• Add Review
  • Subscribe
  • Nominate
  • Submit Media
  • RSS

Hate to be the one to say it, but...

  • Ayanin
  • 09/09/2013 06:28 AM
  • 35085 views
Pretty graphics are wonderful things. Original storylines are admirable, too, but when it comes down to it, a game has got to actually be playable. Even a non-gamer should be able to play it, and not be dying frequently. After all, this is not a first person shooter! (A game type where frequent death is anticipated.)

Well, that's what happened here.

Now, it would be one thing if you could traditionally "level grind" ... gain a few extra levels here and there, move on, and be fine... but you can't do that here. The monsters in each new area are pretty overkill, so that you can die more or less at any area you advance to. If you gained a few levels in the last area, you'll hardly even notice it in the next, if at all. Used up the only items that made winning against the last boss possible? Too bad. You'll die frequently in boss fights without serious help from something that isn't you (which you won't get but maybe once or twice, and maybe only then if you checked nearly every tile that you've laid eyes on), but evidently, you're otherwise just plain out of luck. Not what I would call a good gaming experience.

How bad was it?

Well, my experience was (without spending hours level grinding) the average boss fight goes like this:

1) You have approximately one round to use up whatever help you have on you... which you will probably die instantly, without. If you're lucky, you may actually get a WHOLE ROUND to attack! But it won't accomplish anything, even if you do.

2) Then, the boss promptly reduces you to near-death (as in one-hit) state. If not your whole party.

3) Now what?

Yeah... "now what?" is right. Because in the time it takes you to heal everybody (if you have enough MPs or whatever to do that), you've just wasted your next round. At which point, the boss promptly reduces you (all?) to one-hit life status, once again. So for every round that you heal yourself beyond having only one hit left, the boss simply undoes whatever you just did, pretty much the next turn he gets. Okay, you MIGHT get a single round between, sometimes, in which to attempt pathetically to attack... but often not. I say pathetically, because you are basically fleas as far as the bosses are concerned. You do fairly negligable damage to the boss, no matter what you use, while the boss, on the other hand, mops the floor with you every single round.

Basically, it's a viciouis cycle of getting knocked down, healing and then getting knocked down again.

So get ready to waste countless hours level grinding!

Or, you can just do what I did, and uninstall, and hope for another game to come along where you can actually survive long enough without truly ridiculous emounts of effort, in order to see the entire game. Or even the first half of it.

So if you actually like level grinding for hours on end, go for it. Or if you just like looking at the pretty game over screen. Or if you've got a program that allows you to hack save files, maybe. (For the first time, I really, really wished I had that, and normally, I hate even using walkthroughs, because I dislike any kind of "cheating".) But if none of that describes you... I'm afraid you might not have much more fun playing this game than I did, even if it was pretty.

Finally, I felt that in all honesty, I had to give it a pretty bad rating, and not just to be a jerk, or because I personally didn't care for it, but for a pretty striaghtforward and valid reason: like I said... a game should be playable.

Any way you look at it, no matter how beautiful, haunting or grand the music and graphics were, or how original and deep the plot, not much of that is really going to matter if the player faces what feels like literally "mission impossible," from the moment they start. If you're dying almost the moment you set foot outside of the first town, at monsters that are not even bosses, and when fighting bosses boils down to a never ending circle of "die now or die later" choices (see above), chances are, at least some people are never going to stick around long enough to see those beautiful graphics, hear your best music, or enjoy your story. Think about it: how many times does the average person... the AVERAGE person... have to end up dead in an RPG (again, not a first person shooter, or some other game-type where you'd EXPECT to die often, but in an RPG of all things), before they simply go away and find something that actually amuses them, instead of just frusterating them continually?

The cold hard truth is this: no matter how great your game is, if the player quits in frustration before they ever get to see %90 of it, then for that person, none of that remaining %90 really counts for anything. It's the same for that player as if the game ended where they quit. Or you might say, it's almost the same as if the play was somehow "broken" and you simply could not continue (even if it is actually technically possible, by some means involving epic patience, to do so).

Now, a person might object and say that's not fair, because the player COULD have played it, and it's not the game maker's fault that they quit. Oh sure. They could have continued to play... with a ridiculous amount of effort. But in this case, we're not talking about people quitting because they're lazy. We're talking about people quitting because an absurd level of effort is required by the game. In this case, it's the game, not the user, that's unreasonable. The fault, in this case, lies with the game.

For this reason, in trying to give an honest rating, I rated it subpar.

In my book, a game is "not playable," if it's not playable for common people without an insane/ridiculous amount of effort, and if a game is "not playable," then it fails to meet the most fundamental criteria of all games: that to begin with, you can actually play it! It should not just be TECHNICALLY playable, if, for instance, you're willing to frisk every tile on every screen of the game you can physically access, and press up against every inch of wall in every map, and waste days of your life level grinding like you were playing Maple Story (where at least the players would have the option of talking to their friends rather than just dying of boredom or quitting in frustration). It should be playable for anyone willing to put forth a reasonable effort. But a REASONABLE effort, not just for those who are willing to sit up all night with a pot of coffee frisking tiles and level grinding for hours on end. (Definitely not reasonable.)

It would be far better to do a less glorious job with your game, and at least to have a game that everyone can actually play... and dare I say, maybe even enjoy? ... than to have a drop-dead-gorgeous game, that you have to have no life at all (eg, the countless hours for level grinding), and endless patience, in order to play.

And by "play" I do mean without a walkthrough. Cheating should not be a prerequisite to being able to play the game. It should be pretty straightforward and fairly balanced in difficulty, for those who know what to expect in an RPG of this kind (in this case, the mainstream kind, as opposed to, say, puzzle RPGS, where it's taken for granted that you pretty much have to be a genius to play without a walkthrough).

Posts

Pages: first prev 123456 next last
Irili
3198
09/10/2013 02:28 PM
At the end of the day, this is just one dude's opinion out of many. I don't think this review will keep new players from approaching SSP. There's 6 other reviews that sing it's praises (well deserved praises in my opinion).

@Ronove: I liked the difficulty. I found it refreshing in a world filled with cookie cutter, simple rpg's.
TheBadMan
0
09/10/2013 02:31 PM
@SorceressKyrsty:
Just don't write a review and don't downgrade a good game without a "valid reason" then, and if you haven't experience at all with rpgs (as he says).

Seriously, what are we talking about here? This is silly.
kentona
Bunnyhug
21020
09/10/2013 03:01 PM
author=alterego
author=Avee
If anyone dislikes the fact that this rather unprofessional review got accepted and alters the game's overall score, suck it up. That's how things work here.
Only because we let it be that way? Maybe if we spoke out more often against these reviews, the people in charge would get a clue?
Seriously dude? One borderline review or article or game or whatever gets accepted and suddenly the admin team is "clueless"? Do you just sit around and wait for opportunities to bash us?

Speak up, not out. Solitayre is doing one heckuva job managing the review submission queue.
Crystalgate
694
09/10/2013 04:58 PM
This review is rather poor, but I don't think it's a problem though. It has the following near the beginning:
author=Ayanin
Even a non-gamer should be able to play it, and not be dying frequently. After all, this is not a first person shooter! (A game type where frequent death is anticipated.)

People who disagree with this statement will likely be skeptic of this review and people who do agree with this statement are probably not going to enjoy this game. The score isn't a problem either, there's a bunch of high score ones up and I think there's a non trivial amount of people who doesn't like this game, so a low score one doesn't mislead anyone.

To Ayanin: The biggest problem with this review as I see it is that you seem to speak for others and state your opinion as facts. Now, normally when someone write "the game is to hard" we ignore that it's stated as a fact and assume the author simple didn't want to add "IMO" or "I think" to every sentence. However, your use of "the cold hard truth" and your choice of emphasis strongly suggests you mean your statements as facts.
StarSkipp
2007
09/10/2013 05:05 PM
Not every reviewer has to adopt the story, graphics, music, gameplay template to express their opinion to the player. Now if the whole review was focused around the music direction alone, then I can understand the uproar (In a bizarre way I would love to see that). But as he's talking about the gameplay here that makes or breaks a game, then I can't really see how this review is automatically void. =o=

Off semi topic of reviews of reviews and not that I suspect it applies here at all. (or maybe it does?) But I always found that most review drama boils down to our primal urge to discredit people who "dislikes what we like" and find any justification in why they're subjectively wrong. If one person doesn't share the vast consensus then it doesn't mean his opinion is invalid.

I'm going to be a hyprocrite here, but my only gripe with Ayanins piece is that you can mostly copy and paste this in any review and you wouldn't know that it was tailored specifically for SSP. Other than the lack of identity, I personally don't have a problem with it.

Decky
I'm a dog pirate
19645
09/10/2013 06:48 PM
I am not a fan of the review, but I feel some of the comments here are equally worth discussing.

First and foremost, Solitayre approved this review, and I would have as well. I don't like the review, but it meets the standard. Standards are crafted with consensus in mind.

"Be prepared to justify your rating with the content of your review. If you give an exceedingly low score you are expected to describe the game's flaws in detail. Similarly if you feel the game deserves a high score you must adequately justify this viewpoint."

If you want to see a change in review standards, do what Kentona said and "speak up, not out." Please don't just make random potshots during controversial reviews and forget about the whole thing, as it's not very productive and we can't really do anything about it. It comes across as malicious, not constructive.

We look for reasonably well written and well supported opinions in reviews. Everyone has a different opinion on what a review is, and everyone has a different opinion on what a good game is. We're not going to censor people just because they want to talk about a certain aspect of the game more than others, or because certain members want their own style of review to be the norm. When people review art, some are more objective about it and some are more subjective. This is evident in every single publication on the planet. It's common sense, not carelessness on the part of staff. Otherwise every single editor and publisher would be pretty clueless :P This isn't the "Dictatorship of Alter Ego" - there are many ways to write a review, some better than others, but we accept them all as long as they are reasonably supported and well written.

Second, no mods are going to come down and censor heated-yet-civil discussion, solid defense, and relevant debate. Overmoderation is not what RMN is about. This review has an unpopular opinion. I disagree with the spirit of the review and even some of the content, but I love how this sort of thing is fair game on our site. I was victim to a 2-star review as well, under similar circumstances. It frustrated me but it is what it is, and the reviewer had some opinions worth considering for my future projects.

Lastly, a low rating may bring down a game's average score, but that's not a reason to complain. If you enjoy a game and want to see it have a better review average, speak up and write your own piece to offset things.

Archeia_Nessiah
Tear Harvester Nessiah
17368
09/10/2013 07:05 PM
I read the review last night as well and to be quite honest, I was a little bit confused at the first few sentences? paragraphs? What exactly was frustrating and why did you classify something as a level grind?

It would've been great if you had discussed the strategies and your entire progress playing the game and why it was frustrating that you had to eventually quit. While it could've been a personal experience, at least you told the developer what exactly put you off? The way you wrote it felt like it's very vague and just mostly you're raving at how unplayable it was but not exactly going into it. What moves did turn you off? What was the boss strategy and have you fully explored most of your skills or the systems of the game?

Now before you classify me as a follower or anything, In my first (second to fourth) playthrough of SSP, I avoided battles like a plague since I thought Snowe was freaking useless and stopped after the first chapter. I just didn't enjoy controlling a weak player right at the beginning and I didn't agree with his personality. I don't think any point of level grinding will save his sorry ass. Thus hindering me from enjoying the full experience. It might've gotten better later but this game isn't my cup of tea. But it's wrong for me to say this game is unplayable just because I didn't like it or it was a "frustrating" personal experience. There could've been other several factors since I also experienced the older version's one-shotting ghost mobs which built up annoyance. But ANYWAY.

I just feel like you could've covered more than what you said in your review, to justify the 2 star rating or at least acknowledge that there were elements of the game that you didn't personally like the learning curve/features and why so. Even then, a blank star review would've been more appropriate if you're not its target audience.
Hasvers
1298
09/10/2013 07:31 PM
I tried not to add yet another message to this trench war, but well. I'm just surprised that, since the beginning, no one seems to have voiced my only concern with this review: it is misguiding to potential players in suggesting that you have to grind. I hate grinding. I never do it, and I would be dicouraged off a game if I were told that it is the only option. But this is actually not the case here. With enough care you can go through the whole game without ever walking around for a random encounter (and without walkthroughs as well).

The whole problem is our expectation that RPGs should require no skill or thought, only labor; once you know that you have to use items carefully and plan with limited resources, well, the game IS punishing in a few occasions, but at least it asks for your competence, not for your mindless expense of time. And I think anyone can respect that.
So I don't know, there should be a disclaimer "Grinding is not the solution" so that people actually shake off their habits and try understanding what the game is about.

Otherwise, I see no problem with someone voicing their opinion, although rants that appear misinformed (at least to me) like this one essentially suggest that the writer would have enormously benefitted from a simple mail exchange with the creator in trying to understand what they intended. It's not like sending hate mail to the Electronic Arts PR department, we are a community here, let's try to communicate.
Ratty524
The 524 is for 524 Stone Crabs
12986
09/10/2013 08:12 PM
Popular game gets a 2-star review, everyone goes "wtf" and starts a heated debate in the comments section. Classic.

author=eplipswich
You rate a game based on graphics, story, animation, gameplay, music and sound, all in one package, not just on one feature alone. The bulk of your review only focuses on gameplay, but you never weigh in equally the other features of a game.

Well gameplay is kind of a big deal... Because IT'S A GAME.

Regardless there are many things about this review that is vague and questionable. You wrote down a lot... but you were ultimately saying the same thing over again for every paragraph. Maybe I'll give this game a shot myself.
Darken
3952
09/10/2013 08:27 PM
Yeah I think people need to like, chill out more. The gameplay was just a roadblock for the reviewer and that's enough to explain why he was frustrated with the game. Do you really want the reviewer to write filler paragraphs that just contain graphics good sound good story okay. It's like someone reviewing a mister big t game and being offended by the content and subject matter then someone asks "hey how come you didn't talk about the mapping???"

Like idk, do people ever have a problem with positive reviews focusing way too much on one aspect?

I agree that Ayanin's attitude is a little questionable and combative but uh whatever.
alterego
RMN's wet blanket
2875
09/10/2013 08:29 PM
author=kentona
Seriously dude? One borderline review or article or game or whatever gets accepted and suddenly the admin team is "clueless"? Do you just sit around and wait for opportunities to bash us?

Seriously dude? One jab I make in one of the many borderline reviews, blogs, whatever I post into and suddenly I'm bashing you? ;P
_
Hey "Dictatorship of Alter Ego" that's a good one - Let me just ask this: If you as a mod don't agree with a review, what's wrong with just saying: "Improve it, then it gets published"? You're not "censoring" anyone, you're merely delaying a publication so that its content truly reflects the standards the community expects. Because, judging by most comments here, you forgot to include a lot of us in this "consensus" you speak of... I'd say more, but I'm sure people is going to blame ME for making this bigger than it needed to be. xD

author=StarSkipping
But I always found that most review drama boils down to our primal urge to discredit people who "dislikes what we like" and find any justification in why their subjectively wrong.

Haha! That's probably true. But seriously, if people saw that you're at least making an effort to appreciate what they like - to see see things from a broader perspective, I'd be willing to say none of them would find legitimate grounds to complain. Sure, you can focus on whatever made the strongest impression on you, even if it's music, but at least dedicate a short paragraph(s) to the other aspects of the game, preferably in a non-rantish fashion. That's all anyone is really asking... That's not asking for much, is it?

I think the "drama" truly stems from this "all reviews are precious snow flakes" mentality we adopt, when that's not true for anything.

Edit: "Like idk, do people ever have a problem with positive reviews focusing way too much on one aspect?" - Sometimes. =B
kentona
Bunnyhug
21020
09/10/2013 09:24 PM
author=alterego
author=kentona
Seriously dude? One borderline review or article or game or whatever gets accepted and suddenly the admin team is "clueless"? Do you just sit around and wait for opportunities to bash us?
Seriously dude? One jab I make in one of the many borderline reviews, blogs, whatever I post into and suddenly I'm bashing you? ;P
_
Hey "Dictatorship of Alter Ego" that's a good one - Let me just ask this: If you as a mod don't agree with a review, what's wrong with just saying: "Improve it, then it gets published"? You're not "censoring" anyone, you're merely delaying a publication so that its content truly reflects the standards the community expects. Because, judging by most comments here, you forgot to include a lot of us in this "consensus" you speak of... I'd say more, but I'm sure people is going to blame ME for making this bigger than it needed to be. xD
Nothing's wrong with that, and that's what happens. A lot.

(and you bash me. A lot. The offhand comments that I am clueless, careless, callous or capricious hurt. I care a lot about this community.)
Ratty524
The 524 is for 524 Stone Crabs
12986
09/10/2013 09:38 PM
author=kentona
(and you bash me. A lot. The offhand comments that I am clueless, careless, callous or capricious hurt. I care a lot about this community.)


You even made it your user title. SEE WHAT YOU DID ALTER!? >:(
kentona
Bunnyhug
21020
09/10/2013 10:20 PM
author=Ratty524
author=kentona
(and you bash me. A lot. The offhand comments that I am clueless, careless, callous or capricious hurt. I care a lot about this community.)
You even made it your user title. SEE WHAT YOU DID ALTER!? >:(
Those comments hurt because they are TRUE
kumada
3917
09/10/2013 10:28 PM
author=Ratty524
Popular game gets a 2-star review, everyone goes "wtf" and starts a heated debate in the comments section. Classic.


This. This exactly.

I like what I've played of SSP an awful lot, but--as a creative work--people's reactions to it are going to vary. I'd be honestly quite worried if they didn't.

For anyone that's concerned this review is going to stain SSP's honor: it's not. Statistically, all this means is that we've gotten one low rating out of the way and that we can proceed to get another fourteen or so five-star ratings before the next one inevitably happens.
Decky
I'm a dog pirate
19645
09/10/2013 11:22 PM
author=alterego
Hey "Dictatorship of Alter Ego" that's a good one - Let me just ask this: If you as a mod don't agree with a review, what's wrong with just saying: "Improve it, then it gets published"? You're not "censoring" anyone, you're merely delaying a publication so that its content truly reflects the standards the community expects. Because, judging by most comments here, you forgot to include a lot of us in this "consensus" you speak of... I'd say more, but I'm sure people is going to blame ME for making this bigger than it needed to be. xD

Judging by most of the comments here, they think the review could be better. A C-graded paper could be better, but it still meets the standard. Consensus is determined by discussion and feedback, driven in part people like you who are willing to speak your mind on both sides of an issue (we need those!). There is a difference between criticizing a review and criticizing a standard. I'd be more than happy to change a standard if it's what the userbase wants and it's in line with what this site is about. People are always welcome to post in the Feedback thread :)
Ayanin
50
09/11/2013 01:12 AM
Okay... in an attempt to civilly addres at least some of the problems with my review, let me try to explain what happened, and the nature of my review and it's apparent "lacks" by a little story example that I think should pretty much clear up the whole thing, hopefully without crushing too many people's feelings.

Suppose I go to amazon.com and buy a $40 toaster. (Just put aside the fact that the example uses something that costs money... that is not relevant here.) The toaster gets to my house, I unpack it, put it in it's place, and the next morning I wake up, and go to have my breakfast. I plug the toaster in, I put the bread into it, put it down... and nothing happens. Okay... maybe it's a temporary problem. Try again. Nothing. Try a few more times. Nothing.

All right. I go to amazon.com. Go to the toaster's page. Go to the review section. Give it one star. Tell the story of what happened. The toaster I got of this model from this company didn't work when it arrived. Yes, I'm upset. After all, it was $40. But I try to stick to the fact that it didn't work, instead of resorting to calling the company names, and alleging they're frauds, which is usually not the case.

Then what?

Comment section:
"Okay... you told us it didn't work, but why the heck didn't you review anyting else about it?!"

Me: "Uh... because it didn't work. I mean... What can I say? It's.... shiny? I could turn it sideways and use it for a mirror maybe? But, it didn't work, so... what can I really say?"

"You are SO full of it... I got this toaster and it worked just fine. Best toaster I ever had!"

Me: "Well... I'm really happy that you're happy but the fact is... mine was DOA."

"That's not a fact. Everyone else's works just fine."

Me: "But mine is the same model, and it doesn't. That IS a fact."

"This is SO unfair to the manufacturer! There are 547 POSITIVE reivews on this toaster, and only you and a couple of other negative idiots rated it one star!"

Me: "Well, the one I got was defective. I mean, if it had worked great, I probably would have said that, right? But I can't know how it worked, if mine didn't work. And I think it's important for people to know how many people this happened to. If it was only a few people, great! Then only a few people will give it one star, and the truth will come out in the ratings."

"HAHAHAH! What a moron! You seriously don't even know how to make TOAST?!! WTH LOOSER?!!!"

Me: "Uh... actually, I'm about as good as the next person at making toast, but... if the toaster didn't work, it didn't work. That's kind of the toaster's fault. Not every malfunction is a user malfunction."

"This is so stupid... It worked for ME!!"

Me: "I'm happy that it did. However, mine was broken."

Okay... I'm hoping that at this point, everybody can see where this is going.

If you go to review soemthing, you're right... it should give whatever information you have to give. But if the product (in this case game) did not work for you, then you have no/limited knowledge of those other aspects, don't you? Chances are you saw little or nothing of it, so... how can you review those things that you didn't see, or didn't fully see? Seeing 3 or 4 areas of a game does not give me information enough to review the entire game's graphics or music. That's why I left those things out. Out of fairness. You don't judge the parts you did not fully experience. (At least I wouldn't.)

So why review it if you didn't see the whole game?! ... right? Remember the toaster! You get something, it's defective, you bet your bologna you rate it. And what does it get? 0 stars, right? Or as close to that as possible. Cause how can you give it more than that, if the product in question did not work for you? You've got no idea how it was, because yours was defective! (Are we on the same page yet?)

You also cannot review it based on someone else's experiences. Only your own. So if it didn't work for you, it didn't work for you. That's what you've got to put. "I tried this. It did not work! My experience was that this was (nigh)impossible!" I couldn't have put, "players 1-9,000 played this game that I found impossible and they say it's great, so, based on their experience, my experience was 5-stars!" But that's not how reviews work. A review relates YOUR experience. If it worked for all those other people, lovely! If it did not work for 10, then those 10 people are not being any less honest or right in saying it didn't work for them. It didn't. Hate to break it to you, but the personal bliss in your experience did not get those other people any farther in theirs.

It's also not right to assume a person is a moron or "doesn't know how to play games" just because their experience was different from yours. It pretty much goes without saying that if even one person was able to see the entire game, it was not LITERALLY impossible. But I didn't say it was LITERALLY impossible, now, did I? No... I believe I said something about it being not playable for ALL PLAYERS, because my experience proved that it was not playable for ALL PLAYERS. (The word "all" does actually mean "all" ... as in literally everyone.)

Finally, while some people may not agree, I beleive the ability of an average, even a non-gamer... to pick it up and play it, does matter, if the expectation of the player, given how it's presented, is that it will be playable by everyone. In the way Super Mario was playable, even if you never beat that blasted valley fortress! This qualm has to do with the content being able to be accessed to begin with. Not whether or not the person could, for example, perform the hardest quests or unlock all the secrets. It's a judgment about whether anyone could enjoy the basic gameplay. That seems to me to be a pretty major point. I tried leveling up. I tried going back and talking to everybody. I tried searching nearly every tile I saw. I tried different strategies in battle. The bosses were, in my personal experience, still nigh impossible. (I say nigh, because again, obviously, if they were literally so, then no one could have beaten it.)

And the person who said I wasn't personally attacking the author was correct. I wasn't. I simply meant that people in general need to learn to be a whole lot more open to other people's experiences, criticisms and input, and not just when it's positive, because it's important (vital actually) for acheiving your full potential as whatever kind of creator/producer you happen to be. If you believe your work is always perfect, or even always close enough to it that you cannot admit problems (or will only selectively do so), then you can't fix those problems. So you don't progress as what you are. There was no malicious, hidden attack intended. I also added that I hold myself up to the same standards for that very reason, so it's not just that I'm going around picking on everyone else for some kind of sick fun, either. That doesn't mean I'm perfect, but that I don't believe in double standards... a set for myself and a set for everybody else, even if I myself must often admit something I've done is also "sub par".

But look... One person posts a negative review. Says they personally had a bad experience with the game, and even tries to explain what happened, and gives the reason for their low rating, even if some may not agree. And what is the response?

1) You suck at reviewing, because you don't agree that it's good.
2) You suck at playing games, because your experience differs from mine.
3) Why the -beep- did the mods allow this dissenting viewpoint?! Unsightly! Get it off!
4) Misc. other personal attacks upon the reviewer.

So... why did I feel the need to make that comment about being able to take in criticism?

The review might not have been as elegantly given as some may have liked (and others might have not detected the hint of sarcasm at the point where I said if you like the pretty game over screen, and what not, go for it), but a review is a review. The reviewer only has their personal experience to relate. They do not have yours. As long as it relates a real experience that someone actually had, as they gave a reasonable effort to play the game with an open mind, how is that not legitimate?
eplipswich
2728
09/11/2013 01:31 AM
After reading your post, Ayanin, I pretty much get what you're saying. While your review alone won't affect the overall rating of this game (since there are many other positive reviews) (and it's not like I care about the rating, anyway), I still think you should have left this as a comment (or as a PM to the author) rather than a review, really. Because, probably this is just me, but I think a more proper review should be something that reviews the whole game experience, and not just part of it.

Which is why I think the review system needs to be clearly defined as to whether it should be just for the whole game experience (or at least a bulk of the game), or a combination of whole game experiences and personal experiences that do not involve completing the game or at least playing a bulk of it.
SnowOwl
5188
09/11/2013 01:36 AM
I can only agree that bashing a reviewer for not being "good enough" at RPGs is a stupid thing to do.
The players overall experience should be the basis for the score given. Which judging from this review, is how the score was given. He/she thought it was frustrating and unfair and I believe it is entirely in his right to think that.
The review could have been more well thought out I guess, but it's not as bad as some seem to make it out to be. Personally I think some people here disagree just because they like the game themselves and disliked the score that was given.
I haven't played the game myself so I probably shouldn't say too much, but if as some say the best way to win boss fights is through status effects that does not always hit, I can understand where he is coming from. I would be frustrated too if I had to rely on the dice to win me fights.

Is this specific score the absolute truth? Probably not. But that's what average score is for, and this game has plenty more reviews.
Ayanin
50
09/11/2013 03:52 AM
author=eplipswich
I still think you should have left this as a comment (or as a PM to the author) rather than a review, really. Because, probably this is just me, but I think a more proper review should be something that reviews the whole game experience, and not just part of it.

At the risk of going a bit more off topic, because I think this is an important point...

The reason why "partial" reviews are actually pretty relevant, is actually for situations just like this. When people quit, for for whatever reason. A bad (negative) review tells the people who are thinking of downloading the game, what it was honestly like for the individuals who played it, AS IT IS NOW... not as it may be some day if the person actually gets around to fixing it. So part of it is honesty with the people thinking of downloading. It's that the players are able to tell people what the experience was for them personally, as the game is, in the moment.

Second thing is this... The content of the review itself. It IS important, and not just for the maker of that game.

Even if the person had quit because they personally found it too frustrating, if it was my game, I'd want to know that. Because if enough people say it, there's probably something to it. Even if one person says it, I'd want to know their reasons, and the more specifically the better, because then I can judge for myself whether what they're saying is true or not. But more than being important to just me, other game creators can also learn from the mistakes discussed in reviews. They can learn what not to do, or maybe whether something they were considering doing, really wouldn't be a good idea. You can learn quite a bit from other people's mistakes... but not if they're hidden in a private inbox! It's not that I'm saying we should want to shame the authors... but isn't the idea of the site for people who want to do this, to have a place to learn how?

Now, if it was something like, "your bushes are disproportionate to your chracters." Okay... that's just a comment. That kind of thing, I can see wanting people to just write to the maker of the game and letting them know, unless they want to put it as part of the broader review. But if there's a reason the person quit prematurely, I wouldn't care if it was out of pure boredom, I'd sure as heck want to know it! That's valueable info right there. And again, it matters if it's not just one person, but many... and the rating system, here, allows us to see that general score, so that we can tell if we did really well, or if we totally went wrong or whatever. And if we actually fix those problems, we'll probably end up with more positive than negative reviews, in the end, anyway.

I can totally understand people who like the game not liking to hear anything negative about it. It's also pounded into our heads from the cradle that it's the height of rudeness and obnoxiousness to point out flaws in someone else's work, while the world teaches us "anything goes"/"it's all good." But that's death to the creative process.

Like I said... the good reviews are pretty much the least helpful/important. At least the "I love this game!" kind of good reviews. It's the bad reviews that are often going to imrpove what you do, the most, so long as the person doesn't just go, "this is stupid!" and leave it at that. If they give you examples of what happened, what they didn't like, why they left... all of that info is GOLD to someone who wants to perfect what they do. Whereas, "Awesome!!" is not particularly useful.

That's why I think it makes perfect sense to ask reviewers to give reasons and examples for why they think or say what they do in their reviews, because otherwise they really would be pointless. But beyond that, the negative reviews are something I sure as heck wouldn't want to get rid of. I'd want people to tell me if something in a game I made was bad enough to make them quit. (Or even seriously frustrate them.) And I like to learn from the negativecomments I see on other reviews.

A shift in thinking about bad reviews really helps.

There will always be someone who is just having a bad day, who will write nonsense just to vent, and if what someone is saying is not plausible, not true or what not, you simply pass over that. Don't let their bad day ruin yours. But the rest of those bad reviews are very important to those who are not taking the reviews section like it's a personal "likes" or "dislikes" meter for themselves, but rather as a powerful tool to improve a project they are serious and passionate about.

Edit: We should also try to pass over obnoxious overtones without getting bent out of shape, because not only does answering them fuel unnecessary verbal fights, but there are also people in this world who simply talk a certain way and honestly don't mean anything genuinely obnoxious by it. (Yes... I would know all about that...)
Pages: first prev 123456 next last

Reply

Comments have been disabled on this review.