one fighting game, then maybe you should also review the tutorials' writing for all fighting games.

You're arguing that my opinion is just wrong, which is funny coming from a gaming journalists who always play the "it's my opinion" card (I don't know if you do it, but almost every journalists do it). While I'm just pointing out the inconsistency of reviews just to smear a particular game.

*whooosh* =)

Reviews are consistent. Anytime you see a tutorial with the production values of the one in The Fight, it's usually mentioned in the review. I still don't understand why this is so surprising to you.

Exactly, so The Fight's fault is having a higher production value in its tutorials than other games. Got it. Fighting games should always just not have tutorials or single players at all just to avoid being reviewed. Fight Night also has high production value in its tutorials (it only lacks cinematic, but it also has a coach and commentary), but nothing in the reviews even come close to talking about the writing in its tutorials.

Also, Cataclysm emphasizes its narrative more than The Fight, but the review also didn't mention how the writing was.

P.S. I think I should make it clear that production value includes other things besides cut scenes, in case you didn't already know.

Optimystic:
That boxing game looks awful. Like Sissy Fight Night.

Time Crisis, however, will be at the top of my list when I eventually get a PS3+Move.

A-fucking-men I love Namco rail shooters and when I get a move (preferabley the bundle because I have no camera) That will be my first and only Move purchase

Did I mention Namco makes great rail shooters!

ThisNewGuy:

boholikeu:

ThisNewGuy:

Ahahaha, this is awesome. Good job man. Congrats on reviewing the writing of fighting game's tutorial. I love how reviewers never think that what they're doing may be remotely wrong. It's always the reader's fault. Again, I don't really care about people's opinions on what's good and what's bad, since that depends on taste. But if you're going to review a tutorial's writing for one fighting game, then maybe you should also review the tutorials' writing for all fighting games.

You're arguing that my opinion is just wrong, which is funny coming from a gaming journalists who always play the "it's my opinion" card (I don't know if you do it, but almost every journalists do it). While I'm just pointing out the inconsistency of reviews just to smear a particular game.

*whooosh* =)

Reviews are consistent. Anytime you see a tutorial with the production values of the one in The Fight, it's usually mentioned in the review. I still don't understand why this is so surprising to you.

Exactly, so The Fight's fault is having a higher production value in its tutorials than other games. Got it. Fighting games should always just not have tutorials or single players at all just to avoid being reviewed. Fight Night also has high production value in its tutorials (it only lacks cinematic, but it also has a coach and commentary), but nothing in the reviews even come close to talking about the writing in its tutorials.

Also, Cataclysm emphasizes its narrative more than The Fight, but the review also didn't mention how the writing was.

P.S. I think I should make it clear that production value includes other things besides cut scenes, in case you didn't already know.

Still missing the point. The Fight's problem isn't that it has tutorials with high production values, it's that those tutorials turned out lame despite the high production values. That makes The Fight worse than a game with cheaply made tutorials, because apparently The Fight tried to make their tutorials seem cool with a fairly well known actor, but still failed.

Also, I didn't see the Cataclysm review on this site, but most of the other reviews I saw mentioned the storytelling the the game. They were quite positive about it, too.

boholikeu:

ThisNewGuy:

boholikeu:

*whooosh* =)

Reviews are consistent. Anytime you see a tutorial with the production values of the one in The Fight, it's usually mentioned in the review. I still don't understand why this is so surprising to you.

Exactly, so The Fight's fault is having a higher production value in its tutorials than other games. Got it. Fighting games should always just not have tutorials or single players at all just to avoid being reviewed. Fight Night also has high production value in its tutorials (it only lacks cinematic, but it also has a coach and commentary), but nothing in the reviews even come close to talking about the writing in its tutorials.

Also, Cataclysm emphasizes its narrative more than The Fight, but the review also didn't mention how the writing was.

P.S. I think I should make it clear that production value includes other things besides cut scenes, in case you didn't already know.

Still missing the point. The Fight's problem isn't that it has tutorials with high production values, it's that those tutorials turned out lame despite the high production values. That makes The Fight worse than a game with cheaply made tutorials, because apparently The Fight tried to make their tutorials seem cool with a fairly well known actor, but still failed.

Also, I didn't see the Cataclysm review on this site, but most of the other reviews I saw mentioned the storytelling the the game. They were quite positive about it, too.

Wow, I guess it's been so long, you've forgotten what's being argued. I'm not arguing that the tutorial narrative is good, or that it's bad. I'm criticizing the fact that you are actually judging the narrative of a fighting game's tutorial.

It doesn't matter if the Fight tried to make a tutorial cool and failed. Reviewing a fighting game's tutorial for its narrative depth is plainly asinine. It's like criticizing a car's instruction manual for poor writing.

ThisNewGuy:

boholikeu:

ThisNewGuy:

Exactly, so The Fight's fault is having a higher production value in its tutorials than other games. Got it. Fighting games should always just not have tutorials or single players at all just to avoid being reviewed. Fight Night also has high production value in its tutorials (it only lacks cinematic, but it also has a coach and commentary), but nothing in the reviews even come close to talking about the writing in its tutorials.

Also, Cataclysm emphasizes its narrative more than The Fight, but the review also didn't mention how the writing was.

P.S. I think I should make it clear that production value includes other things besides cut scenes, in case you didn't already know.

Still missing the point. The Fight's problem isn't that it has tutorials with high production values, it's that those tutorials turned out lame despite the high production values. That makes The Fight worse than a game with cheaply made tutorials, because apparently The Fight tried to make their tutorials seem cool with a fairly well known actor, but still failed.

Also, I didn't see the Cataclysm review on this site, but most of the other reviews I saw mentioned the storytelling the the game. They were quite positive about it, too.

Wow, I guess it's been so long, you've forgotten what's being argued. I'm not arguing that the tutorial narrative is good, or that it's bad. I'm criticizing the fact that you are actually judging the narrative of a fighting game's tutorial.

It doesn't matter if the Fight tried to make a tutorial cool and failed. Reviewing a fighting game's tutorial for its narrative depth is plainly asinine. It's like criticizing a car's instruction manual for poor writing.

Still missing the point. I'm saying it's not asinine to review a tutorial if they put a lot of money and work into it, especially if they got a Hollywood actor to star in it. They obviously wanted people to pay attention to it, so it's hardly surprising that it gets mentioned in some reviews.

Also, I'd like to point out that dialogue=/=narrative depth. No one would expect it to have a thought-provoking story, but if you hire a well known actor to star in it it's fair to expect at least passable dialogue.

boholikeu:

ThisNewGuy:

boholikeu:

Still missing the point. The Fight's problem isn't that it has tutorials with high production values, it's that those tutorials turned out lame despite the high production values. That makes The Fight worse than a game with cheaply made tutorials, because apparently The Fight tried to make their tutorials seem cool with a fairly well known actor, but still failed.

Also, I didn't see the Cataclysm review on this site, but most of the other reviews I saw mentioned the storytelling the the game. They were quite positive about it, too.

Wow, I guess it's been so long, you've forgotten what's being argued. I'm not arguing that the tutorial narrative is good, or that it's bad. I'm criticizing the fact that you are actually judging the narrative of a fighting game's tutorial.

It doesn't matter if the Fight tried to make a tutorial cool and failed. Reviewing a fighting game's tutorial for its narrative depth is plainly asinine. It's like criticizing a car's instruction manual for poor writing.

Still missing the point. I'm saying it's not asinine to review a tutorial if they put a lot of money and work into it, especially if they got a Hollywood actor to star in it. They obviously wanted people to pay attention to it, so it's hardly surprising that it gets mentioned in some reviews.

Also, I'd like to point out that dialogue=/=narrative depth. No one would expect it to have a thought-provoking story, but if you hire a well known actor to star in it it's fair to expect at least passable dialogue.

I'm saying that, using the car manual example, even if the instruction manual uses premium color pictures, that doesn't make it any more valid to criticize those pictures for its artistic value.

Similarly, even if they used a well-known actor with high production value, that doesn't make it more valid to criticize the writing for its depth. It's a tutorial of a fighting game. Reviewing the writing of a tutorial of a fighting game is plainly asinine. You can muddle the issue with excuses like "oh they spent so much money on it", but that doesn't change the fact that it's still only a tutorial of a fighting game. That's like saying we should criticize the artistic value of Rolls Royce ash trays simply because they spent over $1million in its design. Criticizing something so extremely trivial is nick-picking at best, and finding excuses to slander a game at worst. Justifying this atrocious behavior is putting your integrity in danger. Especially when you are saying that this behavior is natural and that I shouldn't be surprised at it, and then turn around and play dumb when other reviews clearly don't do this: Fight Night reviews, Kirby reviews WoW reviews, etc.

But I can see how this method may be just your personal review style, but just don't say that this style is everywhere in other reviews because it's absolutely not. Every fighting game have a whole section dedicated to training/tutorials, but you will never ever find a review that talks about the writing of those modes. The production value is there, but it's just absolutely idiotic to review the writing of a tutorial of a fighting game.

I mean, UMD cost a lot of money and effort to its design as well, why don't you critique the artistic value of its case? Companies also spend a crap ton of money just to design the box art, why don't you review the artistic value of every box art of every game? Hell, companies spend money and a lot of effort just to decide the font of the title screen, why don't you review that?

It's trivial. It's idiotic. It's slander.

If you still can't see how reviewing the writing of the tutorial of a fighting game is trivial, then there's just no hope for you. Stubborn people will always be stubborn.

ThisNewGuy:

boholikeu:

Still missing the point. I'm saying it's not asinine to review a tutorial if they put a lot of money and work into it, especially if they got a Hollywood actor to star in it. They obviously wanted people to pay attention to it, so it's hardly surprising that it gets mentioned in some reviews.

Also, I'd like to point out that dialogue=/=narrative depth. No one would expect it to have a thought-provoking story, but if you hire a well known actor to star in it it's fair to expect at least passable dialogue.

I'm saying that, using the car manual example, even if the instruction manual uses premium color pictures, that doesn't make it any more valid to criticize those pictures for its artistic value.

Similarly, even if they used a well-known actor with high production value, that doesn't make it more valid to criticize the writing for its depth. It's a tutorial of a fighting game. Reviewing the writing of a tutorial of a fighting game is plainly asinine. You can muddle the issue with excuses like "oh they spent so much money on it", but that doesn't change the fact that it's still only a tutorial of a fighting game. That's like saying we should criticize the artistic value of Rolls Royce ash trays simply because they spent over $1million in its design. Criticizing something so extremely trivial is nick-picking at best, and finding excuses to slander a game at worst. Justifying this atrocious behavior is putting your integrity in danger. Especially when you are saying that this behavior is natural and that I shouldn't be surprised at it, and then turn around and play dumb when other reviews clearly don't do this: Fight Night reviews, Kirby reviews WoW reviews, etc.

But I can see how this method may be just your personal review style, but just don't say that this style is everywhere in other reviews because it's absolutely not. Every fighting game have a whole section dedicated to training/tutorials, but you will never ever find a review that talks about the writing of those modes. The production value is there, but it's just absolutely idiotic to review the writing of a tutorial of a fighting game.

I mean, UMD cost a lot of money and effort to its design as well, why don't you critique the artistic value of its case? Companies also spend a crap ton of money just to design the box art, why don't you review the artistic value of every box art of every game? Hell, companies spend money and a lot of effort just to decide the font of the title screen, why don't you review that?

It's trivial. It's idiotic. It's slander.

If you still can't see how reviewing the writing of the tutorial of a fighting game is trivial, then there's just no hope for you. Stubborn people will always be stubborn.

Well, since you still aren't getting it, I'll use you manual example to explain it. If a car company got, say, Stephen King to write their car manual, you can bet that it would be mentioned in many reviews even though it has nothing to do with how the car actually drives. Furthermore, a game tutorial has much more of an affect on the overall game than a car manual does, especially when the game has an all new control scheme (like this game does).

What's more, it's funny that you should mention the design of PSPs, because most hardware reviews actually do include at least a sentence or two about the aesthetic design of the item. Obviously they don't base their overall decision about the product on that, but the same is true of The Fight's review. Honestly, it's kind of amusing that you are getting so worked up over a simple remark that probably had no effect on the final score and really isn't that uncommon in reviews.

ThisNewGuy:
But I can see how this method may be just your personal review style, but just don't say that this style is everywhere in other reviews because it's absolutely not. Every fighting game have a whole section dedicated to training/tutorials, but you will never ever find a review that talks about the writing of those modes.

I guarantee you that it's mentioned in reviews for every game that features a Hollywood actor in its tutorial.

So that's exactly my point then. The only reason why this tutorial is critiqued was because of its actor.

And even if Stephen King wrote the car instruction manual, it would be mentioned, but it would not be critiqued, otherwise that would just be ridiculously stupid kinda like critiquing the writing of a tutorial of a fighting game just because they had an actor to do it...oh wait.

But hey, it's a months old review of a game that I don't even care about, so just say whatever you need to let you sleep at night, but the truth is the undeniable truth--you criticized a fighting game's tutorial's writing. I just find that funny (considering how little critics regard fighting games' actual campaign's writing).

Optimystic:
That boxing game looks awful. Like Sissy Fight Night.

Time Crisis, however, will be at the top of my list when I eventually get a PS3+Move.

I can tell you first hand that the Move is great with the arcade shooters and the story mode sucks

Alphakirby:

Optimystic:
That boxing game looks awful. Like Sissy Fight Night.

Time Crisis, however, will be at the top of my list when I eventually get a PS3+Move.

I can tell you first hand that the Move is great with the arcade shooters and the story mode sucks

Who plays Time Crisis for the story though? :-P

It usually amounts to "Are you a bad enough dude to save the President's daughter by shooting some guy's rockets out of the air?

(And who fires ROCKETS at two Asian guys wearing pleather anyway?)

 Pages PREV 1 2

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here