The Shrine

Black Lotus wrote:Which Japanese and European reviewers? I'm not arguing with you, I'm just wondering where you heard that.

Famitsu for one gave it a 34/40 (which is higher than 95% of the games they review). IGN Europe gave it an 8.0, and various UK magazines have scored it in the 80's and 90's, which is higher than any North American site.

Famitsu also recently gave DOAX2 a 35/40 (9,9,8,9) and Gundam for the PS3 a 32/40 (8,8,8,8). Compare this to gamerankings.com averages of 55% and 36% and something's fishy. As far as I can tell, Famitsu rates everything high (individual reviews under 6 seem very uncommon) and as such does not deserve to be used as a referrence by Westerners who have never even seen the publication.

Black Lotus wrote:Famitsu also recently gave DOAX2 a 35/40 (9,9,8,9) and Gundam for the PS3 a 32/40 (8,8,8,8). Compare this to gamerankings.com averages of 55% and 36% and something's fishy. As far as I can tell, Famitsu rates everything high (individual reviews under 6 seem very uncommon) and as such does not deserve to be used as a referrence by Westerners who have never even seen the publication.

Well, Gamerankings is primarilly an English North American site. They don't really look at reviews from any other places except perhaps other English speaking countries. It is not a good site to see how Japanese and European reviewers score their games.

Famitsu is one of the hardest reputable reviewers in the industry; perhaps the hardest. The vast majority of games do not get higher than 30/40. It is also by far the #1 source in Japan.

The User Score of Red Steel on Gamerankings is 8.1, which is quite far from the 66% average that the press gave it. On DOAX2 it is 6.2, which is reletively sclose to the 5.5 on Gamerankings; it seems that the DOA series lives up to its name, dead on arrival.

To corroborate with Dolph, Famitsu is notorious for tough reviews, not the other way around. It's well known within the game industry, Blotty...

Famitsu's actually known, as most of the Japanese press is, for being in the pockets of their advertisers. Most reviews are vetted by a game's publisher before being printed.

Andrew, Killer Bee wrote:Famitsu's actually known, as most of the Japanese press is, for being in the pockets of their advertisers. Most reviews are vetted by a game's publisher before being printed.

I have not heard anything of the sort about Famitsu. Though I have heard it quite frequently about a magazine called EGM and the gaming website 1up.com (clear example of this is a game called Bully). These activities do not surprise me, it is probably not a good idea to listen to reviewers =P

Nev wrote:To corroborate with Dolph, Famitsu is notorious for tough reviews, not the other way around. It's well known within the game industry, Blotty...

Go search for Famitsu ratings (I've been trying to find a database somewhere) and you'll see that MOST games rate over 70%.

Examples I found through Google:

http://dreamcast.ign.com/articles/561/561126p1.html
http://wiilive.wordpress.com/2006/11/21 ... e-ratings/ Wii Launch
http://www.segatech.com/archives/march1999.html Dreamcast launch (scroll down)
http://www.kotaku.com/gaming/sony/famit ... 211460.php PS3 launch
http://forum.teamxbox.com/showthread.php?p=7191306 This one, if true, is just wrong.

Black Lotus wrote:

Nev wrote:To corroborate with Dolph, Famitsu is notorious for tough reviews, not the other way around. It's well known within the game industry, Blotty...

Go search for Famitsu ratings (I've been trying to find a database somewhere) and you'll see that MOST games rate over 70%.

Examples I found through Google:


http://wiilive.wordpress.com/2006/11/21 ... e-ratings/ Wii Launch

This supports my original point. Red Steel is the #2 game in the Wii launch, according to Famitsu.

Oh, and by the way, except for Red Steel and that racer with N64 graphics that sells with a free steering wheel, all of the Wii games have above a 70% average on Gamerankings:

1. The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess WII Nintendo 35 9.1 95.4%
16. Trauma Center: Second Opinion WII Atlus Co. 14 8.5 84.0%
18. Madden NFL 07 WII EA Sports 12 7.4 83.2%
37. Marvel: Ultimate Alliance WII Activision 13 8.5 79.7%
39. Dragon Ball Z: Budokai Tenkaichi 2 WII Atari 9 7.5 79.6%
41. Rayman Raving Rabbids WII Ubisoft 17 8.4 79.4%
47. Wii Sports WII Nintendo 33 8.7 76.6%
49. Tony Hawk's Downhill Jam WII Activision 14 7.5 75.8%
51. Call of Duty 3 WII Activision 12 8.5 74.5%
52. Super Monkey Ball: Banana Blitz WII Sega 23 8.2 74.4%
55. Excite Truck WII Nintendo 29 8.7 73.8%


http://www.gamerankings.com/itemranking ... atings.asp

Dolph wrote:Though I have heard it quite frequently about a magazine called EGM and the gaming website 1up.com (clear example of this is a game called Bully).

Eh? What interweb trolls are you listening to? It's been a long time since I've read any print publication, but 1up is my go-to site for reviews.

Kupek wrote:

Dolph wrote:Though I have heard it quite frequently about a magazine called EGM and the gaming website 1up.com (clear example of this is a game called Bully).

Eh? What interweb trolls are you listening to? It's been a long time since I've read any print publication, but 1up is my go-to site for reviews.

Go ask about 1up on the IGN or Gamefaqs boards, the two largest videogame communities on the web.

The most recent evidence that their reviews scores are bought by their sponsors was a game called Bully that 1up heavily advertised. 1up ended up giving it 100%, but they gave better games much lower scores.

Andrew, Killer Bee wrote:Famitsu's actually known, as most of the Japanese press is, for being in the pockets of their advertisers. Most reviews are vetted by a game's publisher before being printed.

At this point, every game journalism source I know, with the exception of perhaps Penny Arcade, is known for being in the pockets of its advertisers. The entire industry is suffering from problems of ego, cash, corruption, whatever you want to call it. Publishers are running the game, and most of them have no scruples whatsoever. I'm personally disgusted with the whole thing, but I can't do anything about it.

It's true that Famitsu had a controversy surrounding being at the mercy of their advertising dollars - so has the rest of game journalism. It's also true that their review scores have been swinging upwards on average - so has the rest of game journalism, as far as I know, anyway. The whole goddamned game journalism "industry" is having these issues. However, within that framework, as far as I understand it, Famitsu is still known relatively for having a much tougher ratings system than some of its competitors.

"Better" is subjective. I read some of that review, and it sounded fair to me. 1up advertises many games just as heavily that don't get 10s. People just want conspiracies - particularly interweb trolls.

Kupek wrote:"Better" is subjective. I read some of that review, and it sounded fair to me. 1up advertises many games just as heavily that don't get 10s. People just want conspiracies - particularly interweb trolls.

That's what I was going to say. Plus, having played the game, I felt they pointed out the pros and cons very fairly. The score it got was what I would have given it, personally.

The Seeker wrote:I have not heard anything of the sort about Famitsu.

Interesting post on Famitsu by Tim Rogers:

http://forums.selectbutton.net/viewtopic.php?t=476

Interesting, but I have on question. Who the fuck is Tim Rogers?

Haha . Freelance gaming journalist based in Japan. Created Insert Credit (http://www.insertcredit.com/) with Brandon Sheffield.

Black Lotus wrote:http://forum.teamxbox.com/showthread.php?p=7191306 This one, if true, is just wrong.

Dynasy Warriors shouldn't ever score higher than Ninja Gaiden. Ninja Gaiden is the best action fighter/platformer that's ever been out.

SineSwiper wrote:

Black Lotus wrote:http://forum.teamxbox.com/showthread.php?p=7191306 This one, if true, is just wrong.

Dynasy Warriors shouldn't ever score higher than Ninja Gaiden. Ninja Gaiden is the best action fighter/platformer that's ever been out.

No it's not, it's a glorified Tenchu, and that's not a good thing. It doesn't even touch the original Ninja Gaidens. It's good, but too many flaws for me to keep going. I honestly got bored of it.

Zeus wrote:No it's not, it's a glorified Tenchu, and that's not a good thing. It doesn't even touch the original Ninja Gaidens. It's good, but too many flaws for me to keep going. I honestly got bored of it.

No, it's not. Have you even played either game? Tenchu is a game of stealth. It takes a lot of patience, and going in with swords at the ready is punished, not rewarded. The whole point is to kill everybody without being seen. Both Tenchu games are really hard and all of that sneaking around ends up being amazingly boring.

Ninja Gaiden was designed by Team Ninja (of the DoA series), so the gameplay was designed with fighter games in mind. The physics of the moves range from standard push-button combos to undocumented advanced-level tricks that can give you a vareity of advanced free-form combos. (Just look at the Advanced Combat FAQ on GameFAQs.)

It's clearly a game of action, not stealth. And it's really fun and fast-paced, too. The graphics and music are also top-notch.

It's such a brilliant game that it should have scored much higher on Famitsu. Just to prove my point, here's various scores for it from other reviewers:

GameSpot - 9.4
IGN - 9.4
1 Up - 9.1
X-Play - 5 out of 5
GameTab - 92.39% (critics average)
GameSpy - 5 out of 5 stars
Gaming World X - 9.7
Game Informer - 9.5
GamePro - 5 out of 5
EGM - 9.5

That's just a few, but every single review I've seen about it has been glowing, because it's that good a game. Nobody paid them to put out those scores. Hell, nobody's paying me, and I think it's one of the top 3 games for the XBox.

Now, the fact that Famitsu gives NG a 32/40 speaks volumes about how much they suck at reviewing. The fact that they give Dynasty Warrior 4, a shitty fighter, a score higher than Ninja Gaiden means I won't ever trust any Famitsu score/review again.

Keeping in mind how reviewers score games you've played helps you to evaluate their scores of games you have not played. But to completely discount them because they scored a game you like higher than a game you dislike is silly. Scores by themselves are rather meaningless, anyway. You need to read the review to understand why they gave the score they did. Then you can actually figure out how their review and score translates to your tastes.

This is rather academic with Famitsu, though, since none of us are going to read their reviews.

Yeah, but there are some clearly obvious ones. Like Superman 64. Nobody in their right mind is going to give that trashy game a good score. Likewise, Guitar Hero or Gears of War is always going to be reviewed high because they are that good.

There's plenty of gray areas, but the extremes should stay on the extremes for everybody.

Having never played Dynasty Warrios, I can't say whether or not its one of those extremes. And while I played some of Ninja Gaiden and thought it was fun, I dind't think it was <i>great</i>.

I love reading reviews for Superman 64. It's so bad that it angers reviewers, and those are so fun to read.

Oh, and Zeus, your rose colored glasses are amazing.

Kupek wrote:I love reading reviews for Superman 64. It's so bad that it angers reviewers, and those are so fun to read.

I used to think that reviewers were just blowing things out of proportion and that it was just slightly worse than your typical licensed title. Then I saw Gamespot TV's (now X-Play, for those of you who didn't have ZDTV) review for it, and I knew that I had to play it to see for myself. Oh god, they weren't kidding. That game is so bad it's insulting.

On Ninja Gaiden. The original is one of the most over-rated games I have ever played. I would not rank it in the top 30 all time best side scrollers.

All I know is I liked Ninja Gaiden for the Xbox, generally find Dynasty Warriors games to be fun but lack content, and Ninja Gaiden 2 for the NES is probably one of the hardest console action games in existence.

Kupek wrote:Oh, and Zeus, your rose colored glasses are amazing.

This one you're going to have to explain

SineSwiper wrote:Yeah, but there are some clearly obvious ones. Like Superman 64. Nobody in their right mind is going to give that trashy game a good score. Likewise, Guitar Hero or Gears of War is always going to be reviewed high because they are that good.

There's plenty of gray areas, but the extremes should stay on the extremes for everybody.

Not really. Look at the reviews for FF7. I beat that game and I thought it was the weakest of the bunch at that time (we only had 1, 4, and 6 then). There's a lot of personal opinion involved as well. I don't like RTSs so I don't care if it's rated 9.9 overall by 3000 reviewers, I likely won't like it. Same with a lot of people and sports games.

Reviewers (should) look at things with as little personal opinion as possible, which is why they have the different categories. For us consumers, it could be beautiful, have excellent gameplay (for the genre), great music, lots of stuff to do, but if it's not our type of game, we personally won't like it. Also, it could be our type of game and we just not agree for whatever reason.

Shadow of the Colossus was highly rated, but there are A LOT of people who can't stand the slow pace of that game (and the fact the controls - although good - are sluggish feeling). When my bud had it at his EB for that month, we were shocked at how many people just couldn't play it.

Zeus, it's just a cheap shot at how you generally prefer the old-school versions of games and movies.

Kupek wrote:Zeus, it's just a cheap shot at how you generally prefer the old-school versions of games and movies.

Games not so much, but movies yes. I'm much harder on Hollywood than the gaming industry.

Ninja Gaiden for the Xbox is fantastic. To call is a 'glorified Tenchu' is so wrong... Zeus, go to your room.

(nice split, whoever did this)

(another Ninja Gaiden split may be necessary )

(Ninja Gaiden is awesome and comparisons between it and Tenchu are ridiculous)