Gamespot Review Thread

[EnigmaNemesis]

What does call of duty offer "new" every year to deserve 9's all the time?

Yeah I thought so. Case closed.

Scores are lame anyhow, but are still used and judged by not only the game maker and their higher ups, but the general public.

Point is noone is asking for a 10. But this game is no less than a 9. Especially comparative to previous version and the competition it is supposed to be judged upon (based on both IGN and Gamespots review explanations on how they review games).

They contradict themselves.

[Mos1ted]

Re: Gamespot Review Thread

Let me address the folks real quick who say that we shouldn't care what reviews say...

...On the surface, that statement is correct. We should do things based on our own opinions. My beef with the review has more to do with perception than reality. Everyone here knows that the Show 11 is one of the finest sports games ever created. I'm more upset at the bias that's given to sports game really. People can justify IGN and Gamespot giving 11 8's across the board by saying that compared to NBA 2K11, MLB 11 just didn't make that big of a leap from last year. Why that statement may be correct, how come it's okay for these sites to judge sports games based on year to year improvements and grade them accordingly, but other genres get a pass? Last I check, the Call of Duty franchise has made even less year to year improvements and those games constantly get 8.5's and up. Again, I ask, why are other genres judged differently?

COD: MW - IGN, 9.4 GS, 9.0
COD: MW2 - IGN, 9.5 GS, 9.0
COD: BO - IGN, 8.5 GS, 9.0


Show '09 - IGN, 8.7 GS, 9.0
Show '10 - IGN, 8.9 GS, 8.0
Show '11 - IGN, 8.0 GS, 8.0

There's not a sane person that can argue or prove to me that the COD franchise made as many improvements from their '08 game (MW) to their '10 game (BO) as the Show did during the same time frame. But if you look at the scores, the COD consistently received high review scores while the Show is "a victim of its own success." What those that say we are whining over nothing are missing is the domino effect that critical reviews have on media. If Ebert and Roeper gave a movie a thumbs down, how many of you would still go see it? Probably not many. What you have to understand is that, although the Show is well known here, there are still plenty of gamers our there who are oblivious to what this franchise is about (hard to believe, but most likely true). So those 8's across the board carry more weight than you might think. Developers and publishers also grade their success based on what mainstream reviewers score it because they know how much influence these reviews can have. A smart consumer would either rent the game first or rely more on consumer reviews, but how many smart consumers do you think really exist? This causes developers to go and make drastic changes to future renditions as a way of remedying low review scores. Then you get things such as Operation Flashpoint: Red River and the drastic changes they are making in their upcoming game, in essence, alienating their core fanbase.

[jswaykos]

Re: Gamespot Review Thread

You all realize, right, that the point of writing is to get people to read? IGN doesn't care if you love or hate them, so long as you read them and talk about them. I'd be willing to bet, on SOME level, that they intentionally lower scores on occasion just to spark controversy, or say something negative for the same reason. Then, the boards come alive with people talking about the review which makes even MORE people go to IGN (or Gamespot, or wherever) to see what was said about their beloved title.

I mean, they could basically say, "9.5, as with most successful sports franchises there are enough improvements for the die-hards to justify another purchase. Great game." But how is that interesting? Nobody would read that. It's just business on their part.

They DO NOT care what you think, so long as you think SOMETHING. It's when you don't care/don't read that they'll start to worry. Everyone here is quick to say they 'never read' sites for whatever reason, but then two posts later they'll quote something verbatim from a review.

I'm not trying to bash anyone, but that's how the 'media' works. It's why radio and TV personalities like Rush Limbaugh or Colin Cowherd or Don Imus are so successful - they ignite controversy. If all they ever did was agree with popular sentiment, they'd be boring.

[Giants4Natic]

Re: Gamespot Review Thread

Let me address the folks real quick who say that we shouldn't care what reviews say...

...On the surface, that statement is correct. We should do things based on our own opinions. My beef with the review has more to do with perception than reality. Everyone here knows that the Show 11 is one of the finest sports games ever created. I'm more upset at the bias that's given to sports game really. People can justify IGN and Gamespot giving 11 8's across the board by saying that compared to NBA 2K11, MLB 11 just didn't make that big of a leap from last year. Why that statement may be correct, how come it's okay for these sites to judge sports games based on year to year improvements and grade them accordingly, but other genres get a pass? Last I check, the Call of Duty franchise has made even less year to year improvements and those games constantly get 8.5's and up. Again, I ask, why are other genres judged differently?

COD: MW - IGN, 9.4 GS, 9.0
COD: MW2 - IGN, 9.5 GS, 9.0
COD: BO - IGN, 8.5 GS, 9.0


Show '09 - IGN, 8.7 GS, 9.0
Show '10 - IGN, 8.9 GS, 8.0
Show '11 - IGN, 8.0 GS, 8.0

There's not a sane person that can argue or prove to me that the COD franchise made as many improvements from their '08 game (MW) to their '10 game (BO) as the Show did during the same time frame. But if you look at the scores, the COD consistently received high review scores while the Show is "a victim of its own success." What those that say we are whining over nothing are missing is the domino effect that critical reviews have on media. If Ebert and Roeper gave a movie a thumbs down, how many of you would still go see it? Probably not many. What you have to understand is that, although the Show is well known here, there are still plenty of gamers our there who are oblivious to what this franchise is about (hard to believe, but most likely true). So those 8's across the board carry more weight than you might think. Developers and publishers also grade their success based on what mainstream reviewers score it because they know how much influence these reviews can have. A smart consumer would either rent the game first or rely more on consumer reviews, but how many smart consumers do you think really exist? This causes developers to go and make drastic changes to future renditions as a way of remedying low review scores. Then you get things such as Operation Flashpoint: Red River and the drastic changes they are making in their upcoming game, in essence, alienating their core fanbase.

You cannot compare a shooter vs a sports game.

COD has an online function that caters to millions and is fantastic with no technical issues for the most part. It also offers single player campaings that are different every time the game is released and it also had new mulit player maps and new multiplayer functions and weapons.

The chore of the game is a shooter but the elements are all new and new features are added each year.


A sports game and this is not about the Show, it is any sports game is just that a sport. If it improves and offers tons of new content like NBA 2K has done with their NBA game then it would get the type of score that it got now. But Madden or any other sports game always hovers around the same score because unless they bang out new and improve features and things that will sell to the casual gamer then in the eys of reviewers it is still a great game but much of the same.

We die hard sports fans realize the changes but those changes do not cater to the masses. We love the changes to the game but those are not wholesale changes.

I bet if the commentary was changed and the presentation was changed and added things like pre game or post game show then you will see a spike in the score. But these changes are great for us die hards but not substantial for the dude who just goes to buy a baseball game.

Shooters also continue to get support after it releases with DLC and things of that nature. People to this day still play MW 2 on line.

Nobody is playing MLB the show 09 on line now.

You cannot compare shooters to sports games.

[Mos1ted]

Re: Gamespot Review Thread

You cannot compare a shooter vs a sports game.

COD has an online function that caters to millions and is fantastic with no technical issues for the most part. It also offers single player campaings that are different every time the game is released and it also had new mulit player maps and new multiplayer functions and weapons.

The chore of the game is a shooter but the elements are all new and new features are added each year.


A sports game and this is not about the Show, it is any sports game is just that a sport. If it improves and offers tons of new content like NBA 2K has done with their NBA game then it would get the type of score that it got now. But Madden or any other sports game always hovers around the same score because unless they bang out new and improve features and things that will sell to the casual gamer then in the eys of reviewers it is still a great game but much of the same.

We die hard sports fans realize the changes but those changes do not cater to the masses. We love the changes to the game but those are not wholesale changes.

I bet if the commentary was changed and the presentation was changed and added things like pre game or post game show then you will see a spike in the score. But these changes are great for us die hards but not substantial for the dude who just goes to buy a baseball game.

Shooters also continue to get support after it releases with DLC and things of that nature. People to this day still play MW 2 on line.

Nobody is playing MLB the show 09 on line now.

You cannot compare shooters to sports games.

I get your point, but I don't think I can agree with it. You stated that shooters cater to millions online. Don't sports games do the same thing, albeit on a slightly smaller scale? And shooters have different campaigns with each iteration; this is true. But how is that any different than roster updates? It's rare that shooter campaigns delineate from sequel to sequel. Most of the time, they feature the same exact characters with just different objectives the next go around. The gameplay is still the same: shoot them before they shoot you. Again, I ask, how is that any different than sports games? And sports games also support their titles after launch with DLC. You see that with patches, living rosters, etc. Did the COD franchise continue to pump out DLC for MW once MW2 came out? I don't follow those franchises because I don't play them, but I'm going to assume that the answer is no. Again, I ask, how is that any different from sports games?

[Giants4Natic]

Re: Gamespot Review Thread

I get your point, but I don't think I can agree with it. You stated that shooters cater to millions online. Don't sports games do the same thing, albeit on a slightly smaller scale? And shooters have different campaigns with each iteration; this is true. But how is that any different than roster updates? It's rare that shooter campaigns delineate from sequel to sequel. Most of the time, they feature the same exact characters with just different objectives the next go around. The gameplay is still the same: shoot them before they shoot you. Again, I ask, how is that any different than sports games? And sports games also support their titles after launch with DLC. You see that with patches, living rosters, etc. Did the COD franchise continue to pump out DLC for MW once MW2 came out? I don't follow those franchises because I don't play them, but I'm going to assume that the answer is no. Again, I ask, how is that any different from sports games?

It is totally different. A roster update is not chaning the spectrum of the game. A new campaing with new weapons and maps and gameplay tunes is not the same as chaning the batter contact rating and name on another player.

The online community is the biggest pie in the video game business. I personally do not play much online sports game but the fact is that online is the way of the future and the way of now. You go log in to a shooter server and see tons and tons of players and all of them remain for more then a season of baseball.

Everything in MW1 is not the same was MW2 except the fact that they are both shooters.

MLB 10 and MLB 11 for the most part a casual gamer picks it up is not going to see the differences that a die hard gamer like we do.

We love the aspects of sports sim. But that does nothing for the masses, we are not a spec on the shooters landscape.

The show has and continues to make a great game of baseball with fantastic graphics and gameplay. But the changes made under the hood are not going to sell the game to more people and are not going to give enjoyment to those people who want to play a baseball game.

I know some of my friends who are not show buyers every year but come to my house to play and they all have told me that they do not see anything different in this years game compared to last year after playing for a couple of days.

I sat there and explained to them the changes and they looked at me like I needed to get out more if I was breaking the game down like that.

That is what I mean by catering to the masses. Those same friends thought that KZ3 and MW2 and BO and games of that magnitude even NBA 2K11 were amazing the year after the last release

They get all into it.

My friend are the casual gamers and the fans of video games. We are more fans of sim sports.

So if IGN or GS give the game a great rating and it is an 8 because they thought that nothing in the game besides Analog and co op is new then they are going to say. hey the game plays a great game of baseball but there is nothing there that screams at you.

When you see the same cuts for foul balls and same stat overlays and same announcers, that all counts and those things are front and center of what you see every game.

My rating for this game is incredible baseball sim. I appreciate Ramone's post here about what is new every year because I love sim sports.

But I know that unless they make those changes I listed, then it will not appeal to the masses.

They will look at it as the show but nothing earth shattering for them to feel like they have to rate it higher or even buy it again.

The back of the box for the game says All New Analog control which is their mantra this year.

But I see nothing on the box that says, new fielder AI tuned or under the hood changes.
Why?

Because that is not what sells.

That is just fact

[Giants4Natic]

Re: Gamespot Review Thread

Look at the online review of the show that Chris put up. He is right on and this is why the game also does not sky rocket to the top. The review might be even lower from IGN if they mentioned the horrible lag online

It has been like this for the last 4 years on PS3

[Skyboxer]

Re: Gamespot Review Thread

Maybe the Show should add some "perks" when you hit HR's or something.......

Either way... who the F goes to Gamespot for reviews???

[SoxFan01605]

Re: Gamespot Review Thread

Soxfan01605's got his review right here:

Spoiler

AWESOME!

That's the only review that matters to me.

[travis72]

Re: Gamespot Review Thread

Read it and weep fellas....literally: http://www.gamespot.com/ps3/sports/m...%3Bread-review



The good news is, those of us at O.S. can truly appreciate what this game is in relation to other baseball games and other sports games in general. I'm guessing IGN and Gamespot like to base their scores over year to year improvements instead of judging the game on its own merits.

If they only give The Show a 8, whats the other games score, a 2,lol. I think the reviewers for one reason or another need to either find a way to put a good game down instead of continuely praising it even if it deserves it. While a game thats routinely bad every year they will find a way to give it a good score instead of continuing to put it down even if it deserves it.

I for 1 know that there is only 1 true sports game that will get my money each year and that The Show. While it is far form perfect each year to start with I know the guys at SCEA will get it all straighten out, where as other companies usually don't.

[jswaykos]

Re: Gamespot Review Thread

The reviews say whatever they need to say to get message boarders talking about them. If that means a less than stellar review for a good game, or a good review for a bad game, so be it. All they want is for you to read and discuss, and if we all agreed 100% there'd be nothing at all to talk about. They can't have that. So they'll write about how great it is, then give an arbitrary score of "8". Who even cares?

[djep]

Re: Gamespot Review Thread

I personally don't care what a reviewer says about a game that I really enjoy but it can negatively impact a game franchise's development in the future.

Some development contracts are written so devs get bonuses based on metacritic scores. Not saying this is the case with Sony SD. Also negative reviews that harp on learning curve could see future iterations of the game being dumbed-down for the masses.

[El_MaYiMbE]

Re: Gamespot Review Thread

I personally don't care what a reviewer says about a game that I really enjoy but it can negatively impact a game franchise's development in the future.

Some development contracts are written so devs get bonuses based on metacritic scores. Not saying this is the case with Sony SD. Also negative reviews that harp on learning curve could see future iterations of the game being dumbed-down for the masses.

Very good points. How is a steep learning curve too steep on a game that has no end?

I mean its not like COD or Gears of War where the story mode is maybe 9 hours...tops. So you cant afford to spend 4-5 hours "learning"

Baseball is a timeless game, hours and hours of learning curve is only a very very small fraction of the gameplay hours your going to get.

[Fictionix]

Re: Gamespot Review Thread

those review places seem to only care about COD and Halo or games where you blow **** up. I love the show. It made me buy a ps3 for the show 11. 10/10 for me.

[Scottdau]

The camera options alone is a big change. Then you throw in better jumbo trons, better player models and then you throw in the analog controls. Yeah it is the not much changed? What ever!