First major review (Game Informer)

[RoyalBoyle78]

Re: First major review (Game Informer)

Since when did I say it's a factor in my purchasing decisions?

As far as I'm concerned, it's just another item to shoot the breeze about and help pass time until the game's are released.

If you rely on magazines to make decisions for you, well then... good luck with that.

I agree Pared, I could careless what the Mag's say.

[RoyalBoyle78]

Re: First major review (Game Informer)

Since when did I say it's a factor in my purchasing decisions?

As far as I'm concerned, it's just another item to shoot the breeze about and help pass time until the game's are released.

If you rely on magazines to make decisions for you, well then... good luck with that.

I agree Pared, I could careless what the Mag's say.

[CMH]

Re: First major review (Game Informer)

Game Informer is a crappy magazine. Most video game magazines aren't worth much - heck, most video game reviews aren't worth much. Hil Goldstein did a good job at IGN with WSB 2k3, but blew it with espn 2k4. Half the major sites gave Fable an extremely high score, yet I finished that itty bitty "RPG" (more of an action game that you could fart in) in what seemed like twenty minutes.

Really? I always thought GI was the best.

Electronic Gaming Monthly is a close second, but it's mostly filled with information you've already read elsewhere. GamePro is complete garbage. They spend time in their reviews to tell you what buttons found in a manual do and then they tell you that they thought about a game from 1995 when playing the 2004 version.

Game Informer is the only magazine that releases new information and is very detailed on new titles and news about games, companies, and ideas.

Is it the best way to know what game you'll enjoy? No. Nothing is, but you. But, GI is, in my opinion, the best in informing you of what a game does and does not offer.

[CMH]

Re: First major review (Game Informer)

Game Informer is a crappy magazine. Most video game magazines aren't worth much - heck, most video game reviews aren't worth much. Hil Goldstein did a good job at IGN with WSB 2k3, but blew it with espn 2k4. Half the major sites gave Fable an extremely high score, yet I finished that itty bitty "RPG" (more of an action game that you could fart in) in what seemed like twenty minutes.

Really? I always thought GI was the best.

Electronic Gaming Monthly is a close second, but it's mostly filled with information you've already read elsewhere. GamePro is complete garbage. They spend time in their reviews to tell you what buttons found in a manual do and then they tell you that they thought about a game from 1995 when playing the 2004 version.

Game Informer is the only magazine that releases new information and is very detailed on new titles and news about games, companies, and ideas.

Is it the best way to know what game you'll enjoy? No. Nothing is, but you. But, GI is, in my opinion, the best in informing you of what a game does and does not offer.

[nkhera1]

Re: First major review (Game Informer)

marino what did they say was wrong with the fielding?

[nkhera1]

Re: First major review (Game Informer)

marino what did they say was wrong with the fielding?

[BigTim]

Re: First major review (Game Informer)

GI has come a long way from the Gamestop owned magazine they were a few years ago( might still be, but its not as apparent, obviously).

But the fact is, they SUCK at reviewing sports games, as all reviewers do.

Everything else is usually on par with what the general public feels, but when it comes to sports games I would rather rent it myself and try it for myself. When they say that this doesnt feel like real football, I cant take that comment seriously....these people are gamer english/journalism majors, which while I hate to stereotype(as I am the exception to this upcoming "rule"....I'm an English major) they dont know what they are talking about, as they mostly have never played the sport competitevly.

The most athletic guy on the staff(Justin, the wrestler...might not be there anymore) never reviewed the wrasslin games. Dont you think someone with somewhat insdier experience in the area should be the one reviewing it. That would be like telling Curt Schilling that he cannot review gametape of his own performance.

The industry really needs a bi-monthly sports only magazine from someone out there, hell have ESPN or SI hire someone to do a video game review section in their magazines(ESPN being the more likely in this case).

[BigTim]

Re: First major review (Game Informer)

GI has come a long way from the Gamestop owned magazine they were a few years ago( might still be, but its not as apparent, obviously).

But the fact is, they SUCK at reviewing sports games, as all reviewers do.

Everything else is usually on par with what the general public feels, but when it comes to sports games I would rather rent it myself and try it for myself. When they say that this doesnt feel like real football, I cant take that comment seriously....these people are gamer english/journalism majors, which while I hate to stereotype(as I am the exception to this upcoming "rule"....I'm an English major) they dont know what they are talking about, as they mostly have never played the sport competitevly.

The most athletic guy on the staff(Justin, the wrestler...might not be there anymore) never reviewed the wrasslin games. Dont you think someone with somewhat insdier experience in the area should be the one reviewing it. That would be like telling Curt Schilling that he cannot review gametape of his own performance.

The industry really needs a bi-monthly sports only magazine from someone out there, hell have ESPN or SI hire someone to do a video game review section in their magazines(ESPN being the more likely in this case).

[CMH]

Re: First major review (Game Informer)

GI has come a long way from the Gamestop owned magazine they were a few years ago( might still be, but its not as apparent, obviously).

But the fact is, they SUCK at reviewing sports games, as all reviewers do.

Everything else is usually on par with what the general public feels, but when it comes to sports games I would rather rent it myself and try it for myself. When they say that this doesnt feel like real football, I cant take that comment seriously....these people are gamer english/journalism majors, which while I hate to stereotype(as I am the exception to this upcoming "rule"....I'm an English major) they dont know what they are talking about, as they mostly have never played the sport competitevly.

The most athletic guy on the staff(Justin, the wrestler...might not be there anymore) never reviewed the wrasslin games. Dont you think someone with somewhat insdier experience in the area should be the one reviewing it. That would be like telling Curt Schilling that he cannot review gametape of his own performance.

The industry really needs a bi-monthly sports only magazine from someone out there, hell have ESPN or SI hire someone to do a video game review section in their magazines(ESPN being the more likely in this case).

Sport games in general are much more difficult to rate because everyone has their own feel for sim/arcade.

When it comes to a shoot-em-up game or an action adventure, it is what it is.

[CMH]

Re: First major review (Game Informer)

GI has come a long way from the Gamestop owned magazine they were a few years ago( might still be, but its not as apparent, obviously).

But the fact is, they SUCK at reviewing sports games, as all reviewers do.

Everything else is usually on par with what the general public feels, but when it comes to sports games I would rather rent it myself and try it for myself. When they say that this doesnt feel like real football, I cant take that comment seriously....these people are gamer english/journalism majors, which while I hate to stereotype(as I am the exception to this upcoming "rule"....I'm an English major) they dont know what they are talking about, as they mostly have never played the sport competitevly.

The most athletic guy on the staff(Justin, the wrestler...might not be there anymore) never reviewed the wrasslin games. Dont you think someone with somewhat insdier experience in the area should be the one reviewing it. That would be like telling Curt Schilling that he cannot review gametape of his own performance.

The industry really needs a bi-monthly sports only magazine from someone out there, hell have ESPN or SI hire someone to do a video game review section in their magazines(ESPN being the more likely in this case).

Sport games in general are much more difficult to rate because everyone has their own feel for sim/arcade.

When it comes to a shoot-em-up game or an action adventure, it is what it is.

[Rangers67]

Re: First major review (Game Informer)

GI's reviews are contradictory and hard to take seriously. In this very issue they complain about how disappointed they are in a certain game, yet they give it a 7.5. If 5 is average, 1 is the worst, and 10 is the best, then 7.5 must be considered above average. "This game sucks, but it's above average" is basically what they say in reviews all the time.

However, they nailed MVP and every EA game for the last 5 years. Minimal improvements which only hardcore fans will notice.

[Rangers67]

Re: First major review (Game Informer)

GI's reviews are contradictory and hard to take seriously. In this very issue they complain about how disappointed they are in a certain game, yet they give it a 7.5. If 5 is average, 1 is the worst, and 10 is the best, then 7.5 must be considered above average. "This game sucks, but it's above average" is basically what they say in reviews all the time.

However, they nailed MVP and every EA game for the last 5 years. Minimal improvements which only hardcore fans will notice.

[Erv]

Re: First major review (Game Informer)

GI's reviews are contradictory and hard to take seriously. In this very issue they complain about how disappointed they are in a certain game, yet they give it a 7.5. If 5 is average, 1 is the worst, and 10 is the best, then 7.5 must be considered above average. "This game sucks, but it's above average" is basically what they say in reviews all the time.

However, they nailed MVP and every EA game for the last 5 years. Minimal improvements which only hardcore fans will notice.

They say 7 is average actually.

[Erv]

Re: First major review (Game Informer)

GI's reviews are contradictory and hard to take seriously. In this very issue they complain about how disappointed they are in a certain game, yet they give it a 7.5. If 5 is average, 1 is the worst, and 10 is the best, then 7.5 must be considered above average. "This game sucks, but it's above average" is basically what they say in reviews all the time.

However, they nailed MVP and every EA game for the last 5 years. Minimal improvements which only hardcore fans will notice.

They say 7 is average actually.

[ComfortablyLomb]

Re: First major review (Game Informer)

What if all the websites/magazines/message boards give all the baseball games that come out this year an 8.5/10 or 85/100 or whatever out of 5 would make an 8.5?? Are you just not gonna buy a baseball game this year then??? LOL :O

No, you're missing the point entirely. Congrats.