Zero Punctuation: Super Mario Galaxy

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 NEXT
 

So you're left-handed then eh?

Another fine review Mr. Zee. Galaxy does have some awkward parts that seem sort of wrong (that pubic hair thing is actually halfway true and does come with an "ewwwww" factor) and the lives system is just awkward. Really, what's the freaking point when you end up getting 50 some odd lives EVERY play session?

I can't wait for next week's review. Come on NiGHTS review!

You do realize that complaining about Yahtzee giving a negative review is like complaining about shoe stores selling shoes.

I am surprised that people who don't want to hear Yahtzee complain about a game still come here and listen to Yahtzee complain about a game. Tomorrow, I plan on walking into a nearby Piggly Wiggly and complaining that there's groceries laying about on all the shelves.

the point that Mario never gets any is old; here is a fun comic about it (worksafe); http://go-girly.com/go/cake

Some may find the negative rant style a cheap gimmick, and it is a gimmick. But hey, it makes me laugh.

I liked this one, as I liked every one of em.

I've been a fan for a long time, I just haven't signed up to comment because I'm lazy like that.

I would just like it to be known that I signed up purely to state that a game in which you start a snow-shoveling buisness in Hell would make a neat Nintendo game if they ever deciced to actually try new games these days.

Ironic, huh?

Yahtzee HAS to criticize games; he said so in the Orange Box review. I think he may like the game a LOT more than he's letting on, really. If he says that he'd love a game just about the space levels from Super Mario Sunshine, and then he gets a game that's just that, he can't be TOO hateful about it.

Anyway, I too have a few problems with Galaxy, even if I love it with all my heart and being. I want to press the "c" button to orient the camera to directly behind Mario, right-side up, similar to pressing "z" in any of the 3D Zelda games. However, the areas in which you can do this always seem extraordinarily limited, and you end up having to run TOWARDS the camera at times, something which is particularly nerve-racking. Even if it does let you use the "c" button, it seems to like orienting the camera upside-down. That, and the complaint about being unable to tell where a given push of the thumbstick is going to go is totally true.

One complaint I personally have is that the gravity doesn't work well. It's REALLY hard to tell at times whether letting go of whatever you're flying on will drop you to a planet, or if the game decides you're out of reach and drops your ass into space and death. Then there are those planets that are shaped really weird. If there's a part on a planet that's shaped like a U or a C, I try to long-jump from one tip to another to save time. If the planet just has a curve to it, I try to long-jump a few times along the inside of the curve to get there faster. However, all too often, neither of these techniques actually work. For the tip-to-tip jumping, the game seems to REALLY like keeping me bound to whatever surface I jumped off of. Unless I get within about 6 inches of the surface I'm trying to get to, it drops me back to the first tip where I then have to walk around to get to the point I could have spit on earlier. For the long-jumping on the inside of a curve, I don't know why the game tries to make my movement so wonky. Whenever I come down from a long-jump I made to cut to another part of the curve, the game always makes me move back some before I hit the ground. It's rather annoying.

Long-jumping seems to have been fucked over in general, really. On any of the smaller, round planetoids, running is faster than long-jumping, because as you long jump, you move in a relatively straight line as the world curves away, meaning the actual distance across the world you moved is pretty short. Then you have the extra time it takes for you to fall. While this technically makes sense, it hurts gameplay, to me. Plus, why have proper physics there where it makes it annoying, then have bullshit physics elsewhere when proper physics there would have been more helpful?

However, other than those complaints, the game is mind-blowingly fun. I think the life system is charming, even if it's useless.

BigText:
Yahtzee HAS to criticize games; he said so in the Orange Box review. I think he may like the game a LOT more than he's letting on, really. If he says that he'd love a game just about the space levels from Super Mario Sunshine, and then he gets a game that's just that, he can't be TOO hateful about it.

Anyway, I too have a few problems with Galaxy, even if I love it with all my heart and being. I want to press the "c" button to orient the camera to directly behind Mario, right-side up, similar to pressing "z" in any of the 3D Zelda games. However, the areas in which you can do this always seem extraordinarily limited, and you end up having to run TOWARDS the camera at times, something which is particularly nerve-racking. Even if it does let you use the "c" button, it seems to like orienting the camera upside-down. That, and the complaint about being unable to tell where a given push of the thumbstick is going to go is totally true.

One complaint I personally have is that the gravity doesn't work well. It's REALLY hard to tell at times whether letting go of whatever you're flying on will drop you to a planet, or if the game decides you're out of reach and drops your ass into space and death. Then there are those planets that are shaped really weird. If there's a part on a planet that's shaped like a U or a C, I try to long-jump from one tip to another to save time. If the planet just has a curve to it, I try to long-jump a few times along the inside of the curve to get there faster. However, all too often, neither of these techniques actually work. For the tip-to-tip jumping, the game seems to REALLY like keeping me bound to whatever surface I jumped off of. Unless I get within about 6 inches of the surface I'm trying to get to, it drops me back to the first tip where I then have to walk around to get to the point I could have spit on earlier. For the long-jumping on the inside of a curve, I don't know why the game tries to make my movement so wonky. Whenever I come down from a long-jump I made to cut to another part of the curve, the game always makes me move back some before I hit the ground. It's rather annoying.

Long-jumping seems to have been fucked over in general, really. On any of the smaller, round planetoids, running is faster than long-jumping, because as you long jump, you move in a relatively straight line as the world curves away, meaning the actual distance across the world you moved is pretty short. Then you have the extra time it takes for you to fall. While this technically makes sense, it hurts gameplay, to me. Plus, why have proper physics there where it makes it annoying, then have bullshit physics elsewhere when proper physics there would have been more helpful?

However, other than those complaints, the game is mind-blowingly fun. I think the life system is charming, even if it's useless.

Heh I remember when he said he had to criticize games, that was funny as hell. Besides guys he has always criticized games and he should continue. I remember when he reviewed Phyconauts
everyone complained about him being nice to a game. Next week, when he complained about Bioshock people continued to complain.

Lord T Hawkeye:

One thing though...

The guy is paid to give a negative review of a game.

This is the kind of thing that doesn't sit well with me. Anti-conformatism is just conformatism with a cheap coat of paint thrown over it.

Anti-conformatisim is conformatisim is anti-conformitism.

@8Track: Dude ... what?

So I'm glad he's back to the reviews. I liked his SMG review (Duke 3D flashback? Anyone?), but Yahtzee makes a really good point in his blog about some people being upset over his review style. People complain that he's too negative or too positive, or that he doesn't use a 10-point scale, or whatever.

What he basically talks about on his page is that he gets paid to do what he does because The Escapist thinks he's unique and entertaining when he does it (and, naturally, I agree). If he leans toward negative reviews, it's only for the sake of his readers/viewers. He doesn't want to assign numbers to his reviews because he doesn't feel like his thoughts and impressions can be assigned a numerical value (and I agree there, too).

To me, that proves he's not just a journalist, but a journalist that cares enough about what he journalizes not to pigeon-hole his reviews into a "10-point" like everybody else on the web.

Whether people like his reviews or not is up to them, but if they're questioning whether he's a "real journalist," I'd argue that they could better spend their time after their naps coloring or making doody on their respective potties, not in the comment section where the big kids play.

If there's anything I've learned, it's that being a "journalism major" hasn't made me a real journalist nearly as much as being one of the millions of idiots with a blog.

Welcome to the internet.

Enjoy your stay, play nice with others, and don't get paste on your monitor. Mommy and Daddy are already disappointed enough.

Yahtzee. Stop reviewing good games!

You get paid for this, so you shouldn't enjoy it. I want you to suffer with crap, so that we might all be amused by your bitter outrage.

He does pigeon hole his "reviews", they're all going to be negative.
I don't care if he does or doesn't give a number rating system to his games, my concern is that people would actually buy a game based on his information. He's a standard journalist who, like most others, has game upon game thrown at his desk every other week. His opinion is based on the novelty of the game, not it's overall playability.

Psychonauts(sp) is a great example, the game on it's own is great once, but worth being your only game of the year? Absolutely not. My reasoning behind this, is that while fun, there is no reason to ever buy it. You'll play it once, maybe twice then shelve it, going back to the standard BF2 or Hellgate: London, only because you can invest time into these and get something out of it.

'Games are art!". Yahtzee and others will cry. While that's a good view for progression of the industy, it does not help those that can only afford two or three games a year, and jounalists like Yahtzee, only serve to hinder people looking for a review that will provide them will a game that is always fun, and not a game that gets put on a high-horse, and compared to all other games around it.

To sum it up, Yahtzee, and most other game journalists are so over indulged in games, that their opinion is only worth a passing glance, until you finally search down that magazine/site/soap box that has writers that sit on the same wallet as you.

mario has been a pretty old icon for nintendo but having something consistent could be comforting in creating games that dare to be different. mario has had a lot of spin-offs and he has practically done anything that homer simpson has done. knowing which are the good guys, which are the bad guys, and having the standard plot probably makes it easier to focus that the game mainly focuses on a new type of gameplay. injecting mario into bowser's intestines shouldn't be any less that putting mario into space. for all we know, the colorful characters are known to be attractive to children. it might as well be that seeing their favorite icons in different situations like karting or playing in the olympics has the same attraction in seeing your favorite porn star doing all kinds of kinky stuff or seeing your favorite jpop stars playing in some crazy japanese variety show (which ever floats your boat). it's like doujinshi i suppose.

i can't say much about gameplay since i'm not that all too game savvy and practically just play what appeals to me for whatever reason. although i did like some mario games i've played (not much on the karting since i like simulated racing); but it feels unfair to keep thrashing nintendo for recycling their bringers of fame and fortune.

also, whether it's a positive or a negative review, i found remarks on psychonauts and orange box as funny as bioshock and mass effect. but then again, between me and those that complain that the reviews are on one end of the extreme, it might just be a matter of one of us simply lacking humor.

you can't please everyone but as long as it pleases the nice guy with the boat and strange talking dog. :D

I didn't imagine that this was about 6 times slower than usual? Still some funny gags, but it's much more amusing when they go by at a rate of knots and I have to go back to hear some bits of it. I can understand the slower pace this week though. Been busy with the beer I'm guessing :)

And yeah people complaining that they dont like his review style. This isn't IGN or CVG. Don't come here expecting myriad details about the pros and cons of a game. Expect a cuttingly honest review of its flaws and the tedium that is the video game industry in general, done in a way that makes you laugh.

Anyone who bases their computer game purchase decisions on Yahtzee's reviews needs their head checking :). Whether he's positive or negative, he leaves you to go make your own decision on whether you want to buy a game. Go check other sites for that stuff. He's generating interest in games, and most of the time that is enough.

If you're all cut up because he doesn't like your favourite game or developer, then it doesn't really matter does it. If you like the game you like the game. All that matters.

Happy new year and thanks for the review!

Hearing about a game's faults tells you just as much if not more about how good it really is rather than just hearing about its strong points. Anyway, I hope this is the last Mario review. I think we've covered this ground well enough. Same goes for Zelda.

Really wish you people would stop bitching, it's only for fun and not to be taken completly serious....

So please you forum crying fanbois go out and get laid.

I would like to consider my self an intelligent guy, yet i still cannot fathom why so many people post comments saying they don't like Yahtzee's opinion. My question is, why do you keep coming back to watch it? and furthermore, what makes you think your tiny little roar's of distaste are going to make him change his ways?

Personally i like the reviews, even the reviews for games that i like that Yahtzee has kicked in the face till unconscious. He makes valid points, which i agree slant toward the negative, but i honestly don't watch these for a balanced review.

keep up the good work Yahtzee.

Arcticflame:
I reckon you need to loosen up, stop being blinded by your fanboiness and take a look at the game.

Halo is not a great game, it is a fun game.

It's like super smash bros, Fun game? Definitely. Great game? No.

Halo was an better than average shooter, but certainly not incredible.

You know, I was just about to counter post something against you not liking Halo but then I read the "Halo is not a great game, it is a fun game."

That must be the best sentance I have ever heard. It doens't discrimnate the game for being unoriginal but it confirms that it is fun! Thx:)

To the review: By far the worst, it isn't really fun to watch when the game is good and Yahtzee was talking way to slow. He sounded kind of tired and bored.

PurpleRain:
Ahh, Mario. When will you get laid. Anyway, how does a plumber end up with some Princess chick anyway?

He's short, hairy, and not a little rotund. This should be obvious.

Mario is Ron Jeremy.

8Track:

Psychonauts(sp) is a great example, the game on it's own is great once, but worth being your only game of the year? Absolutely not. My reasoning behind this, is that while fun, there is no reason to ever buy it. You'll play it once, maybe twice then shelve it, going back to the standard BF2 or Hellgate: London, only because you can invest time into these and get something out of it.

Far as I'm concerned, that's a perfect reason to buy a game. If a 50 game lasts me eight hours, it's still given me more value for money than going out to the pub and being bitter, lonely, and drunk.

GloatingSwine:

8Track:

Psychonauts(sp) is a great example, the game on it's own is great once, but worth being your only game of the year? Absolutely not. My reasoning behind this, is that while fun, there is no reason to ever buy it. You'll play it once, maybe twice then shelve it, going back to the standard BF2 or Hellgate: London, only because you can invest time into these and get something out of it.

Far as I'm concerned, that's a perfect reason to buy a game. If a 50 game lasts me eight hours, it's still given me more value for money than going out to the pub and being bitter, lonely, and drunk.

wow, someone actually liked hellgate london? and thinks they're getting something out of it? weird

To everyone here that gets upset over Yahtzee's reviews, get a life! do you actually think people take Yazhtzee at his word on everything he says about a game!?

I for one, LOVE Yazhtzee's reviews, they are funny, well thought out, well put together, and more importantly, 9 times out of 10 are spot on with both the positive and negative sides of the game.

But this doesn't mean when Yazhtzee says something negative about a game, i instantly refuse to buy that game. Don't make me laugh! Yahtzee obliterated The Darkness in one of his reviews and i still bought the game with no hesitation, because i loved the concept and i didn't have as much trouble with the demo as Yahtzee did :P

And even then, if anyone is dumb enough to not make up their own mind about the games they buy and simply follow blindly what other people say, then they deserve to miss out on potentially good games for being so recessive and weak minded!

I personally read a lot of reviews about games on the internet before i go out and buy a game, and even then, i only take what they say as a thumb rule and not an exact science every time a decision is made. The reason why i watch Yaztzee's reviews (other than there pure entertainment value!) is that Yahtzee comes over to me as someone who genuinely likes to play games and see things as a normal joe blog gamer would, so if he faces a problem with a game, there's a better chance he is telling the truth then other reviewers that are paid just as equally to give a good review about a game just to boost its sales.

It's a rare thing when someone gets a position where he is paid to be just as cynical about a game as he is positive (although you could pretty much say he is paid to be totally cynical as this is what seems to have brought in the viewing figures but while this could possibly be the Escapists view (and there is no proof that it is), i certainly don't think this is Yahtzee's personal view. In the end, Yahtzee just gives us his points of view and his take on the games he plays and the majority of the time, Yahtzee tells the truth about a games flaws as well as it's strengths instead of just kissing it's ass like most gaming reviews have done for years. Yes, Yahtzee owes most if not all of his reputation to his negative and cynical views on games but that's not his fault, blame the huge fan base that come back every Wednesday to watch his videos for those very reasons! :)

I know from Yahtzee's previous posts and general persona that he is the type of person who doesn't give a shit about what a few select people on this forum may say or think about his videos, he does his job the way he wants to, not how everyone else wants him to, people can either watch his videos or not watch his videos, that's their choice, but don't come here, piss in Yahtzee's pocket and tell him it's raining. The fact that so many people come back every week to watch yet another one of his reviews gives him all the proof he needs to carry on doing what he does best and what most people love him for, and that's being cynical about games, not everyone loves a critic but i don't know anyone who doesn't love a cynic!

I know your not listening to what these negative dick heads have to say Yahtzee but if you ever come across this thread when you're bored, keep on rockin', your reviews kick ass! :)

I didn't have any problem with the Psychonauts review, I don't get why people complained. It was just as funny as any other review.

You cannot come here expecting a conventional review, It is his style to sound like he does'nt enjoy ANYTHING he plays, that's what's funny and that's his hook. There are dozens of other review sites that offer more "normal" reviews with scores included and all.

SeruK:
I didn't have any problem with the Psychonauts review, I don't get why people complained. It was just as funny as any other review.

I agree, but apparently that proves that my sense of humor is not as cynical as I thought it was.

GloatingSwine:

Purple Rain:

Ahh, Mario. When will you get laid. Anyway, how does a plumber end up with some Princess chick anyway?

He's short, hairy, and not a little rotund. This should be obvious.

Mario is Ron Jeremy.

That certainly matches up with the porn.

And what the Jesus is up with the quoting sytem on this board?

I like this reviewing style because it doesn't see the game in a vacuum; this is the first decent review style that describes the whole Nintendo-re-using-franchises argument (In SPM I believe). Don't get me wrong I enjoyed the game itself (as well as the metroid and zelda series), but they're never really that more innovative than any past game of its type.

Or maybe I should just stick to Wario Ware.

Summary: Carry on the good work ftw.

Come on; it was voted the game of the year by just about everyone, for some gorramn retarded reason. Of course he had to review it; of course he wanted to do just about anything else. If he'd done something good like, I dunno, reviewing something like a Monkey Island game I'd give him points and accolade for sheer integrity. This fellation of reviewers to this mindless idiocy that is the Mario series is beginning to get seriously boring.

(Yes, Mario 632 was shockingly voted Game of the Year in the year of Bioshock, Halo 3, Mass Effect, Call of Duty 4, The Orange Box, World in Conflict, God of War II, Ninja Gaiden Sigma, Rainbow Six: Vegas and Supreme Commander - ALL OF WHICH DESERVE THE TITLE MORE. And that's not me saying those games are fucking fantabolous, that's me saying that Mario: Galaxy is an inflated, unoriginal, slogg-dull piece of franchise curdling crap. Game of the year?! Company Officials with syringes of dopamine, indeed . . .)

"Galaxy is an inflated, unoriginal, slogg-dull piece of franchise curdling crap. Game of the year?! Company Officials with syringes of dopamine, indeed . . .)"

I just don't understand how a video game (one about a plumber flying accross galaxies) could cause so much anger and aggrivation on a person. I wouldn't want to know how these people react when they feel personally insulted. God damn, a game, a fucking game... I understand that gaming is the main hobby for all of us here, and that we can be pretty serious about it, but when you start seeing people use profanity and insults because they somehow feel that their integrities are threatened buy a game about a plumber, that's when all this starts to get a bit bizzare. Save all that passion for when you're actaully playing (or save it for you're wife and kids; or girlfriend, or partner, or whoever the fuck you guys consider to be you're significant other).

beoweasel:
Is anyone else getting seriously tired of the comment wank? I know I am.

It seems whenever Yahtzee makes a review, a thousand people hastily make accounts so they can all rush in and say Yahtzee is wrong, that he's not funny, or that he's a terrible reviewer, or they just whine and rant about how anyone could possibly point out flaws in their precious, precious games.

I just hastily made an account to rush in and say Yahtzee is awesome. :)

Seriously, people complaining about Yahtzee's reviews reusing the same type of humor need to take their heads out of their asses. It's like complaining about Chris Rock making black jokes all the time. Yahtzee has a particular comic style, and if you dislike it, then don't watch his reviews. Do you really expect a comedian to do a complete 180 and change their entire style of humor every week? Why would you want someone to keep changing when they're already hilarious?

I love Yahtzee's reviews because he brutally points out all the flaws of the instant 10/10 games we know when every other reviewer won't. If you want really objective video reviews, watch IGN or Gamespot's, but don't expect to be entertained.

@ the Zero P haters that are trying to antagonise Yahtees' thing; I've played or own roughly half of the games Yahtzee has reviewed. I find his opinion of them accurate, and I am more than positive that the games I don't own are accurate too. The side effect of his ruthless accuracy is that I laugh my ass off and get a kick out of it. If the game sucked bad, then I'm glad some humor could be found in an otherwise lame game. :)

Also, if you don't like the reviews; stop watching. No ones forcing you. And if they are, be a hero, not a zero.

PurpleRain:
Ahh, Mario. When will you get laid. Anyway, how does a plumber end up with some Princess chick anyway?

You obviously aren't Italian :)

Once again congratulations on your humorous review. I have been watching for some time now but because of you, I have been reading a few Escapist articles and decided to join. Thanks for keeping me entertained on Wednesday and thanks for getting me into The Escapist.

Mario Galaxy then, good review, and funny as always. Yes Nintendo does need to make a few more characters and add a little bit of variety in the game's plot, but It doesn't really bother me because I'm not too much of a story in my game kind of person. Don't get me wrong on this, I like Nintendo but I'm not the stereotypical fanboy who collects everything the crap out on the market. From the games I have played, the Gameplay and overall design seems to change, such as Starfox64-Adventures, Ocarina Of Time-Majora's Mask, Mario64-Galaxy. Some parts in Galaxy don't make much sense, such as a space station randomly exploding after Mario rockets out of it.

Yes, the characters are all the same, plot is repetitive and in the super abstract allot of the objectives have a common factor but I still find it fun because of the changes. I can only guess how it ends but I could care less if it really had an ending. The Holy Grail had a stupid and unpleasantly unexpected ending but it's still a funny movie.

I haven't beaten the game yet but most boss' I see aren't Ganondorf style pong. Examples would be the Beatle, Mole, Komek and Baby Bowser. One thing I do hate is how all the major boss battles like Bowser and Koopa Kid are all fought in the same way. I saw my brother face the last bowser and It's simply 9 hits instead of 3 which is a true disappointment.

I don't think Galaxy is all that challenging, especially compared to our 8 and 16 bit versions. I too could care less about lives at this point, but the punishment to loosing all of them is going back to a really early checkpoint. For most people though, this makes lives extremely precious. I can't imagine starting at a checkpoint after I died several times, otherwise it would have that nonthreatening Bioshock sense.

I thought the camera angle worked well and I could always point Mario in the desired direction. I'm not sure if you have played 64, but this has one of the worst cameras I had ever seen in a game. I read that Miyamoto said the team "fixed" the camera but I couldn't imagine what it was like before. If you played Mario 64 then you would love the new camera. It has always shown me what I need to see and never once have I desired to rotate it.

I can't imagine how this game would work with a Gamecube controller. I got the same feeling that I got when people tell me Portal should be multilayer. How would you shoot the starbits, blast out of star rims, blow the bubble, climb vines or some of that other stuff? I was abrade the whole game was going to rely on wagging the thing simply to promote the idea, but I was actually very impressed with the system. I know it hurts your hand to waging the Wiimote, But my guess is that you're thrashing the thing like a pissed off barbarian on steroids. If this is the case, then remember that you're dealing with Japanese wireless, which means it's a competent wireless device and doesn't require much effort. Just make small strokes and if you have to, configure the distance.

I want to completely beat the game, but I don't want to do Luigi's part. It's a stupid idea. From what I hear, you have to do the whole game over and the only thing that changes is the character and voice. I'm sure it would make any high degree "I gotta get everything" guy go insane.

I like how you drew Peach. You got the main features down and I can't see how anyone could complain. I like the message regarding the Imp. Always wondered what those little guys were called.

Its like Charlie brown syndrome.
Every time he goes to kick the ball ,it gets pulled away at the last minute and he gets hurt. The next episode he tries again and thinks for some odd reason it will be different. Then again he is a 3rd grade bald kid trapped for all eternity in a very basic plot that would never last so I guess thats not the worst thing to do. But anyway if you look at the reviews all but one of them are the same(The way he talks about them and criticism) , I still don't understand why someone expects the next one to be different.

It was entertaining and had some good points that a lot of reviewers seem to always overlook or never say.

Russ Pitts:
Yes. It's almost as tiring as reading an equal number of posts complaining about those people.

I wasn't aware staff were allowed to troll.

Anyway, for those of you who are of the opinion you can discredit Croshaw's opinion because "it's not supposed to be a review, just entertainment" or "he's paid to be negative", here's why you're little but wrong.

Yahtzee Croshaw:
'Seems like this Yahtzee guy is one of those "it's cool to be contrarian" types.'

I love this fucking argument.

Now, I consider myself a reviewer. I do tend to use a lot of comedy and irony to make things interesting but ultimately I endeavour to give my honest opinion. Most of the time I avoid reading other people's reviews of a game and ignore most of the pre-existing hype so that I can review a game at face value based solely on my impressions of it. I only mentioned the other reviews of Halo 3 in this case because they're impossible to avoid. Let me put this down in writing so it can come back to haunt me later: I would never mark down a game out of a personal bias or desire to be 'different'. I like to think I have more integrity than that.

Here's the link, if you care enough to wonder. Fourth page, third post or third page, fourth post or maybe neither.

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/6.49217

Solid review - loved Goebbels on the mantis and the disclaimer frame - but I must admit that I kind of missed the speed of the earlier reviews here (always felt like part of the concept, oh well).

Small note to the people who feel Yahtzee's reviews are "the same": well, that's how it generally works with a series, now isn't it? You build a concept, a personal style and you stick with it because that's what's going to get people to recognise your creations as your audience increases.

Incidentally, it's the same reason why the Mario story has barely changed over the years. Miyamoto and co. want it to sell truckloads and thus (a) to reach (b) to be instantly recognisable by and (c) to be instantly understood by the largest audience possible (i.e. all ages). That's why the story was, is and always will be about Mario saving Princess Peach. It's instantly recognisable, understandable, and an immediate motivation to sit down and play.

Have some kind of reason to be tired of Zero Punctuation or Mario? Then go look at something else. It's a big world out there, you'll surely find something to tickle your fancy. Stating the obvious never did a lot of good, unless it's part of a brainstorm.

All right, I'm admittedly a little confused by people who say these aren't reviews. Yahtzee is, you know... talking about the gameplay, the game qualities, and all the stuff that I look at reviews to get. Also, he tends to do a much better job of it than Gamespot, who give totally misleading numerical scores to games largely based on who is sponsoring them right now. Or have you not noticed the way they delay "crappy" (anything less than an 8) reviews on big name games until anyone who is going to buy it already has done so. There has been flap, in the recent, as I recall.

Nonetheless. I very much prefer to see a review that does not give me an arbitrary rating number and talks instead about what playing the game is actually like. I pretty much feel that most wii games, by the way, would be improved by having a game cube controller. Or even a N64 controller. So yeah.

Making me laugh doesn't hurt either, thanks.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Your account does not have posting rights. If you feel this is in error, please contact an administrator. (ID# 54301)