@Flynn: I wear my flavour on my sleeve and say so.

And the important thing (in my opinion) is to challenge yourself as a reviewer, and you don't do that by playing games you like all the time.

A food reviewer doesn't stay in the job by only eating at McDonald's.

So I will review games in genres I don't like, and encourage others to do so, because I figure if I enjoy it, then others who don't normally like that kind of game will as well, which gives me a more positive basis to my writing.

Then again, I'm pretty easy to please. I like games - I am happy sitting playing the Sims as I am playing Halo3 or Super Paper Mario.

FunkyJ

This is no different than a music reviewer who favors Korn and Limp Bizkit calling Orbital "teh suck." Sometimes, I think reviewers of all types should wear their tastes on their sleeves. If you don't like teen comedies and you think Fellini was the best director ever, you shouldn't be reviewing the latest American Pie without MAJOR caveats.

And the problem in game reviews is that everyone likes FPS's. You don't have the reviewer who thinks that Half Life is repetitive and boring. If mags/sites did, I think it'd be easier to hand the review off to someone who might actually LIKE a different style of game.

Flynn

*THAT sounds amazingly suggestive! Damn this EDIT feature and its total lack of being.

Colwyn vs. "The Beast"

That is one of the worst looking websites I have ever seen. Black on pink? That's sounds amazingly suggestive!

Colwyn vs. "The Beast"

"Does the fact that the New York Times film critics routinely pan huge summer blockbusters stop hordes of the movie going public from enjoying them?"

Let's think about this analogy a second, and transform it into its more accurate representation.

The New York Times is *recommending* the huge summer blockbusters, and calling the rest of the films bland and uninteresting for not being exciting enough.

See the problem?

gblock

The problem with the eurogamer review, in my opinion, is the number at the bottom. The review itself is pretty positive; but then the game gets a 6/10 for not fitting into some preconceived picture of what a game should look like. That's just dumb, and it hurts the game, its sales numbers, and the probability that other devs will try similarly interesting concepts.

L_K_M

@Runouthearts:

I agree with you. Endless Ocean is a game with "missions", structure, emergent gameplay, and some pretty good graphics (for the Wii).

As you say, it doesn't make sense that this game is being singled out for being a "non-game". Just the other day, Kotaku did a nice bash-piece "High School Musical Sing-it", though I don't know if they played the game. It's SingStar with very popular songs. Wow, what a travesty. I guess the game sucks because they don't like the music.

I guess to most game reviewers, any game targeted for a different age group/demographic is automatically garbage.

Just for some balance, I'd love to see a month of game reviews written exclusively by 12 year old girls. As it stands now, it feels like all the reviews online are written by 12 year old boys.

SeeOne

while I feel that the article the post was based on is rather poor, it does (yet again) raise a great point... that reviewers truly are failing their base.

I can't even count the number of games (going waaay back to my old PC days) that got mid-range scores, but by actually reading the text of the review, realizing that this was exactly what I was looking for, as much as it wasn't for the reviewer.

I was super-excited about Endless Ocean from the moment I read about it in previews... this was exactly what I was waiting for (if the game pulled it off properly, of course). Since I bought it at launch, I've played 30+ hours and am still loving it. Of course the game has some definite flaws (as do most), but they're very easy to overlook, as the overall experience is perfect (again, for me). the ability to come home after a very long day and put on EO with the perfect MP3 soundtrack (usually Boris with Merzbow - Feedbacker) is exactly what I need.

it's hard not to be somewhat perturbed by the reviews that seemingly totally miss the point... I can definitely understand that games like this aren't everyone's cup of tea, but for what it is, it's a very well-executed and surprisingly long and deep experience (especially at $30).

these genre labels (hardcore etc.) just reek of the high-school mentality where you have to label yourself as being part of some stratified group. I can enjoy so many different games (hell, I got No More Heroes at the same time and love it as well), it would be a shame for people to limit their experiences based on such childish notions.

this is rather long-winded, but this whole "non-game" classification is ridiculous. how is Electroplankton NOT a game (as was mentioned earlier)? sure it doesn't cling to genre conventions, but that's exactly why it's so successful and absorbing... the goals aren't implicit and I find that in itself more immersive than anything.

also, EO is essentially Animal Crossing underwater, with a HELL of a lot more stuff to do, and yet the AC titles were generally very well-reviewed. doesn't make a bit of sense!

Runouthearts

@The_Inquisitor: You win the entire post.

All of this can be measured in one phrase. The guy from Tale of Tales was too harsh saying that the Eurogamer review was bad, because as I've read it, it's pretty professional... and he should choose his words more wisely, so he doesn't get caught in anti-hardcore gamer stereotypes.

And Endless Ocean, while a beautiful game, might be for some people, and not for others. Reviews should specify what kind of game it is, so the gamer will think if he likes it before buying it.

That's just it.

Ashurahori

Ignoring the whole issue of whether there need be reviews targeting "casual games" or not, let's discuss the article and the way the author approaches the subject.

"What if you don't hate your life and you don't want to be knocked unconscious by your entertainment?"

Wow, I don't know the author, Mr. Samyn. I have never read any of his previous works, but that small amount of respect I give someone I don't know; you know, that benefit of doubt, that's gone with the sentence here. The implicit assumption here that all gamers who want an engaging game that suspends disbelief have some sort of self-hatred issues is really disgusting. This just reeks of the sort of self-important prick that I really find loathsome.

So what do all these happy people who don't hate their lives do then? (Seeing as I'm the sort of gamer who automatically must hate my life, I wouldn't know.)

"What if you just want to relax in front of the television set, doing not much of anything, spending some time with your family, experiencing a story or looking at pretty moving pictures?"

So, these happy, non-life-hating people just want to sit around and experience a story and look at pretty pictures.

...

I guess as a person who hates life, I just can't understand the difference between sitting around enjoying one type of story and pretty pictures, or sitting around enjoying this OTHER type of story and pretty pictures. But apparently there is a BIG difference, and I would know this if I wasn't so busy immersing myself in hardcore escapism.

When I got a moment to stop thinking about how much I hate my life and wish I was dead, I started thinking about what got this guy so upset in the first place. So I went and read the Eurogamer review. I'll pick out some choice snippets here:

"All the sea life is as believable and beautiful in its appearance as it is ridiculous in its diversity."
"As dreamy as the game looks - all suffused, dappled blue light - the pull to explore every nook and cranny of its underwater world isn't quite as strong as it could be."
"Endless Ocean is simple to the point of being quite dull, and certainly no masterpiece. But sometimes all a game needs to do is offer you something different, and it's an honest relief to play something that doesn't shout in your ear, set any time limits, or feature a single explosion; a game whose raison d'être is just beauty and peace. Playing this game is almost like taking a holiday from gaming. If you can live with that paradox - and if you can find it reasonably cheap - it's worth dipping a toe in these calm, blue waters."

So that's it. They just felt it was a bit boring, that the story and pretty pictures just weren't good enough story and pretty pictures to keep them interested. What does Mr. Samyn have to say about this?

"And it's not like they don't realize this: [...] It's that they don't appreciate it. And apparently don't care that other people do."

Hold on a second, I gotta cut my arms a bit, I just hate myself so much.

Ok, I'm back. So I read that last paragraph from Eurogamers, and I interpret this as "We didn't really enjoy the game, but you might, so if you read this and it sounds like your cup of tea, go for it." Apparently Mr. Samyn interpreted it as "We know what sort of game this is, but we don't like it, and no one else can either!" Perhaps one of us needs to consider investing more time in the study of the english language. Fortunately there are a few of the more esoteric english courses I haven't taken at my university yet, so I'll make sure to fit them in next quarter. Maybe then I can be as happy and non-hateful as Mr. Samyn.

Or maybe I can just write Mr. Samyn off as an elitist asshole fanboy who gets his knickers in a twist because somebody writes a review of his favorite game that isn't glowing hearts and candy floss. Thus making him feel it necessary to lash out at everyone who would so denigrate his beautiful bride - err, game.

Now if you'll excuse me, I have to go climb to the top of my office building and sit there thinking about how tomorrow I'm going to jump, just like I do every night. Because I hate life.

The_Inquisitor

I like "chill out games", like animal crossing and chibi robot. I love a challenge, but after some time of Contra 4, Ikaruga, and geometry wars (especially geometry wars) I get damn TENSE, as in sweating like a pig. I just cant go on past some time, after you are past a million in geometry wars your hands aren't even in synch with your brain anymore, it's just madness. Games that don't pose a challenge at all are of great help in those times.

Bunn

@Donutta: That's just it. Right there. You're boiling it down to who likes the game, and you're generalizing it as a non-game. No, a non-game would be a screensaver. Or a movie. Anything you interact with on your console that has some kinda control or objective, regardless of how loose or unforced they are, still a game. It is a niche game at most, but still a game. Gamers can still pick it up, gamers can still enjoy it.

Now, in your case, I can understand the price coming into it, it's a lot more pricey for you there than it is here (by about half the price.) and asking average gamer to shell out 60 dollars to try something they may not really get into, instead of the 30 it is here, could be asking for alienating you from the readership. But is that the game's fault? When you write a review, you're not supposed to be pandering to your audience, you're supposed to give people a reason to buy or avoid something, based on the product itself, not the audience. I can see passing up reviews for some cheesy Dogz knockoffs or another Brain Age knockoff, but this isn't some entirely 'made to cash in' type of title. This might be worth someone's time and money.

The way I review stuff (Or am experimentally fiddling with it on my unread blog anyway.) is to give a general synopsis of what the game's about, it's flaws and strengths, and then the reasons why I think someone should check it out, either buying or renting it, and then the reasons why I think someone should pass on it. Because no game is going to be perfect, some are going to be wholly uninterested in Endless Ocean. And that's fine. There are also plenty of people who are. I think if you give people reasons both to try something, and not to try something, they might actually read those, pick out what they fall more in line with, and base their opinion on that. Even if the game is mediocre or average, there's usually at least something to do with it, and someone might really like that one redeeming value enough to ignore the downsides. (Usually the case with, say, anime-based games.) Of course, my method doesn't give any form of score, but I'm also not doing this for a living.

Ampillion lives a life much like No More Heroes.

The problem with gaming reviews is that they all come from magazines that cater specifically to the hardcore crowd. Stuff like "Game Informer" and "IGN" are not going to be read by Average Joe looking to get a game for little Timmy. This is the issue that the article brings up, and Greene seems to miss it completely with her analogy. Yes, movie critics pan movies that may be successful, but that's not the problem. What movie critics do is review all movies: documentaries, comedies, romance, action, drama, thriller, etc. They do not cater to one specific audience, though, but that's precisely what most game reviews do.

Gaming is currently undergoing a massive transition where casual gaming and lighter fare is being much more accepted. I'm not asking publications to raise their scores to match this movement, but it needs to open up to the new audience instead of always relying on the obsessive gamers to sustain their sales.

Ninja-Z

For the Wii right?

Allen750

i think it also depends on what is considered professional reviews. many people point at book or movie reviews as being more professional and many times I think they are crap and don't bother reading them. And as videogames become more and more a part of modern society, the need to look at game reviews will wane for me as well. thankfully, with games you can read some impressions and watch a few videos to get an idea about a game or rent, but you can't do that with movies past the trailer really.

jp182

@Donutta: Of course, Gamerankings.com... the central supply depot for fanboys.

Btw, I wasn't criticizing you personally or anything. A business operates as the owners see fit.

Xiedo

@themule: Gah my engrish and grahmmerz is a bit dull. lol

themule

@Fyren: Hey that hurt :'(, i love ass creed...erm, i meant assassian's creed.
Seriously tho, I do agree with about not trusting reviews though because they're opinions that you may yourself no agree with. Play something yourself, your own opinion is what really matters.
Assassian's Creed Owns :P

themule

Because, to be frank and honest, you then lose Gamerankings. And never underestimate the number of hits that GR will get you. In this business, it's more important that people are reading your publication. A shame, but that's the way it flies.

Donutta

@Donutta: God, I would also love it if scores got ditched. A bullet list of pros and cons is fine for quick scanning, why ya gotta dumb it down even further to a 1-10 score? Anyone who goes by the numerical score alone is going to get burned by a game sooner or later... distilling the usage of these numbers as ammunition in fanboy wars.

Xiedo

@Ampillion lives a life much like No More Heroes.: I don't know if you could say it doesn't work. If it's a site for gamers, are they really going to feel any differently about non-games? That's not to say that We/I hate non-games -- one of my favourite games is Electroplankton -- but when it comes to recommending a game to our audience, we have to think about who our audience is.

Reviewing non-games as a gaming site is hard. We currently rank graphics, sound, gameplay, and value as our four main areas for analysis. Now, those are obviously subjective, but in the case of non-games we've actually had to leave them blank. How, then, does the final number score not become arbitrary (although some would argue it already is)? Oh, this math simulator is worth 7/10. Why?

Personally, I'd be in favour of ditching scores and letting the text do the talking, but unless you can convince the industry to ditch "quick glance" opinions for the people who can't be bothered to read more than a sentence, you're stuck between a rock and a hard place.

Donutta

I've got Endless Ocean, and...

IT'S OFF THE FREAKIN' HINGES!

Aimless

@Ampillion lives a life much like No More Heroes.: Ugh. I need to hire an editor to proofread my grammar for when I'm having off days. McWhertor, get in here and proofread my posts before I make 'em!

Ampillion lives a life much like No More Heroes.

@Donutta: No, but that comparison wouldn't work. That'd be like sending a copy of Metal Gear Solid 4 to a site labeled "Nintendofanboy.net" or "Xbotnation.com", sending something to a source that'd never even review it anyway, or has reviewed anything of a similar sort before. So unless For Him Magazine was known for it's 'Chick Flix' one-page article somewhere within it's covers, you'd never bother sending it to that source in the first place.

Now, I do hate the idea of publishers kinda pointing the finger back at the reviewers after the fact, and while I do think the review wasn't entirely accurate; It is just an opinion piece, and in the end, I think the game itself probably ended up getting a lot more positive reviews than negative ones, and I'm sure you as a publisher should know if your game is good or not before it hits shelves. And even this review wasn't entirely negative on the game, just on some of the execution.

Ampillion lives a life much like No More Heroes.

Jesus, what the hell? Can't people have opinions these days or something?
These jerks need to shut the hell up and let people say what they think, whether they have a preference for something or not.

Demaar

Since we're talking about target audiences, would anyone expect a studio to send the latest Meg Ryan chick flick to For Him Magazine and then expect a glowing review?

Donutta

I've worked in the game industry for several years now now and have seen first hand how a good casual style game can struggle to overcome bad reviews written by a reviewer who didn't understand the game's intended audience. If I made the ultimate platformer, I wouldn't want some guy who eats, sleeps and farts first person shooters to review it, would I?

I think comparing games to movies is also a bit naive. After all, if you don't like a movie you're only out $10.00 a ticket. If you buy a game and don't like it you're out $40-60. Also, movies are typically group experiences where you are often paying more for the social experience than the entertainment aspect (ie. "date movies"). I don't know anyone who's first date was playing a game.

Finally, my ultimate pet pieve with reviewers is the idiot who always reviews games against the one he popped his cherry on. The mongrel who says no platformer will ever be better than Super Mario World, no puzzle game better than Tetris, no console FPS better than Halo, etc.

vine

Tale of Tales--at least, the couple of guys that write reviews on Tale of Tales--has got to be the greatest congregation of pretentious hacks I have ever had the displeasure to encounter through seeing their "work".

Check out the guy's scathing review of Half-Life 2. "ooh, it's a shooter, it doesn't tell a great story, it's immature and it's disgusting!" Well you know something? You're disgusting for telling me what I should like.

Thankfully this guy belongs to an isolated and obscure cybersociety, which is fair grounds for me to ignore everything he says. Next time I play Halo 3, in addition to the fun of playing, I will have some pleasure in knowing that somewhere out there a pompous asshole is fuming uncontrollably.

Gunhaver

There is a lot wrong with game reviews and the Enthusiast Press that review them. One of them being that there are too many Crispin Boyer's out there with too many preconceived ideas about what a game has to be to get reviewed and reviewed well.

crazyscreenwriter

@Guizzy: I just cut something out of today's newspaper, and revealed through the hole was the ad for Rambo. Which has a big quote that says the movie is "a nasty, Call of Duty 4 style shoot 'em up!"

That's ironic or poetic or something.

Evil Tortie's Mom

This guy does not know what he is talking about.

Just because people play vidogames doesnt mean they hate their lives...they play because its entertainment, plain and simple. Movies distract your attention too. So do books!

Under this guy's logic, people read books to distract themselves from the fact that all they are doing in reality is sitting in one spot for long periods of time staring at pages of paper(all to distract them to a point where they can't realize how they are actually not doing anything productive while sitting, plus they also do it because they hate their lives.)

Hey sir, maybe if you hate hardcore entertainment in the league of videogames, movies and novels maybe you should read kiddy books. I'd recommend Bearenstein Bears...you don't get as engrossed/distracted with those as you would in books for smarter people, and you certainly won't forget how much you love your life and how you look down on those who play hardcore videogames.

fenderfuel08

Oh, you mean like Leigh Alexander and her review of Radiant Dawn, except it was less of a proper review and more of a rant against the strategy genre? Yeah, I agree.

Izaak

I dunno, I read the NZGamer review and it seems pretty fair. He didn't complain that it didn't feature shooting things or that it was about exploring the ocean and watching underwater life, rather that it didn't do them well.

If the argument is that people that are into casual games are entertained more easily and thus the reviews for casual games should be judged more easily, I disagree.

An excellent casual game will entertain everyone. Tetris, the Sims, Guitar Hero. These don't cater exclusively to casual or hardcore gamers, but they're loved by all (well, I'll grant you that hardcore gamers are probably passing on the Nth Sims expansion, but the core Sims games were worth the bucks I spent on them).

DannoHung

@kidnicky: QFT.

I just got Endless Ocean, I've only played an hour, but i liked it a lot.

It is relaxing. You do still use your brains a little -- deciding which way to swim, what to look at, which fishies to feed. So it's still more interactive than watching TV, but very relaxing. No stress, no time limit, no finding save points to keep you from getting whomped by the next boss. Unlike TV/movie, though, you get to decide how long it will last and how it'll progress. You can't watch a whole movie in the 30 minutes while dinner's cooking, but you can get a Wii scuba dive in.

Where are the softcore (yeeek) or mid-core review sites, anyway? Not just trailers, but decent reviews of these sorts of games, not hating on them b/c you're not shooting stuff.

Evil Tortie's Mom

Personally, I believe a reviewer's intent should be, at the very top of the list, to try and get the right game into the right consumer's hand.

This is my issue with "Hardcore" videogame reviews. They largely seem too busy trying to prove their point, rather than trying to help people understand whether they may or may not appreciate a certain title.

So ya, I think a lot of game reviews can be so apathetic towards titles, or in the opposite, so disgustingly supportive of other titles, that it feels to me like they clutch onto their opinion as fact, rather than a perspective, leaving the idea of subjectivity in the toilet.

I don't necessarily agree with the New York Times movie review analogy either, mostly because the games industry is far younger, and the idea of subjectivity within game choice isn't as widely known as common sense, even if many of the veteran gamers know it to exist.

Also, I think the high cost of games does place a larger priority on the need for reviewer's opinions for a large amount of people out there. More people will go see a movie because the trailer is cool, than people are willing to check out a game simply because the trailer is cool. They'll need a little bit more info and assurance before they go plunk down $50-60.

theALLseeingEYE

Where I think most reviewer's are wrong is that they cannot even fathom that there can be games that are not goal-oriented. Besides Endless Ocean, if you look at a sample of reviews of Electroplankton and Jam Sessions you'll see many froth at the mouth and give horrible scores for these games for being exactly what they were advertised as. Which is musical software that happens to be on your DS. I remember at least one critic bemoaning that Jam Sessions wouldn't declare "You Rock!" after strumming through a song and score-bombing it.
Every decent-sized outlet needs to recognize that the definition of videogames is going to keep expanding, and find or get someone on their staffs who can review music making software, cooking tutors, language tutors and such on their own merits. The "Blue Ocean" audience coming in knows how to use the internet too. You can add them to your readership by fairly critiquing things, or get dismissed by them when you dismiss their favorite games for not fitting your narrow definition about what every game needs to be.

DiscipleofJamzy

Different reviews should cater to diffent demographics,not all gamers are hardcore and not all gamers are FPS whores(to put a example)

Wargamer234,Monarchy and God

@All About Lily Chou-Chou: I think the comparison about being less futile is supposed to be more of a 'It should be as equally acceptable as a gamer to be whatever I want to play a game as, regardless of what the content might be' angle as opposed to 'being something more serious and realistic should be better in gaming than something ridiculous or cliche.', though perhaps, as you said, the whole 'picking apart the Eurogamer review' (Which I'll agree isn't nearly as bad as other reviews out there. That one review from Insomnia from the No More Heroes Frankenreview comes to mind. Hurl...) ends up really taking away from his point more than really adding to it.

Ampillion lives a life much like No More Heroes.

I agree to this actually. Like the time Luke (1up) gave his thoughts about Flow. Some of these guys should stay away from reviewing these types of games, like endless ocean, eurogamers review is pretty dumb. Compared to the 1up show when they played the game and gave pretty good comments about it, accurate ones.

In a releated story, I'm sooo getting this game for the Wii, I really do want this. Sometimes I wanna play what people call "hardcore" and sometimes I wanna play games like this, it doesn't stop me from jumping into counter strike once a week every week for the past what 10 *blip years :P

Irenicus-the one and only

@Eagle Epsilon [ZTF]: Reviews should say what kinds of people should play this or that game. Or they don't help the public know if that game's good or not, and are not reviews in the first place.

Ashurahori

Here is the conclusion to Eurogamer's review:

"Endless Ocean is simple to the point of being quite dull, and certainly no masterpiece. But sometimes all a game needs to do is offer you something different, and it's an honest relief to play something that doesn't shout in your ear, set any time limits, or feature a single explosion; a game whose raison d'être is just beauty and peace. Playing this game is almost like taking a holiday from gaming. If you can live with that paradox - and if you can find it reasonably cheap - it's worth dipping a toe in these calm, blue waters.

They're hardly bashing the game... The review itself is everything but crushing. While Mr Samyn article may have a point, using the Eurogamer review as a springboard detracts from the validity of his argument.

Also, I can't help but wonder: how is pretending you're scubadiving less futile than pretending you're a ruggedly handsome treasure hunter or a trigger-happy furball with a robot-friend on his back?
I fail to see the criteria used to differenciate between irresponsible escapism and socially acceptable leasure.

Finally, the idea that non-casual games are designed to "knock you unconscious" is pretty ignorant, as is the implication that you can't "experience a story" or if you're playing a "hardcore" game.

Aside from the fact that I hate the whole hardcore/casual terminology, dozens upon dozens of games that Mr Samyn would certainly qualify as "hardcore" are essentially built around experiencing a story.

(As a sidenote, Eurogamer is known for its constant tongue-in-cheek humour. Mr Samyn clearly took the review much too seriously. Again, he has a valid point, but he chose the wrong target to pick a bone with, IMO.

To those who haven't, read the review and decide for yourselves: [www.eurogamer.net] Personally, I found it rather positive, and it even got me somewhat interested in a game I wouldn't have given a second thought to.)

All About Lily Chou-Chou

The problem here isn't that a lot of 1337 gamerz don't LIKE Endless Ocean,it's that without playing it,they look at the back of the box and see that it isn't about ninjas,or robots,or even the dreaded ROBOT NINJAS,so the game must be "shovelware".
Every couple days I have to read shit on here about how games should be a respected form of media,like books or movies. Well,guess what? All movies aren't about killing people or aliens,all books aren't about the army of the future,all TV shows aren't Dragon Ball Z. By bashing Endless Ocean,you're doing your part to make sure you'll always be considered a man-child "manatee" at best.
Game review sites/magazines are like travelling to a bizarro world and seeing Siskel and Ebert make fun of Citizen Kane because it's "for pussies" and hailing Friday the 13th part 2 as the best classic film of all time.

kidnicky

@Fyren: In the same vein, if I went by reviews, I'd never have purchased and loved a hundred different titles that got a 7 or lower. Also, I would be expected to love Halo 3 or CoD4, which I don't.

That's why I rent *everything* before I buy it, with the exception of a few very rare titles (like GTA, which I know I like and don't change much in basic gameplay each time). Reviews just aren't enough, ever.

MrBionic

Gamers want games that trick them? I, I can't reflect on fast paced hardcore games? So I guess the nights I spent discussing DMC 4 (story, characters, style) never actually happened...

Why do people keep getting jobs in gaming news when they don't know anything about games(Croal, whoever this guy is etc)?

Garro

That scuba diving game for the Wii looks decent.

Swean

@VeeKaChu: Well sometimes it's not just some sort of hatred of games they don't like. A hardcore gamer can still have a lot of fun with certain types of non-hardcore games. And only the really opinionated, biased types of reviewers out there are going to spout some sort of fanatical bullshit towards something they don't like. Not all hardcore gamers are somehow out to destroy a growing casual culture, some are smart enough to see that there's a better chance of us all benefiting in the end. It's always a small portion of a larger populace that's always fanatical, be it in gaming, religion, sports, or what have you. That minority is just always more vocal on the internet, where they can be more easily heard.

Ampillion lives a life much like No More Heroes.

This is a problem with all media formats, alot of people, for example, hate on Sweeny Todd the movie because its a musical when "it should have just been a straight up slasher/horror flick". It was a great musical movie, just like Endless Ocean is a great casual "lets just explore" style of game, and easily one of the best in its genre.

BassForever

The thing is, people that like Transformers the movie, or games like Endless Ocean have come to understand they cannot rely on reviews for this.

The thing is, if you want an action-packed movie, or an casual game with little in the way of actual gameplay, you don't NEED reviews.

You'll already know if an action movie has enough action from trailers, or if a casual game seem easy or is pretty from gametrailers or screenshots.

Reviews are necessary for movies and games that go beyond the mainstream, because the qualities that set them apart (characterisation, story, gameplay, controls, replayability) can not be as obvious to someone who hasn't played them yet.

I did not need to read a review of Rambo 4 to know it would be violent and action-packed, But without reading reviews, I wouldn't have known Assassin's Creed would be repetitive, or that Bioshock, Portal, Mass Effect were teh awesome.

What would a review of Rambo 4 intended for its target audience, would sound like? First, it would have to forgo (or keep to the minimum) talk of its story and characters (except John himself). What would there be to say?

If you take out what makes hardcore games good or bad out of reviews, there isn't enough left to actually make a review.

Guizzy

@chiefpoopingpants: Absolutely right. The majority of the people that make up the gaming press are simply not good at what they do. They aren't very good writers and cannot convey their ideas in articulate and enlightening ways. They don't have the same education a real writer would have, and it's generally because real writers tend to go to better and more prestigious fields, so you're left with a small talent pool.

baccardi84

I would argue that the difference between critics bashing shitty movies and shitty games is that when you go to buy your ticket for "shitty summer blockbuster" the guy selling it to you will not say how bad it is. Usually, anyway. Blockbuster will not say "OH GOD THAT'S SO BAD" when you try to rent it.

If you go into a gamestop, however, and try to buy "shitty casual game" the employee working is probably going to at LEAST make a crack about how bad it is, if not try and persuade you to buy something else.

wtfomg

The "Hardcore V. Casual Last Nerd Standing Texas-Twister Deathmatch" is the most spurious and idiotid "debate" going in elctronic enentertainment today. It really gained traction when the Wii emphasised gameplay and broad appeal while it's stable-mates were slathering on the power and the graphical glory. When it became clear that Nintendo was achieving great success without hi-def carnage- and getting the GD grown-ups interested as well- the howling began...

What exactly is it that alleged "hardcore" gamers fear from the broadening of the overall audience for video games? What even defines "hardcore", and what are the specific benefits of being in that club? Could it simply be that they fear getting pushed off the couch so that sis can get her Cooking Mama on?

And who speaks for the "Casual" gamers? NOBODY! Because they don't even know there's a beef.

VeeKaChu

@Ampillion lives a life much like No More Heroes.: Exactly. And for what it is, I think it's fantastic. Aquanaut's Holiday-esque good times. I can also see why it won't appeal to a lot of people, but I've disliked the tone a lot of reviews have taken. "Well, you can't fight anything and you can't die, so it sucks" more or less.

Grave

@djcoffee: What about the core-core, apple core, Molten Core, nougat core or chewy whipped chocolate core demographics?

Ampillion lives a life much like No More Heroes.

"What if you just want to relax in front of the television set, doing not much of anything, spending some time with your family, experiencing a story or looking at pretty moving pictures?"

Here's a novel thought. Turn off the console and watch some TV. That's what all those networks spend countless millions of dollars for; so you don't have to spend 60 dollars to enjoy some time in front of the tube.

And to all you naysayers out there that say there is no good programming on TV these days, I'm pretty confident there is SOMETHING on cable that you'd enjoy, what with it's eleventybillion channels.

Bacardi151

Original article was spot-on.

Great! The videogame industry and its audience is finally growing large and broad enough to support different types of "games", Endless ocean being one of them.

I generally steer away from game industry/movie industry analogies, but this seems like an obvious one- not all games are for all gamers, like not all movies are for all moviegoers. And that is fine!

Someone who loved the transformers movie might hate casablanca, and vice versa. Does that mean either sucked? No.

Mega-Driven

@Donutta: See, here it's at most, US30. It's a budget title here by comparison. So, I can see how the price tag could at least a deterrent to giving it a try there. Again, I can't understand how anyone can think the game is terrible by any means. Now, it might just be too boring, or too uninteresting to hold onto your attention, and that's one thing... but we're not talking about a Cruis'n, where a game entirely doesn't try. Or crash and burns. We're talking about a game with a purpose of having little purpose other than a little relaxation, a little information, and general poking around.

Ampillion lives a life much like No More Heroes.

I love endless ocean absolutely worth the purchase.

JesseLacey

@Ampillion lives a life much like No More Heroes.: I didn't purchase it. I'm said reviewer of the NZGamer link someone else posted too. A lot of people seem to be of the mind that I went into the game hating it, but in all honesty I also got the rest of my flat to play it too as I was afraid I was being too harsh on it. I gathered their thoughts and mine and wrote a review. Considering it also sells for US$60, I didn't think it was worth recommending to our target audience.

Donutta

@Kyle81: gross over-generalization. you're forgetting the mid/ex-core audience.

djcoffee

i would like a review site with reviewers that are exactly like me in lifestyle and game tastes. that'd be awesome.

in all seriousness though, i do think there is enough of an audience for sites that are more casual/mid-core than most game review sites. gametrailers seems to do a nice job here.

djcoffee

The non hardcore do not read reviews, who cares.

Kyle81

@Ampillion lives a life much like No More Heroes.: Ignore the grammatical typos, my brain is a splittin'. Need a good drink, or some Excedrin.

Ampillion lives a life much like No More Heroes.

@iamnotdryad: I was really thinking hardcore gamers in general not necessarily reviewers. Hardcore gamers will lambaste good titles in the comments for silly nitpicking details.

Uglyshoe

@Donutta: Exactly why you would NOT purchase the game in the first place. It's not for you, not meant for you, and would never 'satisfy' whatever it is you're after. The 'opinion is fact' attitude, exactly what this article is tapping at.

There is no 'standards' to drop. Outside of how well the game is constructed, each game has it's own standards. Each genre has it's own standards. That's why you have reviewers in the first place, to take something in and interpret it for others. To think that there is some giant 'Blueprint for Awesome Game' laying around that everything should be compared to is foolish, and when reviewers take to doing that, it's stifling games as a whole, pigeonholing themselves into this squawk-box that only preaches to a particular brand of gamer. If that's what a reviewer wants to do to themselves, their choice, but what's to stop me from writing off the review and indeed, the entire site, from being a load of 'shite'.

Ampillion lives a life much like No More Heroes.

I don't really understand what they're trying to convey here. First, they say that all games are mindless drivel that require no critical thinking and offer nothing to the player outside of killing time. Then they go on to say that casual games are different because they're just for killing time.

sloner

@Uglyshoe:

It's not hardcore gamers that are never happy; it's reviewers. They want every game to be a 10/10. They can't accept that a game is going to have flaws.

iamnotdryad

It seems hardcore gamers are never happy in the first place. Games, even when good, are scourged in the hardcore game reviews as for being too short or expensive or easy. I stopped reading game reviews after I had seen enough complaining that the game doesn't match the aspect ratio of their television, or the version on their preferred system was unacceptable because that other system had higher brightness levels.

Uglyshoe

@Donutta: I have to disagree - Endless Ocean is an excellent game - great graphics (for the Wii) an interesting (though clumsily told) storyline, lots of different objectives, plenty of opportunities to just enjoy the underwater scenery, optional side stories and some really nice music.

I can honestly say that I've spent more time playing Endless Ocean than any other Wii game including Mario Galaxy and Twilight Princess. Of course, it helps that I dive as a hobby and I find it genuinely interesting discovering new varieties of fish in the game and exploring so of the more exotic dive sites such as the abyss and the lost city.

It's unfair to write a game off just 'cause it's 'casual' - It's a cop-out I know but if you like this sort of thing, Endless Ocean is a wonderful game - if you want to fight monsters under the sea, you're probably better off with BioShock (which I also loved).

Aegis: Gentleman mercenary for hire...

Game reviews are pretty obviously biased toward Action games, First Person Shooters, and the loved franchises.

If you are a popular FPS franchise....well let's just say I don't think you could score lower than an 85/100 on Metacritic if you crapped in a box and labelled it Half Life 3, Halo 4 or Call of Duty 5?

tincow

What really bugs me about Endless Ocean is that it's a shite game in a shite series and the only reason anyone cares now is because Nintendo's publishing it and its on the Wii. I got most of my non-gaming flat to play it, and they all thought it was a boring bunch of wank too.

Nintendo and its supporters can't expect hardcore sites to drop their standards just because they are trying to court a new demographic. If they don't want Endless Ocean and its kin to be reviewed to those standards, then don't send them a review copy. It's as simple as that.

Donutta

I think the issue here is more of a case of someone judging a genre outside of its intentions. Good critics in any medium may have preferences for one or another genres, but usually take the time to try and understand a work within the context of its intended audience, its genre conventions and some ultimately subjective final take. So a film critic might not love Westerns for example but s/he can spot a good Western if it comes along. If you go look at pretty much any respected critic in the press, you'll see this to the point that yes, even big tent summer blockbusters will occasionally get positive reviews.

But reading reviews like the Eurogamer one you see people not really bothering with thinking about what the game is, what and who it is for, and if it might be enjoyable but rather grading it on a scale designed for typical high adrenalin goal oriented fare. It's like taking points off some romantic comedy because it didn't have spaceships, or the effects were few and far between. It just kind of doesn't make sense and it reeks of 'enthusiast' writing over a more critical stance.

ajay42

@Moonshadow101: Glad to see you didn't even bother.

Ampillion lives a life much like No More Heroes.

While I won't disagree with the fact that reviewers should keep themselves focused on the key points of the game, mechanics, story, the gameplay as a whole, I do think that some reviewers really need to sit down and weigh their reviews a bit better sometimes. On occasion, the reviews I've read at various places read to me more like an explanation of fact rather than an opinion on the game. I can understand if a game's controls feel clunky, or if there's pop-ups or bugs in the game that need to be pointed out, that's something that's hard to deny. Outside of real, physical things you can point out and go 'This is bad/good', everything else is merely you (the reviewer's) opinion. If the story doesn't quite pull you along, or the gameplay could stand to be a little deeper... that's all entirely your opinion.

If you can't see why something could be fun to someone else, you're probably not a very good reviewer, and you're doing little more than a personal opinion piece. Really, unless you have a name and a following as a good reviewer, does that opinion matter much? It's like me sitting down and reviewing things. Who the hell am I? Outside of people that might read a few grips and smart ass remarks I post around here, does that somehow make me a source to go to for game opinions? Maybe not, but on the other hand, I don't really shun games for being different, or casual, or free-form. Not everything has to be pushed out before me, cramming me through the hoops that've been programmed into the game for me to enjoy it. And games that want to try something outside of the normal are just fine with me and they should be just fine with everybody else. Unless of course you really want the industry boiled down to a handful of game types.

Ampillion lives a life much like No More Heroes.

This game does look interesting.

Sailorcancer

I visit Rotten Tomatoes for a digest of movie reviews, frequently, and I think the movie review process is every bit as broken as the game review process.

I've seen as many toweringly dip-shitted film reviews as I have game reviews. What has always irked me specifically about game reviews, is having the jaded palate of people who are obliged to play a great many similar titles adversely effect their assessment of what may be a very enjoyable game to those whose experiences aren't saturated in the same way.

Tackling Eurogamer on scores is rather futile though, they seem to pride themselves on their "No Hive-Mind" approach, letting each reviewers score stand as the official word of the site. This leads to astonishing inconsistencies in criteria for marking down/up, most notably when a different reviewer gives a widely different score to a PAL version of title that scored much higher as an import title.

The number at the end of the view isn't worth a damn compared to reading the text. As long as games have an arbitrary score system attached, most people are going to be unhappy with games reviews.

JudgeNutmeg

I think that with the Wii and the DS and this Nintendo idea of changing the way games are played is bringing bringing a lot of games that doesn't fit on the "traditional" genres.. and the press still doesn't know how to deal with then.. you can't review a game like Brain Age or Endless Ocean the same you review Halo..

CockroachMan

They are right. Video gaming news and reviews are one of the least professional forms of journalism.

The problem is gamers in general, for some reason, are very narrow minded. Like psychotic racist kind of narrow minded. I dunno if this stems from the fact gaming is treated like a kid's activity so those involved act like kids or if gaming does ruin social skills and as such gamers lack the ability to behave maturely.

Or maybe it's the fact that anyone can be a games reviewer/ newsie. While I don't believe you need a qualification to to do writing, I do think there will be a problem if the majority of an industry's media are generally very young people with no experience.

As long as gamers aren't accepting of new ideas and casual games then games will never be like books or movies but maybe that's what gamers want.

chiefpoopingpants

Thing is, the chimps who adore this shit don't read reviews at all.

Moonshadow101

I ran into this issue not too long ago on a forum I frequent. One of the other posters writes game reviews for a website that targets the hardcore (in this case, meaning the "non-casual") demographic. He was assigned to review Endless Ocean and he took the hardcore gamer's approach in writing the review. The end result was that he absolutely reamed it.

The review can be found here:

[www.nzgamer.com]

Not long after the review went up, the website's head editor apparently got an e-mail from Nintendo regarding the review. It wasn't anything Gerstmann-like. It just said that if the website had no intention of reviewing casual games like Endless Ocean for their intended audience, then they wouldn't send the site review copies of their casual games anymore.

There are two ways that this can be interpreted. One is that Nintendo acted like dicks for threatening to essentially take their ball and go home. The other is that, in reading the review, it seems like the reviewer never gave Endless Ocean an honest chance because he took the wrong approach in reviewing it. I'm not judging him for that. It's his and the website's prerogative in determining what criteria they use to review games. And really, if the website isn't going to write reviews for casual games with a casual audience in mind, what point does Nintendo (or any company, for that matter) have in sending the site review copies? After reading it myself, the only thing I felt was that if I wanted a review that told me what I wanted to know about the game, I would have to look elsewhere.

And honestly, I don't believe that there is a magic formula by which all games can be judged equally. Just like I wouldn't use the same criteria to judge Endless Ocean and God of War, for example, I wouldn't take the approach I use in judging Metal Slug Anthology to review Final Fantasy XII.

Lezard

Never heard of this game (though it looks awesome), but I'm all for "games" that help with relaxation and/or meditation. I'm still saving up for "Wild Divine."

topaz420

Isn't the criticism leveled at Endless Ocean because it's not a traditional game, but rather an experience?

I haven't gotten it from Gamefly yet, but gamers traditionally see games in terms of story and/or scores. Whereas games like Harvest Moon/Endless Ocean/Animal Crossing are not about winning or reaching a satisfying conclusion, they're about the exploration and the experience.

Let's face it, it's hard to review games in terms of score. When an Endless Ocean type of game gets a high-score review, it gets compared to other high-score reviewed games...and if it gets a low score, then gamers won't go out and try it. That's unfair, because they're two very different gaming experiences.

Islandkiwi

@Fyren: thats what blockbuster is for.

mossberg

Different games are like different cuisines -- you need to sample it to see if you like it, and even then, it doesn't guarantee you'll like everything in that genre. For example, my girlfriend loves Italian food, yet hates calimari. I love fighting games, but I don't especially like Mortal Kombat.

Good reviewers can come down hard on a game, yet communicate aspects of the game so that readers can determine if they should give it a shot or not based on their own likes and dislikes. I think reviews are valuable, but shouldn't be over-valued.

jayntampa

I always thought Gametrailers did a great job at reviewing games on their own merits and not on the expectations of certain audiences.

Syril

@mossberg: But thats the pit hole and wasted money.

Perfect example?, I should have read the review on Assassin Creed before purchasing. My local GS will give me 15 bucks for it :/

Ass creed is up in the garbagedom with Mortal Kombat for GBA and Dora explorer.

Fyren

What is funny is how the moment they get a 10/10 rating they splatter the rating on the game site, I have several games with those stickers ... and lets not over advertisement.

So what the hell do they want? 10/10 rating in shovelware?

If anything, its gaming journalism that is not critical or professional enough ...

Drakron

As a hardcore gamer, it is good for me to have a hardcore perspective on games before I think about buying them.

Deux_ExMachina

@mossberg: Me too. Too many decimals, too much focus on light bloom, not enough "this is fun."
now where's my NES...

TheCleaningGuy

@Ashurahori: They do? Shouldn't the reader take it upon themselves to know if the reviewing publication is right for them?

Eagle Epsilon [ZTF]

It is the purest form of escapism: a game that absorbs you completely and doesn't allow your brain any time to reflect on what you're doing

...but, isn't that what games are for? Am I wrong for wanting to be "absorbed completely"?

And what is wrong with "what [I'm] doing"??? I mean, when I read I book, I don't suddenly throw it in a fire because I realized that I'm simply holding a collection of paper and staring at said paper for hours on end.

No, I am enveloped in the story, just like a movie or (GASP!) a game!!!

Bulletkkake

i dislike VG reviews in general. the only way your going to know if you like a game or not is if you play it.

mossberg

My girlfriend bought Endless Ocean for herself and loves every minute of it.

Saxboy

Thing is, reviews need to specify the crowd games are meant to.

Ashurahori