*This week's GBE2 is to write a post that's 100 words long, so here we go....*
Some strange reviewers hate the highest rated video game of all time. Why? Because of "no voice acting," (Duh) "it started the decay of LoZ" (seriously?) and "it's hard to turn Epona around corners." (it's really not) And someone called it "linear." *rotfl*
Maybe these people don't know anything about Zelda or maybe they're crazed PlayStation fans. I can understand not liking a popular game, but a lot of these reviewers seem to hate it simply because they're "real, experienced gamers" and real gamers don't play "cutesy games" or such nonsense. Yeah right....
Showing posts with label strange video game reviews. Show all posts
Showing posts with label strange video game reviews. Show all posts
Tuesday, July 5, 2011
Friday, June 17, 2011
Strange Video Game Reviews: Red Dead Redemption
A video game about the Wild West isn't good unless you can ride bears, apparently. In this week's strange game review, that is the chief complaint. There's horses, but that's just not good enough. What about bears or cougars? Didn't everyone in the cowboy days ride cougars? I thought so...
I don't know why anyone but a *coughtrollcough* would think a game that is trying to stay true to its time period and the way of life in that period would include riding wild animals. Maybe they would have liked Red Dead's DLC, Undead Nightmare, better. But it doesn't stop there, of course. What's the point of playing, the reviewer asking, if you can't do these things? I was also very upset when I stared my game of RDR and realized I couldn't steal chickens or tame bears..... Moving on....
The best (worst) part of the review is the complaint it's too "violent." Holy shit! Rockstar made a violent game with lots of shooting! Tell everyone! The reviewer points out the shooting people is disturbing to kids. And that's why the game is rating M, it says so on the box. And if you flip over the box, you'll see why... blood, violence, sex, language, etc etc.
Red Dead is an awesome game, for adults. It's set at the turn of the century when car were just starting out. Sure there were trains, but horses (not bears) where the standard method of travel. People got shot, people were violent, they said naughty bad things....
Sometimes these reviews are so weird, I wonder if these people are serious. But then really, it's entertaining to read, so keep them coming. lol
I don't know why anyone but a *coughtrollcough* would think a game that is trying to stay true to its time period and the way of life in that period would include riding wild animals. Maybe they would have liked Red Dead's DLC, Undead Nightmare, better. But it doesn't stop there, of course. What's the point of playing, the reviewer asking, if you can't do these things? I was also very upset when I stared my game of RDR and realized I couldn't steal chickens or tame bears..... Moving on....
The best (worst) part of the review is the complaint it's too "violent." Holy shit! Rockstar made a violent game with lots of shooting! Tell everyone! The reviewer points out the shooting people is disturbing to kids. And that's why the game is rating M, it says so on the box. And if you flip over the box, you'll see why... blood, violence, sex, language, etc etc.
Red Dead is an awesome game, for adults. It's set at the turn of the century when car were just starting out. Sure there were trains, but horses (not bears) where the standard method of travel. People got shot, people were violent, they said naughty bad things....
Sometimes these reviews are so weird, I wonder if these people are serious. But then really, it's entertaining to read, so keep them coming. lol
Friday, June 10, 2011
Strange Video Game Reviews: Twilight Princess
In the spirit of all the awesome Zelda and Nintendo news at E3 this week, I give you a completely weird review of Twilight Princess. This one especially gets me because *cough*ImaZeldageek*cough*and I just started a new game of TP.
So that's wrong with this one? Personally, the complaint here doesn't make sense to me at all. In fact, I have the opposite complaint with the game. The reviewer claims to have walked around for about 2 hours and couldn't figure out what to do. They say they had to look up online hints. What???
Okay, maybe it's because I've been playing Zelda since dinosaurs roamed the Earth, but TP basically holds your hand through the game. It's certainly isn't like the original LoZ, where Link was dumped off in the middle Hyrule and all you did was wander around until you found something. All the help you got was a map that was packaged with the game and a few characters who spoke in poorly translated English. There was no internet.
All you got to do in Twilight Princess is interact with your surroundings, for example, you can talk to people. There's a whole town's worth of people to talk to in the beginning of the game. If you talk to them, you know what's going on and what they need help with. The "close up the ranch" complaint is strange. I assume this person means rounding up the goats and putting them in the barn. Yeah, all you got to do is ride on Epona and press A and the goats will run in the barn. It's simple.
Another complaint is "there's nothing to explore." That's blasphemy. Zelda is all about exploring. There's hidden things to find, bugs to collect, new sword moves to learn, wolf songs to find, mini-games etc etc.
My favorite is "you can't figure this out on your own." I must be a freaking genius. I've been figuring out Zelda since I was 10. I'm awesome. *rollseyes*
So that's wrong with this one? Personally, the complaint here doesn't make sense to me at all. In fact, I have the opposite complaint with the game. The reviewer claims to have walked around for about 2 hours and couldn't figure out what to do. They say they had to look up online hints. What???
Okay, maybe it's because I've been playing Zelda since dinosaurs roamed the Earth, but TP basically holds your hand through the game. It's certainly isn't like the original LoZ, where Link was dumped off in the middle Hyrule and all you did was wander around until you found something. All the help you got was a map that was packaged with the game and a few characters who spoke in poorly translated English. There was no internet.
All you got to do in Twilight Princess is interact with your surroundings, for example, you can talk to people. There's a whole town's worth of people to talk to in the beginning of the game. If you talk to them, you know what's going on and what they need help with. The "close up the ranch" complaint is strange. I assume this person means rounding up the goats and putting them in the barn. Yeah, all you got to do is ride on Epona and press A and the goats will run in the barn. It's simple.
Another complaint is "there's nothing to explore." That's blasphemy. Zelda is all about exploring. There's hidden things to find, bugs to collect, new sword moves to learn, wolf songs to find, mini-games etc etc.
My favorite is "you can't figure this out on your own." I must be a freaking genius. I've been figuring out Zelda since I was 10. I'm awesome. *rollseyes*
Tuesday, May 31, 2011
Strange Video Game Reviews: Portal 2
There are spoilers here.
There have been tons of negative reviews about Portal 2. When it was first released, there was the controversy over the add-ons Valve made available for purchase. This content was nothing more then hats, gestures, and the like. It's nothing that makes the game better. There was also problems with how long the game was. I've beaten it three times now and I can tell you it's certainly not just two or three hours long.
Having said that, there are even more reviews of Portal 2 that complain about everything from "it's a puzzle game" (duh..) to the test chambers. Here's one review that talks about the price, among other things.
First they call it "witty" and "comical." Yep, I agree. But then they say they would have given it five stars, not two if it was $20.00 on Steam. Apparently because there are games like Call of Duty, Killzone 3, and Dragon Age 2 out there, Portal 2 should be cheaper. CoD is known for its short single player campaign. There's multiplayer too, but the single player only lasts about five hours. Besides, it's a FPS about war, how is it similar to Portal? Dragon Age is an RPG. They can last forever. I'm fairly certain there's no Portal gun or companion cubes in Dragon Age. It's useless to compare Portal to games that are the same price but in completely different genres.
Looking at the other points of the review:
The part about the environments not changing is untrue. If you look at the three main sections of the game (waking up GLaDOS, old Aperture, and Wheatley's Aperture) they are vastly different. In the first game, the environments didn't change much. That can not be said for Portal 2.
And of course, the story has no twists and turns... I mean I always thought that GLaDOS was going to turn into potato one of these days. Or that Wheatley was going to be a "bad guy." Or that you could make portals on the moon.......
But if you're a fan of Valve, none of this matters cause we're mindless fanatics. Hooray for insulting people who liked the game too. Good job.
There have been tons of negative reviews about Portal 2. When it was first released, there was the controversy over the add-ons Valve made available for purchase. This content was nothing more then hats, gestures, and the like. It's nothing that makes the game better. There was also problems with how long the game was. I've beaten it three times now and I can tell you it's certainly not just two or three hours long.
Having said that, there are even more reviews of Portal 2 that complain about everything from "it's a puzzle game" (duh..) to the test chambers. Here's one review that talks about the price, among other things.
First they call it "witty" and "comical." Yep, I agree. But then they say they would have given it five stars, not two if it was $20.00 on Steam. Apparently because there are games like Call of Duty, Killzone 3, and Dragon Age 2 out there, Portal 2 should be cheaper. CoD is known for its short single player campaign. There's multiplayer too, but the single player only lasts about five hours. Besides, it's a FPS about war, how is it similar to Portal? Dragon Age is an RPG. They can last forever. I'm fairly certain there's no Portal gun or companion cubes in Dragon Age. It's useless to compare Portal to games that are the same price but in completely different genres.
Looking at the other points of the review:
The part about the environments not changing is untrue. If you look at the three main sections of the game (waking up GLaDOS, old Aperture, and Wheatley's Aperture) they are vastly different. In the first game, the environments didn't change much. That can not be said for Portal 2.
And of course, the story has no twists and turns... I mean I always thought that GLaDOS was going to turn into potato one of these days. Or that Wheatley was going to be a "bad guy." Or that you could make portals on the moon.......
But if you're a fan of Valve, none of this matters cause we're mindless fanatics. Hooray for insulting people who liked the game too. Good job.
Tuesday, May 24, 2011
Strange Video Game Reviews: Fallout 3 and Expectations
Since I'm doing GBE2 and I want to continue with Strange Video Game Reviews, I figured I would combine the two this week. It's Fallout 3 review time. I got to admit when I first got the game, I stumbled around for a minute or so. But if you just pay attention, you quickly get the feeling of the game.
Expectations is the word of the week. So what happens when you buy a video game and it's not what you expect? Well, I guess you could do a few things. One would be realizing that it's not what you wanted and trade it in or give it to a friend. Another thing to do (which makes you look a bit silly) is write a review. If you don't take the time to read the booklet, explore the game, or pay attention, what do you expect?
In this review the player claims to have 20 hours invested in Fallout 3. And they still don't know what to do. I find that hard to believe. The beginning of Fallout 3 after you leave the Vault, it's a fairly straight shot to Megaton, (where you're suppose to go) not to mention there's signs pointing the way.
They also complain about lack of ammo. I never experienced that problem so badly. But here's a tip: if you don't have ammo walk around and find some or find some money. The game is huge and there are plenty of places to explore. If you run into fights when you're ammo is low and you don't take the time to find more what do you expect? And guess what you can always just run away from enemies or holster your weapon. It says right in the booklet some enemies will stop fighting if you do.
The reviewer admits they expected the game to be like Mercenaries 2 or Far Cry 2. It's not, oh well. Just because you think something should be a certain way, it doesn't mean that it the game deserves 2 stars and is boring.
I found another awesomely weird review about Fallout 3, but I'll save that for next time. :)
Expectations is the word of the week. So what happens when you buy a video game and it's not what you expect? Well, I guess you could do a few things. One would be realizing that it's not what you wanted and trade it in or give it to a friend. Another thing to do (which makes you look a bit silly) is write a review. If you don't take the time to read the booklet, explore the game, or pay attention, what do you expect?
In this review the player claims to have 20 hours invested in Fallout 3. And they still don't know what to do. I find that hard to believe. The beginning of Fallout 3 after you leave the Vault, it's a fairly straight shot to Megaton, (where you're suppose to go) not to mention there's signs pointing the way.
They also complain about lack of ammo. I never experienced that problem so badly. But here's a tip: if you don't have ammo walk around and find some or find some money. The game is huge and there are plenty of places to explore. If you run into fights when you're ammo is low and you don't take the time to find more what do you expect? And guess what you can always just run away from enemies or holster your weapon. It says right in the booklet some enemies will stop fighting if you do.
The reviewer admits they expected the game to be like Mercenaries 2 or Far Cry 2. It's not, oh well. Just because you think something should be a certain way, it doesn't mean that it the game deserves 2 stars and is boring.
I found another awesomely weird review about Fallout 3, but I'll save that for next time. :)
Tuesday, May 17, 2011
Strange Video Game Reviews
I am thinking of turning "Stange Video Game Reviews" into a weekly feature. Why? Because there are some really weird customer reviews out there. Maybe they misunderstood the game, maybe they just couldn't get the hang of the gameplay or something else. What I hope to do is showcase reviews that are just wrong. Well, here's an example from an Amazon customer reviewing Half-Life 2 for the Xbox.
As you can see the reviewer has no idea what they're talking about. First, the "we don't go to Ravenclaw chapter." Technically, the reviewer is right. Gordon Freeman does not go to Ravenclaw. He does not go to Hufflepuff, Gryffindor, or Slytherin either. But we can pretend Black Mesa and Aperture are Hogwarts House rivals... or maybe not. The correct name of the town is Ravenholm, as other reviewers point out.
But the weirdness doesn't stop there. The reviewer calls Half-Life 2 "sick" because of this chapter. Ravenholm is an abandon town filled with zombies and Headcrabs. The reviewer calls the zombies "mentally handicapped." Really? No, they are zombies. It's very obvious in the game that what you are fighting in Ravenholm isn't human anymore. And, of course, they are trying to kill you. Headcrabs are trying to latch on to you.
So this is the type of review I want to share. You can call Half-Life 2 the crappiest game ever if you don't like the story or the gameplay or the graphics. That's fine. That's your opinion. (I love the game, btw.) But don't give it 2 stars because you don't pay attention to what's going on in the game. Don't call it evil or sick.
When you write a review, at least get the facts straight. That's what we should learn from this.
One last thing: I would like to thank my brother who got me into reading misinformed customer reviews. He would play a game, then go see what the 1 and 2 star reviews were about. It's pretty entertaining.
As you can see the reviewer has no idea what they're talking about. First, the "we don't go to Ravenclaw chapter." Technically, the reviewer is right. Gordon Freeman does not go to Ravenclaw. He does not go to Hufflepuff, Gryffindor, or Slytherin either. But we can pretend Black Mesa and Aperture are Hogwarts House rivals... or maybe not. The correct name of the town is Ravenholm, as other reviewers point out.
But the weirdness doesn't stop there. The reviewer calls Half-Life 2 "sick" because of this chapter. Ravenholm is an abandon town filled with zombies and Headcrabs. The reviewer calls the zombies "mentally handicapped." Really? No, they are zombies. It's very obvious in the game that what you are fighting in Ravenholm isn't human anymore. And, of course, they are trying to kill you. Headcrabs are trying to latch on to you.
So this is the type of review I want to share. You can call Half-Life 2 the crappiest game ever if you don't like the story or the gameplay or the graphics. That's fine. That's your opinion. (I love the game, btw.) But don't give it 2 stars because you don't pay attention to what's going on in the game. Don't call it evil or sick.
When you write a review, at least get the facts straight. That's what we should learn from this.
One last thing: I would like to thank my brother who got me into reading misinformed customer reviews. He would play a game, then go see what the 1 and 2 star reviews were about. It's pretty entertaining.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)