Gragt
Arcane
I found it hilarious myself.
Castanova said:That's only a fun fact in your opinion. Other people might just as well not find that fact to be fun at all.
Am I? Do I need to quote the entirety of S8's post back to you guys? Or Edward_R_Murrow? Seriously, a lot of these posts seem to be built around the inherent assumption that IF someone rated Oblivion highly it can ONLY be because they lack intelligence/are ignorant of past games/catering to the console market.
From that basic false assumption you all seem to be launching attacks and general haughty finger wavings at ElPresidente.
I understand where a lot of it comes from, I too am frustrated by many trends I see in gaming journalism, but just assuming anyone who gave Oblivion 2 thumbs up is automatically an idiot/incompetent/lacking in depth of RPG knowledge is false, see RampantCoyote. My argument is not based on groundless paranoia.
For the same reason I like to call Falcon 4.0 a Roleplaying Game - the Elder Scrolls games are about dropping you into a fantastic world and making it come alive for you.
To top it off, the games are also very replayable with vastly different classes.
But after I finished it, I almost immediately tried to replay it with a new character, and just couldn't. I'd pretty much sucked all the marrow from it the first time around, even though I think I explored less than 30% of the world.
The thing is - some of those with the longer (and sometimes shorter) time frames consisted of a LOT of "make-work." Oblivion was over 120 hours of play, and probably 20 of it was really awesome.
And sorry, you're mistaking academic critiquing with commercial reviewing. An academic essay evaluating the themes, context, history and structure of Hamlet isn't the same as a magazine review of the quality of a local theater's production of Hamlet. Nor is an academic essay on the Noir genre the same as a review of a specific noir novel. It does NOT require a detailed analysis of Noir as a genre being attached to the review.
No one is interested in sitting and reading a 5 page essay deconstructing every elder scrolls game from Arena onwards and their evolution in a magazine review. Or even better, as you guys seem to want, deconstructing every bloody CRPG every time you review a new one. Maybe in a special editorial article, sure. But not a magazine review.
When I read a review of Iron Man I don't want an essay on every super hero movie ever made, the history and elements of each.
And your average consumer doesn't want that. At best you might get a sentence or two introducing the series. And no, this is not the role that reviewers should fill, it's the role academics fill.
Commercial reviewers are there to help consumers make purchasing decisions. In the case of purchasing "fun", they are there to help me decide if I am going to have "fun" with my purchase of X. This is what I am paying for.
Castanova said:It's not a merry-go-round because you've only now started agreeing that reviewers should, to some degree, compare the game with past games. How can you agree with that but then back away when such a comparison is actually made? Are you actually claiming that you could sit someone down (a blank slate who is blissfully unaware of the hype surrounding Oblivion), have them play all those games I mentioned, and then they could honestly rate Oblivion highest based on any individual component of the game? Or are you unwilling to even think about this because that would pull the carpet out from under your "the game is fun for me at this very moment and therefore it deserves a great score" argument.
You misunderstood something here. My point was exactluy opposite. Reviewers who write about Mahler should be well versed in calssical music and one who make topics about GM should probably know their r&b/soul/pop well. Not vice versa. You seem to think that this would be perfectly acceptable, because ya know, it's only a matter of opinion. No knowledge about the genre or comparison with the past achievements are obligatory, as it all boils down to how much ''fun'' i'm getting from this.Naked Ninja said:@Gnidrologist : How many reviewers compare George Michael to Mahler in their reviews? You should complain, they obviously aren't "real critics" if they don't.
ElPresidente said:What if Oblivion had never been marketed as an RPG? What if Oblivion was marketed more like a GTA title (which I strongly argue is a more accurate representation of the title).
ElPresidente said:And if so what role does genre have in a review?
I certainly hope so as it was a crappy "GTA" title. Now if it was marketed as a completely new type game - "poorly designed, boring game for people with ADD", then high scores would have been perfectly justified.ElPresidente said:What if Oblivion had never been marketed as an RPG? What if Oblivion was marketed more like a GTA title (which I strongly argue is a more accurate representation of the title).
Would people be so upset with the high scores then?
Review features and don't worry about what genre games belong to.The above isn't an argument but a genuine question that I've asked myself many times during reviews. Any critic has got to be careful that they review any title for what it is not what it isn't.
Brother None said:So what do you do, as a reviewer? Oh man, that's difficult, because it all comes down to taste. If you have a shooter and the shooter action is bad, it's a bad shooter, no one would disagree, but what single element in RPGs would make the RPG "a bad RPG"? Bad dialogue? Bad narrative? Bad character system? Shoddy combat? Bad setting?
Vault Dweller said:I want to read a detailed explanation and analysis of features and gameplay mechanics. THEN I'll form my own opinion.
Uh, no. Oblivion is simply not a 10/10 game no matter what your point of view is. If you disagree, then I'd like to see some arguments.ElPresidente said:Vault Dweller said:I want to read a detailed explanation and analysis of features and gameplay mechanics. THEN I'll form my own opinion.
But that obviously isn't what people want according to this thread - otherwise the Oblivion review in question would stand.
You are misreading then. I'd love to read an intelligently written, positive Oblivion review, but such a beast does not exist. I'd know. I was a newsposter when Oblivion was released and had to read all that "OMG! The game has amazing graphics! 10/10 and an editor's choice award!" crap.Instead people want reviews to conform to their opinions... that is really what I'm reading here.
ElPresidente said:Furthermore I can't agree that the approach should be "Well it is in this genre so what elements should it have." Genre doesn't define a game, a game defines what genre it falls in.
Oblivion the action adventure. I wouldn't have minded.ElPresidente said:What if Oblivion had never been marketed as an RPG? What if Oblivion was marketed more like a GTA title (which I strongly argue is a more accurate representation of the title).
Would people be so upset with the high scores then?
...
And if so what role does genre have in a review?
What if Oblivion had never been marketed as an RPG? What if Oblivion was marketed more like a GTA title (which I strongly argue is a more accurate representation of the title).
Would people be so upset with the high scores then?
And if so what role does genre have in a review?
Fallout is by far the worst driving simulator ever. Sure... that is a wild exageration of my point but at what point do we stop looking at the existing art as a basis for comparison and talk about the title under scrutiny?
The above isn't an argument but a genuine question that I've asked myself many times during reviews. Any critic has got to be careful that they review any title for what it is not what it isn't.
Hah, now I feel like writing a Fallout 3 review without having seen the game, let alone played it, put it out there and see how accurate it is predictable Bethesda are come release. Anyone double dare me?
Section8 said:Anyone double dare me?