Why are you not Responding to questions about the Beta Copy

[Aeon]

Re: Why are you not Responding to questions about the Beta Copy

Real quick, i'd like to address the "reviews are opinions" assertion that's frequently used to justify questionable reviews.

Let's assume that reviews are *only* opinions, and that nothing that *isn't* an opinion would be in a review. How much worth would that be to you or i? How could we use that to make a guess about whether a game is worth our money? The answer is simple: we assess the reviewer's track record, affiliations, and tastes and see whether those coincide with our own. You see what i'm getting at: Nobody wants to bet money on some stranger's opinion. But ok, we all know this, and it's all well and good.

Except that reviews *aren't* just opinions on a page - "graphics are good, pitching interface is TEH BEST EVAR", and so forth; they also include information passed on about the game that, if the reviewers are good, is factual in nature:
e.g. "The pitching interface includes a meter for power and accuracy", or "the options include a couple of sliders that don't seem to actually have any effect on the game" or "you can't control how hard you throw the ball in ESPN."

In the last example, we see hypothetical information that's passed off as "factual", but is actually inaccurate, as we know now that the duration you hold down the throw button affects the speed and accuracy of the throw. (On a side note, i think that this is one of the things that is appealing to me about ESPN: that the game doesn't beat you over the head with gaudy icons to let you know that you have increased control over the action in question).

Aaanyway, you probably see where i'm going with this. Reviews not only offer opinions, but any (good) review will also be INFORMATIVE, so that when you go to make your choice at GS or EB or wherever, your decision is more likelt to be an educated one. The suggestion that reviews are only opinions (and the corollary implication that this TOTALLY exempts a reviewer from having to worry about the truthfulness of his claims) is, to me, ludicrous. Reviews are NOT just opinions; i mean, in essence, a reiew can't be completely right or wrong as there are opinions included, but parts of a review *can* be wrong or, more commonly, poorly researched.

I know i was a bit wordy here, but i think this needed to be said. Whether anyone bothers to read it is another issue...

[Radja]

Re: Why are you not Responding to questions about the Beta Copy

excellent post, aeon. i agree. that is why i read reviews. when i open the game, i don't want many surprises.

the only problem with professional reviews is some dont play the game much and claim they do. they give it glowing reviews and fail to mention huge flaws that should be mentioned. for instance, the MVP and ESPN hockey reviews are editors choice at IGN. you would think that somewhere along the line of the so called 80 games they played that they would have discovered players dont progress or you cant score on all-star without a complete devotion to the game for several months.

these flaws weren't hard to discover as the OS amateur users found them in only a few days. the OS staff found them also. and they are volunteers. not paid staff at a game review company.

now both these games have things that merit a higher than normal score and are fun in their own right. but there are so many games, especially sports games, that are not played to the extent the reviewer tries to convey. with MLB 2005 one site said you cant play games in their franchise/owner mode and that is blatantly lying.

the opinions, i like or dislike a game, is fine. the not playing and saying you did, that is inexcusable. IGN, along with a few others, is rapidly losing my respect.

[Radja]

Re: Why are you not Responding to questions about the Beta Copy

excellent post, aeon. i agree. that is why i read reviews. when i open the game, i don't want many surprises.

the only problem with professional reviews is some dont play the game much and claim they do. they give it glowing reviews and fail to mention huge flaws that should be mentioned. for instance, the MVP and ESPN hockey reviews are editors choice at IGN. you would think that somewhere along the line of the so called 80 games they played that they would have discovered players dont progress or you cant score on all-star without a complete devotion to the game for several months.

these flaws weren't hard to discover as the OS amateur users found them in only a few days. the OS staff found them also. and they are volunteers. not paid staff at a game review company.

now both these games have things that merit a higher than normal score and are fun in their own right. but there are so many games, especially sports games, that are not played to the extent the reviewer tries to convey. with MLB 2005 one site said you cant play games in their franchise/owner mode and that is blatantly lying.

the opinions, i like or dislike a game, is fine. the not playing and saying you did, that is inexcusable. IGN, along with a few others, is rapidly losing my respect.

[Radja]

Re: Why are you not Responding to questions about the Beta Copy

excellent post, aeon. i agree. that is why i read reviews. when i open the game, i don't want many surprises.

the only problem with professional reviews is some dont play the game much and claim they do. they give it glowing reviews and fail to mention huge flaws that should be mentioned. for instance, the MVP and ESPN hockey reviews are editors choice at IGN. you would think that somewhere along the line of the so called 80 games they played that they would have discovered players dont progress or you cant score on all-star without a complete devotion to the game for several months.

these flaws weren't hard to discover as the OS amateur users found them in only a few days. the OS staff found them also. and they are volunteers. not paid staff at a game review company.

now both these games have things that merit a higher than normal score and are fun in their own right. but there are so many games, especially sports games, that are not played to the extent the reviewer tries to convey. with MLB 2005 one site said you cant play games in their franchise/owner mode and that is blatantly lying.

the opinions, i like or dislike a game, is fine. the not playing and saying you did, that is inexcusable. IGN, along with a few others, is rapidly losing my respect.

[DXZeke]

Re: Why are you not Responding to questions about the Beta Copy

I don't think that the 9 rating for MVP was is really that bad. The fielding in the outfield is needs some tweaking and the franchise mode needs some help with players improving, but what is there is really well done.

I'm currenlty playing MLB 3005 and I really do like it, but I do miss some things that MVP had. I will say though MLBs franchise mode is nuts... granted it doesn't have ASB super deep player management, it sure does have a ton of stuff... even a page from MVP with player happines - which at this rate is hard to say that MVP came up with since MLB has it too.

Personally I think all the baseballs should get pretty high rating since it seems like all the games that are out this year are solid. Honestly, you could go buy any of the games at random and people will probably have fun this year with any title as opposed to years past.

ESPN didn't need a ton of improvements to be a solid baseball title. So VC did what they should have done, keep what worked in there - fixed what was wrong - and tried to add something, but not too much to drastically change the game. People would be pissing up a storm if they made the changes to ESPN MLB like the changes ESPN NBA made.

Just be happy that compaines actaully seemed to care this year about basebal.
(football season is going to be a nightmare here at OS )

[DXZeke]

Re: Why are you not Responding to questions about the Beta Copy

I don't think that the 9 rating for MVP was is really that bad. The fielding in the outfield is needs some tweaking and the franchise mode needs some help with players improving, but what is there is really well done.

I'm currenlty playing MLB 3005 and I really do like it, but I do miss some things that MVP had. I will say though MLBs franchise mode is nuts... granted it doesn't have ASB super deep player management, it sure does have a ton of stuff... even a page from MVP with player happines - which at this rate is hard to say that MVP came up with since MLB has it too.

Personally I think all the baseballs should get pretty high rating since it seems like all the games that are out this year are solid. Honestly, you could go buy any of the games at random and people will probably have fun this year with any title as opposed to years past.

ESPN didn't need a ton of improvements to be a solid baseball title. So VC did what they should have done, keep what worked in there - fixed what was wrong - and tried to add something, but not too much to drastically change the game. People would be pissing up a storm if they made the changes to ESPN MLB like the changes ESPN NBA made.

Just be happy that compaines actaully seemed to care this year about basebal.
(football season is going to be a nightmare here at OS )

[DXZeke]

Re: Why are you not Responding to questions about the Beta Copy

I don't think that the 9 rating for MVP was is really that bad. The fielding in the outfield is needs some tweaking and the franchise mode needs some help with players improving, but what is there is really well done.

I'm currenlty playing MLB 3005 and I really do like it, but I do miss some things that MVP had. I will say though MLBs franchise mode is nuts... granted it doesn't have ASB super deep player management, it sure does have a ton of stuff... even a page from MVP with player happines - which at this rate is hard to say that MVP came up with since MLB has it too.

Personally I think all the baseballs should get pretty high rating since it seems like all the games that are out this year are solid. Honestly, you could go buy any of the games at random and people will probably have fun this year with any title as opposed to years past.

ESPN didn't need a ton of improvements to be a solid baseball title. So VC did what they should have done, keep what worked in there - fixed what was wrong - and tried to add something, but not too much to drastically change the game. People would be pissing up a storm if they made the changes to ESPN MLB like the changes ESPN NBA made.

Just be happy that compaines actaully seemed to care this year about basebal.
(football season is going to be a nightmare here at OS )

[TIm]

Re: Why are you not Responding to questions about the Beta Copy

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
[b][i]DXZeke said

ESPN didn't need a ton of improvements to be a solid baseball title. So VC did what they should have done, keep what worked in there - fixed what was wrong - and tried to add something, but not too much to drastically change the game. People would be pissing up a storm if they made the changes to ESPN MLB like the changes ESPN NBA made.

Just be happy that compaines actaully seemed to care this year about basebal.
(football season is going to be a nightmare here at OS )

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

See you have to wonder if this year they are going to review Based on the Improvements on the other titles..I mean I don't think the gameplay would drop in such a dramatic fashion Over the course of a year..Alot of previews don't sound so good..Game Informer Magazine gave this title early nod for baseball game of the year and yet gave it a 7.5 I mean come on people....If that's not some BS I don't know what is...But Will they review ESPN Based on Improvements in Mind compared to MVP and MLB or will they review the game Based on most likely the same gameplay as last year..I think that If the Game Plays the same and has the same thing as last year that it should get the same Score as it did last year.They are telling me a score drops cause they didn't change much????????That's what I don't understand about the reviews of some games...They are Identical of last year with new added (OPTIONS) and Out of the blue they don't like it.UMMMMMMMMMMM

[TIm]

Re: Why are you not Responding to questions about the Beta Copy

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
[b][i]DXZeke said

ESPN didn't need a ton of improvements to be a solid baseball title. So VC did what they should have done, keep what worked in there - fixed what was wrong - and tried to add something, but not too much to drastically change the game. People would be pissing up a storm if they made the changes to ESPN MLB like the changes ESPN NBA made.

Just be happy that compaines actaully seemed to care this year about basebal.
(football season is going to be a nightmare here at OS )

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

See you have to wonder if this year they are going to review Based on the Improvements on the other titles..I mean I don't think the gameplay would drop in such a dramatic fashion Over the course of a year..Alot of previews don't sound so good..Game Informer Magazine gave this title early nod for baseball game of the year and yet gave it a 7.5 I mean come on people....If that's not some BS I don't know what is...But Will they review ESPN Based on Improvements in Mind compared to MVP and MLB or will they review the game Based on most likely the same gameplay as last year..I think that If the Game Plays the same and has the same thing as last year that it should get the same Score as it did last year.They are telling me a score drops cause they didn't change much????????That's what I don't understand about the reviews of some games...They are Identical of last year with new added (OPTIONS) and Out of the blue they don't like it.UMMMMMMMMMMM

[TIm]

Re: Why are you not Responding to questions about the Beta Copy

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
[b][i]DXZeke said

ESPN didn't need a ton of improvements to be a solid baseball title. So VC did what they should have done, keep what worked in there - fixed what was wrong - and tried to add something, but not too much to drastically change the game. People would be pissing up a storm if they made the changes to ESPN MLB like the changes ESPN NBA made.

Just be happy that compaines actaully seemed to care this year about basebal.
(football season is going to be a nightmare here at OS )

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

See you have to wonder if this year they are going to review Based on the Improvements on the other titles..I mean I don't think the gameplay would drop in such a dramatic fashion Over the course of a year..Alot of previews don't sound so good..Game Informer Magazine gave this title early nod for baseball game of the year and yet gave it a 7.5 I mean come on people....If that's not some BS I don't know what is...But Will they review ESPN Based on Improvements in Mind compared to MVP and MLB or will they review the game Based on most likely the same gameplay as last year..I think that If the Game Plays the same and has the same thing as last year that it should get the same Score as it did last year.They are telling me a score drops cause they didn't change much????????That's what I don't understand about the reviews of some games...They are Identical of last year with new added (OPTIONS) and Out of the blue they don't like it.UMMMMMMMMMMM

[Radja]

Re: Why are you not Responding to questions about the Beta Copy

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
DXZeke said:
I don't think that the 9 rating for MVP was is really that bad. The fielding in the outfield is needs some tweaking and the franchise mode needs some help with players improving, but what is there is really well done.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

i agree that most of the game is really well done and they can give it a score whatever they want. what i dont like is the fact they consistently miss the big things. not liking a hitting system in a baseball game is fine. not liking the tackling or passing in football is cool, too. but missing the huge flaws that can be discovered after playing 15 to 20 games is inexcusable.

i play a game for at least 20 hours before i render a final judgement. i have my impressions, but that changes over time. for instance, when i played espn hockey. the first time i started a franchise in pro, i was in awe of how good the game played. i thought, sports game of the year.

at about the 20 to 30 game range, (games took about 20-25 minutes) i realized the CPU couldnt score on me. i then discovered i couldnt move up to all-star without starting over a franchise. then i realized i would never score on all-star. the collision detection was not as good as advertised. pucks that should have went thru were stopped in mid-air.

now, my amount of playing, roughly 20 to 30 hours, shouldn't have be hard for a pro reveiwer to accomplish. that could be handled in less than a week. several other OS players discovered the same in the same amount of time i did. why couldn't the pros? especially those that claim far more games played than i did.

[Radja]

Re: Why are you not Responding to questions about the Beta Copy

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
DXZeke said:
I don't think that the 9 rating for MVP was is really that bad. The fielding in the outfield is needs some tweaking and the franchise mode needs some help with players improving, but what is there is really well done.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

i agree that most of the game is really well done and they can give it a score whatever they want. what i dont like is the fact they consistently miss the big things. not liking a hitting system in a baseball game is fine. not liking the tackling or passing in football is cool, too. but missing the huge flaws that can be discovered after playing 15 to 20 games is inexcusable.

i play a game for at least 20 hours before i render a final judgement. i have my impressions, but that changes over time. for instance, when i played espn hockey. the first time i started a franchise in pro, i was in awe of how good the game played. i thought, sports game of the year.

at about the 20 to 30 game range, (games took about 20-25 minutes) i realized the CPU couldnt score on me. i then discovered i couldnt move up to all-star without starting over a franchise. then i realized i would never score on all-star. the collision detection was not as good as advertised. pucks that should have went thru were stopped in mid-air.

now, my amount of playing, roughly 20 to 30 hours, shouldn't have be hard for a pro reveiwer to accomplish. that could be handled in less than a week. several other OS players discovered the same in the same amount of time i did. why couldn't the pros? especially those that claim far more games played than i did.

[Radja]

Re: Why are you not Responding to questions about the Beta Copy

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
DXZeke said:
I don't think that the 9 rating for MVP was is really that bad. The fielding in the outfield is needs some tweaking and the franchise mode needs some help with players improving, but what is there is really well done.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

i agree that most of the game is really well done and they can give it a score whatever they want. what i dont like is the fact they consistently miss the big things. not liking a hitting system in a baseball game is fine. not liking the tackling or passing in football is cool, too. but missing the huge flaws that can be discovered after playing 15 to 20 games is inexcusable.

i play a game for at least 20 hours before i render a final judgement. i have my impressions, but that changes over time. for instance, when i played espn hockey. the first time i started a franchise in pro, i was in awe of how good the game played. i thought, sports game of the year.

at about the 20 to 30 game range, (games took about 20-25 minutes) i realized the CPU couldnt score on me. i then discovered i couldnt move up to all-star without starting over a franchise. then i realized i would never score on all-star. the collision detection was not as good as advertised. pucks that should have went thru were stopped in mid-air.

now, my amount of playing, roughly 20 to 30 hours, shouldn't have be hard for a pro reveiwer to accomplish. that could be handled in less than a week. several other OS players discovered the same in the same amount of time i did. why couldn't the pros? especially those that claim far more games played than i did.

[Badgun]

Re: Why are you not Responding to questions about the Beta Copy

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
Hank103 said:
</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
fossen said:
</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
Hank103 said:
This is very interesting because in six months when madden comes out with the same game it has given us for the last three years your going to be reading Madden once again great game now you can use the rihgt and left trigger for some crap,give it a name with a fancy ring to it and walla 9.4 great game must buy.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">


We love Madden?



You haven't been around long, have you?

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

Don't judge me by the number of post I have made. If you look at the registtration date you would see that I've been registered a while, however I don't post that much as a matter of fact I have been visiting this sight before you even had to register. I'm not saying that you like Madden what I'm saying is that WSB was the champ last year and in any sport you have to go up against the champ to beat the champ and from what I've seen so far ESPN hasn't even entered the ring yet and the fight has already been decided.

Oh, I'm not sure if you were infering that ESPN has regressed, but if so the only thing ESPN is guilty of is Maddenism, which is taking a game with a solid base, making some graphical and gameplay improvements and add in a gimmick or two with a fancy name of course, boxing it and selling it. The dividing line between the two, Madden is a household name.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

Well I will definitely agree with that assessment. Most of the publications and gaming sites that did their massive baseball game preview basically took points away from ESPN for only making a few minor improvements, yet Madden has essentially been the same game for 3 years and hasn't lost a point yet.

Personally I haven't read all the threads in question so I don't know if any OS guys did that or not, but I do know that several major publications were just wowed over MVP and lukewarm to ESPN because of minor improvements.

People forget that ESPN or WSB 2K3 didn't have as far to go as MVP so it's obvious they will make fewer improvements. I do know that WSB 2K3 was the best game last year and included a lot of stuff that MVP left out THIS year like position player fatigue, walks, steals, and decent AI.

I wonder what all the "no walks" whiners will do when ESPN delivers walks, steals, and player fatigue in spades this year. They'll probably just whine about the lack of minor leagues or some other fluff that EA added to MVP.

MVP is a damn fine game, but it has a lot of flaws, mostly AI. If ESPN can deliver what it did last year with zone type hitting and a few minor tweaks, then it will blow MVP away in terms of actual gameplay.

[Badgun]

Re: Why are you not Responding to questions about the Beta Copy

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
Hank103 said:
</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
fossen said:
</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
Hank103 said:
This is very interesting because in six months when madden comes out with the same game it has given us for the last three years your going to be reading Madden once again great game now you can use the rihgt and left trigger for some crap,give it a name with a fancy ring to it and walla 9.4 great game must buy.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">


We love Madden?



You haven't been around long, have you?

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

Don't judge me by the number of post I have made. If you look at the registtration date you would see that I've been registered a while, however I don't post that much as a matter of fact I have been visiting this sight before you even had to register. I'm not saying that you like Madden what I'm saying is that WSB was the champ last year and in any sport you have to go up against the champ to beat the champ and from what I've seen so far ESPN hasn't even entered the ring yet and the fight has already been decided.

Oh, I'm not sure if you were infering that ESPN has regressed, but if so the only thing ESPN is guilty of is Maddenism, which is taking a game with a solid base, making some graphical and gameplay improvements and add in a gimmick or two with a fancy name of course, boxing it and selling it. The dividing line between the two, Madden is a household name.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

Well I will definitely agree with that assessment. Most of the publications and gaming sites that did their massive baseball game preview basically took points away from ESPN for only making a few minor improvements, yet Madden has essentially been the same game for 3 years and hasn't lost a point yet.

Personally I haven't read all the threads in question so I don't know if any OS guys did that or not, but I do know that several major publications were just wowed over MVP and lukewarm to ESPN because of minor improvements.

People forget that ESPN or WSB 2K3 didn't have as far to go as MVP so it's obvious they will make fewer improvements. I do know that WSB 2K3 was the best game last year and included a lot of stuff that MVP left out THIS year like position player fatigue, walks, steals, and decent AI.

I wonder what all the "no walks" whiners will do when ESPN delivers walks, steals, and player fatigue in spades this year. They'll probably just whine about the lack of minor leagues or some other fluff that EA added to MVP.

MVP is a damn fine game, but it has a lot of flaws, mostly AI. If ESPN can deliver what it did last year with zone type hitting and a few minor tweaks, then it will blow MVP away in terms of actual gameplay.