Jimquisition: Dragon's Frown

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 NEXT
 

I think it all boils down to the overall quality of review. See, first and foremost it's a 2D RPG/beat-em-up. In case of that review reviewer but a lot of stock into particular art style quirks which are highly, highly subjective. See, all reviews are subjective but what differentiates a good reviewer is ability to determine which parts are most important. That depiction of women ties very neatly into medieval fantasy theme. A good reviewer would evaluate gameplay, RPG elements, story and such first and stuff like huge boobs second. That review reads like a whiny blog and that's the issue.
It would be all fine and good if they scored the game low based on core elements like leveling system. But on basis on some highly subjective and arguably stupid elements of art?
See Jim, the point being it's not a professional review. It's a whiny blog. If we don't stomp such "reviewers" now next thing will be Dynasty Warriors getting 1 and 2 scores because of lack of proper beard on certain characters.

Lightknight:

SonOfVoorhees:
Breasts are breasts. All woman have them. An yes some people use them to sexualise woman and others dont. In a world of porn and mags i just dont seem the point in moaning about one game. Men are sexualised with big muscles, unfortunately thats the way it is. Big breasts or big pecs....its the same thing. But in a world where female singers dress like whores, i think games are the least of your worries.

But as for this game. Is it good or bad? Is it fun or shit? The characters dont matter. Ok, she has big breasts and i understand that people take offense to that. But she isnt a whore, isnt stripping, isnt naked and isnt whipping them out to beat the enemy with them. Seems its just she is a woman with big breasts in a game.

I was with you right up until the whores bit.

I think it's important to realize that developers exaggerate the elements of people which are found to be culturally desireable. Men are usually desired to be strong though as of late it's the desire to capture a rugged look while the individual is more toned muscle-wise. Women have hips/legs/butts/breasts that are incredibly easy to exaggerate. If men had some such attribute that was socially desireable then you can bet it'd be exaggerated. But it's not that appropriate to have a huge bulging trunk running down the inside of the character's pants so they stick with muscles.

But as to this video. Kudos to Jim for pressing this point. There being dissenting opinions is a sign of a healthy society and we just need to learn what reviewers like the kinds of games we enjoy and to pay attention to them more than the people who dissent with our likes. At the end of the day we are talking about subjective tastes unless the mechanics are particularly bad and so subjectivity will be highly relative.

Its all in context. In this game its a woman with big breasts. Thats it. Now compare that with that dead and Alive game with bikini clad woman jumping around in pool sports (not the beat em up) and thats sexualised. Its all in context. An yes men go for breasts and woman go for muscles. Thats just a fact....not for every body but we all like a good looking person. An for men its big breasts over small breasts and woman likes muscles over fat guys. Now there are a ton of other things ontop of that, intelligence, humour etc Just going by first perceptions. But i think if people are pointing fingers then start with bikini clad models in mags, popstars dressed as whores and then look to games after that.

Im writing this from the UK where they just banned (forced to put into a black bag) lads mags because they have a woman in a bikini on the cover. Its just dumb to me, especially when you think of what a person can find on the internet.

People really lost their minds over anything a reviewer wrote? That seems a bit odd but whatever some people are like that I suppose. I guess everybody can't just think the opinion of reviewers doesn't matter or they would be out of a job.

Zachary Amaranth:

StormShaun:
The facehugger attacks once again. Jim, I fear that you never may escape Aliens: Colonial Marines.
... ever.

Much like the titular critters of the franchise, ACM is a force of nature.

Now onto the topic at hand. It does feel that the gaming community is spoiled (In my opinion), games as you said that people complain and demand a '10/10' (Whatever 10/10 is these days. It feels like 10/10 should be impossible to achieve). It is annoying that the single bad review is gaining all of the press now instead of the praise.

In fact, the Escapist gave it a lower score, so you'd think that'd be the focus.

:D Well is there really so much of a difference between a 6.5 and a 3/5=(6/10)?

Then again all this number malarkey is hogwash. ;p The review on the escapist marked Dragon's Crown down because of reasons other than just the titillation, and as you said, the one from Polygon(Who sadly have only one emotions) had other reasons for the score too. The game has a few issues. But the overall review(at the Escapist at least) was still pretty positive.

People saying people are hating on the game just because of the titillation are about as right in the head(or at least as informed) as the people who call 8/10 Hate/10(un-ironically).

My only problem with all of this is the fact there's a score at all. Video game reviews getting scored with numbers are so stupid. Numbers should be objective, not subjective. And every review of everything is entirely subjective.

Though my own personal problem with the polygon review itself is that it seems highly sexist to me. She focuses on the absurd portrayal of women ignoring the men are just as much absurdly portrayed. She seems like a faux feminist that is quick to blame men and sexism and say women are always portrayed wrong ignoring the full reality of the situation. But, oh well.

Jimothy Sterling:
Oh yes, it's another video about reviews and things. Not quite the usual flavor, but certainly something that cannot be repeated enough.

I rate this episode of The Jimquisition a 7 out of 10.

This episode reminded me a lot of Jim's older episode 'Your reviews are TEH BIAS!' where he basically responds to people giving him crap for giving FFXIII a low score and his review containing 'too much of his opinion'.

Lord_Gremlin:
I think it all boils down to the overall quality of review. See, first and foremost it's a 2D RPG/beat-em-up. In case of that review reviewer but a lot of stock into particular art style quirks which are highly, highly subjective. See, all reviews are subjective but what differentiates a good reviewer is ability to determine which parts are most important. That depiction of women ties very neatly into medieval fantasy theme. A good reviewer would evaluate gameplay, RPG elements, story and such first and stuff like huge boobs second. That review reads like a whiny blog and that's the issue.
It would be all fine and good if they scored the game low based on core elements like leveling system. But on basis on some highly subjective and arguably stupid elements of art?
See Jim, the point being it's not a professional review. It's a whiny blog. If we don't stomp such "reviewers" now next thing will be Dynasty Warriors getting 1 and 2 scores because of lack of proper beard on certain characters.

All a good reviewer needs to do is to argue their opinions well, so other people can follow how they reached their verdict.
And 'I enjoyed this game a lot less because I didn't like its art style' is a perfectly valid reason.

Humans are odd

Really one or two bad marks and people go wild.

Just play the game and enjoy it. Ignore the voices that are negative. Relax and seriously there is a reason why both the lowest and the highest score in a review list tends not to count. It is the middle area there you learn the most. And not to mention, read the actual review text. Really just read reviews, watch videos, play through.. make up your own mind.

In the end there are always one or two places that give a game a relative high or low score. A score is just a number in the end, your personal enjoyment of it isn't effected. See beyond the numbers and instead READ the review. Make up your own mind!

How many times I haven't bought games that in the reviews get 6's. I say if the price is right and I like the game .. you know it is worth my money. Hell I don't mind waiting!

So the game has rather big mammeries, so big they are pretty useless in a fight. Well haven't we seen that before in brawlers? I mean they are so big that it is a joke! I mean serious guys that big.. its a joke!

Polygon.

They know how to write articles that get a lot of attention. Fuckin' stole the show during the SimCity debacle. With that score changing nonsense. I'm not sure how many mods and community managers there are on most other sites..mainly because the comments don't stretch a mile long down the front page. But they seem equipped and ready to battle off anyone that goes too far, or drum up even more conversation in those comments sections.

Every time there's a hute stink about a game score, or a game score that doesn't quite line up with the review. It's been polygon more often than not.

To be honest, this is the first I've heard about it..because I quit reading that site. And for some reason, their reviews seem to penetrate deep enough for me to take a notice to them...at least their buzz derailing controversies. Might be a coincidence. I dunno. I quit reading their reviews..And I'm happier for it. Probably need to unfollow Jim, because he's the one who steers me towards the drama now, I mean he's doing his job..but still.

Edit: read the review..

I don't know what the game is about. I just know it has large breasted women, and the boss battles are fun..

That review sucked. I want to know about the game. Not gonna go on a tirade, just going to not read polygon reviews..Which I said I had stopped..but, you know. I got this close to it, might as well read it.

mike1921:

Mulberry:
So... the game scored 6.5/10, or 65%, in one review. It scored more than half marks. And this is a *bad* thing?

This is why numerical quantification of a subjective opinion is useless.

Because you have high tolerance for mediocrity? I see little distinction between mediocre and bad, neither is worth playing or watching if you have alternatives.

That doesn't necessarily imply "mediocre". Take Deadpool for example. The combat is a bit repetitive and the dialogue in combat even more so. But it's not entirely boring action-wise, the writing is fun it's pretty creative so I'd give it no more than 7/10. It's still enjoyable. Hell I loved The Last of Us but the puzzles are repetitive, one hit kills by clickers sucks, the stealth isn't the best and the AI is silly. A game can do a particular thing well enough to make it worth checking out without needing a 9 or a 10.

Lord_Gremlin:
I think it all boils down to the overall quality of review. See, first and foremost it's a 2D RPG/beat-em-up. In case of that review reviewer but a lot of stock into particular art style quirks which are highly, highly subjective. See, all reviews are subjective but what differentiates a good reviewer is ability to determine which parts are most important. That depiction of women ties very neatly into medieval fantasy theme. A good reviewer would evaluate gameplay, RPG elements, story and such first and stuff like huge boobs second. That review reads like a whiny blog and that's the issue.

I'm not so sure about that being all that and nothing else, my Lord.

The Escapist's review brought up issues about Dragon's Crown's gameplay, RPG elements, and the story(Quest giving being done in character, making them a bit hard to follow sometimes), but still arrived(numerically) at about the same score at the end, 3/5.

However, there were still a fair number of angry comments claiming that the lower than perfect score was just because of the "BEWBS!"
Even though the whole of the review was actually pretty positive.

RaikuFA:
Which explains their TLoU review.

Or maybe they just didn't like it? I know I didn't. But nah, better to assume the game was perfect any anyone who doesn't think so is taking teh bribes.

OT: People freaking out over review scores is nothing new, whether its "whhhaaa score to high, must be paid for" or "whhhaaaaa score to low, reviewer is scum/biased/has no taste"
As for Dragon's Crown, I never cared about the overblown controversy, in part because it jumped to front page news after the Kotaku article, and (IMO) Kotaku can not go away fast enough.

I didn't even read any of the scores (I never do), but I'm very mad at every reviewer who looked at Dragon's Crown, including the one at Polygon. I'm mad at them because they write like shit and spend all their time talking about the art, but don't know enough about art or art criticism to notice, let alone comment on all the amazing things going on in that game's art design (hint: not much to do with breasts, more to do with elaborate homages to classic works of art).

Actually, I am mad at the entire gaming press literally all the time because they are all complete failures as critics of any kind despite constantly going on about how much better qualified they are because they read a bastardization of theory decades out of date on a blog somewhere. I would not be at all put out if the entire lot of them were sacked tomorrow and we started over with a new batch who can actually fucking write.

Roman Monaghan:

TL;DR version: "This person has an opinion that I don't agree with, therefore it is wrong and harmful. Also everyone should be emotionless robots so they're never 'bias' about anything ever!"

Well since you said TL;DR, I am going to assume you didn't read what i wrote, and going by your response you didn't.

I think you need to watch this review at least 20 more times until the point manages to penetrate your thick skull. I think he also did a video on how ridiculous the assertion that reviewers can't have a subjective opinions (being human beings and all) is stupid, so watch that one a couple dozen times too.

I understood it fully, that's why I was able to make an argument against it.

But then, maybe that doesn't count because I'm "bias" and would gladly take every copy of Other M that exists and have them thrown into the sun and wipe every pixel of code of the game from the face of the earth, and think everyone who enjoys it is a terrible person.

Yes, that pretty much illustrates my point exactly. I expect people paid to review games to be quite a bit more professional then a random commenter on the internet. Sure, being human means were not all perfect, but there is a requirement (or there should be) for a certain level of professionalism in this field. If you give every game with guns perfect ratings because you LOVE GUNS, you're not a very good game reviewer. You're entitled to your opinion and you can have it, but you're not very good. It seems this should go for things you hate, to, at least I think so.

OtherSideofSky:
I didn't even read any of the scores (I never do), but I'm very mad at every reviewer who looked at Dragon's Crown, including the one at Polygon. I'm mad at them because they write like shit and spend all their time talking about the art, but don't know enough about art or art criticism to notice, let alone comment on all the amazing things going on in that game's art design (hint: not much to do with breasts, more to do with elaborate homages to classic works of art).

Actually, I am mad at the entire gaming press literally all the time because they are all complete failures as critics of any kind despite constantly going on about how much better qualified they are because they read a bastardization of theory decades out of date on a blog somewhere. I would not be at all put out if the entire lot of them were sacked tomorrow and we started over with a new batch who can actually fucking write.

Yeah, I settle in to read a review about a game..

I come out confused, and angry.

I didn't learn anything about the game..

I read some fuckin' editorial about objectification of women.

I then make the mistake of rolling my mouse further into the comments.

I just got in an argument with someone.

I STILL DONT KNOW WHAT THE FUCK THIS GAME IS ABOUT!!

Didn't see an issue with the polygon review. The reviewer stated clearly and honestly what they liked and disliked about the game and rated it accordingly. Nothing wrong with that.

However if the general gaming news and community starts trying to use this one review as the focal point for the entire criticism of the game, then yes I agree that would be bullshit. This review is simply stating how the game measures up against this one individuals personal tastes. Again nothing wrong with that. However its just possible the game was made without this individuals personal tastes in mind. And there's nothing wrong with that either.

Lord_Gremlin:
I think it all boils down to the overall quality of review. See, first and foremost it's a 2D RPG/beat-em-up. In case of that review reviewer but a lot of stock into particular art style quirks which are highly, highly subjective. See, all reviews are subjective but what differentiates a good reviewer is ability to determine which parts are most important. That depiction of women ties very neatly into medieval fantasy theme. A good reviewer would evaluate gameplay, RPG elements, story and such first and stuff like huge boobs second. That review reads like a whiny blog and that's the issue.
It would be all fine and good if they scored the game low based on core elements like leveling system. But on basis on some highly subjective and arguably stupid elements of art?
See Jim, the point being it's not a professional review. It's a whiny blog. If we don't stomp such "reviewers" now next thing will be Dynasty Warriors getting 1 and 2 scores because of lack of proper beard on certain characters.

This got tweeted on Jims twitter, and will/was probably showed around in the comments here already, but fuck it, because you more then anyone needs to see it: http://i.imgur.com/6GXBC96.jpg

xPixelatedx:

Yes, that pretty much illustrates my point exactly. I expect people paid to review games to be quite a bit more professional then a random commenter on the internet. Sure, being human means were not all perfect, but there is a requirement (or there should be) for a certain level of professionalism in this field. If you give every game with guns perfect ratings because you LOVE GUNS, you're not a very good game reviewer. You're entitled to your opinion and you can have it, but you're not very good. It seems this should go for things you hate, to, at least I think so.

I knew there was one. I wantcha to watch this video, while looking at the stupid thing you said, and then feel really bad about yourself.

ITT: Jim whining about whiners.

I thought I'd never see Jim pull out the "it doesn't matter stop whining" card, given that all he does on the show is whine about some particular topic.

Roman Monaghan:
This got tweeted on Jims twitter, and will/was probably showed around in the comments here already, but fuck it, because you more then anyone needs to see it: http://i.imgur.com/6GXBC96.jpg

That's called good PR. The review is still shit and reads like a whiny blog, Atlus implying otherwise is just here to sound good.

People are entitled to their opinions, and reviewers are entitled to their reviews, but that doesn't mean what they produce is quality work.

Roman Monaghan:
I knew there was one. I wantcha to watch this video, while looking at the stupid thing you said, and then feel really bad about yourself.

Quoting someone who doesn't have a leg to stand on with his/her arguments... also doesn't give you a leg to stand on either.

People are entitled to bitch at shitty reviewers who can't bother to add even a modicum of professionalism to their work.

If I flipped out over reviewers not liking the games I like, I'd still be raging at Yatzee for hating on Borderlands and Kid Icarus.

But am I doing that? no. So what if one or two guys don't like it? How does that impact me?

Ugh, this is absurd. Can't people accept that not everyone is going to like the same things? It's because of the homogenization of game scores that makes me less likely to take perfect scores seriously. The only scores I'm apt to take seriously are the ones that are less than perfect.

I skimmed through 5 pages just to make sure no one else has made this point.
Anyone complaining about the rediculous chest sizes of two out of three women in Dragon's Crown is oversexualising, must remember that an equal proportion of male characters has chests bigger than their heads.

My problem with those character designs is that their faces are too soft:
The Sorceress looks like she puts on a lot of makeup, she just doesn't reek of the seductress. But then again, maybe that's part of her act?
Looking at the Amazon's, I get a huge hulk of muscle, a killing machine, topped off with a face that can only be described as innocence. Like, as an Amazon she is not warery of the ways of men. Or maybe it is a sign that she is a broken person? One trained in a spartan society to be completely subservient, sure she is strong physically, but she is not strong spiritually.

(skips to the end of the thread)

I don't think the premise of this video is on point. Who thinks it's totally cool to go off on someone like a spastic 12 year old because of a review? Conversely, who thinks people shouldn't be allowed to criticize a reviewer for what you perceive to be a bad review? It seems to me the real point boils down to something far more universal:[1]

[1] Myself being an offender of this

A game reviewer and commentary show is complaining about complainers complaining about a review that's complaining about a game's artstyle.

Now we have a thread complaining about Jim complaining about complainers complaining about a review that's complaining about a game's artstyle.

Too much meta for me.

That being said, I don't give a shit about this particular reviewer. I try to find reviewers whose tastes have matched up with mine and use them as the basis of games I will like. If there's a reviewer whose tastes do not match mine then I will not use them as a point of reference for reviews.

A reviewer who finds the bombastic art style of Dragon's Crown to be overtly sexist/offensive or whatever is not a reviewer I am going to see eye to eye with on other issues. So they can give Aliens Colonial Marines a 10/10 and Skyrim a 2/10 and I will not lose a lick of sleep because I already decided I don't give a shit what they think.

Complaining about stupid people being stupid is in of itself a stupid thing to do.

Spot1990:

mike1921:

Mulberry:
So... the game scored 6.5/10, or 65%, in one review. It scored more than half marks. And this is a *bad* thing?

This is why numerical quantification of a subjective opinion is useless.

Because you have high tolerance for mediocrity? I see little distinction between mediocre and bad, neither is worth playing or watching if you have alternatives.

That doesn't necessarily imply "mediocre". Take Deadpool for example. The combat is a bit repetitive and the dialogue in combat even more so. But it's not entirely boring action-wise, the writing is fun it's pretty creative so I'd give it no more than 7/10. It's still enjoyable. Hell I loved The Last of Us but the puzzles are repetitive, one hit kills by clickers sucks, the stealth isn't the best and the AI is silly. A game can do a particular thing well enough to make it worth checking out without needing a 9 or a 10.

I should have clarified that I think 6.5 is a very borderline score between 'mediocre' and 'good'.

Deadpool always looked like a 7 to me too, which is why I am unlikely to buy it unless it's on a ridiculous sale. It's not beyond the realm of reason that a game I'd rate a 6.5 is one I wouldn't want to play even if it were free.

Roman Monaghan:

Lord_Gremlin:
I think it all boils down to the overall quality of review. See, first and foremost it's a 2D RPG/beat-em-up. In case of that review reviewer but a lot of stock into particular art style quirks which are highly, highly subjective. See, all reviews are subjective but what differentiates a good reviewer is ability to determine which parts are most important. That depiction of women ties very neatly into medieval fantasy theme. A good reviewer would evaluate gameplay, RPG elements, story and such first and stuff like huge boobs second. That review reads like a whiny blog and that's the issue.
It would be all fine and good if they scored the game low based on core elements like leveling system. But on basis on some highly subjective and arguably stupid elements of art?
See Jim, the point being it's not a professional review. It's a whiny blog. If we don't stomp such "reviewers" now next thing will be Dynasty Warriors getting 1 and 2 scores because of lack of proper beard on certain characters.

This got tweeted on Jims twitter, and will/was probably showed around in the comments here already, but fuck it, because you more then anyone needs to see it: http://i.imgur.com/6GXBC96.jpg

Am I the only one who see's the irony of forcing the opinion of not forcing your opinion?

OKAY!

Stopped the video at an early point to say; I'd never heard of Polygon, let alone the reviewer before and had no idea that anyone had scored Dragon's Crown badly.

Prediction: Female is upset/disturbed/distracted/annoyed by presentation of females- either PC or NPC- in Dragon's Crown, and concludes that it detracts so much from the experience that 6.5 was the result. AKA, person with chip on shoulder goes out of way to provoke their chip, is predictably offended or disappointed and strikes the blow they decided weeks ago to strike for a movement that people increasingly resent. Guaranteed publicity.

Going to watch the rest of the video now.

Edit: Pretty much on the money. It should have been totally ignored, but I can't control my fellow Vanillaware fans. Shame that.

wulf3n:

Roman Monaghan:

Lord_Gremlin:
I think it all boils down to the overall quality of review. See, first and foremost it's a 2D RPG/beat-em-up. In case of that review reviewer but a lot of stock into particular art style quirks which are highly, highly subjective. See, all reviews are subjective but what differentiates a good reviewer is ability to determine which parts are most important. That depiction of women ties very neatly into medieval fantasy theme. A good reviewer would evaluate gameplay, RPG elements, story and such first and stuff like huge boobs second. That review reads like a whiny blog and that's the issue.
It would be all fine and good if they scored the game low based on core elements like leveling system. But on basis on some highly subjective and arguably stupid elements of art?
See Jim, the point being it's not a professional review. It's a whiny blog. If we don't stomp such "reviewers" now next thing will be Dynasty Warriors getting 1 and 2 scores because of lack of proper beard on certain characters.

This got tweeted on Jims twitter, and will/was probably showed around in the comments here already, but fuck it, because you more then anyone needs to see it: http://i.imgur.com/6GXBC96.jpg

Am I the only one who see's the irony of forcing the opinion of not forcing your opinion?

A: that's not irony, and B: not even remotely the same thing.

Anomynous 167:
I skimmed through 5 pages just to make sure no one else has made this point.
Anyone complaining about the rediculous chest sizes of two out of three women in Dragon's Crown is oversexualising, must remember that an equal proportion of male characters has chests bigger than their heads.

No one else mentioned it because Jim already did an episode about why it's a stupid thing to say http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/jimquisition/7290-Objectification-And-Men?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=videos

You can say the oversexualising issue is equal for both genders when this http://fucknovideogames.tumblr.com/post/57454571665/coelasquid-hokuto-ju-no-ken is in the game as well.

Dreiko:
People are calling out sensetionalist or over-biased hacks and are doing it rightfully so.

You need to watch the episode again, cuz if you're honestly saying this with no self awareness whatsoever, you didn't understand the point of it.

Imp Emissary:

Dreiko:
I'm so excited about this game, I just drew this! :D

Having said that, yeah, some designs aren't to my taste...but to simply ignore the good cause there's a thing or two your tastes don't agree with is ignorant.

The reviewer ignores a lot of good art design, a whole lot of it, if she uses one the games' BEST features to justify her score of 65. (which is a D, if we go by exams, this game isn't a D)

First off: I am very jealous that I can't draw that well.

Second: As I said, there isn't a "right way" to do scoring so just going off the score can't mean much. Especially with the 10/10 system. Some use it like the school system(in that a 6 is a failing grade, and anything lower is just a more pungent turd), but some like Angry Joe have 6/10 as there average mark, so a 6.5 would mean somewhat above average.

So I'd go more by what the reviewer said, rather than just the score they gave. For example, even in the positive reviews I've seen of the game(like here on the escapist) the reviewer did mention the issue with the titillation. One even commented on how he was surprised the narrator was able to say all his lines without laughing.

That said, there are a few other miner issues I've heard about Dragon's Crown. Repetitiveness being one, but that's to be somewhat expected with a brawler, and it wasn't a major issue. The others were that the quests are sometimes had to follow, and that the upgraded gear didn't look all that different from the lower level gear. Those ones are a bit more important, at least to me.

What I'm trying to get at is the game does have some flaws, and perhaps that adds to the issues with the titillation problems. Because the game isn't doing as good as it could, you notice the smaller problems more. It doesn't help that it sounds like the game shoves the problem in your face.

That said, I can't make a final call until I've played the game myself. Which will be soon.

Right, I'm not saying the game is perfect and I have no issue with the numerous other reviews which scored it an 80 based on the other issues. This one though seemed to use those issues more as an excuse rather than take real offense to them. She focused so much on a small segment of the overal awesome art style and ignored the rest and tried her hardest to make the game sound as bad as possible and minimized the positivity of every nice thing about it simply cause of a seeming grudge she bore against it, one which apparently stems from her bias against the art style, a bias allowed to infect other areas of the game it should have no contact with.

I think a key factor here is that nobody, NOBODY complained about the multiple 80/100 reviews. Those are hardly "perfect". To compare this with the Uncharted 3 situation is a travesty. People are calling out sensetionalist or over-biased hacks and are doing it rightfully so. They're not badgering people who gave 85s and 80s and saying they should have given 100s, they're badgering the one person who docked 15 points cause they don't like a few drawings that have no effect in gameplay whatsoever which stay on the screen for less than a minute each. That's, what, 15 minutes? Out of a 100+ hour game?

You're gonna dock an extra 15 points out of how much those 15 minutes bothered you? A point for a minute?! That's quite unreasonable lol.

Roman Monaghan:

A: that's not irony, and B: not even remotely the same thing.

A: that is irony, and B: it is the same thing.

wulf3n:

Roman Monaghan:

A: that's not irony, and B: not even remotely the same thing.

A: that is irony, and B: it is the same thing.

Maybe if you're getting your definition from the Alanis Morissette song, which you must be, which means I have to point you towards this: http://www.collegehumor.com/video/5806921/actually-ironic

And again, no it isn't. That's like if someone was lobbying for the right to kill babies, and then someone else lobbied against that person lobbying for the right to kill babies, you'd say "well they're both lobbying, so there is clearly no difference."

Roman Monaghan:

Maybe if you're getting your definition from the Alanis Morissette song, which you must be, which means I have to point you towards this: http://www.collegehumor.com/video/5806921/actually-ironic

I'm certainly not getting it from collegehumor.

Roman Monaghan:

And again, no it isn't. That's like if someone was lobbying for the right to kill babies, and then someone else lobbied against that person lobbying for the right to kill babies, you'd say "well they're both lobbying, so there is clearly no difference."

Are they not both trying to alter the opinion of those they're lobbying against?

edit: Besides, you're either using a strawman or completely missing the point.

The irony comes from the fact that statement is telling people to not do exactly what it is currently doing.

To use your baby killing example it would be like someone lobbying against the killing of babies by killing babies.

Roman Monaghan:

wulf3n:

Roman Monaghan:

Maybe if you're getting your definition from the Alanis Morissette song, which you must be, which means I have to point you towards this: http://www.collegehumor.com/video/5806921/actually-ironic

I'm certainly not getting it from collegehumor.

Roman Monaghan:

And again, no it isn't. That's like if someone was lobbying for the right to kill babies, and then someone else lobbied against that person lobbying for the right to kill babies, you'd say "well they're both lobbying, so there is clearly no difference."

Are they not both trying to alter the opinion of those they're lobbying against?

edit: Besides, you're either using a strawman or completely missing the point.

The irony comes from the fact that statement is telling people to not do exactly what it is currently doing.

To use your baby killing example it would be like someone lobbying against the killing of babies by killing babies.

Oh wow, I'm arguing with an idiot. How.... ironic.

Says the one who instantly resorts to insults. That is ironic.

LifeCharacter:

kazriko:
But that's a 3/5, whereas on a 1-10 scale, normally 6-10 is the equivalent to 1-5. A 6.5 is closer to a 1.5/5 stars.

Here's an example of a 1-10 or 1-100 grading scale. http://www.rpgfan.com/graphics/gradingscale_lg.jpg Polygon's policy is similar, stated at the bottom of this, but a bit more technical. http://www.polygon.com/pages/about-reviews You can see that 6.0-6.9 matches up with the "subpar" rating on RPGFan pretty well, which means it's probably in the 1 to 1.5 star rating on a site that uses a smaller scale like that.

Umm, what? A 3/5 is the exact same thing as a 6/10 or a 60/100 (though less exact since they can only go down to half stars really). If the system is from 0-5, you don't decide that it's really from 5-10, because, not only is that a really crappy system for rating things, it's also your weird interpretation of it, unless it's actually explained somewhere that that is the case, in which case I apologize.

It comes from lining up the text descriptions of various sites that explain their grading systems. Escapist doesn't have a page describing their ratings, so you have to go with a stand-in somewhere else. RPGamer's one such site with a 1-5, here's their page. On theirs, a 6-6.9 rating matches up closest to a 2.0, but there's variations with different sites. http://www.rpgamer.com/pointsofview/info/reviewratings.html Other sites are less specific on what their star ratings mean, like Joystiq. http://www.joystiq.com/2010/06/11/welcome-to-the-latest-joystiq-we-call-it-futurestiq/#4
But the general gist is still that a 5 or 50 in the 10/100 point scale is somewhere around a 1 in the 1-5 scale, and that generally matches the US grading scale in schools... Anything below a 60 is considered a "failing" grade, and it goes up from there, whereas 5 star systems a 1 is a failing, and it goes up from there.

Lets just put it this way.
In US grading, A - 90-100, B - 80-89, C - 70-79 D - 60-69 F < 60
If you line that up to stars, A - 4.5-5, B - 3.5-4, C - 2.5-3, D - 1.5-2, F - 1.

Dreiko:

Imp Emissary:

Dreiko:
I'm so excited about this game, I just drew this! :D

Having said that, yeah, some designs aren't to my taste...but to simply ignore the good cause there's a thing or two your tastes don't agree with is ignorant.

The reviewer ignores a lot of good art design, a whole lot of it, if she uses one the games' BEST features to justify her score of 65. (which is a D, if we go by exams, this game isn't a D)

First off: I am very jealous that I can't draw that well.

Second: As I said, there isn't a "right way" to do scoring so just going off the score can't mean much. Especially with the 10/10 system. Some use it like the school system(in that a 6 is a failing grade, and anything lower is just a more pungent turd), but some like Angry Joe have 6/10 as there average mark, so a 6.5 would mean somewhat above average.

So I'd go more by what the reviewer said, rather than just the score they gave. For example, even in the positive reviews I've seen of the game(like here on the escapist) the reviewer did mention the issue with the titillation. One even commented on how he was surprised the narrator was able to say all his lines without laughing.

That said, there are a few other miner issues I've heard about Dragon's Crown. Repetitiveness being one, but that's to be somewhat expected with a brawler, and it wasn't a major issue. The others were that the quests are sometimes had to follow, and that the upgraded gear didn't look all that different from the lower level gear. Those ones are a bit more important, at least to me.

What I'm trying to get at is the game does have some flaws, and perhaps that adds to the issues with the titillation problems. Because the game isn't doing as good as it could, you notice the smaller problems more. It doesn't help that it sounds like the game shoves the problem in your face.

That said, I can't make a final call until I've played the game myself. Which will be soon.

Right, I'm not saying the game is perfect and I have no issue with the numerous other reviews which scored it an 80 based on the other issues. This one though seemed to use those issues more as an excuse rather than take real offense to them. She focused so much on a small segment of the overal awesome art style and ignored the rest and tried her hardest to make the game sound as bad as possible and minimized the positivity of every nice thing about it simply cause of a seeming grudge she bore against it, one which apparently stems from her bias against the art style, a bias allowed to infect other areas of the game it should have no contact with.

I think a key factor here is that nobody, NOBODY complained about the multiple 80/100 reviews. Those are hardly "perfect". To compare this with the Uncharted 3 situation is a travesty. People are calling out sensetionalist or over-biased hacks and are doing it rightfully so. They're not badgering people who gave 85s and 80s and saying they should have given 100s, they're badgering the one person who docked 15 points cause they don't like a few drawings that have no effect in gameplay whatsoever which stay on the screen for less than a minute each. That's, what, 15 minutes? Out of a 100+ hour game?

You're gonna dock an extra 15 points out of how much those 15 minutes bothered you? A point for a minute?! That's quite unreasonable lol.

Well, like Jim said, the art is a big part of the games selling point, and if the reviewer doesn't like the art that would hurt it's overall score.(Plus, if you don't like any of the art, then the really bad parts are far more likely to stand out.)

That all said, it's just ONE review. Plus I've seen far more critical "reviews"(more like critiques I guess) of games I've liked. Such as the Errant Signal episodes about Bioshock Infinite, and The Last of Us(Waring: Lots of spoilers in them). I actually found myself agreeing with a lot of the criticisms, but I still really love both games.

The review had an experience with Dragon's Crown, and made a review about it. You can't be bias about what you experienced. In this instance it just happened to be a bad one for various reasons. One of them being the stupid big emphasis on titillation(joke/parody that it may in part be). As I said, even in the positive reviews I've see/heard mention of the issue.

That said, I've seem more people dwelling on people complaining about everyone hating on people hating on Dragon's Crown for the tits, than I've seen reviews dwelling on the tits in their reviews. All the ones I've seen have mentioned it, but have also moved past it.

The Escapist review is(numerically) about the same as the one from Polygon, but was scored such not JUST because of over sexually characters.

Side Note: There were still some people who complained about the more positive reviews of Dragon's Crown. Like the one on the Escapist. Then again, they did seem to focus more on the score, rather than the actual review.

Repeating Side Note: That drawing is pretty cool. =w= b

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 NEXT

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
Registered for a free account here